High Court ruling on Citizenship

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,454
In a landmark case, Judge Max Barrett has ruled that the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 means that someone can only get naturalised citizenship if they haven't left Ireland even for one day in the past year.

Is this over the top, or a welcome opportunity to debate Fine Gael's handing out citizenship like confetti at a wedding? Is it time to pause, take stock, and take a more restrictive (but measured) approach to granting citizenship?
 


Myler

Active member
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
100
Actual judgment is here:


"JUDGMENT of Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered on 11th July, 2019.
1. Mr Jones is an Australian national who has applied to become a naturalised Irish citizen. Section 15(1) of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended, provides, inter alia, that “Upon receipt of an application for a certificate of naturalisation, the Minister may, in his absolute discretion, grant the application, if satisfied that the applicant – …(c) has had a period of one year’s continuous residence in the State immediately before the date of the application”. The applicable one-year period here runs from 01.09.2016-31.08.2017. During that period, Mr Jones was out of Ireland for 100 days, 97 on holiday, three for work reasons."

And

'“(iii) The Minister’s finding that, due to absences from the State, the applicant has not had a period of one year’s continuous residence in the State immediately before the date of his application is materially wrong in fact and irrational in the legal sense.”
Court Response: The Minister’s “finding” is neither materially wrong nor irrational. However, his means of getting to that “finding” rests on legal error. The Minister, it will be recalled, arrives at his conclusion because Mr Jones has gone beyond the ‘discretionary absence period of 6 weeks + possibly more in exceptional or unavoidable circumstances’ that the Minister has hitherto applied in the context of s.15(1)(c). By contrast, the court says (i) there is no basis in s.15(1)(c) for the application of such a discretion, (ii) the word “continuous” in s.15(1)(c) bears its ordinary English meaning, (iii) no matter how one comes at Mr Jones’ residence history for the period of 01.09.2016-31.08.2017, one cannot say that a one-year period of residence that is punctuated by 97 days of holiday absences and three days of work absences is “unbroken, uninterrupted, connected throughout in space or time”, (iv) the court does not see that a literal reading of s.15(1)(c) yields an absurdity that requires the court to move on to an alternative reading of same, with (v) the result of (i)-(iv) being that Mr Jones is ineligible to be granted a certificate of naturalisation by virtue of s.15(1).'
 

Paddyc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
9,747
In a landmark case, Judge Max Barrett has ruled that the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 means that someone can only get naturalised citizenship if they haven't left Ireland even for one day in the past year.

Is this over the top, or a welcome opportunity to debate Fine Gael's handing out citizenship like confetti at a wedding? Is it time to pause, take stock, and take a more restrictive (but measured) approach to granting citizenship?
Not what the judgment is saying at all. There are numerous examples in Irish law of 'residence' or 'ordinary residence' or , as in this case 'continuous residence' to include normal periods of vacation. Claiming that 100 days absence in a 365 day period is that same as 1 days absence, is stupid.
 

Myler

Active member
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
100
Well the headline in thejournal claims that is what it said.
Always worth checking the actual judgment. The papers always go for the sensational, and there's plenty of people with an axe to grind willing to give them a printable spin.
 

Cdebru

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
5,491
The judge is an idiot, continuous residence is not continuous presence in the state, the idiot took the dictionary definition of continuous, but forgot to also look for the dictionary definition of residence, leaving the state for a day doesn't give you residency in another state.This will be struck down, also for EU citizens it is an infringement on their freedom of movement to tell them they must stay in the 26 counties for 365 days.

Hang your head in shame judge you are an idiot.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
6,416
Twitter
No
//

"JUDGMENT of Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered on 11th July, 2019.
1. Mr Jones is an Australian national who has applied to become a naturalised Irish citizen. //

Returning to the scene of the crime, mate?
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,295
Twitter
Deiscirt
Is it time to pause, take stock, and take a more restrictive (but measured) approach to granting citizenship?
Having gone through the process of naturalization twice, Ireland seems to be very lax. It's almost as if there's a kind of Fr Dougal-like delight that someone would want to be an Irish citizen. Sure that's great Ted.
 

Se0samh

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
16,029
Not what the judgment is saying at all. There are numerous examples in Irish law of 'residence' or 'ordinary residence' or , as in this case 'continuous residence' to include normal periods of vacation. Claiming that 100 days absence in a 365 day period is that same as 1 days absence, is stupid.

It'll fall on appeal I should imagine...if not, the legislation needs amending...
 

Cdebru

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
5,491
Having gone through the process of naturalization twice, Ireland seems to be very lax. It's almost as if there's a kind of Fr Dougal-like delight that someone would want to be an Irish citizen. Sure that's great Ted.
How does it seem that way ? What is your evidence that it is lax ?
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,295
Twitter
Deiscirt
The whole sham marriage-for residency/citizenship thingy.
 

Cdebru

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
5,491
The whole sham marriage-for residency/citizenship thingy.
So you think the state doesn't bother to check whether a marriage is real or not ? You think they are just handing out passports ? Any evidence to support this ?
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,295
Twitter
Deiscirt
So you think the state doesn't bother to check whether a marriage is real or not ? You think they are just handing out passports ? Any evidence to support this ?
That was in practice exactly what the state was doing for years after it first became a problem. No, I don't think the state is "just handing out Passports. Why do you think that I do? And why are you asking me for evidence for a claim I did not make?

Given that marriage is the easiest way for persons with no connection to Ireland to gain residency and naturalization it follows that the seriousness with which Irish authorities regard that process is a measure of how seriously they regard the residency/naturalization which can be gained as a result.

The state is beginning to take seriously marriage fraud where it did not before. Almost a decade ago I started the below thread based on what I had experienced in Australia and the lack of seriousness - by comparison - with which Irish authorities granted marriage.

The typical dog's dinner Irish authorities oversaw was so egregiously bad that it has become the subject of several long form news programs from the likes of the BBC and DW.



Then this morning I read this: Registrar warns of rapid rise in 'sham marriages' - The Irish Times - Tue, Aug 17, 2010 or what will probably become Irish Born Child Mark 2.

I was struck by the difference in discourse between Ireland and Australia on this. I married an Australian citizen here a few years ago (whilst legally resident of course! :) ). I was free to marry, but gaining residency on the basis of that relationship took several thousand dollars, hundreds of documents, photos, officially witnessed statements from 3rd parties, utility bills and wills showing long term cohabitation and commitment and two, personally intrusive interviews. It wasn't pleasant, but I had nothing to fear from the process and recognized it's importance. I was struck by how highly Australians protect and value the right of residency here. It was solemn and serious process.
 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
907
In a landmark case, Judge Max Barrett has ruled that the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956 means that someone can only get naturalised citizenship if they haven't left Ireland even for one day in the past year.

Is this over the top, or a welcome opportunity to debate Fine Gael's handing out citizenship like confetti at a wedding? Is it time to pause, take stock, and take a more restrictive (but measured) approach to granting citizenship?
The Department of Justice is probably the most inept and indifferent government department. Takes years beyond the qualification date for them to process applications and all in a black box of non-communication with the applicants.
 

bells of shando

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2019
Messages
263
The reason we are given for granting Citizenship to foreigners is the need for more skilled labour.
We know this is nonsense and a down right lie to keep us quiet.
Many Countries have shortages of skilled labour. The solution as used in Germany post war and in Singapore is to give work visas.The visa runs as long as the project requires and when the project is completed the visa expires and the guest worker leaves the jurisdiction. No welfare or other support is granted.
 

middleground

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2014
Messages
907
The reason we are given for granting Citizenship to foreigners is the need for more skilled labour.
We know this is nonsense and a down right lie to keep us quiet.
Many Countries have shortages of skilled labour. The solution as used in Germany post war and in Singapore is to give work visas.The visa runs as long as the project requires and when the project is completed the visa expires and the guest worker leaves the jurisdiction. No welfare or other support is granted.
Do you have any figures on number granted, how long it took after they became eligible, etc. i.e. any facts at all.
 

bells of shando

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2019
Messages
263
Do you have any figures on number granted, how long it took after they became eligible, etc. i.e. any facts at all. 'Quote'

I have worked in most countries of the world as an Engineer. China, Russia. Singapore, Germany etc The process of finding work sometimes required scouring the many special websites for my line of work, or networking and recommendations from colleagues. Sometimes a phone interview ,sometimes an onsite interview, but my CV and recommendations were usually sufficient to find work.
The employer then issues a Letter of Intent (LOI), Medical Cert usually required,check for fitness and diseases, Vaccination shots etc. Visit to nearest Embassy or Consulate and generally pick up visa on same day.
Visa renewed as required by length of project. End of project , leave before visa expires or have problems with Border controls. No welfare available, all health ,housing at employers cost.
Germany had a serious manpower shortages after WW2, they imported many guest workers ,Turks,,Slavs Uk etc. Only the Turks had an integration problem ,being generally Muslims.
Singapore has a low birthrate ,they import from Malaysia, Bangladesh, China and specialists from Western countries. They issue work permits of varying lengths and a visitors visa on arrival. Short term visas can be renewed by a daytrip across the Causeway to Johor Bahru and a stamp from Border control on re-entering. No welfare allowed, health and housing at employers cost.
Singapore has over a million Guest workers, the Singaporeans generally do not like to do manual work. most all are Computer tappers.
As before ,end of project ,end of visa. Extension stays are available, but staying around Singapore ,without work soon makes a big hole in your wallet.
I have never met anyone who applied for Citizenship in any of these countries.
Citizenship is attractive to a person from a 3rd world country coming to the West, because it gives access to a generous welfare system of Health, Housing ,education and unearned cash.
Open borders and a Welfare system are not compatible and lead to society breakdown by its attraction of unskilled ,uneducated welfare tourists.
 

Gin Soaked

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2016
Messages
4,007
Not what the judgment is saying at all. There are numerous examples in Irish law of 'residence' or 'ordinary residence' or , as in this case 'continuous residence' to include normal periods of vacation. Claiming that 100 days absence in a 365 day period is that same as 1 days absence, is stupid.
100 days absence is a lot , but if you travel a lot, plus annual vacations, you could get close. Herself would probably be close to 70 days this year when we add vacation and work. So if you are in that sort of role, you are well paid and pay loads of tax.

It would be reasonable for 4 weeks vacation plus whatever work travel up to be waived. I know people who work about 2 weeks on the trot overseas. Not that uncommon.

So absolutism is not the way here. How invested are their lives in Ireland.?
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
11,295
Twitter
Deiscirt
Do you have any figures on number granted, how long it took after they became eligible, etc. i.e. any facts at all. 'Quote'

I have worked in most countries of the world as an Engineer. China, ...
Open borders and a Welfare system are not compatible and lead to society breakdown by its attraction of unskilled ,uneducated welfare tourists.
What I don't understand is how it has come to be perfectly normal for there to be so many Egyptian Taxi drivers, Belorussian bouncers and the like in Ireland. I thought you had to have skills to migrate to Ireland from outside the EU?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top