Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 47: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the expected position in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 22; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5937/07]

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

I am informed by the Immigration Division of my Department that the person in question made a Family Reunification application in October 2006. The application was forwarded to the Refugee Applications Commissioner for investigation as required under Section 18 of the Refugee Act 1996. When this investigation is completed, the Commissioner will prepare and forward a report to my Department. The application will then be considered by my Department and a decision will issue in due course.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 48: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5938/07]

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

The case referred to by the Deputy falls under the scope of the Dublin II Regulation, (Council Regulation (EC) No. 343/2003).

This 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 Member State or whereby an asylum seeker has been granted a visa to enter another regulation 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 previously pertained in Europe. Under 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.

Following investigation by ORAC, it was determined that the person concerned had previously made an asylum application in France. As a direct result of the ORAC determination, a Transfer Order was signed in respect of him on 01 August, 2006, obliging him to present to the Garda National Immigration Bureau, (GNIB), on 22 August, 2006, for arrangements to be made for his return to France. He presented as requested and a flight was arranged for his transfer on 30 August, 2006. However he evaded his transfer and became illegally present in this State. The person concerned continues to evade his transfer and remains illegally present in the State. I would therefore urge the person concerned to come forward and present himself to the GNIB without further delay.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 49: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency status in the case of persons (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5939/07]

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

I would refer the Deputy to my reply to Dáil Question number 152 of 14 December, 2006, in respect of the mother in this instance.

As you are aware, the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner, (ORAC), determined in accordance with the terms of the Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 343/2003, that France is responsible for examining the mother's asylum application in this instance. Under Article 4(3) of the Regulation any child or children born to an asylum seeker after they arrive in another Member State shall have their asylum application, if they make one, heard in the State where the mother's application for asylum was first lodged. Accordingly a request under Article 4(3) was made to the appropriate authorities in France on 07 December, 2006, asking them to also accept the child, which they did.

Arrangements were made for their transfer on 15 December, 2006. However they evaded their transfer and became illegally present in this State. The persons concerned continue to evade their transfer and remain illegally present in the State. I would therefore urge the persons concerned to present to the GNIB without further delay in order to arrange their transfer to France.