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

Question 292: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if permission to remain in the State on humanitarian grounds will be offered to persons (details supplied) in County Mayo; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37926/08]

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

I refer the Deputy to Parliamentary Question No. 808 of Wednesday 24 September 2008 and the written Reply to that Question.

The persons concerned are a husband and wife and their three children.

The first named person concerned entered the State with one of his daughters and claimed asylum in the State on 29 December 2004. They were refused asylum, following the consideration of their claims by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), the first named person concerned was informed, by letter dated 12 September 2005, that the Minister proposed to make Deportation Orders in respect of him and his daughter. He was 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 he and his daughter should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations were submitted on their behalf at that time.

Following consideration of their case under Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended) and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) on the prohibition of refoulement, the Minister signed Deportation Orders in respect of the first named person concerned and his daughter on 22 March 2006. These Deportation Orders were formally served by letter dated 24 March 2006.

On the 10 May 2006, an application was made on behalf of the daughter of the first named person concerned requesting that she be re-admitted to the asylum process in accordance with the provisions of Section 17 (7) of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended). Following consideration of this application, the application was refused and this decision was conveyed by letter dated 4 September 2006. The first named person concerned and his aforementioned daughter remain the subjects of Deportation Orders.

The second named person concerned claimed asylum in the State on 23 December 2004. Her application was refused following the consideration of her claim by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), the second named person concerned was informed, by letter dated 20 May 2008, 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 notified 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).

The second named person concerned submitted an application for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with these Regulations and, following consideration of this application, it was determined that she was not eligible for Subsidiary Protection in the State. She was notified of this decision by letter dated 30 October 2008.

The case file of the second named person concerned, including all representations submitted, will now 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 consideration has been completed, the case file of the second named person concerned is passed to me for decision.

The couple's other two children have lodged separate asylum applications. It is not the practice to comment in detail on individual asylum applications where a final decision has not been made.

As the Deputy will be aware, applications for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal which make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted.

A final decision on each application is made following receipt of the recommendation of the Refugee Applications Commissioner or the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, as appropriate.

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

Question 293: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in relation to the application for leave to remain in the State on humanitarian grounds in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37928/08]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 11 September 2003. His application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

The person concerned initiated Judicial Review Proceedings against the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, challenging the decision of the Tribunal in his case. These Proceedings were 'settled' resulting in the person concerned being afforded a fresh hearing before the Tribunal. This fresh Hearing took place but again the Refugee Appeals Tribunal concluded that the person concerned did not meet the criteria for recognition as a refugee.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was informed, by letter dated 28 October 2008, 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. In addition, he was notified of his 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).

The case of the person concerned will be considered further upon receipt of a response to my Department's letter dated 28 October 2008.