Almost 1 per cent of newly arrived asylum-seekers whose fingerprints were checked against an EU-wide print- matching facility already had made a refugee claim elsewhere in Europe this year, it has emerged.
Figures for the year to date show that out of 2,737 sets of fingerprints sent for comparison to the central electronic register in Luxembourg, 24 matched prints already held in other European countries.
The prints were transmitted to the Eurodac database, which was set up this year to help curtail "asylum-shopping", where people make multiple applications for refugee status in various EU states.
If Eurodac reveals that fingerprints have already been recorded, the asylum-seekers could be sent back to the country where their fingerprints were originally recorded.
The fingerprints were of asylum applicants aged 14 and over who had made claims in Ireland between January 15th, when the database went on line, and May 13th. They were compared against asylum-seeker prints taken in other EU states during the same period.
Fingerprints taken from asylum-seekers prior to January 15th are not entered, so the print-matching facility is only comparing asylum claims lodged in the countries within the same four-month period.
The 24 "hits" recorded matched fingerprints held by asylum authorities in the UK, Germany, Spain, Sweden, Belgium, Austria, Norway and France, according to the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner (ORAC).
A spokesman for ORAC said the office was pursuing the hits with the countries concerned under the Dublin Convention, which broadly states that people seeking asylum should apply for it in the first safe country they reach. All EU member-states, apart from Denmark, as well as Iceland and Norway, forward asylum applicants' fingerprints for comparison to the centralised electronic fingerprint register.
The Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, welcomed the establishment of the Eurodac system last January.
However, Mr Peter O'Mahony from the Irish Refugee Council, while condemning the fact that there is any abuse of the asylum system, added that "a 1 per cent abuse figure is hardly alarming and doesn't bear out the fears often expressed that there is massive abuse of the asylum system."