Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 21 March 2012
494 Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he will explain the reason in recent years that there has been a consistent drop in Ireland’s first instance positive determinations rate and if he acknowledges that Ireland is the member State with the most restrictive approach to granting asylum in the EU for the year 2010; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15421/12]
Amharc ar fhreagra495 Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he acknowledges that although Estonia is used as an example of how countries with small application rates shift the EU average rates, if he will explain the reason the four states with the highest asylum decision rate for the year 2010 — France, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom — are able to maintain a first instance positive determination rate of between 13-30% despite their higher number of applications; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15422/12]
Amharc ar fhreagra496 Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he acknowledges that in 2010 all signatories to Dublin II could use the regulation to transfer applications to the first state where the asylum seeker entered the EU and that EUROSTAT and ORAC figures state Ireland had 273 transfer requests accepted in 2010 and that this represents 17% of first instance decisions which is in fact below the EU average of 18.2%; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15423/12]
Amharc ar fhreagra497 Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if he accepts the argument that the large proportion of Ireland’s asylum seekers are made in respect of children less than three years of age, due to unsupported asylum claims by their parents, does not fully explain the discrepancy between Ireland’s rate of positive determinations and the rate of other EU countries; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15424/12]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 494 to 497, inclusive, together.
In my reply to Question No. 231 of 15 February, 2012, I drew the Deputy's attention to some significant features of the asylum caseload in 2010 which accounted for a large proportion of the negative determinations made at first instance in that year. My purpose in highlighting these features was not to draw comparisons in those respects with other EU Member States but to draw attention to the fact that they alone accounted for about 50% of all first instance determinations made in 2010. I might add that this has been the position over the past 3 years. It is therefore important that this be taken into consideration when comment is being made about the first instance recognition rate.
I do not accept that Ireland has the most restrictive approach to granting asylum in the EU. While attention has focused on the recognition rate of 1.3% at first instance in 2010, I would draw the Deputy's attention to the trend in that regard in the surrounding years. In 2008 the recognition rate was 7.5%; in 2009 it was 3%; in 2011 it was 4.2% and it currently stands at 5.0% for 2012. This simply serves to illustrate that recognition rates can go up and down commensurate with the merits or otherwise of the applications presented.
In my view, it is important that the asylum recognition rate not be perceived as some target to be achieved irrespective of the merits of applications. In this regard, I would remind the Deputy that applications for refugee status in the State are assessed at first instance by the statutory independent Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner in accordance with a prescribed legal framework and exclusively on their merits having regard to their subjective and objective elements. The Commissioner has indicated that he is satisfied that the assessment and investigation processes in his Office are fully in line with national and international requirements and best practice. In support of this he has pointed to the ORAC training programmes on refugee status determination which have been developed in conjunction with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. The Refugee Applications Commissioner has indicated his continuing commitment to the operation of a comprehensive asylum determination process which ensures that all applicants are treated with dignity, respect and every opportunity to present and have considered on its merits, and on no other basis, all elements of their request for asylum in the State.
The implication in the Deputy's questions is that there is something untoward going on in our asylum process and that there are persons who are entitled to protection in Ireland who are not getting it. I do not accept such an implication. I am satisfied that our asylum system is robust but fair and that anybody who presents here seeking asylum and who is entitled to refugee status gets it. Anything less would not be acceptable to me.
