Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 7 October 2009
290 Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will reconsider an order for deportation in the case of a person (details supplied) in County Monaghan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34830/09]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe person concerned applied for asylum on 21 November 2006. Her application was refused following consideration of her case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.
The person concerned was informed, by letter dated 24 October 2008, that the Minister proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of her. She was given three options in accordance with Section 3(3)(b)(ii) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), to be exercised within 15 working days. Namely, to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to the making of a Deportation Order or to make representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why she should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State i.e. why she should not be deported.
By correspondence dated 9 July 2009, an application for Subsidiary Protection was made on behalf of the person concerned by her legal representative. Following consideration of the information submitted, the application was refused. The person concerned and her legal representative were notified of this decision by letter dated 1 September 2009.
Her case was then examined under Section 3(6) of the Immigration Act, 1999, (as amended), and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended), on the Prohibition of Refoulement. Consideration was given to representations submitted on her behalf by her legal representative for permission to remain in the State. On 2 September 2009, I refused permission to remain temporarily in the State and instead signed a Deportation Order in respect of her. Notice of this order was served by registered post requiring the person concerned to leave the State by 3 October 2009 or failing that, present herself at the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2 on 6 October 2009 in order to make travel arrangements for her removal from the State.
I am satisfied that the applications made by the person concerned for asylum, for temporary leave to remain in the State and for Subsidiary Protection, together with all refoulement issues, were fairly and comprehensively examined and, as such, the decision to deport her is justified.
The effect of the Deportation Order is that the person concerned must leave the State and remain thereafter out of the State. The enforcement of the Deportation Order is an operational matter for the GNIB.
291 Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the residency status in the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 8; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34831/09]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe person concerned applied for asylum on 7 March 2003. His application was refused following consideration of his case by the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and, on appeal, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.
The person concerned was informed, by letter dated 22 September 2004, that the Minister proposed to make a Deportation Order in respect of him. He was given three options in accordance with Section 3(3)(b)(ii) of the Immigration Act, 1999 (as amended), to be exercised within 15 working days. Namely, to leave the State voluntarily, to consent to the making of a Deportation Order or to make representations to the Minister setting out the reasons why he should be allowed to remain temporarily in the State i.e. why he should not be deported.
His case was examined under Section 3(6) of the Immigration Act, 1999, (as amended), and Section 5 of the Refugee Act, 1996 (as amended), on the Prohibition of Refoulement. Consideration was given to representations submitted on his behalf by his legal representative for permission to remain in the State. On 10 December 2004, the then Minister refused permission to remain temporarily in the State and instead signed a Deportation Order in respect of him. Notice of this Order was served by registered post requiring him to ‘present' to the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB), 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2, on 20 January, 2005, in order to make travel arrangements for his deportation from the State. The person concerned failed to ‘present' as requested and was classified as evading his deportation.
On 28 August 2007, the legal representative of the person concerned lodged an application for Subsidiary Protection pursuant to the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations 2006 — Statutory Instrument No. 518 of 2006. The legal representative of the person concerned was invited to make an application under Regulation 4(2) of the aforesaid Regulations setting out any new facts or circumstances relevant to the person concerned or his country of origin which had arisen since the original decision to deport was made and which related to a possible entitlement to Subsidiary Protection. This application was considered and refused. The person concerned and his legal representative were notified of this decision by letter dated 8 August 2009.
The legal representative of the person concerned also lodged a request for revocation of the Deportation Order pursuant to Section 3(11) of the Immigration Act, 1999, (as amended). The application was refused and the Deportation Order was affirmed. The person concerned and his legal representative were notified of this decision by letter dated 8 August 2009.
The person concerned was notified by letter dated 8 August 2009 of the requirement that he present himself at the Offices of the Garda National Immigration Bureau on 8 September 2009 in order to make arrangements for his removal from the State. He failed to present and was classified as evading his deportation. Should he come to the notice of the Gardaí, he would be liable to arrest and detention. He should, therefore, present himself to the GNIB without any further delay.
I am satisfied that the applications made by the person concerned for asylum and for temporary leave to remain in the State, together with all refoulement issues, were fairly and comprehensively examined and, as such, the decision to deport him is justified.
The effect of the Deportation Order is that the person concerned must leave the State and remain thereafter out of the State. The enforcement of the Deportation Order is an operational matter for the GNIB.
