Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 278: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if, in respect of deportation orders served on persons (details supplied) in County Wexford, his attention has been drawn to matters (details supplied); if he will reconsider the decision to deport these persons in view of these matters and on humanitarian grounds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24018/04]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The persons referred to by the Deputy entered the State on 23 April 2000 and 9 August 2000, respectively, and applied for refugee status. Following consideration of their cases by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner, they were refused refugee status in the State. They subsequently appealed to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Following consideration of their cases, their appeals were rejected and the original determinations affirmed.

In accordance with section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, the persons concerned were informed on 24 February 2003 and 26 June 2003, respectively, that it was proposed to make deportation orders in respect of them and they were given the following options: to make written representations within 15 working days to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform setting out reasons they should not be deported; to voluntarily leave the State; or to consent to deportation. Applications for leave to remain in the State were received from their legal representatives on 14 March 2003 and 15 July 2003, respectively.

Following consideration of their cases under section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 as amended, and section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 — prohibition of refoulement— deportation orders were signed in respect of both persons on 6 September 2004 and served by registered post on 28 September 2004. High Court proceedings have been instituted by the persons in respect of the deportation orders. As the matter is now sub judice I cannot comment further.