Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

226. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the number of international protection applicants who have come from the UK before applying for international protection in Ireland for each of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022,2023, 2024 and to date 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66351/25]

Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

227. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the number of inadmissible international protection decisions made under Section 21 of the International Protection Bill 2015 made by the IPO and IPAT for international protection applicants, by reason of having come from the UK for each of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and to date 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66352/25]

Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

228. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the average processing time for inadmissible international protection decisions made under section 21 of the International Protection Bill 2015 by both the IPO and IPAT for applicants by reason of having come from the UK for each of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and to date in 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66353/25]

Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

229. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the number of inadmissible international protection decisions made under section 21 of the International Protection Bill 2015, by reason of having come from the UK that have “timed out” because the Department did not transfer or act on the decision within the time frame for removal permitted by law for each of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and to date in 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66354/25]

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 226, 227, 228 and 229 together.

My Department is taking all necessary steps to manage the international protection process efficiently and effectively, while ensuring the integrity of those processes is maintained at all times.

There are a number of circumstances where a person might apply at the International Protection Office (IPO) without first applying at a port of entry. They may enter at an airport with valid documentation for example but choose not to apply at that time. Or they may apply having been in the State for a period previously, for example on foot of a different permission to remain.

My Department’s assessment, based on the experience of staff and others working in the field, and based on the material gathered at interviews, is that in a significant proportion of cases, those applying for the first time in the IPO have entered over the land border. Details on the route travelled to Ireland are recorded as part of the applicants file at the IPO, but are not stored in a manner which allows detailed data to be extracted in the manner sought by the Deputy.

The below table provides a yearly breakdown of IP applications and the location the claim was made.

Ireland and the United Kingdom (UK) share a long history and common interest in the effective operation of the Common Travel Area (CTA) and work together to prevent any abuses of the CTA.

There is also significant operational cooperation between the Gardaí, UK Border Force, UK policing services and the Police Service of Northern Ireland in relation to both immigration and criminal matters. This strong practical engagement and cooperation serves the mutual interests of both Ireland and the UK, and will continue.

In relation to the inadmissibility process, the International Protection Act 2015, Section 21(2)(a) provides that an application for international protection is inadmissible where one or more of the following circumstances applies in relation to the person who is the subject of the application:

• Another member State has granted refugee status or subsidiary protection status to the person;
• A country other than a Member State is, in accordance with Section 21(15) of the 2015 Act, a first country of asylum for the person;
• The person arrived in the State from a safe third country that is, in accordance with Subsection 17, a safe country for the person.

Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

230. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the number of Dublin III transfer decisions made by the IPO and IPAT for international protection applicants each of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and to date in 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66355/25]

Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

231. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the average processing time for Dublin III decisions from initial application to the IPO to IPAT decision for international protection applicants for each of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and to date in 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66356/25]

Carol Nolan (Offaly, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

232. To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality the number of Dublin III transfer decision that have “timed out” because the Department did not transfer the applicant within the six months permitted by law for each of the years 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and to date in 2025; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [66357/25]

Jim O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay South, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 230, 231 and 232 together.

My Department is taking all necessary steps to manage the international protection process efficiently and effectively, while ensuring the integrity of those processes is maintained at all times.

Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 (Dublin III Regulations), came into force on 19 July 2013, and lays down the criteria and mechanisms for determining which EU country is responsible for examining an asylum application. The Dublin Regulation is based on the principle that the first Member State to facilitate entry to the EU should be responsible for examining the protection application.

A decision to transfer made under the Dublin III Regulations expires after six months. This extends to 18 months if the applicant has absconded. If an appeal is launched, a Dublin III decision expires six months from the date the appeal decision is given.

In practice, and in keeping with the experience of other Member States, effective implementation of the Dublin Regulation is challenging. Member States have found significant problems with the Dublin Regulation, including the lack of consistent implementation across the Member States and that shortcomings with the design of the Regulation makes it difficult to achieve its main objectives.

In advance of a transfer, it is necessary to inform the receiving State of the transfer and make the arrangements to transfer the person in the specific notification periods for each EU Member State. The notification periods range from 3 working days to the majority of EU Member States requiring at least 7 working days. Earlier this year I increased the permissible detention period to facilitate a transfer under the Regulations from 7 to 42 days, with the intention being to give the Garda National Immigration Bureau more capacity to make the required arrangements in advance of the transfer being effected.

Ireland has opted in to the EU Asylum and Migration Pact which is due to enter operation in June 2026. The Pact will provide a fair, sustainable and efficient asylum procedure. This will be achieved through convergence in asylum practices across the EU.

One of the major benefits for Ireland of the Pact is that it replaces the Dublin III Regulation with a more efficient and streamlined process.

The Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (AMMR) which will replace the Dublin III Regulation, provides for, among other things, streamlined criteria and reduced timeframes for determining the Member State responsible for determining an asylum application as well as revised rules on transferring responsibility and addressing evasion.

This will significantly improve the current system by reducing the administrative burden on the Member States seeking to transfer a person to the Member State. It will also extend the period by which a transfer must be carried out from 18 months to 3 years.

The table below shows the number of Dublin III transfer decisions issued by the IPO for international protection applicants from 2019 to 14 November 2025.

The table below shows the median processing time of Dublin III decisions at the IPO from when a formal request is accepted to the transfer decision issuing from 2019 to 23 November 2025.

International protection applicants have 10 days to lodge an appeal with the International Protection Appeals Tribunal in the case of Dublin III Regulation Appeals.

The table below shows the number of Dublin III Appeals accepted by the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT) from 2019 to 23 November 2025.

The table below shows the median processing time of IPAT Dublin III Appeals in months from 2019 to 23 November 2025.

The table below shows the number of Dublin III Appeals Decisions issued by the IPAT for international protection applicants from 2019 to 23 November 2025.

The table below shows the number of Dublin III transfer decisions that have expired (including in cases of absconding) from 2019 to 31 October 2025.

The figures for 2020-22 reflect the impact of Covid on returns arrangements, as returns were largely limited to cases involving criminality during that time.

Please note that figures are correct at time of issue and may be subject to data cleansing.