Gay Mitchell
Ceist:393 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will reply to representations concerning persons (details supplied) in view of the special circumstances of the case. [16452/03]
Written Answers. - Asylum Applications.
The 36 year old female, a national of Cameroon, accompanied only by a one year old son, arrived in the State in May 2001 and applied for asylum. She gave birth to an Irish citizen child in October 2001. Thereupon she withdrew her application for asylum and applied for residency on the basis of her child. This application was granted in January 2002.
Visas were granted to two of her children aged four and 12 in September 2002 to enable them join her in Ireland. Subsequently applications were made for two other sons – one a minor aged 16 and one an adult aged 18.
Her partner, whose whereabouts was unknown to her at the time of the original asylum application, arrived in the State in March 2002. He was in possession of forged travel documentation which, according to information on file, had been arranged for him in Ireland. He gained entry to the State on foot of a claim for asylum but withdrew that subsequently and applied for residency on the basis of his parentage of the aforementioned Irish citizen child. He married his partner in the State on 14 August 2002.
Following the Supreme Court judgment of 23 January 2003, which found that the Minister was entitled to deport persons who are the parents of Irish born children, no further processing is taking place on applications for residency on the basis of being the parent of an Irish born child, or applications from family members of persons who have residency on the basis of being the parent of an Irish born child, pending implementation of a new policy framed in the light of a Government decision.
The husband's application for residency and the visa applications for her sons are included in these. More than 11,000 applications come within the ambit of the Government's interim policy and it is simply not possible to reply to representations in regard to these applications. Second, it is not possible to address the special circumstances of such individual cases except within the framework of a general policy. Many, if not all, of the cases involve special circumstances to the families involved.