Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 27 October 2004
297 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the decision of the Czech President to veto legislation introducing the EU arrest warrant to the Czech Republic due to the fact that it would have meant handing over a part of the country’s sovereignty and its right to protect its citizens. [26210/04]
View answerI am not in a position to say why or in what circumstances the President of the Czech Republic decided to exercise his constitutional right not to sign the laws passed by Parliament implementing the framework decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between member states. However, I understand the relevant laws have now been enacted in accordance with the provisions in the constitution of the Czech Republic and they are expected to come into force on 1 November 2004.
298 Aengus Ó Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the countries he proposes should be included on the EU’s proposed safe country list; and the countries he proposes should be excluded from the EU’s proposed safe country list. [26211/04]
View answerThe proposed safe country of origin list to which the Deputy refers is that provided for in Article 30 of the draft council directive on minimum standards on procedures in member states for granting and withdrawing refugee status on which a general approach was agreed at the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 29 April 2004 under the Irish Presidency.
Article 30 of that draft directive provides for a minimum common list of safe countries of origin to be annexed to the directive at the time of adoption and also for the amendment of the list after adoption. The criteria by which a country is to be assessed in determining its suitability, or otherwise, for inclusion on the common list require an in-depth assessment of the extent to which a country provides protection against persecution or mistreatment through, inter alia, its observance of international human rights instruments and the manner in which its laws are applied. The criteria are set out in Annex II to the draft directive. Member states will retain the right at national level to designate safe countries of origin other than those included on the binding common list.
Discussions are at an advanced stage at EU level on the proposed common list. The countries under consideration at this time, namely, Botswana, Benin, Cape Verde, Ghana, Mali, Mauritius and Senegal, are considered by the vast majority of member states, including Ireland, to fulfil the criteria set out in the draft directive for inclusion on the common list. In arriving at this conclusion, member states have considered a range of information sources on the legal situation, the application of the law and the general political circumstances in the countries concerned. These information sources included reports from member states, third countries, United Nations treaty monitoring bodies and other international organisations.
In the case of Ireland, we conducted our assessment of these countries in consultation with the Department of Foreign Affairs. The Dutch Presidency will be reconsulting the European Parliament on the directive, including the common list, prior to its adoption. In view of the misconceptions surrounding the safe country of origin principle which appeared in a recent media report, I emphasise that the principle is simply a mechanism which allows for applications for asylum to be streamed for prioritised processing.
The safe country of origin principle derives from the recognition that while certain countries may be asylum seeker producing countries, conditions in those countries are not generally those that result in refugees. The principle is incorporated in our domestic law, by way of section 12(4) of the Refugee Act 1996, as inserted by the Immigration Act 2003, and in that of other member states and is acknowledged by the UNHCR to be an appropriate accelerating tool.
It is important to note that the designation of a country as a safe country of origin allows for the possibility that the country may not be safe for a particular applicant from that country. Accordingly, a complete examination of information provided by the applicant in support of his or her case for refugee status will always be conducted on an individual basis, with applicants enjoying a range of procedural safeguards, including the right to legal assistance, the right to an interpreter and the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal. This is the case under the provisions of both our Refugee Act and the draft directive.
