Written answers

Tuesday, 19 January 2010

Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Asylum Applications

9:00 pm

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

Question 633: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, further to Parliamentary Question No. 219 of 2 December 2009 in respect of persons (details supplied) wherein it was stated that the case was then examined under section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1999 and section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996, as amended, on the prohibition of refoulement, if such examination was sufficiently detailed to justify the outcomes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1747/10]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 2 February 2006 on her own behalf, and on 30 March 2006 on behalf of her child. 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.

The person concerned was informed, by letter dated 8 January 2009, that the Minister proposed to make Deportation Orders in respect of her and her child. She was given three options in accordance with Section 3(3)(b)(ii) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), to be exercised within 15 working days. Namely, to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to the making of Deportation Orders or to make representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why she and her child should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State i.e. why she should not be deported.

This communication also advised the person concerned 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. Following consideration of the information submitted, the application was refused. The person concerned and her legal representative were notified of this decision by letter dated 23 October 2009.

Her case was 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 her behalf by her legal representative for permission to remain in the State. On 28 October 2009, I refused permission to remain temporarily in the State and instead signed Deportation Orders in respect of her and her child. Notice of these orders was served by registered post requiring the person concerned and her child to 'present' to the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB), 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2.

The legal representatives of the person concerned subsequently made an application seeking consent, pursuant to Section 17(7) of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended), to allow their client make a further application for a declaration of refugee status. The information provided was fully considered and the outcome was that the application for re-admission was refused. The person's legal representatives were notified of this decision on 6th January, 2010.

The person concerned continues to meet the presentation requirements of the Garda National Immigration Bureau (G.N.I.B.) in accordance with Section 8(1)(b) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended. She last presented on 14th January, 2010 and is due to present again today 19th January, 2010.

I am satisfied that the applications made by the person concerned for asylum, for temporary leave to remain in the State and for Subsidiary Protection, together with all refoulement issues, were fairly and comprehensively examined and, as such, the decision to deport her and her child is justified.

The effect of the Deportation Order is that the person concerned must leave the State and remain thereafter out of the State.

The enforcement of the Deportation Order is an operational matter for the GNIB.

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

Question 634: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for residency and family reunification in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Waterford; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1748/10]

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

The person concerned applied for asylum on 13 January 2009. 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 5 January 2010, 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 15 working day period referred to in my Department's letter of 5 January 2010 expires on 27 January 2010. It is open to the person concerned to make representations and/or apply for Subsidiary Protection in the State within that period. In any event, the case of the person concerned will not be further processed until the 15 working day period referred to has elapsed.

The Deputy might to note that the current position in the State of the person concerned is not such as would confer any entitlement to family reunification.

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

Question 635: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application for residency in respect of persons (details supplied) in Dublin 8; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1749/10]

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

The first named person concerned applied for asylum on 3 December 2007. In accordance with Section 9 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended), he 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 10 September 2008, 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. 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 first named 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 first named 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 first named 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 first named person concerned.

The second and third persons referred to, infant children born in 2006 and 2008 respectively, are the subject of individual asylum applications. As the Deputy will be aware, it is not my Department's policy to comment on individual asylum applications where a final decision has not been made and this position applies in the context of the second and third persons referred to.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.