Dáil Éireann - Volume 628 - 05 December, 2006

Written Answers. - Citizenship Applications.

Mr. Penrose asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position of applicants who include an Irish citizen child and a non-national parent or parents who apply or have applied to stay in the State under administrative arrangements established in 2005 which became known as the IBC/05 scheme, consequent upon a recent decision of the High Court delivered on judicial review proceedings on 14 November 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41361/06]

  Mr. McDowell: Under the administrative arrangements announced by me on 15 January 2005, commonly referred to as the IBC/05 Scheme, applications for permission to remain in the State were received from non EU national parents of Irish citizen children who were born in the State prior to 1 January 2005.

In order to qualify for permission to remain in the State under the IBC/05 Scheme each applicant had to satisfy defined criteria. Some 17,917 applications were received of which a total of 16,984 applicants were granted permission to remain in the State. A further 933 applicants were refused under the IBC/05 Scheme. Each applicant who was refused under the revised arrangements was advised of the reasons for their refusal in writing.

The closing date for the receipt of applications was 31 March 2005. Applications received after this date were considered as “late applications” and were returned unprocessed to the applicants. [2029] A number of applicants who were refused under the IBC/05 Scheme challenged their refusal decision by way of Judicial Review proceedings. The judgments delivered in the High Court on 14 November 2006, as referred to by the Deputy, were test case proceedings taken in relation to the IBC/05 Scheme.

I am currently considering an appeal to the Supreme Court of the High Court judgements delivered on 14 November 2006. As the outcome of such an appeal is inextricably linked to the position of the applicants referred to in the Deputy’s question, I am unable to comment further until those proceedings, if any, have been determined.