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

Question 191: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in the matter of the residential status of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11 in view of the considerable evidence provided to the effect that if returned to his or her homeland, he or she would be in a life threatening situation and in further view of the fact that he or she has provided substantial information to this effect; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9993/06]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State on 1 July 2005 and claimed asylum. His asylum claim was independently investigated by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, both of which concluded that he did not meet the criteria for recognition as a refugee.

The person concerned had his case considered under section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, and section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 on prohibition of refoulement, following which I signed a deportation order in respect of him on 27 February 2006. The person concerned was advised of this decision and of the requirement that he present himself at the offices of the Garda National Immigration Bureau on 9 March 2006 at 10 a.m. to make arrangements for his deportation from the State. The deportation of the person concerned is now an operational matter for the Garda National Immigration Bureau. I am satisfied that the applications made by the person concerned for asylum and for leave to remain in the State have been comprehensively examined and, as such, it is not my intention to further review his case.

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

Question 192: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will reconsider the best practice to adopt in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin; if his or her interests are best served by transferring him or her to Belgium or processing his or her case here; the Minister's views on whether due to his or her traumatic, life-threatening torture, persecution, physical and sexual abuse to date he or she requires the full support of family members; his further views on whether the attempts to date to effect transfer to Belgium to be in accord with best humanitarian practice in a modern European state; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9994/06]

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

I would refer the Deputy to my replies to Questions Nos. 149, 181, 249, 215 of 26 January, 9 February, 16 February and 2 March, respectively, and a reply given to a Dáil Adjournment debate on 23 February in relation to this case.

It must be again emphasised that the person concerned is not being returned to her country of origin but rather to Belgium. She had lodged a previous asylum claim in Belgium and, in accordance with the Dublin II Regulations, it is entirely appropriate that she be returned to have her asylum claim determined there. It can hardly be argued that Belgium's welfare, medical and social protection systems are inferior to ours or that any international protection she requires cannot be provided by the Belgian authorities.

The person concerned is currently illegally present in this State but her removal to Belgium will, nonetheless, be handled with sensitivity and care, particularly as I understand that she is currently in receipt of hospital treatment. Officials in my Department have asked the legal representatives of the person concerned, the refugee legal service, to keep the Garda National Immigration Bureau informed of the whereabouts and up-to-date medical condition of the person concerned and I have been assured that the bureau will not effect her transfer to Belgium until such time as she is discharged from hospital. Additionally, the Belgian authorities will be informed of her medical status prior to her arrival and if necessary, medical escorts will be provided to accompany her on her journey.

I do not believe that the procedure being adopted in this case is in any way contrary to best humanitarian practice. Indeed, the fact that she is being returned to Belgium to have her asylum claim considered in the State where she first sought protection is fully in accord with humanitarian principles.

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

Question 193: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if extended residency will be favourably considered in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin to facilitate necessary specialist medical treatment in view of the fact that such treatment will not be readily available if he or she returned to his or her homeland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9995/06]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State on 4 October 2003 and applied for asylum. Her application was refused following consideration of her case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Subsequently, in accordance with section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, she was informed by letter dated 23 March 2005 that the Minister proposed to make a deportation order in respect of her. She was given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days, of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why she should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State, leaving the State before an order is made or consenting to the making of a deportation order.

Her case file, including all representations submitted, will be considered under section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, and section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 on prohibition of refoulement. I expect the file to be passed to me for decision in due course.

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

Question 194: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will further defer on compassionate grounds the intention to deport a person (details supplied) in County Kildare to obtain residency status given the validity of the situation in his or her homeland and the serious danger to his or her health safety and well-being in the event of his or her deportation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9996/06]

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

I would refer the Deputy to my replies to Questions Nos. 726 and 781 of 26 January 2005, No. 129 of 14 April 2005, No. 143 of 19 May 2005 and No. 470 of 31 January 2006.

The person concerned applied for asylum and had her claim refused following the independent examination of her claims by the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. The person concerned then had her case considered under section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, and section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 on prohibition of refoulement, following which I signed a deportation order in respect of her on 3 August 2004.

The person concerned presented herself, as required, at the offices of the Garda National Immigration Bureau but her deportation from the State was postponed as she was at an advanced stage of pregnancy at that time. She subsequently made an application to have her deportation order revoked based on her relationship with a man granted refugee status in the State and their parentage of a child born in Ireland on 10 June 2005. This application is under consideration by Department officials and I expect the file to be passed to me for decision in the near future.