M.A.H. v International Protection Appeals Tribunal

 
FREE EXCERPT

[2017] IEHC 462

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

O'Regan J.

[2017 No. 506 J.R.]

BETWEEN
M.A.H.
APPLICANT
AND
THE INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION APPEALS TRIBUNAL, THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY, IRELAND

AND

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
RESPONDENTS

Asylum, Immigration & Nationality – Art. 31.2 of the Geneva Convention, 1951 – Reg. (EU) No. 604/2013 (‘Dublin III’) – Legality of Regulation – Right of asylum seeker to choose place of asylum

Facts: The applicant filed an application for leave to apply for an order of certiorari seeking a declaration that reg. Dublin III was invalid on the ground that it unlawfully removed the applicant's right to choose the country in which the applicant wanted to apply for asylum and thus, contrary to the Geneva Convention, 1951. The applicant contended that by virtue of art. 31(1) of the 1951 Convention, the contracting states was barred from imposing any penalties for illegal entry on the applicant.

Ms. Justice O'Regan refused the applicant's application. The Court held that the applicant's interpretation of the 1951 Convention was unreasonable. The Court found that the applicant had failed to provide any basis for filing asylum claim in another country other than Ireland. The Court held that there was no suggestion that when the applicant first arrived in the other county, he was merely en route to Ireland for the purposes of seeking asylum, as the applicant first arrived and had claimed asylum in that country, and after the passing of 10 years, he again applied for asylum in Ireland. The Court held that the obligation on the contracting parties by virtue of art. 31.2 of the Convention were to give refugees a reasonable time to obtain admission to another country.

JUDGMENT of Ms. Justice O'Regan delivered on the 17th day of July, 2017
1

This judgment is confined to so much of the applicant's application for leave as seeks a declaration that Regulation (EU) No. 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of the 26th of June, 2013 is invalid.

2

This Regulation, known as Dublin III introduced a number of changes to the prior Regulation (No. 343/2003) both of which are for the purposes of establishing the criteria and mechanism for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third country national or a Stateless person.

3

The relevant criteria are set forth in Chapter 3 of Dublin III which sets out a hierarchy as to criteria to be applied in determining the Member State responsible. In the instant matter, the applicant had applied for asylum in the United Kingdom in 2009 and in Northern Ireland in 2014. He was refused on both occasions. On the 29th of August, 2016 the applicant who had arrived in the State applied for asylum here, however, on the 17th of November, 2016 ORAC notified the applicant that the UK was responsible under the Dublin III criteria. This notification was the subject matter of an appeal on the 1st of December, 2016 and following an oral hearing on the 30th of March, 2017 the first named respondent confirmed the Commissioners decision that the applicant's application for refugee status was...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL