Ciarán Lynch (Cork South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality the numbers of persons who were refused entry to the State and subsequently claimed asylum and the stated nationalities of these persons; if he will provide a full numerical breakdown in tabular form, of all nationalities and numbers of persons refused permission to enter who were subsequently removed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52016/12]

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In 2012, up to 21st November, a total of 2,037 non-nationals were refused permission to enter the State. 126 of these persons were subsequently permitted to enter the State having made an application pursuant to the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended).

Details of the top five nationalities of persons refused leave to land in 2012 (up to 21st November) who did not subsequently make an application pursuant to the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) are set out at Table 1 below and details of the top five nationalities of persons refused leave to land in 2012 (up to 21st November) who subsequently made an application pursuant to the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) and thus were permitted to enter the State are set out at Table 2.

Table 1. Nationality of persons Refused Leave to land in 2012 (up to 21st November) who did not subsequently make an application pursuant to the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended).

Table 2. Nationality of persons Refused Leave to land in 2012 (up to 21st November) who subsequently made an application pursuant to the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) and thus were permitted to remain in the State.

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

To ask the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will review the decision of his predecessor in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Waterford in view of the fact that a considerable doubt exists as to the conclusions reached by the immigration authorities with particular reference to the conclusion reached in respect of photographic evidence of identification; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [52084/12]

Alan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Following a comprehensive and thorough examination 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 21 May, 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 accordance with the provisions of the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations 2006.

Following the consideration of her application for Subsidiary Protection,a decision was taken that the person concerned was not eligible for Subsidiary Protection.

The case of the person concerned was then 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 a Deportation Order was made in respect of her. A Deportation Order was signed on 16th November, 2012.

I am satisfied that the applications made by the person concerned for asylum and for temporary leave to remain in the State were fairly and comprehensively examined and, therefore, the decision to make a Deportation Order against her is justified.

Queries in relation to the status of individual immigration cases may be made directly to the INIS by e-mail using the Oireachtas Mail facility which has been specifically established for this purpose. This service enables up to date information on such cases to be obtained without the need to seek information by way of the Parliamentary Questions process. The Deputy may consider using the e-mail service except in cases where the response from the INIS is, in the Deputy’s view, inadequate or too long awaited.