Time for a zero refugee policy? - *Read OP for mod warnings and threadbans - updated 11/5/24*

I can't believe that anybody would be so flippant about diluting Irish people's electoral presence. . . . . well actually, I can.

Well call me old fashioned if you like, but I would like people who have a legal right to be here, be allowed to have a say in our elections. If you have no legal right to stay here, or whether you do or not is yet to be determined, then you should have no say in our elections.

Dilution is a pretty strong word here. Historically our proportion of asylum seekers/ refugees has been low, and therefore their wider influence on local elections fairly negligible. Even now, where we have an unprecedented number of such persons in the State, they represent a very, very low overall percentage of the local election electorate.

Yes, the number of Ukrainians in particular could — in theory — be of significance at a local level in certain areas where there might be relatively higher numbers residing. But they would still have to be motivated enough to actually register to vote, and then actually vote. So the number of them voting could be pretty low regardless (something which even Gript actually subtly acknowledge in one of their articles complaining about the situation, around paragraphs 6 and 7). https://gript.ie/ireland-is-an-outlier-re-non-national-voting-my-german-neighbour-thinks-we-are-mad/

I note as well their reference to "70 non nationals" running in upcoming Local Elections which does seem, in the context of the article about asylum seekers voting, a fairly sneaky conflation when many of those candidates have resided in Ireland for many years. But regardless, we will see from results whether any abnormal patterns emerge that could be attributed to asylum seekers voting.

Well asylum seekers do have a legal right to be here, so you don't need to be worried

GoSh i wonder which of those two options the irish people would vote for now

Why? Why should someone paying tax, USC and property tax have the same voting rights as an asylum seeker who doesn’t do any of those things? Regardless if they can or not.

Really, If things were done speedily as they should be when making these decisions, it would be negligible the amount of AS that would be here long enough to vote and then get deported.

Don't be going down this slippery slope, why should someone on the dole here not paying any of those things get to vote?

See where this is going?

you don’t need a passport to get through Dublin airport and you can then vote. We are a strange place!

1. If your not an approved AS then you NO you should not be allowed vote in a local election that may or may not affect you
2. The shitshow in the Gov is on the go slow hence they absolute mammoth length
3. This is the big one, the approvers are probably trying to figure who out who these people are that are in this country with no IDs
4. 513 deportation orders issued up to the end of April. 186 were removed from the State, including 136 voluntary repatriations, so we as a country know have 327 refused AS in this country

Anyway Im out, enjoy your Friday

A And what if that person born here ( you know not everyone born here is Irish right?) But never worked a day in their life? Never paid a penny tax?

What if, like me, someone recently moved to a new area, why should they get the right to vote? W

Oh right, if their application is approved they are refugees, and I would have no issue with refugees having voting rights. I do think there should be minimum time spent here as a AS before being eligible.

Story of a Gaynain man seeking refugee status

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/judge-upholds-decision-to-refuse-refugee-status-to-ghanaian-man-1635018.html

"It was not unreasonable or irrational for a tribunal to reject a Ghanaian man’s claim he was openly gay and had, therefore, been subjected to persecution, the High Court has held.

Mr Justice Barry O’Donnell on Friday refused the divorced father-of-three’s request for him to overturn the International Protection Appeal Tribunal’s affirmation of a decision to refuse him refugee status and subsidiary protection.

The judge said findings were made during the international protection process that impugned the credibility of the applicant’s accounts of persecution and his claim that he was gay.

Assessing the credibility of assertions about sexual orientation are “undoubtedly” sensitive and difficult, but “they are assessments that have to be made”, Mr Justice O’Donnell said. Here, the IPAT “conspicuously” endeavoured to assess this claim with reference to the appropriate standards, he said.

The judge said the tribunal accepted that gay men may face extreme discrimination and homophobia in Ghana where violent homophobic attacks are common.

Ghana’s parliament passed a bill last February seeking a prison sentence of up to three years for anyone convicted of “identifying” as LGBT+. Engaging in gay sexual acts was already an imprisonable offence.

The applicant arrived in Ireland in February 2020 and immediately sought international protection at Dublin Airport. He was called for an interview with the International Protection Office 26 months later and was in June 2022 refused refugee status, subsidiary protection and leave to remain.

The appeal tribunal upheld this decision in November 2022 and the man issued High Court judicial review proceedings over this rejection the following month.

He alleged the tribunal legally erred in determining that his account was not credible and made findings based on an assumption about the experience of a gay man.

Further, he claimed, the tribunal breached fair procedure principles by making findings about his credibility without putting these to him for a response.

The tribunal fully stood over its determination, which it argued was lawful, fair and reasonable.

Mr Justice O’Donnell said the applicant told the tribunal he had been married and had three children. He “lost touch for women” after his divorce in 2017 and met a man in 2018 who told him “about gay and how it was going on”, the applicant said.

He said he decided to give it a try, and he moved in with the man that year and felt like he was in the right position and is no longer interested in women. He said his family was disgusted when they heard he was living with a man, and he felt like an outcast to them. He claimed he was attacked three times in Ghana between 2017 and 2020.

Due to an accumulation of unexplained issues with his narrative, the tribunal had significant doubts about his credibility and could not accept he had been persecuted. The tribunal said that although he may “simply have been naive or reckless”, his account of engaging in a carefree way in an openly gay relationship in the face of widespread intolerance and oppression seemed “unexpected and unusual”.

The tribunal had further issues with his account of his relationship with the other man and of coming to realise he was gay, which was “entirely bereft of any of the thoughts, feelings and emotions that are commonly experienced”.

Mr Justice O’Donnell said he was not at all satisfied the tribunal erred by making findings based on conjecture or stereotype. The findings proceeded from a careful consideration of the facts and by giving the applicant extensive opportunities to explain his position, he said.

He held that the tribunal’s decision was lawful.