Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 188: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the longest period of time an applicant has had to wait for a decision from his office of a decision on the right to remain here on humanitarian grounds; and the reason for such a delay. [24323/06]

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

It is assumed that the Deputy is referring to applications for permission to remain in the State made pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended).

As the Deputy will appreciate, my Department will at any time have a considerable number of such cases on hands with these cases arising predominantly from persons whose asylum applications have been formally rejected with smaller numbers of cases arising in respect of persons who have otherwise become illegal in the State, e.g. where they overstayed a Visa or Work Permit etc. In all such cases, regardless of their origin, each person is served with a notice of intention to deport, as set out in Section 3(3) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended) and the person is advised of the three options open to them at that point in time namely to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to deportation or to submit, within 15 working days, written representations setting out reasons why they should not be deported i.e. why they should be permitted to remain temporarily in the State.

Where an application for permission to remain temporarily in the State is submitted, this must be examined having regard for all of the factors specified in Section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended) which are as follows:

(a) the age of the person,

(b) the duration of residence in the State of the person,

(c) the family and domestic circumstances of the person,

(d) the nature of the person's connection with the State, if any,

(e) the employment (including self-employment) record of the person,

(f) the employment (including self-employment) prospects of the person,

(g) the character and conduct of the person both within and (where relevant and ascertainable) outside the State (including any criminal convictions),

(h) humanitarian considerations,

(i) any representations duly made by or on behalf of the person,

(j) the common good and

(k) considerations of national security and public policy.

It might be noted that each case is considered individually and regardless of whether written representations are submitted or not by or on behalf of the person. Following a detailed examination of each individual case, including a consideration having regard to Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) on the prohibition of refoulement, a recommendation is made as to whether a Deportation Order should be issued or permission to remain in the State granted. Refoulement essentially relates to the safety of returning a failed applicant to their country of origin.

In light of the detailed assessment required to be carried out in each individual case, the Deputy will appreciate that this is a resource intensive exercise and, as such, it is obviously difficult to have some of the more complex cases processed as quickly as would be desirable. The Deputy will appreciate also that other factors sometimes come into play while such an application is being examined, i.e. where an applicant's circumstances change, e.g. where they marry an EU or Irish National or a recognised refugee and seek to have their position in the State regularised on such a basis. Equally, some applicants, either directly or indirectly, submit several sets of written representations which makes it difficult to complete the processing of a case within a short time-frame.

Overall, I would estimate that a relatively straight-forward application can be finalised within a matter of weeks of receipt while some others, because of the complexity of the case or other factors, will take considerably longer to finalise.

The Deputy might also wish to note that cases from certain prioritised countries, namely Bulgaria, Croatia, Nigeria, Romania and South Africa, have their asylum applications and, where appropriate, their applications for permission to remain temporarily in the State finalised within prescribed timeframes. Such cases, with occasional exceptions, are the subject of accelerated processing on the basis that, in the case of four of those States, they have been designated as safe countries of origin while, in the case of Nigerian applications, the accelerated processing of such cases is based on the fact that Nigeria would not normally be regarded as a refugee generating country.

The Deputy can be assured that all applications for permission to remain temporarily in the State are considered on their individual merits, having regard for all relevant criteria. The Deputy can also be assured that, in general, any delay in having such a case finalised will arise from the complexities associated with such a case.