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

Question 224: 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 Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19221/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned arrived in the State and, on 8 February 2008, presented himself at the Offices of the Refugee Applications Commissioner for the purposes of lodging an asylum claim in this State. However, when it was established that the person concerned had been recognised as a refugee in another EU Member State, the Refugee Applications Commissioner made a decision in accordance with the provisions of Section 17 (4) of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) i.e. that the person concerned was a person to whom a declaration of refugee status could not be given. This decision was conveyed to the person concerned by letter dated 12 June 2007. As a person recognised as a refugee in another EU Member State, the person concerned was permitted visa-free travel to the State for a period of 90 days, in accordance with the 1959 European Agreement on the Abolition of Visas for Refugees. Following the expiry of that 90 day period, the person concerned became illegal in the State.

By letter dated 3 April 2008, the person concerned was notified that, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), his permission to be in the State had expired and he was advised of the options open to him as a result which were to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to deportation or to submit, within 15 working days, written representations to the Minister setting out the reasons as to why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations have been submitted on behalf of the person concerned.

It was never intended that the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees would provide for a situation where a person recognised as a refugee in a State party to that Convention would be enabled to make a further asylum application in another State party to the same Convention. As such, the position in this State of the person concerned quite rightly falls to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended).

The case file of the person concerned will now be dealt with in accordance with these provisions. Following the examination of the case file, including a consideration of the representations submitted by or on behalf of the person concerned, the file will be passed to me for decision.

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

Question 225: 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 Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19222/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned arrived in the State on 8 February 2007 and presented himself at the Offices of the Refugee Applications Commissioner for the purposes of lodging an asylum claim in this State. However, when it was established that the person concerned had been recognised as a refugee in another EU Member State, the Refugee Applications Commissioner made a decision in accordance with the provisions of Section 17 (4) of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) i.e. that the person concerned was a person to whom a declaration of refugee status could not be given. This decision was conveyed to the person concerned by letter dated 12 June 2007. As a person recognised as a refugee in another EU Member State, the person concerned was permitted visa-free travel to the State for a period of 90 days, in accordance with the 1959 European Agreement on the Abolition of Visas for Refugees. Following the expiry of that 90 day period, the person concerned became illegal in the State.

By letter dated 3 April 2008, the person concerned was notified that, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), his permission to be in the State had expired and he was advised of the options open to him as a result which were to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to deportation or to submit, within 15 working days, written representations to the Minister setting out the reasons as to why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations have been submitted on behalf of the person concerned.

It was never intended that the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees would provide for a situation where a person recognised as a refugee in a State party to that Convention would be enabled to make a further asylum application in another State, party to the same Convention. As such, the position in this State of the person concerned quite rightly falls to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended).

The case file of the person concerned will now be dealt with in accordance with these provisions. Following the examination of the case file, including a consideration of the representations submitted by or on behalf of the person concerned, the file will be passed to me for decision.

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

Question 226: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in regard to residency status in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Leitrim; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19223/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The immigration case histories and up to date positions of the persons concerned, a husband and wife, are almost identical. As a result, for the purposes of this reply, I will deal with the two cases as one.

The persons concerned arrived in the State on 21 March 2003 and applied for asylum. Their respective asylum applications were refused following the individual consideration of their cases by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner. Both were notified of their respective entitlements to appeal these determinations to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, however, neither did so.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), both of the persons concerned were informed, she by letter dated 7 October 2004 and he by letter dated 14 October 2004, that the Minister proposed to make deportation orders in respect of them. They were each given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days, of leaving the State voluntarily, of consenting to the making of deportation orders or of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why they should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations have been submitted on behalf of both of the persons concerned and will be fully considered, 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, before their respective files are passed to me for decision.

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

Question 227: 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 Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19224/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned, accompanied by her three children, arrived in the State on 7 August 2005 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 12 June 2006, that the Minister proposed to make a deportation order in respect of her and her children. 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 submitted on behalf of the person concerned and will be fully considered, 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, before the file is passed to me for decision.

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

Question 228: 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 22; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19225/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned arrived in the State on 27 November 2006 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 6 November 2007, 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. In addition, she was informed of her entitlement to apply for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations, 2006 (S.I. No. 518 of 2006). An application for Subsidiary Protection in the State was submitted on behalf of the person concerned and this application is under consideration at present. When consideration of this application has been completed, the person concerned will be notified in writing of the outcome.

In the event that the Subsidiary Protection application is refused, the case file of the person concerned, including all representations submitted, will then be considered 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. When this latter consideration has been completed, the case file of the person concerned is passed to me for decision.

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

Question 229: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if, in view of the fact that a person (details supplied) in County Galway has been here for more than seven years and has entered into commitments here, he will be granted extended residency, having particular regard to the fact that the decision to refuse his application for asylum was taken in 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19226/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy will be aware of the history of this case from previous Dáil replies. The person concerned is the subject of a deportation order following a comprehensive examination of his asylum claim and of his application to remain temporarily in the State. In addition, he has been evading his deportation since 31 October 2003 and should therefore present himself to the Garda authorities without any further delay.

As a matter of policy, I do not intend to reward persons who have failed a very fair and comprehensive asylum process, and who have thereafter proceeded to evade their deportation for several years, by granting such persons residency in the State. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if there has been a change in the circumstances of the person concerned, or new information has come to light which has a direct bearing on his case, there remains the option of applying to me for revocation of his Deportation Order pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (11) of the Immigration Act, 1999, as amended. However I wish to make clear that such an application would require substantial grounds to be successful.

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

Question 230: 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 Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19227/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned arrived in the State on 17 November, 2000 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.

The person concerned was informed by letter dated 25 October, 2001, 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, representations to the Minister, in writing, setting out the reasons why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State.

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. On 11 December, 2003, one of my predecessors refused temporary leave to remain in the State and instead signed a deportation order in respect of him. Notice of this order was served by registered post requiring him to present himself to the Member in Charge, Carlow Garda Station, Carlow, on 22 January 2004, in order to make travel arrangements for his deportation from the State. The person concerned failed to present himself as required and was classified as evading his deportation. He should therefore present himself to the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) without further delay.

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 GNIB.

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

Question 231: 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 7; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19228/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person concerned arrived in the State on 6 December 2002 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 30 November 2004, 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 submitted on behalf of the person concerned.

All representations submitted by or on behalf of the person concerned will be fully considered, 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, before the file is passed to me for decision.

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

Question 232: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will issue a temporary residency card to a person (details supplied) in Dublin 3 while awaiting closure of his case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19229/08]

Dermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I refer the Deputy to Parliamentary Questions No. 185 of Thursday 1 May 2008 and No. 247 of Thursday 3 April 2008 and the written replies to those questions.

The person concerned arrived in the State on 7 June 2002 and made an application 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 10 September 2003, 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 submitted on behalf of the person concerned.

The case file of the person concerned, including all representations submitted, will be carefully considered, 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, in advance of the file being passed to me for decision. Given that the person concerned has no legal basis for being in the State, it is not possible to provide him with any form of a temporary residence card.