Joe McHugh (Donegal North East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 290: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will immediately make a decision in relation to the status of persons (details supplied) in County Meath who have been living in Mosney Accommodation Centre in view of the fact that the person's son is paying full international college fees at Letterkenny Institute of Technology, County Donegal, despite the fact that he completed his junior certificate and leaving certificate here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [45267/08]

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

The first and second named persons referred to by the Deputy are a wife and husband. The third named person referred to is their adult son.

The first named person concerned applied for asylum on 7 August 2002 but later withdrew her application and applied for residency in the State on the basis of her parentage of an Irish citizen child. The first named person concerned was refused residency in the State on the basis of her parentage of an Irish citizen child and this decision was conveyed to the person concerned by letter dated 12 March 2004. This communication also informed the first named person concerned that, arising from the refusal of her residency application and in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), 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 submitted on behalf of the first named person concerned at that time.

The first named person concerned re-applied for asylum on 1 April 2004 and her application was refused following the investigation of her claims by the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Arising from the refusal of her asylum application, the first named person concerned was informed, by letter dated 6 December 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 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 submitted on behalf of the first named person concerned.

The first named person concerned again applied for permission to remain in the State on the basis of her parentage of an Irish citizen child, born in the State before 1 January 2005, in accordance with the Revised Arrangements announced by my predecessor on 15 January 2005, commonly referred to as the IBC/05 Scheme. Following the consideration of this application, a decision was taken to refuse the application and this decision was conveyed in writing to the first named person concerned by letter dated 12 January 2006.

The first named person concerned was later 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). No such application was submitted.

The case file of the first named person concerned, including all representations submitted, now falls to be considered in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended). All representations submitted by and on behalf of the first named person concerned will 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, before the file of the first named person concerned is passed to me for decision.

The third named person concerned arrived in the State on 14 April 2003 as an unaccompanied minor but was later reunited with his mother and included as a child dependant on his mother's asylum application.

The Deputy might wish to note that all decisions taken in respect of the first named person concerned applied equally to the third named person concerned. However, given that the third named person concerned has recently become an adult, he was invited, by letter dated 28 November 2008, to submit representations, specific to his circumstances, that he would wish to have considered before the Minister makes a final decision in his case. While I understand that no such representations have yet been received, it is reasonable to assume that any such representations submitted by or on behalf of the third named person concerned will refer to any educational course he is pursuing. The Deputy can be assured that any such representations submitted will be fully considered before a final decision is taken in the case of the third named person concerned.

The second named person concerned applied for asylum on 18 November 2002. He withdrew this application on 10 February 2003 and applied for residency in the State on the basis of his parentage of an Irish citizen child. By letter dated 12 Mach 2004, the second named person concerned was informed 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. The second named person concerned re-applied for asylum on 1 April 2004 and, in light of this fact, the second named person concerned was notified by letter dated 22 April 2004 that his application for residency in the State could not be determined until such time as his asylum application had been finalised.

The asylum application of the second named person concerned was refused following the investigation of his claims by the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Arising from the refusal of his asylum application, the second named person concerned was informed, by letter dated 30 December 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 were submitted on behalf of the second named person concerned.

The second named person concerned applied for permission to remain in the State on the basis of his parentage of an Irish citizen child, born in the State before 1 January 2005, in accordance with the Revised Arrangements announced by my predecessor on 15 January 2005, commonly referred to as the IBC/05 Scheme. Following the consideration of this application, a decision was taken to refuse the application and this decision was conveyed in writing to the second named person concerned by letter dated 12 January 2006.

Arising from the refusal of his application under the IBC/05 Scheme, the second named person concerned was notified, by letter dated 2 November 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. 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). No such application was submitted.

The case file of the second named person concerned now falls to be considered in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended). All representations submitted by and on behalf of the second named person concerned will 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, before the file of the second named person concerned is passed to me for decision.