Supreme Court hears appeals over family reunification rights

The Supreme Court has heard significant test appeals by two women over whether refugees who become Irish citizens are entitled to enhanced family reunification rights under the Refugee Act.

After hearing submissions on the appeals this week, the five judge court reserved judgment to a later date.

Two women who got refugee status here and later became Irish citizens have appealed decisions of the Court of Appeal they are not entitled to enhanced family reunification rights under the Refugee Act 1996.

A person with family reunification rights under the 1996 Act does not have to meet certain requirements for family reunification under the Immigration Act 2004 or the Non-EEA National Family Reunification Policy.

In March 2019, the Court of Appeal ruled neither woman is entitled to the enhanced rights under the 1996 Act because, as a result of citizenship, they are no longer refugees. Their declarations of refugee status were revoked by operation of law once they acquired Irish citizenship and this was consistent with international instruments, including the Geneva Convention, case law and commentary, it held.

Refused

One of the women is aged in her 30s and from Somalia. She got refugee status in 2008 and became an Irish citizen in 2013. Before acquiring citizenship, she got permission for her children, her mother and her wards to join her here.

After re-establishing contact with her husband in late 2016, she sought family reunification in respect of him under the 1996 Act but was refused by the Minister for Justice on grounds of her Irish citizenship.

The second woman, aged in her 40s and from Uzbekistan, got refugee status here in 2009. After getting citizenship in 2012, she sought family reunification rights under the Refugee Act for her eldest daughter and two young grandchildren but was also refused due to her citizenship.

Both women took separate proceedings against the Minister but their cases were rejected by the High Court's Mr Justice Richard Humphreys.

After losing appeals to the Court of Appeal, they secured a fresh appeal to the Supreme Court.

Their lawyers Rosario Boyle SC and Colm O’Dwyer SC argued this week the Court of Appeal erred in a number of respects, including in concluding the grant of citizenship has an effect on a declaration of refugee status. It has no such effect, Ms Boyle argued.

The State opposed the appeal, arguing that granting the reliefs sought would give the appellants a form of "super" citizenship. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, which says access to family reunification for people granted international protection has been narrowed as a result of legislative changes in 2015, was involved in the appeal as an assistant to the court on legal issues.

Its submissions focussed on the right to family unity as guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In trying to strike a “fair balance” between the rights of the appellants and the State, the court should take into account the refugees’ family separation had been involuntary and the only way they could reunite with their families was if the latter came here, it submitted.