Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 27 September 2006
337 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8; when he expected a decision to issue in this regard; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29139/06]
Amharc ar fhreagra340 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in regard to residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29142/06]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 337 and 340 together.
As the Deputy will be aware, applications for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal which make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted. While it is not the practice to comment in detail on individual asylum applications, I am advised that the finalisation of the case referred to by the Deputy must await the outcome of Judicial Review proceedings.
338 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin who is the father of an Irish born child; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29140/06]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe person concerned arrived in the State on the 24 November, 2005 and applied for asylum. His application was refused following consideration of the case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and on appeal by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Subsequently, in accordance with Section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, the applicant was informed by letter dated 21 July, 2006, that the Minister proposed to make a deportation order in respect of him. He was given the options, to be exercised within 15 working days of making representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State; leaving the State before an order is made or consenting to the making of a deportation order. Representations have been received on behalf of the person concerned.
This person's case file, including all representations submitted, will be considered under Section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1999, as amended, and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (Prohibition of Refoulement), as amended. I expect the file to be passed to me for decision in due course.
339 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Clare; if his attention has been drawn to the strong evidence of a humanitarian nature to the effect that a return to their homeland would have serious implications for their health and safety; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29141/06]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the Deputy will be aware, applications for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner (ORAC) and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (RAT), which make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted. While it is not the practice to comment on individual asylum applications, I am advised that a decision issued in relation to the applicant's appeal on 31 May 2006. However, Judicial Review proceedings, which were subsequently taken by the applicant, are still before the courts.
341 Mr. Durkan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in regard to an application for family reunification in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 15; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [29143/06]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe refugee in question made a Family Reunification application in respect of her husband and children in May 2005. She withdrew the application in respect of her husband in May 2006. A decision has recently been made on this application and the person in question has been informed of same.
