Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 439: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 14, who had their application for asylum refused on the grounds that they were a deserter from the Iraqi Army and as such did not come within the scope of the definition of a refugee under the Refugee Act, 1996; his views on whether such persons require some protection under international law even if they cannot be considered refugees; if his attention has further been drawn to the UNHCR briefing note dated 27 September 2005 regarding the return of Iraqis, which states that those asylum seekers, who are not recognised as refugees, require some form of protection in keeping with international human rights principles; if his attention has also been drawn to EU Directive 2004/83/EC, due to be transposed by 10 October 2006 at the latest, which requires Irish law to provide for subsidiary protection; his further views on whether the person would qualify for subsidiary protection; if he intends to grant leave to remain to the person; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16107/06]

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

As the Deputy is aware, there is a statutory framework governing the asylum determination process in Ireland, which is set out in the Refugee Act, 1996.

Every asylum applicant is guaranteed an investigation and determination of his or her claim at first instance. Each application is assessed on the basis of the circumstances of the individual case and having regard to both the subjective elements (the applicant's own account or personal history) and objective elements (up-to-date information on the applicant's country or place of origin). This country of origin information comes from a wide variety of sources. Applicants are also guaranteed a de novo hearing with the Refugee Appeals Tribunal where necessary and have access to legal advice throughout the process.

While it is not appropriate to go into the details of specific cases, it is my understanding that the person specified by the Deputy in his question applied for asylum in the State on 17 January 2000. I am advised that his application was refused following consideration of his case at first instance and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999, he was informed by letter dated 5 November 2002 that the Minister proposed to make a deportation order in respect of him. He was given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days, of leaving the State before an order is made; or of consenting to the making of a deportation order; or of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State.

This person's case file, including all representations submitted, will be considered under Section 3(6) of the Immigration Act, 1999 and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (Prohibition of Refoulement) in due course.

Under Section 3(6) of the Immigration Act, 1999, there are a wide range of factors which can be taken into account by the Minister in determining whether or not a deportation order should be made in respect of, inter alia, a person who has been refused a declaration of refugee status.

There is also, of course, an absolute prohibition on refoulement or forced return to a State where the life or freedom of the person concerned would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion as defined in section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996.

In relation to the UNHCR Advisory Regarding the Return of Iraqis, as referenced by the Deputy, such a document is among the types of information routinely considered during the process of considering representations made under the Section 3(6) process outlined above.

As the Deputy is aware, the State does not yet have a system of subsidiary protection. However, such a subsidiary protection regime is required to be put in place later this year under the terms of the EU Council Directive 2004/83/EC on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted (the "Qualification Directive"). The transposition of the Directive is being dealt with in the context of the Immigration and Residence Bill, which is under preparation in my Department at the present time.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 440: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the status of the asylum application of a person (details supplied); when he expects a final decision on the application to be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16118/06]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum as an unaccompanied minor on 1st June 2005 and had his claim investigated in turn by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Both of these bodies concluded that he did not meet the criteria for recognition as a refugee. Their recommendations were communicated to the person concerned on 1st November 2005 and 23rd March 2006 respectively.

My Department's Ministerial Decisions Unit will be writing to the person concerned in the coming days outlining his current position in the State and the options open to him.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 441: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a decision will be made in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Louth. [16126/06]

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

The person in question arrived in the State 14 March 1996 and claimed asylum. On 30 March 1999 he also made an application for permission to remain in the State based on his parentage of an Irish child born on 12 August 1998. He was refused asylum on 26 July 2000 but did not appeal that decision. In January 2001 he ceased to reside with his Irish born child and he provided no further evidence that he was fulfilling the role of parent to the child to enable the application to be processed to a conclusion.

That earlier procedure for considering applications for leave to remain in the State on the sole basis of parentage of an Irish born child ceased on 19 February 2003.

The person concerned subsequently applied for permission to remain in the State on the basis of being the parent of an Irish born child, in accordance with the revised arrangements announced on 15 January 2005. It is a requirement under the revised arrangements that the applicant provide evidence of continuous residence in the State since the birth of the Irish born child. It is also a requirement that an applicant under this scheme provides evidence of identity in the form of either an original valid passport or a national Identity card. In this case, the applicant did not provide any evidence of identity or evidence of continuous residence in the State.

As the person concerned did not meet the criteria for the granting of permission to remain in the State under the revised processing arrangements, insofar as evidence of identity or continuous residency is concerned, the application was refused. The decision was relayed to the person concerned by letter dated 14 December 2005.