Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 24 January 2013
163. Deputy Robert Dowds asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of persons waiting for decisions on their leave to remain here; and in tabular form, the length of time such persons have been waiting. [3531/13]
View answer164. Deputy Robert Dowds asked the Minister for Justice and Equality his plans to speed up processing of applications for leave to remain here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3532/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 163 and 164 together.
What is generally referred to and understood as 'an application for leave to remain' refers to the submission of written representations to the Minister for Justice and Equality against the making of a Deportation Order, pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended). In all such cases, before a final decision is made, consideration must be given to the eleven separate headings set out in Section 3 (6) of the 1999 Act, the provisions of Section 5 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended) on the prohibition of refoulement and other relevant legal and constitutional provisions. Such decision-making is also guided by, among other things, international law and Supreme and High Court Judgments. This process is followed equally in asylum related cases and in the cases of illegal immigrants. The ultimate decision will be to make a Deportation Order or to grant Leave to Remain in the State for a specified period and subject to stated conditions.
Before any non-EEA national can 'apply for Leave to Remain', they must be served with a notification of intention to deport, as provided for under Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 (as amended). However, it must be borne in mind that many of the potential 'leave to remain' cases, although having been served with such a notification, will have their cases finalised through the granting of Subsidiary Protection or the granting of permission to remain under different headings, such as under EU Treaty Rights or family reunification provisions or indeed through marriage to an Irish national. Additionally, some of the persons awaiting a 'leave to remain' decision will, for their own valid reasons, opt for voluntary repatriation, formally and informally, before a final decision is taken in their cases. The Deputy will appreciate that many other cases cannot be finalised owing to the existence of judicial review proceedings.
Precise figures for each of the above categories, and for the numbers of cases which are currently awaiting a 'leave to remain' decision, are not be available without engaging in a very detailed and time-consuming exercise. This would not be justified as it would have the effect of diverting case processing personnel from this area. As the Deputy will appreciate the actual processing of cases must continue to be afforded the highest priority.
I can also advise the Deputy that I recently approved an initiative to put in place a panel with legal expertise who will assist the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service in processing a cohort of repatriation cases, thus speeding up the overall process and reducing the time spent by persons in the Direct Provision system. I would expect to see significant dividends, in terms of cases finalised, from this initiative in the coming months.
The Deputy should note that the processing of cases at the repatriation stage is a complex one with obligations to adhere to both domestic and international laws and jurisprudence, and to make decisions in accordance with the UN Convention on Human Rights. However, I am anxious that all cases are processed as promptly as possible and, to this end, apart from the legal panel initiative referred to earlier, additional staff members have also been deployed to this area of the Irish Naturalisation and Immigration Service (INIS) in recent years. Moreover, substantial investment has been made in the development of technology required to support the processing of such cases.
In terms of the time taken to finalise cases of this nature, no two cases will be the same in terms of their nature or complexity. Equally, cases will vary, depending, for example, on the countries of origin and the nature of family groups involved. The reality is that each case will have its own complexities which must be analysed in great detail, under a variety of headings as indicated at the outset, before a final decision can be made.
Depending on the nature of the case, in some instances, a decision may be reached in a matter of months, whereas in others where for example there may be multiple legal challenges at various stages of the process it may not be possible to reach a final decision for a number of years.
Furthermore, the current multi-layered approach to the processing of cases of asylum origin is not resource efficient and that is why I am providing for a single-procedure based approach in the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill, which I plan to progress in 2013. This proposed single-procedure will require asylum applicants to advance, at the outset, all reasons, protection or otherwise, behind their request to remain in the State.
