Finian McGrath
Ceist:400 Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will not deport the 33 Afghan men at St. Patrick’s Cathedral; and if he will ensure their personal safety. [19105/06]
Amharc ar fhreagraTuesday, 23 May 2006
Ceisteanna (345)
Freagraí scríofa
I wish to state at the outset that none of the persons referred to by the Deputy are, or were, at any immediate risk of being deported. The reason for this is that the persons concerned have, in the main, failed one or both stages of the asylum determination process, which processes are in place for the purposes of determining, on a case by case basis, as to whether each person should or should not be deemed to come within the definition of ‘refugee' as set out in Section 2 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended). However, none of the persons concerned have had their cases finalised pursuant to the provisions of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended). Furthermore, I would advise the Deputy that one of the 41 hunger strikers entered the State in 2000 and was granted refugee status in Ireland.
As the Deputy may be aware, in the context of every individual failed asylum applicant, they are afforded three options vis a vis their position in the State, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 (4) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), and these options are (a) to leave the State voluntarily, (b) to consent to deportation or (c) to submit, within 15 working days, representations to the Minister, in writing, setting out the reasons why they should not be deported i.e. why they should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State. Where, as happens in the great majority of cases, an application to remain temporarily in the State is submitted, the case is examined under the eleven headings specified under Section 3 (6) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), including consideration of any representations submitted by, or on behalf of, the person concerned. Each individual case is also examined having regard to Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) on the prohibition of refoulement.
The Deputy should be aware that the safety of returning a person, or refoulement as it is commonly referred to, is fully considered in every case when deciding whether or not to make a Deportation Order i.e. that a person shall not be expelled from the State or returned in any manner whatsoever to a State where, in my opinion, the life or freedom of that person would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. My Department uses extensive country of origin information drawn from different independent sources, including the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, in evaluating the safety of making returns to third countries. It is only after these assessments have been carried out in each individual case can a decision be taken to issue a Deportation Order or instead to arrange for temporary leave to remain in the State to be granted.
Given that the persons concerned have not exhausted all statutory processes available to them, as provided for under the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended) and the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), the actions taken by them to circumvent these processes were totally unacceptable.
Finally, I am very pleased that this situation was brought to a peaceful conclusion and for that I wish to record my appreciation to the members on An Garda Síochana and my own Department who worked tirelessly and skilfully to bring this matter to a peaceful resolution.