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

Question 657: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in relation to an application for residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1594/09]

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

Question 658: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the procedure to be followed in the case of an application for green card renewal in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare. [1595/09]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 657 and 658 together.

The current position of the person concerned is that following consideration of her 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, as an exceptional measure and subject to certain stated conditions, the person concerned was granted temporary Leave to Remain in the State for one year until 20 February 2009. The person concerned was notified of this decision by letter dated 20 February 2008.

The person concerned should now write to my Department an make an application for the renewal of her Leave to Remain in the State. She should enclose up to date representations, including her current employment details, and any other relevant information. Her application will then be considered and the person concerned will be notified of the outcome in due course.

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

Question 659: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position on an application for residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 7; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1596/09]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State on 28 August 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 22 January 2003 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.

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 representations submitted on his behalf for permission to remain in the State. On 12 July 2004 one of my predecessors 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 on Tuesday 10 August 2004 in order to make travel arrangements for his removal from the State. He failed to comply with his reporting requirements and was classified as evading his deportation.

By letter dated 26 August 2008, the legal representative of the person concerned lodged an application for Subsidiary Protection pursuant to the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations, 2006 — Statutory Instrument No.518 of 2006. By letter dated 10 September 2008 the legal representative of the person concerned was invited to make an application under Regulation 4(2) of the aforesaid Regulations setting out any new facts or circumstances relevant to the person concerned, or his country of origin, which had arisen since the original decision to deport was made and which related to a possible entitlement to Subsidiary Protection. A condition of this letter was that any representations were subject to a deadline of 10 working days from the date of the letter.

No representations were received within the specified timeline and a decision was taken to issue a further letter dated 28 October 2008 requesting the lodgement of representations and, on that occasion, affording a timeline of 5 working days for the receipt of same. As no representations were forthcoming, a final letter dated 4 December 2008 issued to the legal representative of the person concerned advising that the GNIB had been informed to proceed with the enforcement of the Deportation Order. The effect of the Deportation Order is that the person concerned must leave the State and remain thereafter out of the State. The enforcement of the Deportation Order is an operational matter for the GNIB.