Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Nadim Hussain is a 34-year-old man from India. He is from a Muslim background. In 2018, both of his parents were killed in anti-Muslim violence. Nadim came to Ireland. He currently lives in Cork city, at the Kinsale Road direct provision centre. Nadim worked all the way through the pandemic. He worked in a hospital as a security worker. He paid his taxes. Last month, Nadim received a letter from the International Protection Appeals Tribunal, which affirmed a recommendation of the international protection officer, which stated that he should be refused a declaration as a refugee along with subsidiary protection status. Nadim had provided certificates from his family's doctor concerning the death of his parents, along with a multiplicity of other documentation. Part of the problem is that Nadim has been unable to provide written documentation from the police outlining the details of the death of his parents. Anyone familiar with the question of anti-Muslim violence in India these days and the role of the state under the Modi Government will not be surprised by this. They would not expect someone to get certificates of that kind from the police. Someone knowledgeable about the situation would say that Nadim is being asked to clear an impossible hurdle. The appeal to remain is on the grounds that his life would be in danger were he to be deported back to India. He commenced a hunger strike last Thursday, taking liquids but refusing food. Tonight is the sixth night of his hunger strike.

As the Minister of State knows, physical and mental impairment can begin within two to three days of the commencement of a hunger strike. Nadim's GP has already expressed his concerns in this regard, particularly relating to his kidneys, even over the next couple of days. Despite this, there would be no justification for force-feeding this man, but he claims that energy drinks were force-fed to him by centre staff yesterday. A solution to this situation must be found on the basis of agreement. Is the Minister of State willing to talk to this man or to have a senior official from his Department do so? I would suggest that this should happen in the morning.

While I am on my feet, I also raise the case of the tiler, Raminder Singh. Raminder also lives in Cork. He is a Sikh from Punjab. His family has also been the victim of sectarian violence. He has a wife, Harinder Kaur, a daughter, Sandeep, aged 22, and two sons, Gursewak and Gurcharan, aged 20 and 18 respectively. Sandeep is studying to be a beautician and wants to start her own business. Gurcharan plays cricket for Cork County Cricket Club, and aspires to play for Ireland. Gursewak is a talented member of the Citadel music group. Like Nadim, they too are in danger of deportation back to India. The Singh family are well known in Cork. They made fantastic colourful masks during the pandemic, and distributed them on the main street, St. Patrick's Street, free of charge. A petition supporting their right to remain has been signed by more than 3,000 people so far.

I want to make some points about the direct provision system. I will do that in my supplementary question. My main question for the Minister of State is for a comment on this case and a request that he or a senior official from his Department would contact this man in the morning.

James Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for raising this important matter. As the Deputy is aware, I cannot comment on any individual cases. However, I can assure the Deputy that each application for international protection is examined in detail on its individual merits, taking all factors into account. The permission to remain process includes a full consideration of their private and family rights in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights as well as consideration of their work situation, among other issues. My objective is to have decisions made on international protection applications and permission to remain considerations as soon as possible. This ensures that those who are found to be in need of our protection can receive it quickly and begin rebuilding their lives here with a sense of safety and security. For those found not to be in need of international protection, a full consideration of all aspects of their case under the process I have outlined is considered before any deportation order is made.

I can also assure the Deputy that a negative decision on an appeal by the independent International Protection Appeals Tribunal is not the final stage in the international protection process. In these circumstances, an applicant will have their permission to remain consideration reviewed by the International Protection Office. This represents a fifth opportunity for the applicant to put forward his or her case to be allowed to remain in the State, having already been considered for a grant of refugee status, subsidiary protection, permission to remain and the appeal to the International Protection Appeals Tribunal. All appellants who come before the independent tribunal have their appeals assessed on an individual, objective and impartial basis. This is based on precise and up-to-date information from various sources, such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, about the general situation prevailing in the country of origin of the appellant concerned, including such information contained in submissions made by them or on their behalf.

I assure the Deputy that the principle of non-refoulementapplies to decisions made on international protection applications. Under international human rights law, the principle of non-refoulementguarantees that no one should be returned to a country where he or she would face torture, cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment and other irreparable harm.

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to restate the basic point that this man is on the sixth day of a hunger strike. Tomorrow is day seven of this hunger strike. The man's GP has expressed some serious concerns about the effect of this on him, particularly on his kidneys. He is not talking in terms of weeks but about the next number of days. I have requested that the Minister of State would contact the man directly or have a senior official in his Department do so. The Minister of State has not replied to that question and I ask that he do so. There are nearly 7,000 people in the direct provision system and more than 8,000 asylum seekers in the country as a whole. Many of them, like Nadim and Raminder, face the threat of violence or even death if they return to where they came from. Many, like these two men, worked and contributed to our society during the pandemic. I understand that the Minister of State's Department is currently preparing an amnesty scheme for undocumented workers. I welcome this, even though I fear that it may not go far enough.

I stand for the abolition of the direct provision system. The Minister of State is proposing no significant change in this system for a number of years. That is not acceptable. I put it to the Minister of State that, alongside the changes for undocumented workers, he needs to introduce a package for asylum seekers this side of Christmas. This is an urgent issue. There is significant frustration in these centres. The Government has, in a backhanded way, admitted that the system is not fair.

It is in the programme for Government that the system will be abolished before the Government's term ends. That is an admission that the system is not fair and has to change. The issue is there are hundreds and thousands of asylum seekers who are not prepared to wait for that. The frustration is shown in this instance and the Government must address it. Again the question to the Minister of State is: Are you prepared to act on this case? It is six days into a hunger strike. Tomorrow is day seven and the health issues are mounting up.

James Browne (Wexford, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy will be aware, responsibility for direct provision centres falls to the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, Deputy O'Gorman, and not the Department of Justice.

I repeat what I said in the opening, which is that I cannot comment on individual cases. A negative decision on an appeal by the independent International Protection Appeals Tribunal is not the final stage in the international protection process. In these circumstances, an applicant will have their permission to remain consideration reviewed by the International Protection Office. This represents a fifth opportunity for the applicant to put forward their case to be allowed to remain in the State, having already been considered for a grant of refugee status, subsidiary protection, permission to remain and the appeal to the IPAT. A full consideration of all aspects of their case is carried out before a decision is made to grant permission to remain in the State or to make a deportation order. This includes a full consideration of their private and family rights in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as consideration of other relevant issues.