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

Question 208: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected position in the matter of residency in the case of a person (detail supplied) in Dublin 15; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9951/08]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State on 27 July 2003 and applied for asylum. His application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was informed, by letter dated 24 April 2006, that the Minister proposed to make a deportation order in respect of him. He was given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days, of leaving the State voluntarily, of consenting to the making of a deportation order or of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations have been received on behalf of the person concerned and will be fully considered before the file is passed to me for decision.

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

Question 209: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will use his discretion to defer, pending further investigation, the order to deport in the case of a person (detail supplied) in County Kildare in view of the fact that evidence exists suggesting danger to life and well-being in the event of deportation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9952/08]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State on 7 May 2002. He claimed asylum on 31 May 2002 and his application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

The person concerned was informed by letter dated 24 May 2004 that the Minister proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of him and afforded him three options in accordance with Section 3(3)(b)(ii) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), namely to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to the making of a Deportation Order or to submit, within 15 working days, written representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State i.e why he should not be deported.

His case was examined under Section 3(6) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) on the Prohibition of Refoulement. Consideration was given to all representations submitted on his behalf for permission to remain in the State. On 21 July 2005 my predecessor refused permission to remain temporarily in the State and instead signed a Deportation Order in respect of him. Notice of this order was served by registered post requiring the person concerned to present himself at the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB),13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2 on Thursday 4 August 2005 in order to make travel arrangements for his removal from the State. He presented as required and was given further presentation dates which he kept. He is due to present again on Thursday 6 March 2008.

The effect of the Deportation Order is that the person concerned must leave the State and remain thereafter out of the State.

The Deputy might wish to note that, in addition to the eleven factors contained in Section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), I must, as stated earlier, also have regard for Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) on the Prohibition of Refoulement before making a deportation order. This essentially means that the safety of returning a person, or refoulement as it is commonly referred to, is fully considered in every case when deciding whether or not to make a deportation order i.e. that a person shall not be expelled from the State or returned in any manner whatsoever to a State where, in my opinion, the life or freedom of that person would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. My Department uses extensive country of origin information drawn from different independent sources, including the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), in evaluating the safety of making returns to Guinea and other third countries. In this case, I am entirely satisfied that there are no refoulement related reasons to prevent the deportation of the person concerned.

Further, I am satisfied that the applications made by the person concerned for asylum and subsequently for temporary leave to remain in the State, together with all refoulement issues, were fairly and comprehensively examined and, as such, the decision to deport him is justified.

The enforcement of the deportation order is an operational matter for the Garda National Immigration Bureau.

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

Question 210: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or proposed residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9953/08]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State on 20 December 2004 and applied for asylum. Her application was refused following consideration of her case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was informed, by letter dated 24 March 2006, 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 leaving the State voluntarily, of consenting to the making of a deportation order or of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why she should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations have been received on behalf of the person concerned and will be fully considered before the file is passed to me for decision.

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

Question 211: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency position in the case of a person (detail supplied) in Dublin 8; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9954/08]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State on 20 August 2003 and applied for asylum. His asylum application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was informed, by letter dated 14 January 2005, that the Minister proposed to make a deportation order in respect of him. He was given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days, of leaving the State voluntarily, of consenting to the making of a deportation order or of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations have been received on behalf of the person concerned and will be fully considered before the file is passed to me for decision.