Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 19 February 2004
209 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the determining factors in a decision to deport non-national parents of Irish citizens; and the determining factors in a decision to grant leave to remain to non-national parents of Irish citizens. [5506/04]
View answer210 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if immigration officers take into account the length of residence here, the age of the children, and the school status of the children when deciding whether to deport or grant leave to remain to the non-national parents of Irish citizens. [5507/04]
View answer211 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if immigration officers take into account the likelihood of persecution or discrimination against either the parents or the children when deciding whether to deport or grant leave to remain to the non-national parents of Irish citizens. [5508/04]
View answer212 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if immigration officers take into account the Irish child’s or children’s likely access or lack of access to education, healthcare and other social services when deciding whether to deport or grant leave to remain to the non-national parents of Irish citizens. [5509/04]
View answer214 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the measures which have been put in place to ensure that Irish children who have to leave the State to go to their parent’s or parents’ country of origin due to their parents having been deported can enjoy the same rights as Irish children who remain here. [5511/04]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 209 to 212, inclusive, and Question No. 214 together.
At the outset it should be emphasised, as was stated in the public notice of 18 July 2003 on this matter, that every application for leave to remain in the State based on the parentage of an Irish born child will be examined and decided individually.
In respect of every person, including a parent of Irish born children, who has no legal entitlement to remain in the State, a letter issues under the terms of section 3(3) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, informing him or her of the Minister's intention to deport. The person is allowed fifteen days in which to opt for one of the following: make representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why he or she should not be deported; leave the State before an order is made; or consent to the making of a deportation order.
If a person opts to return voluntarily, assistance will be provided. If a person opts to make representations as to why he or she should not be deported a range of factors must be taken into account in deciding the matter. The specific legislative provisions are as set out in section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, and section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 dealing with refoulement. Further, consideration is given to the specific findings in the Supreme Court L v. O judgement of January 2003 and to subsequent judgements. Included in this consideration are the family and domestic circumstances of the person concerned which would encompass the age and length of residence in the State of the Irish born child.
The judgement in the L v. O. case is complex but an important finding was that while an Irish child has a right to have the care and company of its parents, there is no absolute right for this to take place in Ireland; further, that the Government may determine to deport a family, notwithstanding the effective removal of the Irish born child, without violating the child’s rights. The absence of such automatic rights of residence are a feature of most immigration regimes.
In relation to exposing Irish citizen children to persecution or discrimination in the countries concerned, it should be noted that the making of a deportation order in respect of the child's parents is subject to section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996, which forbids the sending of a person in any manner whatsoever to a place where the life or freedom of the person would be threatened on account of that person's race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. Notwithstanding this refoulement provision it is, of course, accepted that non-national parents of an Irish born child, and in most circumstances, the child also, will return to countries which may have education, healthcare and other social services at a lesser level than are enjoyed in this country. In this context, it should be noted that the Supreme Court in the L v. O judgement indicated that it cannot be said as a matter of law that the parents of a minor can assert a choice to reside in the State on behalf of a minor, even if that could be said to be in the interests of the minor.
