Brazilian Asylum Seeker Forces Extension Precedent in Supreme Court

While eyes have been justifiably fixed on the spiralling disaster that is Irish asylum policy, a ruling Monday at the Supreme Court bodes badly for any future hope of reforming the already busted system.

Dealing with the (non) plight of a Brazilian and Georgian asylum seeker it was judged that the International Protection and Appeals Tribunal (IPAT) which manages the appeals process for failed applicants acted beyond its remit in pushing for the deportation of the individuals.

The saga began when the two individuals named Mr A and MS B failed to appeal their refusal for international protection and were recommended for deportation by the IPAT which the court ruled was outside their original remit.

With the IPAT’s original decision upheld by the High Court before heading to a five judge panel at the Supreme Court, the ruling enables failed asylum seekers to extend their appeal time by challenging the ability of the IPAT to cut down on the hiatus period by which applicants can extend their deportation process. Those monitoring the asylum logjam know this is an age-old tactic whereby bogus applicants can run down the clock and the state’s patience through repeated appeals.

The origin of this precedent lies in technicalities which exist in the 2015 International Protection Act and the manner in which an ‘applicant in defined’

The implication of the Supreme Court’s judgement is yet another and potentially significant roadblock in kicking the already dysfunctional deportation process into gear. As a consequence henceforth the IPAT which deals with the mass of junk asylum claims will have their hands tied in refusing an extension of appeal time owing to the precedent set.

Already a ragtag process, in April of last year The Burkean under Freedom of Information showed how only 20% of deportation orders are actually a figure increasingly dwindling despite the asylum surge the state is witnessing post pandemic.

With increasing grandstanding by a government seemingly willing to take a stand on runaway asylum fraud (at least if one believes the press releases) this new precedent grants bogus asylum seekers already refused protection an extra crutch to lean on.

The nationality of the two asylum seekers leading the charge on this matter points to the regularised fraud occurring throughout the system safeguarded by legal jargon, NGO culture as well as supine Department of Justice.

Beginning in 2017 the Georgian asylum spike condemned even by the Georgian ambassador himself has been driven by a cynical desire by arrives to attain access to the Schengen zone through Ireland. With regards to the Brazilian we may only speculate but could relate to the allegorical trend of Brazilians latching onto the asylum system when their visa runs out.

The open door on Irish asylum nudged ever wider ajar with a rough few months ahead of us all as the dinner bell is rung across the world on Ireland’s flummoxed asylum system and the death by a million legal cuts it has endured.