Peadar Tóibín
Question:116. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the rate of refusal at each stage of the asylum process for each of the past five years. [32915/25]
View answerWednesday, 18 June 2025
Questions (116)
Written answers
It is a central priority for me as Minister that our immigration laws are robust and enforced.
There are a number of figures in thae public domain relating to the recognition rate for international protection. The two most often cited figures are the recognition rate at first instance, and the recognition rate at final instance. These figures appear to demonstrate markedly different recognition rates, which can largely be explained as a function of timing.
In the case of the recognition rate at first instance, these statistics are drawn from International Protection Office (IPO) data. They reflect the first instance recommendations of the IPO, and over time these figures will largely be reflected in the final recognition rates (allowing for some level of overturning of recommendations on appeal).
In the case of the recognition rate at final instance, these statistics are drawn from the work of the Ministerial Decisions Unit. That unit finalises cases in two scenarios – one is where a person has been awarded refugee status at first instance, or does not submit an appeal following any other first instance recommendation, and the second is following the conclusion of an appeal to IPAT. At present, the MDU is issuing a much smaller number of decisions than the number of IPO recommendations as second instance ( appeal) decisions are awaited from IPAT. This means that positive decisions are issuing more quickly than final negative decisions. When expressed as a percentage of total final decisions, this has the effect that the rate of positive decisions will appear is higher than will ultimately be the case for any set group of applications.
The increase in applications over recent years has required a significant investment of additional people and process improvements. These were logically targeted at the IPO in the first instance, to sharply increase the speed of processing by that office. This investment has achieved a great deal, with the number of recommendations issuing exceeding the number of applications by hundreds each month of late, and the number of applications pending now steadily reducing.
It was always understood that the large increase first experienced by the IPO would then logically flow on to IPAT, and similar investments in people and process improvements are being made within that office. At this juncture, however, the number of applications pending, and the average length of time applications have been pending is still increasing.
As a result of the above, there is a significant lag between the patterns that are being seen at first instance flowing through to be reflected at final instance.
The data requested by the Deputy is in the attached document.