Liam Herrick

While acknowledging that there is additional detail in the bill since the General Scheme, the commission warns that substantial gaps and ambiguities persist in areas that directly affect the rights and safety of international protection (IP) applicants, including vulnerable applicants such as children and victims of trafficking.

The bill does not define what is meant by legal counselling or clarify who will provide it. With fewer than five months remaining before the Pact is due to be implemented, this creates serious uncertainty regarding IP applicants’ entitlements to legal advice and representation at all stages of the new process. The commission is particularly concerned about the lack of clarity around whether legal counselling may be provided by non-legal professionals. The commission does not believe that group counselling can be provided by legal professionals under existing professional or ethical rules. The commission remains concerned that applicants may be denied tailored, individualised legal advice.

The bill also lacks clarity on who will conduct age assessments and what specialised qualifications they must hold. The minister retains broad powers to designate those who will conduct such assessments. There is also no detail on what constitutes a “suitable medical means” of assessing age, despite the sensitivity and potential impact of such examinations on children.

The commission recognises that some provisions regarding oversight in the General Scheme have been rolled back to better reflect the Pact. However, serious concerns remain about the independence and effectiveness of the Independent Monitoring Mechanism (IMM), as set out by the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency. The chief inspector’s powers appear primarily regulatory rather than investigative, with unclear authority to initiate investigations into the most egregious human rights breaches, including assault, sexual assault, or deaths in custody. The commission is also concerned about provisions allowing the government to remove the chief inspector where it is deemed to be “in the best interests of the State”, a standard that is overly broad and open to abuse.

Liam Herrick, chief commissioner of IHREC, said: “Ireland can have a migration and protection system that is fair, efficient and fully compliant with human rights and equality law. That requires careful, meaningful scrutiny of this bill by the Oireachtas.

“Without clear, enforceable safeguards, there is a real risk that the new system will fall short of the State’s human rights and equality obligations.”