In a ruling last Thursday, the High Court determined that the State violated the basic rights of homeless asylum seekers, an issue reminiscent of a familiar pattern. Over the past year, Ireland has struggled to accommodate all asylum seekers, with the inaugural legal challenge to the crisis being adjudicated 16 months prior.
In this prior judgement, made in cases led by two males, State-allocated Dunnes Stores vouchers worth €28 and details of private charities, provided as a substitute for state-provided accommodation, were judged by the High Court to have “significantly failed” to meet legal requirements. The Court found that the men’s unconditional right to human dignity had been compromised.
The Minister defended the case, and although the court acknowledged that the State was endeavouring to manage a surge in asylum applications along with the commitment to providing for inbound Ukrainians fleeing conflict, it did not insinuate inaction or reluctance.
Upon final judgment, the State accepted its reproach and elected not to contest further. When bed shortages resulted in the inability to house all newly settled males last December, it took only a few weeks for Ireland’s human rights monitor to compile the necessary legal documentation and launch its inaugural group action.
Mr Justice Barry O’Donnell confirmed last Thursday that the State’s action towards homeless foreign protection applicants violated their right to human dignity, echoing the prior case’s verdict. However, he rejected the additional demand from the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) for a mandatory order compelling the Government to instate a system that upholds the basic rights of all international protection applicants.
The judge’s rationale was that such measures seemed “not warranted or essential”, given the State’s proactive efforts towards achieving said objective.
The State has attempted to undertake improvements following a prior court ruling, signalling its defence against the commission’s allegations by augmenting a weekly assistance of €75 for homeless men and forging official agreements with charities delivering food and hygiene facilities. However, Mr Justice O’Donnell determined that these actions were insufficient, though they demonstrated the State’s aspiration to comply with the court’s 2023 verdict. He noted there was no implication that the State may not comply with the current decision.
The fresh measures failed to satisfy all essential requirements, compelling the men to decide between food, clothing and cleanliness. Having overloaded daily services and the weekly payout of €113.80 being inadequate to cover a personal hostel bed for more than a couple of nights, the judge surmised.
The State had advocated that these modifications were in sync with the systems of other EU nations, where housing could not be supplied, ensuring calibrated offerings without making Ireland an enticing asylum-seeking destination.
The Irish Refugee Council claimed that the ruling obliges the State to provide shelter for people, and in the interim, drastically enhance the resources given to the 2,352 without housing.
Due to the proposed new centres attracting significant, and at times, chaotic protests, it is currently unclear how the State will align itself accordingly.