Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 517: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding persons (details supplied) in County Tipperary who have applied for subsidiary protection. [10840/09]

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

The immigration case histories and up to date positions of the first and second named persons concerned, a husband and wife, are almost identical. As a result, for the purposes of the Deputy's Question, I will deal with the two cases as one.

The persons concerned applied for asylum in the State on 25 February 2003. Following investigation by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner, it was established that the persons concerned had previously made asylum applications in the United Kingdom and, as such, a determination was made that the persons concerned should be transferred to the United Kingdom for the purposes of having their asylum applications examined there. The first named person concerned appealed the determination in respect of him to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. The Tribunal affirmed the determination of the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner. The second named person concerned also appealed the determination in respect of her but that appeal was refused as it was not submitted within the specified time period. A Deportation Order was signed in respect of the second named person concerned on 6 May 2004.

The first named person concerned initiated Judicial Review Proceedings in the High Court, challenging the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal in his case. The High Court refused the Judicial Review Leave Application with the consequence that the earlier decisions of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and the Minister stood. A Deportation Order was signed in respect of the first named person concerned on 3 August 2004.

The persons concerned initiated further Judicial Review Proceedings in the High Court, challenging the Minister's decisions to make Deportation Orders in their cases. Following the conclusion of those Proceedings, the Deportation Orders were revoked on 31 July 2006 and the persons concerned were re-admitted to the asylum process at the commencement of the process. The couple had a child born in the State in late 2006 and this child was included as part of the asylum application of the second named person concerned.

The new applications for asylum were refused following the separate 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 separate letters, dated 15 January 2009 in the case of the first named person concerned and dated 14 October 2008 in the case of the second named person concerned, that the Minister proposed to make Deportation Orders in respect of them and their child. 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 have submitted applications for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with these Regulations and these applications are under consideration at present. When consideration of these applications have been completed, the persons concerned will be notified in writing of the outcomes.

In the event that the Subsidiary Protection applications are refused, the case files of the persons 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 files are passed to me for decision.