CASE SUMMARY: CA V REFUGEE APPEALS TRIBUNAL (2014) IEHC 504

On the 1st of October 2014, Barr J of the High Court directed that the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal to refuse an asylum application to a Nigerian national be referred back to the Tribunal for a further decision before a different member of the Tribunal. The applicant in this case claimed that he was fearful of returning to his country on grounds of his sexuality. The High Court held that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (RAT) fell short of its duty to give a clear, reasoned and rational decision for its refusal. 

Many aspects of the RAT decision were criticised by Budd J in this case. Budd J stated that the RAT did not take into account the country of origin information submitted by the applicant. The Tribunal had found that the applicant in this case was "unlikely to face persecution from State agents in Nigeria.” Budd J stated that this ran contrary to the information submitted by the applicant on his previous treatment in Nigeria that included beatings by police officers. Similarly, Budd J rejected the Tribunal’s finding that the applicant could relocate internally to the city of Lagos safely. The learned judge found that on the facts, such internal relocation was not a viable option for the applicant. The High Court instead found that there was strong evidence that homosexuals did not live openly in Lagos for fear of persecution. 

The Tribunal had stated that the applicant's reasons for not claiming asylum in the United Kingdom were not plausible. The Tribunal generally did not find the applicant’s story credible. Budd J however held that it is not sufficient to merely state that the applicant’s version of events was implausible; the decision of the RAT must be supported by reasons. 

The Tribunal had also stated that: "It is clear from the information provided by the applicant that he has not suffered any persecution for a Convention reason in Nigeria, nor is he likely to face persecution upon returning to his country of origin.” Budd J stated that this was not sustainable as the Tribunal failed to give adequate reasoning for this assertion. The learned judge also stated that there is no requirement on the applicant to prove that he is likely to suffer torture or inhumane or degrading treatment, rather the proof required is that he has a well-founded fear of torture or inhumane or degrading treatment. 

Budd J in the case granted leave to the applicant to seek certiorari of the decision of the Tribunal and he made an order quashing the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal. Budd J directed that the case be referred back to the Tribunal for a further decision before a different member of the Tribunal.

Rebecca Keatinge

EMN IRELAND REPORT ON UNACCOMPANIED MINORS - 2014

The European Migration Network (EMN) Ireland last week produced a report detailing the policies, procedures and circumstances surrounding unaccompanied minors. Unaccompanied children can be defined as children who are not in the care of a responsible adult. The report coincides with a general upward trend in the numbers of unaccompanied minors in the EU and a decrease in the number of unaccompanied minors in Ireland. The primary reason for this was cited as economic factors. 

In the report, many of the shortcomings of the system are called into question. The report accepts that major improvements have been that have addressed the specific issues faced by these children. Prior to the reforms, unaccompanied children were placed in hostel-based care. The report notes that this was wholly inadequate as it failed to recognise that the children were already in a uniquely vulnerable position and hostel-based care was unsuitable for the needs of children. The report states that the lack of regional oversight and inconsistencies in care around the country have been improved on greatly in recent years. However, the report states that more resources are required outside the Dublin region and explain that there is a lack of comprehensive data on the situation facing children in rural Ireland especially. 

In recent years, TUSLA have been given the responsibility of supporting these children through foster care and residential placements. This is far more child-friendly than the hostel-style care in place before. The recent ease on the State resources (due to the reduction of unaccompanied children in Ireland) has contributed to the improvements in the system. 

There is one noteworthy recommendation contained in the report in relation to family reunification. There is no policy in Ireland for the repatriation unaccompanied children however the report recommends that there be follow up family reunification as part of the after-care of children. The report concedes that this is a difficult task as these children often have a general mistrust of people and therefore are unlikely to divulge any information about their family or country of origin. 

The report notes that the lack of legal status afforded to this group places them in a position of unique vulnerability. Often, the children are sent to Ireland to seek work or to reunite with family. It would seem from the report that the principle difficulty with the situation is that the unaccompanied children fall into the categories of children and immigrants. There is a natural tension therefore between the child protection concerns and the immigration concerns. It appears that greater legal recognition of the status of such unaccompanied children will afford them greater protection. It may also act to reduce their vulnerability, improve their quality of life and ensure that difficulties in regularising their status when they turn 16 are averted. 

Rebecca Keatinge 

MIGRANT RIGHTS CENTRE IRELAND REPORT - 2014

A recent survey conducted by the Migrant Rights Centre Ireland has revealed that 21% of undocumented migrant people in Ireland have lived here for over a decade. The survey is the first of its kind in Ireland. 540 migrants were questioned in the survey and opened up about their lives in Ireland, detailing their employment and family situations. It gives a clear snapshot of the lives that migrants are living in Ireland including the types of industries they work in and their emotional connections to Ireland. The research conducted by the MRCI has also shown that 81% of undocumented migrants in Ireland have been here for 5 years or more. 

The survey sheds light on the particular difficulties faced by migrant workers in Ireland. One account highlights the difficulties of being unable to travel. One respondent in particular was unable to return to his county of origin for his father’s funeral. On this basis, the report has drawn attention to the stark contrast between the Taoiseach’s condemnation of the treatment of the undocumented Irish in the US and his called-for change in treatment on humanitarian grounds with the treatment of undocumented in Ireland. It is clear that most migrant workers have financial and emotional ties in Ireland and share similar challenges to the undocumented Irish in the US. The Taoiseach’s inconsistency in this matter has therefore come under fire. 

With the survey also illustrating that a large proportion (one third) of those surveyed has children living in Ireland, a spokesperson for the MRCI has stated that the problem of undocumented workers in Ireland can no longer be ignored by the Government. 

The research has also shed some light on the educational attainments of the migrant workers in Ireland. It has noted that 53% of the respondents have obtained a third level qualification. This figure, coupled with the figure that 87% of those surveyed are working, acts to show that most migrants in Ireland are hard-working and educated individuals. 

This survey will hopefully act as an impetus for the Government to make some much needed reforms in the area of undocumented in Ireland. 

Rebecca Keatinge