Written answers

Thursday, 14 April 2005

Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Citizenship Applications

5:00 pm

Photo of Bernard DurkanBernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 130: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his decision to refuse naturalisation in the case of persons (details supplied) is in accord with established practice in the case of persons who have worked in full-time employment here for more than five years; if a new precedent is being set for future reference; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11514/05]

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

There has never been an established practice or a precedent in place whereby an applicant for naturalisation who has been in full-time employment in the State for five years will become an Irish citizen solely on that basis. It has always been the case that standard inquiries are carried out in respect of each application relating to character, financial background etc. and that a determination on an application will only be made once such inquiries are completed.

An application for naturalisation was received from the male adult member of the family only. The basis for the refusal of this application has been set out in detail in the letter dated 17 February 2005 to the applicant informing him of my decision.

I have adopted a general policy that applicants for naturalisation, other than refugees, programme refugees or stateless persons, should have been supporting themselves and their families without recourse to State support for a three-year period prior to applying for naturalisation, and that, furthermore, they can show, as far as is practicable, that they have the capacity of supporting themselves into the future.

Inquiries by my officials revealed that the person in question had received various State supports, including rent allowance and unemployment assistance, between 1997 and 2002 and had received substantial payments under a back to work scheme between 2002 and 2004.

I was of the view that there were no circumstances disclosed on the case file of the person concerned to lead me to depart from my general policy in such cases and I decided to refuse the application.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.