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

Question 172: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding the residency status in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [45251/09]

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

The first named person concerned applied for asylum on 2 February 2005. 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 and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Arising from the refusal of his asylum application, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the first named person concerned was notified, by letter dated 30 September 2005, 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 a Deportation Order should not be made against him.

Representations have been received on behalf of the first named person concerned and these representations will be fully 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 is passed to me for decision. Once a decision has been made, this decision and the consequences of the decision will be conveyed in writing to the first named person concerned.

In relation to the second named person concerned, the Deputy will appreciate that it is not the practice to comment on individual asylum applications where a final decision has not been made. However, the Deputy may wish to note that where an asylum application is made, the outcome of that application is determined at first instance by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

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

Question 173: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will consider extended residency in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8; if he will defer deportation at this time; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [45252/09]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 6 May 2004. Her daughter was born in the State on 12 May 2004 and is an Irish citizen. This person notified my Department that she wished to withdraw her asylum application as she was returning to Nigeria. It appears that she left the State in June 2004. Her asylum application was refused thereafter.

This person returned to the State with her daughter in or around February 2005. Her son was born in the State on 20 June 2005. Her application for permission to remain under the IBC 2005 scheme was refused on 8 December 2005. Following consideration of all representations for leave to remain submitted on their behalf, I signed Deportation Orders in respect of the persons concerned on 4 February 2009.

In relation to the second person concerned, It is not the practice to comment on individual asylum applications.

As the Deputy will be aware, applications for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, which make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted.

The recommendation of the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner is currently the subject of ongoing judicial review proceedings. There are also separate judicial review proceedings challenging the decision to make the Deportation Orders.

As both matters are sub judice, I cannot comment further.