Billy Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 438: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in relation to persons (details supplied) who have applied for Irish citizenship; if, in view of the fact that they lost nine months with their previous application, their new application will be expedited; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19506/06]

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

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform may, in his absolute discretion, grant an application for a certificate of naturalisation provided certain statutory conditions are fulfilled. One of these conditions is that the applicant has had a period of one year's continuous residency in the State immediately before the date of the application and, during the eight years immediately preceding that period, has had a total residence in the State amounting to four years.

In the context of determining if an applicant meets the residence requirement for naturalisation, certain periods of residence in the State must be excluded. These include periods of residence in respect of which an applicant does not have permission to remain in the State; periods granted for the purposes of study and periods granted for the purposes of seeking recognition as a refugee within the meaning of the Refugee Act, 1996.

The persons referred to in the Deputy's Question arrived in the State in February 1999 and sought asylum. They subsequently withdrew their applications and sought permission to remain on foot of their parentage of a child born in Ireland in December 1999. Permission to remain in the State was granted to them on this basis in July 2000.

The couple applied for naturalisation in September 2005. The first element of the assessment process for such applications involves determining if the applicant meets the above mentioned statutory residency requirement. It was not possible to ascertain from the documentation submitted with the couple's applications and my official's internal enquiries that they had appropriate permission to reside in the State for the period August 2001 to May 2002. It was determined, therefore, that the couple did not meet the residency requirement at the time of their applications. They were informed of this decision in writing on 16 November 2005. It is important to note in this context that the issue is not whether the couple were actually resident in the State for a total of 5 years, but whether they had appropriate permission to reside here for that period. I understand that the couple now fulfil the residency criteria. If they submit fresh applications at this stage, it will be only necessary to assess those applications against the other statutory criteria for naturalisation.

Since the couple did not meet the statutory requirements for naturalisation when they applied in September 2005, those applications were invalid. I do not consider, therefore, that it would be appropriate to expedite new applications from the couple in the circumstances outlined by the Deputy.