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

Question 200: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Galway; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28001/07]

Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would refer the Deputy to the Reply given to his Dáil Question No. 363 of Wednesday 27 September 2006. The status of the person concerned remains as set out in that Reply.

Since the earlier Reply, the legal representative of the person concerned, by correspondence dated 28 August 2007, wrote to my Department lodging, inter alia, an application for Subsidiary Protection. My officials, by letter dated 7 September 2007, advised that while the person concerned did not have an automatic entitlement to apply for Subsidiary Protection, pursuant to the decision in Hila and Djolo judgement handed down in the High Court on 27 July 2007 by Mr. Justice Feeney, he was invited to make representations to me setting out any new facts or circumstances which had arisen since the original decision to deport was made and requesting that I exercise my discretion under Regulation 4 (2) of the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations, 2006 — Statutory Instrument No. 518 of 2006 to accept and consider an application for Subsidiary Protection.

As my Department did not receive any documentation requesting the exercise of my discretion under Regulation 4 (2) of the aforesaid Regulations within the 15 working days allotted, my officials wrote to the legal representative of the person concerned by letter dated 3 October 2007 to advise that the time to make representations had passed.

The effect of the Deportation Order is that the person concerned must leave the State and remain thereafter outside the State. The enforcement of the Deportation Order remains an operational matter for the Garda National Immigration Bureau.

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

Question 201: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when green card status will be updated in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 6; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28002/07]

Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person in question submitted an application on 14th February, 2005 for permission to remain in the State under the revised arrangements for parents of Irish children born prior to 1st January, 2005, commonly referred to as the IBC/05 scheme. The application was refused as the individual concerned did not meet the continuous residency criteria. Judicial review proceedings have been initiated in respect of this refusal.

My Department is currently appealing a number of matters related to the IBC/05 scheme, including the issue of continuous residency, to the Supreme Court. The application in question, including the residency status of the individual concerned, may be considered further in the light of the findings of the Court.

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

Question 202: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 24; if they can apply for naturalisation, green stamp update or other status; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [28003/07]

Brian Lenihan Jnr (Dublin West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned arrived in the State in August, 1999 with her family and applied for asylum. She was refused refugee status. Her application seeking permission to remain in the State, which was based on her being a part of her parents' family unit, was refused.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999, as amended, she was informed by letter dated 21 April, 2004, that the Minister proposed to make a deportation order in respect of her. She was given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days, of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why she should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State, leaving the State before an order was made or consenting to the making of a deportation order. On 3 June, 2004 the person concerned was granted permission to remain in the State on humanitarian grounds for a period of one year. This permission to remain has been renewed on a yearly basis, the current renewal being valid until 7 September, 2007. The current application for renewal of the permission to remain in the State of the person is currently under consideration by my Department. I expect a decision to issue in due course.

The position regarding naturalisation is that an application from the person concerned to my Department must clearly indicate that the applicant has been legally resident in the State for five consecutive years.