The new Immigration Bill being discussed in the Dáil today should be withdrawn to allow for proper consultation, said the Human Rights Commission.
The statutory body is responsible for observing the human rights implications of new legislation. However, according to a statement from its president, Dr Maurice Manning, the Government chose not to refer this Bill to it for consideration.
Despite its limited opportunity to examine it, Dr Manning said the commission had a number of concerns. It was particularly worried about the lack of adequate time for discussion. The commission was also concerned about giving immigration officers power to detain a person "reasonably believed . . . to be a non-national", as this could allow people to be singled out for special treatment because of race, colour or other distinguishing characteristic.
It was also concerned about the provision which allows entry to be denied to people suffering from a mental disorder. The Schizophrenia Association of Ireland shares this concern, and asked in a statement what would happen to such a person who was put back on a ship or aircraft.
Similar concerns have been raised by a number of groups representing immigrants and refugees, and by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties.
In a joint submission to the Department of Justice the Immigrant Council of Ireland, the Irish Refugee Council, the Migrant Rights Centre of Ireland and the Irish Council for Civil Liberties call for the withdrawal of the Bill. This would allow further discussion and the introduction of temporary legislation to meet the immediate problems caused by the striking down of Section 2 of the 1999 Immigration Act.
This section had declared that all ministerial orders made under it were Acts of the Oireachtas. It was inserted following an earlier High Court finding that the Minister for Justice had too much discretion to make specific determinations about the status of immigrants.
According to the joint submission, the new Bill lacks basic safeguards and is divorced from the practical operation of the immigration system. It says it also contains discriminatory and retrospective provisions in violation of international law. This includes provisions in the European Convention of Human Rights that there be an independent appeals mechanism for disputed decisions.
A spokesman for the Department of Justice said the Attorney General would have examined the legislation to ensure it complied with international obligations and with the Constitution.
He said most of its provisions had already been applied under the old Aliens Act. This was modelled on the 1911 British Aliens Restrictions Act, drawn up to prevent German spies infiltrating the state, said the submission.
Ms Becker, legal consultant with the Immigrant Council of Ireland, said this Bill contained certain new elements which could be discriminatory. For example, it required a householder to ensure that a non-national living in their house was legally in the State. If the householder was a non-national, he or she was liable to prosecution if a person living in the house was not legally in the State, even if the householder had committed no other offence.
This created a discrimination between nationals and non-nationals.
She said the Bill also sought to reintroduce retrospectively decisions already ruled unconstitutional by the High Court on January 22nd. This conflicted with Article 15.5 of the Constitution, outlawing retrospective legislation.