Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 19 Feb 1998

Vol. 487 No. 5

Written Answers - Asylum Applications.

Róisín Shortall

Question:

126 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if the new procedures now in operation in relation to the processing of applications for asylum were agreed with UNHCR; the length of time that these procedures will apply and if it is proposed that they would be reviewed; his views on whether the new procedures undermine the Refugee Act, 1996; the training, if any, provided for staff who are dealing with asylum applications; if he will avail of training provided by UNHCR; the access which applicants have to legal assistance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4459/98]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue)

The introduction of revised procedures to deal with applications for refugee status became necessary as the arrangements made in 1985, involving formal consultation with UNHCR in each individual case, were no longer workable due to the huge increase in numbers applying and a new approach was necessary. The 1985 administrative arrangement worked well when the number of applications being lodged in the State were less than 60 a year. The procedures were not designed, however, to handle, and were incapable of handling, the increased volume of recent years. The new procedures which were drawn up in July 1997 and, following extensive consultation with the UNHCR, finalised in December 1997 are based on the philosophy of the Refugee Act, 1996, and will, I am satisfied, bring about an improvement in the position, not just in fairness to those who have applied for refugee status who are entitled to a speedy decision but also to the taxpayer who must support applicants and their families while a decision is pending.

My Department provides £120 per case in legal aid for asylum seekers to present their cases to the appeals authority. This amount is paid to the legal representatives, who are engaged independently by asylum seekers, on certification by the appeals authority that the representatives have acted in the case. The fee of £120 is the same as that paid by the Legal Aid Board under its private practioners scheme for legal services provided for certain District Court family law cases.

As part of my ongoing review of the whole asylum issue I am considering how best the issue of legal aid might be tackled. In this regard I am availing myself of the advice of the UNHCR. Given its experience in other parts of the world, I consider it would be foolish to act without consultation with that body. Various options are being considered and a decision in the matter is expected soon.

As I have stated in this House on a number of occasions my Department has full responsibility for the training of officials who deal with asylum matters. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has provided, and has given a commmitment to continue to provide, training in asylum law and practice geared to the needs of the staff and other officials involved in the asylum process.

Extensive training courses, run in conjunction with the UNHCR, are currently being prepared and officials of the asylum division are meeting on a regualr basis with UNHCR representatives to finalise details of a comprehensive training programme for existing staff and for new staff who will be assigned to the asylum division shortly.