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

Question 626: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for residency in respect of persons (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1740/10]

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

The applicant, together with his wife and daughter, arrived in the State on 13 September 2005 and applied for asylum on 14 September 2005. Their applications were refused following consideration of their cases by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner, and, on appeal, by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the persons concerned were informed, by letters dated 15 February 2006, that the Minister proposed to make Deportation Orders in respect of them. 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 she should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State.

Their cases were then 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 their behalf by their legal representative for permission to remain in the State. On 2 May 2006, I refused permission to remain temporarily in the State and instead signed Deportation Orders in respect of them. Notice of these orders was served by registered post requiring the persons concerned to 'present' to the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB), 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2 in order to make travel arrangements for their deportation from the State.

On 8 November 2006 the persons concerned submitted an application for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations 2006 (S.I. No. 518 of 2006). The Subsidiary Protection applications were not considered, as the regulations are not applicable in cases where a deportation order was made before coming into operation of the regulations. The persons' legal representative was notified of this decision by letter dated 23 November 2006. Judicial Review proceedings were instituted challenging this decision. These proceedings were settled on 3 March 2008 following the findings of Justice Feeney in the cases of Hila and Djolo, that I have a discretion under Regulation 4(2) of the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations, 2006 S.I. No. 518 of 2006 to accept and consider applications for subsidiary protection from persons who do not have an automatic right to apply but who have identified new facts or circumstances which demonstrate a change of position from that which pertained at the time the deportation order was made.

By letter dated 5 November 2007, the applicants' legal representative was advised that they could seek the exercise of Ministerial discretion pursuant to Regulation 4 (2) of the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations, 2006 by making further representations identifying any new facts or circumstances which demonstrated a change of position from that at the time the Deportation Order was made on 2 May 2006. Representations were received on 27 November 2007. Following consideration of the information submitted, the applications were refused. The persons concerned and their legal representative were notified of this decision by letter dated 4 December 2007.

The applicants instituted Judicial Review proceedings on 4 February 2008 challenging the decision that they had established no grounds which would enable me to exercise my discretion under Regulation 4(2) to consider an application for subsidiary protection from them and accordingly, as the matter is sub judice, I do not propose to comment further.

The couple's other two children have lodged separate asylum applications. It is not the practice to comment in detail on individual asylum applications where a final decision has not yet been made.

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

Question 627: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for residency in respect of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1741/10]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 12 June 2007. In accordance with Section 9 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended), the person concerned was entitled to remain in the State until her application for asylum was decided. Her asylum application was refused following consideration of her case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Arising from the refusal of her asylum application, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was notified, by letter dated 22 September 2009, that the Minister proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of her. She 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 her. 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 person concerned submitted an application for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with these Regulations and this application is under consideration at present. When consideration of this application has been completed, the person concerned will be notified in writing of the outcome.

In the event that the application for Subsidiary Protection is refused, the position in the State of the person concerned will then be decided by reference to the provisions of 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. All representations submitted will be considered 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 person concerned.

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

Question 628: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for residency in respect of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 11; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1742/10]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 13 April 2006. In accordance with Section 9 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended), the person concerned was entitled to remain in the State until her application for asylum was decided. Her asylum application was refused following consideration of her case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Arising from the refusal of her asylum application, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was notified, by letter dated 25 June 2008, that the Minister proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of her. She 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 her. 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 person concerned submitted an application for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with these Regulations and this application is under consideration at present. When consideration of this application has been completed, the person concerned will be notified in writing of the outcome.

In the event that the application for Subsidiary Protection is refused, the position in the State of the person concerned will then be decided by reference to the provisions of 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. All representations submitted will be considered 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 person concerned.

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

Question 629: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a decision will be made regarding a residency application in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1743/10]

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

The person concerned and her two children applied for asylum on 25 October 2006. The two children were included on their mother's asylum application. In accordance with Section 9 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended), the person concerned and her two children were entitled to remain in the State until her application for asylum was decided. Her asylum application was refused following consideration of her case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.

Arising from the refusal of her asylum application, and in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended), the person concerned was notified, by letter dated 6 April 2009, that the Minister proposed to make Deportation Orders in respect of her and her two children. She was 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 Deportation Orders should not be made against her and her two children. 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 person concerned submitted an application for Subsidiary Protection in the State in accordance with these Regulations and this application is under consideration at present. When consideration of this application has been completed, the person concerned will be notified in writing of the outcome.

In the event that the application for Subsidiary Protection is refused, the position in the State of the person concerned and her two children will then be decided by reference to the provisions of 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. All representations submitted will be considered 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 person concerned.