Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 77: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his policy regarding persons who have been refused asylum but who have no State to which they can be deported; the options which are available for a person (details supplied) in County Clare who has been refused entry to the only country for which he has travel documents and who does not wish to be considered for leave to remain; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [32896/09]

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

The person concerned arrived in the State in September 2008 and applied for asylum. In accordance with Section 9 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended), the person concerned was entitled to remain in the State until his application for asylum was decided. His asylum application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner. The person concerned was advised of his entitlement to appeal this determination to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal but he chose not to do so.

In accordance with current policy and the law as it relates to persons refused asylum, the person concerned was notified, by letter dated 15 June 2009, that, under Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), 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 a Deportation Order should not be made against him. 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 person concerned has indicated a willingness to return to a country of origin with which he has had a past association and indeed holds a travel document issued by the authorities of that country and claims to have direct family members living in that country. Against this background, officials from my Department have endeavoured, through the International Organisation for Migration, to facilitate the return of the person concerned to that country but to date these efforts have been unsuccessful. Continued efforts are being made in this regard and it is hoped that a favourable conclusion can be achieved. Should these efforts fail, the position in the State of the person concerned will then fall to be considered by reference to the other options notified to him in my Department's letter dated 15 June, 2009.