In response to the growing concern throughout the country at the government’s immigration policy, senior figures have responded by insisting that fingerprinting and checks for criminal records are carried out when migrants claim asylum here.
Now, breaking information released by the Department of Justice has shown that no such checks against a criminal database are, in fact, carried out.
Security and safety fears have been raised repeatedly by local protesters, especially after it became known that thousands of those claiming to be asylum seekers had been allowed to enter the country without passports or documentation.
Protesters have been criticised for describing asylum seekers as “unvetted” persons. Now, information released to TDs Carol Nolan and Michael McNamara by the Department of Justice has provided clarity on the matter.
The International Protection Office (IPO) takes the asylum applicant’s fingerprints but, while they are checked against two databases, neither is a criminal database.
They are checked against Eurodac – but, as Matt Treacy has pointed out previously on this platform, Eurodac “is an EU database that stores the fingerprints of international protection applicants or people who have crossed a border illegally.”
The Department of Justice is clear on this matter, confirming in its response to Deputy Nolan yesterday that “EURODAC is not a criminal records database”.
“However”, the Department adds, “the underpinning regulations permit law enforcement agencies to compare fingerprints linked to criminal investigations with those contained on EURODAC in certain circumstances involving serious criminal offences”. That would only happen as a “last resort” as per Eurodac.
Our analysis of Eurodac records, from 2015 until May 2023, shows that there have been zero instances in which the Irish authorities have used the Eurodac database “for the purpose of comparing fingerprint data sets in order to prevent, detect or investigate terrorist offences or other serious criminal offences”.
Not a single one.
So what about other databases? Nolan asked:” Are the applicant’s fingerprints checked against any other databases to see if they have a criminal record?”.
The Department revealed that checks are only made against the Schengen Information System (SIS) – which, again, is not a criminal database. SIS contains information about false documents or identification which has been captured by an EU member state or the Schengen associated countries (Switzerland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland) – and also shares alerts about outstanding arrest warrants or vulnerable persons. It does not record a person’s criminal history or records.
MINISTER O’GORMAN’S CLAIM
Minister for Integration, Roderic O’Gorman, told the Journal in December that: “When an International Protection applicant arrives in the country, they’re fingerprinted. Their fingerprints go through two databases. One to see if they’ve been involved with the immigration authorities in any other EU member state and the other to see if they’ve been involved in criminality in any other member state”.
According to the Department of Justice, this is not the case. Neither Eurodac nor SIS are criminal databases.
The EU agency, Europol, does operate a criminal database, called the Europol Information System (EIS) which is the agency’s “central criminal information and intelligence database. It covers all of Europol’s mandated crime areas, including terrorism.”
But according to the Department of Justice’s response to Deputy Nolan, when processing asylum applicants checks are not made against the EIS database operated by Europol.
The Minister has been contacted for a response to this article, which will be updated when that response is received.
Clare TD Michael McNamara also asked a question of the Minister for Justice regarding the use of the Europol system. The Department replied that “An Garda Síochána does not input fingerprints on the Europol Information System (EIS)”.
“An Garda Síochána directly contacts Member States and third party countries via the Secure Information Exchange Network Application (SIENA) if a search on fingerprints is required. As a result, there are no figures available for fingerprint checks against EIS,” the response stated.
ASYLUM APPLICATIONS FROM THOSE OUTSIDE EU
There’s another factor in checking for criminal records when processing the applications of asylum seekers.
The majority of people coming to Ireland to claim asylum, according to IPAS, are from countries like Nigeria and Algeria which don’t in general subscribe to European databases.
IPAS says, for example, that in November (the last monthly report available) some 84% of those who applied for asylum that month came from African and Asian countries, like Somalia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Africa – with Georgia being a notable exception in recent years.
The IPO is not checking the fingerprints of these applicants against a criminal database that most likely captures details from those countries of origin.
Most migrants are arriving here from countries which to not subscribe to the databases against which the Irish authorities are performing their checks – and that would be the case even if the International Protection office were to check against Europol.
If one of the more than 8,000 people who have arrived here without identification does, in fact, have a criminal record in an African or Asian countries, the Irish authorities does not have the capacity of checking their fingerprints against a database that captured their criminal records.
The exception would be if that person has committed, and been convicted of, a crime since coming to Europe.
The information released yesterday by the Department of Justice clarifies that:
- The Irish authorities are not checking the fingerprints of asylum seekers against a criminal database.
- Thousands of asylum seekers are arriving here without passports, and, for a great many of those arrivals, taking their fingerprints and contrasting them against European databases will not reveal criminal convictions from their country of origin.
In fact, Nolan further asked that if the asylum applicant did not appear on Eurodac “and is from a country of origin that does not share its databases with Eurodac or the Irish state, is that country contacted to perform a check for criminal records?”.
The Department of Justice said that this would be a “breach of their responsibilities”.
“In relation to countries of origin which will not be a party to the EURODAC database, it would be in breach of our responsibilities in respect of refugee protection to contact the consular or police authorities in relation to persons who have sought the protection of the Irish State as doing so may have the consequence of making such authorities aware of an applicant’s presence in the State, and their claim for international protection,” they replied.
And the Department added: “If an international protection applicant does not generate a “hit” on EURODAC, because they have not had an immigration interaction with another EU State, and they do not have identifying documentation, their international protection claim must still be processed. Their claim, as with all international protection claims, will be determined on the grounds set out in the International Protection Act 2015”.
A clearer picture of what ‘vetting’ is actually taking place is now emerging, and it seems the safety fears of local people in relation to hundreds of men without documentation being imposed on their communities might, in fact, be justified.
It is telling that a TD had to submit a raft of parliamentary questions to get that clarity from the government on such a pressing issue. It is also extraordinary that the Minister for Integration, who has responsibility for this area, appears to have made incorrect claims in regards to the process, and in regard to criminal checks in particular.
The statements from the Department of Justice do contradict an Taoiseach Leo Varadkar said on this subject just a week ago.
He sought to assure people that Ireland was operating “very robust checks” in regard to immigration. That involved, he claimed, taking asylum applicants’ fingerprints and comparing them against databases including, “of course”, checks against criminal records.
“Myths” and “disinformation needed” to be tackled, as did people on the “far-right” who “don’t tell the truth”, Mr Varadkar said.
"Part of my job is to tell the truth about migration": Leo Varadkar recently said it's a “far-right myth” to say that refugees must apply for asylum in the first safe country they enter.@Ben_Scallan asks if he was spreading "misinformation" when he made the same claim in 2019: pic.twitter.com/DmB2yvzw8a
— gript (@griptmedia) January 10, 2024
Media commentators took up his comments with Newstalk reporting that “one of the biggest myths we have is these people are unvetted when they come into the country”.
“These people are fingerprinted when they come into the country,” the The Anton Savage Show heard. “Their fingerprints and names are checked against international databases – if there is a record of criminality they are dealt with differently.”
The same claims have been made frequently by immigration NGOs who have referenced fingerprinting as evidence that thorough checks are being performed.
But now we know that fingerprints of asylum applicants are not checked against a criminal database. In addition, it is also the case that for the majority of asylum seekers, who come from Africa and Asia, checking against Europol won’t reveal if they have a criminal record in their country of origin.