Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 421: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if a person (details supplied) in County Sligo will be given leave to apply for asylum here. [23803/06]

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

I wish to advise the Deputy that the case of the person concerned falls under the terms of the Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 343/2003. Consequently, I wish to preface my reply by briefly explaining the workings of this Regulation.

The Dublin II Regulation is intended to prevent the phenomenon of 'asylum shopping' across Europe and sets out criteria for determining which Member State is responsible for examining an asylum application where applications have been lodged in more than one State. At the same time it guarantees applicants that one State will process their application, thereby preventing the creation of 'refugees in orbit', a situation which had pertained in Europe prior to the introduction in 1995 of its predecessor, namely the Dublin Convention. Under the Dublin Convention, and now the Dublin II Regulation, the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner (ORAC) can, on the basis of relevant criteria, request another State to accept responsibility for an asylum application and have it processed in that other State.

The person concerned lodged an asylum claim in this State on 3 March, 2006. Following investigation, it was determined by the ORAC that, pursuant to the provisions of the Dublin II Regulation, the United Kingdom was the appropriate State to process the application as the person concerned had previously been issued a visa in Islamabad on 12 September, 2005, to enter the United Kingdom, which was valid up to 9 March, 2006. He entered Heathrow Airport, London on this visa on 7 October, 2005.

Article 9.2 of the Dublin II Regulation provides, inter alia, that 'Where the asylum seeker is in possession of a valid visa, the Member State which issued the visa shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum—'. The U.K. Authorities accepted the transfer of the person concerned pursuant to the terms of Article 9.4. of the Dublin II Regulation which provides, inter alia, that 'Where the asylum seeker is in possession only of one or more residence documents which have expired less than two years previously or one or more visas which have expired less than six months previously and which enabled him actually to enter the territory of a Member State, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall apply for such time as the applicant has not left the territories of the Member States.'

The person concerned claimed asylum in this State using a different name and date of birth than that which appeared on his British visa document. The person concerned was offered an opportunity to appeal the determination of the ORAC, to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, but did not do so. The person concerned was kept informed of developments throughout the course of his asylum application in this State and was made aware as soon as it was possible to do so that his case came under the terms of the Dublin II Regulation.

Following the acceptance by the United Kingdom of responsibility for the case of the person concerned, a Transfer Order was signed in respect of him on 7 June, 2006. This Order was issued to the person concerned on 15 June, 2006, requiring him to present himself to the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB), 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2, on 20 June, 2006, to make arrangements for his transfer to the United Kingdom. The enforcement of the transfer order is now an operational matter for the GNIB.

In accordance with the provisions of the Dublin II Regulation, the United Kingdom, and not Ireland, is responsible for examining the asylum claim of the person concerned. As a result, it is not my intention to grant the person concerned any period of leave to reside here. Given that the person concerned had been issued a visa to enter the United Kingdom and not Ireland, it is entirely appropriate that he be transferred to that State.