I thank the members of the joint committee for making time available to consider this motion which relates to the exercise of the opt-in by Ireland to the proposals from the European Commission for the recasting of the Dublin regulation and the Eurodac regulation. Ireland currently takes part in the application of these two interrelated EC regulations which are now proposed to be recast. Accordingly, as will be clear at the end of my contribution today, it is proposed that Ireland maintains this position of full participation in the Dublin system.
The two proposals are presented pursuant to Title IV of the EC treaty and therefore do not automatically apply to Ireland or the UK under the terms of the relevant Amsterdam treaty protocol. The protocol provides that Ireland may opt into a proposed measure within three months of it being presented if it wishes to take part in its adoption. Ireland may exercise this option by notifying the President of the Council in writing. As the two proposals were adopted by the European Commission in early December 2008, time is now short for completion of the process for the opt-in so that Ireland may take part in the adoption of the two proposals.
Under Article 29.4.6° of the Constitution, the exercise of the possibility to opt into a Title IV measure is subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas. On 10 February 2009, the Government authorised the exercise of the opt-in to the adoption and application of the two proposals subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas. This is the business we are about here today.
The two proposals are subject to the co-decision procedure involving the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament set out in Article 251 of the EC treaty. The proposals are also examples of the use of the recasting technique pursuant to the Community's normal legislative process. Recasting involves the adoption of a new legal Act which incorporates in a single text both the substantive amendments which it makes to an earlier Act and the unchanged provisions of that Act. The new legal Act replaces and repeals the earlier Act. Under the terms of the 2001 EU interinstitutional agreement on the recasting technique, substantive amendments and new recitals are clearly distinguished from the provisions and recitals which remain unchanged. Accordingly, substantive changes are indicated by shadowed text on the documents presented by the European Commission.
The two proposals were included in a range of proposed measures in the field of asylum announced by the European Commission in its communication of June 2008 entitled, Policy Plan on Asylum: An Integrated Approach to Protection across the EU. In its policy plan on asylum, the Commission announced a package of proposals which aim to ensure a higher degree of harmonisation and better standards of protection for the common European asylum system. The Commission's action plan set out a three-strand strategy comprising: better quality and enhanced harmonisation of standards of international protection, particularly proposed amendments to the directives in the field of asylum dealing with reception conditions, procedures and qualification; practical co-operation, particularly a proposal for the establishment of a European asylum support office with the remit of developing practical co-operation between the administrations in the member states in charge of examining asylum applications; and promoting responsibility and solidarity within the EU and between the Union and third countries, particularly proposed amendments to the Dublin system, solidarity mechanisms within the EU and external solidarity including a proposed EU resettlement scheme.
In December 2008, as a first step in the implementation of its action plan, the European Commission adopted proposals for the recasting of the Dublin regulation and the related Eurodac regulation. In the European Pact on Immigration and Asylum, adopted in October 2008, the European Council expressed broad support for the Commission's policy plan on asylum. The European Council stated that it considers that the time has come to take new initiatives to complete the establishment of the common European asylum system, provided for in the Hague Programme, and thus to offer a higher degree of protection as proposed by the Commission in its plan.
The Dublin system consists of the Dublin regulation, the Eurodac regulation and their two implementing regulations. In an area without controls at the internal borders of the member states the twin problems of "asylum shopping" and "refugees in orbit" could arise. A mechanism for determining responsibility for asylum applications lodged in the member states was needed in order, on the one hand, to guarantee effective access to the procedures for determining refugee status and not to compromise the objective of the rapid processing of asylum applications, and, on the other, to prevent abuse of asylum procedures in the form of multiple applications for asylum submitted by the same person in several member states with the sole aim of extending his or her stay in the member states.
Arrangements for determining responsibility for considering asylum applications were initially part of the intergovernmental Schengen Convention. These arrangements were replaced with the convention determining the state responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the member states of the European Communities. This convention was known as the Dublin Convention. To support the operation of the Dublin Convention, a Council regulation was adopted in December 2000 for the establishment of Eurodac as a Community-wide system for the comparison of fingerprints of asylum applicants. In February 2003, the Dublin regulation was adopted to replace the Dublin Convention with a Community legal instrument.
In parallel with the association of several non-EU states to the Schengen acquis, the Community has concluded agreements associating these countries also to the Dublin acquis. Accordingly, in addition to the 27 EU member states, the Dublin system includes Iceland, Norway and Switzerland, and is intended to include Liechtenstein in the future.
The Dublin regulation was adopted in February 2003 and is considered to be the cornerstone of the common European asylum system. Its purpose is to establish the criteria and mechanisms for determining the member state responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the member states by a third country national.
It significantly improved the Dublin Convention while being based on the same general principles, in particular that responsibility for examining an application should primarily lie with the member state which played the greatest part in the applicant's entry into and residence in the territories of the member states, with some exceptions designed to protect family unity. The Dublin regulation provides that an application for asylum or international protection lodged by a third country national at the border or on the territory of a member state shall be examined by a single member state which shall be determined in accordance with the hierarchy of criteria set out in Chapter III of the regulation. The member state responsible is determined on the basis of the situation obtaining when the asylum seeker first lodged his or her application with a member state.
The regulation provides that the member state responsible shall be obliged to "take charge" of an asylum seeker who has lodged an application in a different member state or to "take back" an asylum seeker whose application is under examination and who is in the territory of another member state without permission. The transfer of an asylum seeker to the member state responsible shall be carried out at the latest within six months of acceptance of the request that charge be taken. Where the transfer does not take place within the six months time limit responsibility shall lie with the member state in which the application for asylum was lodged. This time limit may be extended up to a maximum of 18 months if the asylum seeker absconds.
The proposal generally maintains the existing instrument which lays down member states' obligations vis-à-vis each other and member states’ obligations vis-à-vis asylum seekers subject to the Dublin procedure. The proposal also contains new elements in relation to the following: the scope of the regulation, which is to be extended to include subsidiary protection in addition to refugee protection; enhanced legal safeguards for persons falling under the Dublin procedure, including provisions relating to a personal interview, detention and an effective judicial remedy; enhanced provisions relating to family unity, unaccompanied minors and other vulnerable groups; greater clarity regarding the discretionary clauses allowing for derogation to be made from the strict application of the Dublin criteria for humanitarian and compassionate reasons; and temporary suspension of transfers in circumstances of particular pressure on the reception capacities of a member state or an inadequate level of protection in relation to a member state.
In December 2000 the Eurodac regulations established Eurodac as a Community-wide information technology system for the comparison of fingerprints of asylum seekers. Eurodac facilitates the application of the Dublin regulation in respect of applicants for asylum, third country nationals apprehended in connection with the irregular crossing of an external border and third country nationals found illegally present in a member state. The Eurodac system consists of the following: a central unit, established within the European Commission equipped with a computerised fingerprint recognition system; a computerised central database in which the data are processed for the purpose of comparing fingerprint data; and a means of transmission between the member states and the central database.
The proposal aims to improve the efficient use of the Eurodac database in relation to prompt transmission of fingerprints to the central unit, to update provisions relating to the management of the database and to unblock data on persons granted protection in a member state. The proposal aims to ensure respect of data protection principles and to provide for supervision by the European Data Protection Supervisor. In accordance with the Irish Data Protection Acts, the Data Protection Commissioner is the national supervisory authority for the purpose of Eurodac regulation.
The proposal also foresees the establishment of a management authority for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of visas, immigration and asylum. This authority is to be responsible, in particular, for the Schengen information system, SIS ll, the visa information system, VIS, and Eurodac.
The Dublin system is a cornerstone of the common European asylum system and is essential to avoid the phenomena of asylum shopping and secondary movements of asylum seekers within the European Union. During 2008, a total of 271 asylum seekers were transferred from Ireland to other states in the Dublin system and a total of 86 asylum seekers were transferred to Ireland. This represents a significant proportion of the total number of 3,866 asylum applications in 2008.
The stated aim of the proposals is to increase the efficiency of the Dublin system and to ensure higher standards of protection for persons falling under the Dublin procedure. The proposals retain the same underlying principles as in the existing Dublin system, namely that responsibility for examining an application for international protection lies primarily with the member state which played the greatest part in the applicant's entry into or residence in the territories of the member states.
Some of the new elements now proposed by the Commission give rise to issues relating to the workability of the Dublin system in Ireland. During the course of the legislative process we will seek to address these elements, particularly in co-operation with our partners within the Council framework and with the European Parliament, to preserve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Dublin system.
It is considered in the best interests of Ireland to opt into the proposals in the initial three-month period to take part in negotiation of recasting the legal instruments underpinning the Dublin system. The alternative to not opting into whatever revised arrangements are adopted for the Dublin system would almost certainly result in the eventual exclusion of Ireland from the Dublin system.
On the basis of experience we know that this could lead to Ireland being perceived by international networks of people-smugglers as a favoured destination for claiming asylum in the European Union. Outside the Dublin system, we could expect a significant increase in asylum applications, either new or repeat applications, which are not well founded and which are made primarily for the purpose of gaining a foothold on the territory of an EU member state in circumstances where an immigration permission would not ordinarily be available. Such a development would place an additional burden on our asylum determination system, would add to the average time period for processing an asylum application and would delay the granting of protection to the minority of applicants who need it. Accordingly, I recommend to the Houses of the Oireachtas that the approval sought to opt into the two proposals be granted.
