Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 444: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in so far as the retention here of a person (details supplied) is concerned; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13294/06]

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

The persons concerned arrived in the State on 15 April 2005 and applied for asylum. Their application was refused following consideration of their case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Office of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

The persons concerned were informed, by letter dated 12 August 2005, that the Minister proposed to make deportation orders in respect of them and afforded them three options under section 3(3)(b)(ii) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended; namely to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to deportation or to submit written representations, within 15 working days, setting out reasons they should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State.

Their case was examined under section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, and section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996, as amended, on the prohibition of refoulement. Additionally, consideration was given to all representations received on behalf of the persons concerned. On 10 November 2005, deportation orders were signed in respect of the persons concerned, including a child born in the State on 25 May 2005. Notice of these orders was served by registered post requiring the persons concerned to present themselves to the Garda National Immigration Bureau, GNIB, 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2, on Thursday, 24 November 2005, in order to make arrangements for their deportation from the State. The persons concerned failed to present themselves as required on this occasion and were thus classified as evaders. However, the persons concerned were deported from the State on 8 December 2005 by charter flight.

The Deputy might wish to note that, in addition to the 11 factors contained in section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, I must also have regard to section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 on the prohibition of refoulement, before making a deportation order. This essentially means that the safety of returning a person, or refoulement as it is commonly referred to, is fully considered in every case when deciding whether or not to make a deportation order, that is, a person shall not be expelled from the State or returned in any manner whatsoever to a State where, in my opinion, the life or freedom of that person would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. My Department uses extensive country of origin information drawn from different independent sources, including the UNHCR, in evaluating the safety of making returns to Nigeria and other third countries. In this case, I was entirely satisfied that there were no refoulement related reasons to prevent the deportation of the persons concerned. I am satisfied that the applications made by the persons concerned for asylum and for leave to remain in the State, together with all refoulement issues, were fairly and comprehensively examined and, as such, the decision to deport them was justified.