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

Question 127: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Monaghan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42070/08]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 7 January 2005. Her application was refused following consideration of her case 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 person concerned was informed, by letter dated 29 June 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 were received from the person concerned at that time.

The person concerned has also submitted an application for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations, 2006 (S.I. No. 518 of 2006) 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 128: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if leave to remain temporarily in the State will be offered to a person (details supplied) in County Louth; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42071/08]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 31 December 2001. Two minor children of the person concerned were included in her application. Her application was refused following consideration of her case 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 person concerned was informed, by letter dated 28 February 2003, that the Minister proposed to make Deportation Orders in respect of her and her two children. She 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 she and her children should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Representations were submitted on behalf of the person concerned at that time.

Following consideration of the case of the person concerned, 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, Deportation Orders were signed in respect of the person concerned and her two children on 22 February 2005. Notice of these Orders was served by registered letter dated 23 March 2005 requiring the person concerned and her two children to present themselves at the Offices of the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) on a specified date in order to make travel arrangements for their deportation from the State.

Judicial Review proceedings were instituted on behalf of the person concerned on 24 May 2005 challenging the decisions to make Deportation Orders in respect of the person concerned and her two children. These Proceedings were subsequently withdrawn by the person concerned who was afforded the opportunity to submit fresh representations within a period of 21 days. While no representations were received in my Department within the agreed timeframe, the person concerned, through her new legal representative, has contended that this situation arose as a result of inaction on the part of her previous legal representative rather than as a result of any act or omission on her part. The person concerned, through her new legal representative, submitted fresh representations to my Department on 9 June 2008.

In light of the status of the person concerned as a person subject to a valid Deportation Order, the representations lodged on behalf of the person concerned are being treated as an application for revocation of the existing Deportation Orders, pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(11) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended). When a decision has been made on this application, this decision, and the consequences of the decision, will be conveyed in writing to the person concerned.

The Deputy may be assured that the existing Deportation Orders will not be enforced pending the consideration of the Section 3(11) application referred to.

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

Question 129: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the current or expected residency status in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42072/08]

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

The immigration case histories and up to date positions of the three persons concerned, a husband, wife and child, are almost identical. Accordingly, for the purposes of the Deputy's Question, I will deal with the three cases as one.

The persons concerned applied for asylum on 2 February 2007. Their applications were refused following consideration of their cases 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 persons concerned were informed, by letter dated 18 February 2008 in the case of the first named person concerned and by letter dated 15 February 2008 in the cases of the second and third named persons concerned, that the Minister proposed to make Deportation Orders in respect of them. They were 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. In addition, they were notified of their 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 persons concerned submitted applications for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with these Regulations and, following consideration of these applications, it was determined that the persons concerned were not eligible for Subsidiary Protection in the State. The persons concerned were notified of these decisions by letters dated 15 October 2008.

The case files of the persons 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 these latter considerations have been completed, the case files of the persons concerned are passed to me for decision.