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

Question 226: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in relation to the application for residency in the case of persons (details supplied) in Dublin 22; if a review of the deportation order will be undertaken; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36348/09]

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

The first person concerned arrived in the state with her two children in November 2007 and they made an application for asylum on the 27th November 2007. The application for refugee status was refused following consideration of the 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 6th March 2009, that I proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of her. The letter also informed her of the three options now open to her, one being to make written representations setting out reasons why she should be allowed to remain temporarily in the state. In addition, she was 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).

The second person concerned was born in the State on the 4th January 2008 and is the infant daughter of the first person concerned. On the 23rd January 2008, an application for asylum was made on her behalf by her mother. This application was refused following consideration of the 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 6th March 2009, that I proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of her. The letter also informed her of the three options now open to her, one being to make written representations to myself setting out reasons why she should be allowed to remain temporarily in the state. In addition, she was 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).

The people concerned submitted representations for Leave to Remain and Subsidiary Protection dated 6th April 2009 to my Department. The application for Subsidiary Protection was considered and refused by my Department on the 20th May 2009. An examination of the file under Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999 and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 was then compiled and the file was forwarded to myself recommending Deportation on the 20th May 2009. I considered all aspects of the files and made Deportation Orders in respect of the people concerned on the 27th May 2009.

The persons concerned have instituted Judicial Review proceedings on the 15th June 2009 challenging the refusal to grant Subsidiary Protection and seeking to quash the Deportation Orders made in respect of them. Accordingly, this case is sub judice and I do not propose to comment further.