Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 May 1998

Vol. 491 No. 3

Written Answers. - Asylum Applications.

Gay Mitchell

Question:

428 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action, if any, he will take to deal with the concerns of a person (details supplied) in relation to the Refugee Act, 1996; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12201/98]

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

The letters enclosed with the Deputy's question are similar in content to many letters received by me over the past number of months. Indeed many Deputies have received similar letters which they in turn have passed to me. This has resulted in a situation where I have received two, three or even four copies of the same latter from the same letter writer. Such letters would appear to form part of a write-in campaign. I have my doubts about the benefits of such a procedure when the end results is that I have to assign staff to replying to such correspondence when this very staff would be better employed in helping to process the very significant backlog of asylum applications that currently exists.

For the benefit of the Deputy and all other interested parties I will set out the general contents of my replies to such letters.

There appears to be some misconception among groups and individuals about the asylum process in this State. Ireland fully lives up to its international obligations in the asylum area. People entitled under international law to protection are given protection. Despite views to the contrary, we have a long and honourable tradition in this regard. A corollary to the granting of protection to those in need of it is the fact that those found not to require protection must return to their countries of origin. The UNHCR recognise this and is on record as stating that such returns are necessary to protect the integrity of the asylum process. It may well happen that, in certain cases, persons who do not qualify for protection as refugees may be allowed to remain in the State on humanitarian grounds. I, and previous Ministers for Justice, have exercised our discretion in this regard where it has been appropriate to so do.

A popular misconception is that UNHCR dictates what a country's asylum policy should be. This is not the case, it is Ireland as a sovereign state which decides how it will process claims for refugee status in accordance with its international obligations. This is not to say that we do not take account of the views of the UNHCR, we do and we place great value on them.

The treatment of asylum seekers is an issue which requires great sensitivity. One of the tasks of the UNHCR and NGOs is to heighten our awareness of the issues facing asylum seekers. As a Government we have an obligation to hear what such organisations are saying and why they are saying it. Government is not of course obliged to assume that everything that may be said is to be taken on board and acted upon without question. There is also the duty on Government to hear other points of view and to assess fully and as best it can where the truth lies, where the needs are greatest and how needs — which sometimes can be quite conflicting — can best be met.

I have approached the implementation of the procedures for processing claims to refugee status in this spirit. I have listened, I have heard the different points of view, I have carefully assessed the propositions put to me, tried to find the right balance and have made my decisions. In reaching my decisions I was conscious of the fact that provisions of the Refugee Act were unworkable, that the 1985 "Von Arnim" arrangement was outdated, that the UNHCR was no longer able to assist in assessing cases on an ongoing basis and that the UNHCR stated that a new interim procedural arrangement was necessary. The new arrangements of 10 December followed closely the procedural provisions of the Refugee Act. Indeed, the "manifestly unfounded" criteria are taken directly from section 12 of the Act. Many people who have been particularly critical of these provisions have chosen to overlook this fact: in many cases the self-same people who laud the Refugee Act and seek to castigate the Government and myself for its non-implementation.

I have continued to listen to the concerns of UNHCR and NGOs as is evidenced by the fact that I agreed to amend the procedures set out in the letter of 10 December 1997 following a meeting in February of this year. The amendments met two particular concerns of these bodies and, as far as I am aware, the UNHCR are happy with the current arrangements as an interim measure.

I must defend both the Government's and my own position regarding the treatment of asylum seekers in the State. Since coming into Government, I have obtained Government approval to recruit an additional 72 staff to assist in processing applications for refugee status. I am also arranging for a refugee legal service to be established which will provide free legal assistance to asylum seekers in presenting their asylum claims. In addition, I have made arrangements to have a ‘one-stop-shop' for asylum seekers set up in Mount Street. The new premises will house officials processing asylum applications, the appeals authorities, the UNHCR, the proposed refugee legal service and the Eastern Health Board's refugee unit.

I am satisfied that the new procedures are reasonable, fair, transparent and in accord with the philosophy of the Refugee Act. They are also in accordance with our international obligations and humanitarian traditions in this area.