Kathleen Lynch
Question:451 Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Justice whether any asylum seekers were returned on third country grounds in 1996; and whether any asylum seekers were deported or expelled during 1996. [1766/97]
Written Answers. - Asylum Procedures.
Kathleen Lynch
Question:452 Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Justice whether the Dublin Convention is being implemented on an ad hoc basis prior to implementation of the Refugee Act, 1996, in spite of not having been ratified; the number of persons, if any, who have been denied access to the asylum procedure at port of entry on Dublin convention grounds; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [1767/97]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 451 and 452 together.
There is an internationally accepted concept that asylum seekers should apply for refugee status in the first safe country reached. This concept has been mentioned in replies to questions raised in this House in the past, for example, Questions Nos. 35 of 15 October 1992, 41 of 15 May 1996, and more recently in my reply to Question No. 210 of 30 October 1996 to the Deputy. In that latter reply, I stated,inter alia, that “instances have also arisen of persons seeking to make applications in this State where those applications should, in accordance with customary international practice, have been dealt with in another state. In instances such as this, applicants will not be admitted to the asylum process and will be returned to the state which should appropriately deal with their requests for refugee status. Such return will always be preceded by a clarification and confirmation that the other state is willing to accept back the person in question and to process his or her application.” I might also add that this course of action has been agreed with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees — UNHCR — the guardians of the 1951 UN Convention relating to the status of refugees.
In accordance with this internationally accepted practice, which has been the policy of successive Minister for Justice, 38 asylum seekers were advised in 1996 that they would not be admitted to our asylum determination process and that they should return to another state where their claims would be processed.
The Dublin Convention, which was signed in 1990, arose our of a process of intergovernmental co-operation in asylum matters between the then member states of the European Communities. Broadly speaking, the purpose of the convention is to lay down criteria for determining which member state is responsible for examining an asylum application. Its objective is to prevent a situation where an applicant for asylum could be sent from state to state "in orbit" with no state accepting responsibility for examining the application: essentially, convention is a set of procedural or technical rules. A motion for a resolution approving the ratification of the convention will be placed before this House shortly.
Nobody has been refused access to our asylum procedures at ports of entry. All applications for asylum are referred to my Department where, on examination of the facts of each individual case, a decision may be taken that an applicant should more properly have lodged an application in another state. As stated earlier, such a decision was taken in 38 cases in 1996. This said, however, no asylum seekers were expelled or deported to a safe third country in 1996.
Kathleen Lynch
Question:453 Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Justice whether recently adopted procedures require asylum seekers to provide documentary evidence of nationality before completed questionnaires are accepted or identity cards issued; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that many asylum seekers are forced to depart their countries of origin without such documentation; the plans, if any, she has to amend this procedure; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [1769/97]
I am fully aware that many asylum seekers are forced to flee their countries of origin without any documentation as to their identity. For this reason, and to assist them in their contacts with State agencies, my Department introduced identity cards for asylum seekers with effect from 1 September 1995. The Irish Refugee Council was consulted during the preparation of both the identity card and a revised questionnaire form and expressed their satisfaction with the development. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees also stated that they considered the revision of the questionnaire form and the issuing of identity cards as positive and constructive steps.
It is an important feature of the asylum determination process for an asylum seeker to show that he or she has grounds for being recognised as a refugee and that he or she is who they claim to be. It is necessary, therefore, for all asylum seekers to produce, as far as it is possible in their particular circumstances, some sort of evidence as to their identity. It should be recognised that not all asylum seekers flee their alleged countries of origin without some form of identifying documentation; indeed, many of our asylum seekers are in a position to produce identification papers.
Accordingly, it is common practice to advise all asylum seekers to try to secure and provide documentary evidence of their nationality and documentary evidence to support their application for asylum. It is not the practice, and has never been the practice, to prevent an applicant completing the questionnaire simply because he or she cannot provide such evidence.
I am aware, however, that in a very small number of cases identification cards have been held back for a number of days where applicants have not produced documentary evidence of identification. There were cases where it was evident that the information provided by the applicant was, to say the least, questionable. In such cases, the asylum seeker is invariably given documentation to enable him or her obtain access to the State's welfare services pending clarification of the matter.
I have no plans to amend the procedures at this time.