Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION authorities in EU countries can verify that an asylum-seeker is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, but can’t demand, or even accept proof in a way that violates their privacy and dignity.
That’s the ruling of the European Court of Justice this week, in a case brought by three asylum-seekers against the Netherlands.
The court, based in Luxembourg, agreed that if a refugee is applying for asylum on the grounds of feared or experienced persecution based on their sexual orientation, it’s reasonable for authorities to try to confirm their claim.
However, the judges said:
David Carroll, Executive Director of BeLonG To, which runs a service for young LGBT asylum seekers, told TheJournal.ie the ruling would have a “really positive impact.”
It’s very difficult to try to have an objective assessment of a complex, personal, individual thing like sexual orientation, especially when you’re dealing with cultural differences.
We’ve seen people being asked to ‘prove’ their sexual identity using outdated and stereotyped notions of gay culture, as well as being asked to provide letters and other evidence.
In our experience, these young people are extremely vulnerable, and fleeing their country, so they’re highly unlikely to make a point of packing their ‘gay suitcase’ before they do.
The court also ruled that just because an asylum seeker declares their sexual orientation late in their application should not affect the credibility of their claim.
It cannot be concluded that the declared sexuality lacks credibility simple because, due to his reticence in revealing intimate aspects of his life, that person did not declare his homosexuality at the outset.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Convenient they can blame the EU now
@Pj Browne: god forbid we follow laws and agreements.
I wouldn’t mind but it’s literally the government’s job to know how to pass laws and give enough notice to those affected. They’re getting away with doing it to renters, but it sounds like the people who have managed to afford a spare room are able to stand up for their agreed legal right to fair notice.
@Fiona Fitzgerald: sorry what do you mean they are getting away with it on renters ? If you mean not extending the temporary winter eviction ban I think you have that all messed up
Slightly confused about this article? What exactly is the delay? There has to be a reason for this but the article implies that it’s the EU who is for some unknown reason delaying the process. Clearer journalism would help
@Dave Phelan: It says they want to “engage with stakeholders”, which to me means they want to present the data from their analysis and need those at the top to prioritise it over other issues based on that data. The real question to me is why wasn’t this analysis done in the beginning when it was first proposed?
If you have bought a house, paid vat, paye, stamp duty etc, then the government should not be able to prevent you doing something lawful with it. Deflecting blame from their own failures
@Dave Harris: in fairness nobody is allowed do what they like once they buy something. It does seem unfair that somebody could suddenly find themselves living next door to an ever rotate number of strangers on holidays who often don’t respect locals. Think there is a place for short lets but it can’t go on as is.
@Dave Harris: lol lawful? The state decides what’s lawful. In this case lawful is changing it so that you have to have planning permission before turning your property in a domestic structure into a business. All the other people in the area/building bought based on it being a residence not being a hotel. And every other lawful accommodation business needs to register with bord fáilte and have the required standards and checks in place so why should these get away with it?
@Dave Harris: Laws change and rightly so as society evolves. Airbnb has had a huge impact on housing crises across Ireland and internationally. The government has failed on a number of fronts in relation to housing and regulating short-term rents is one thing they need to act on. We have tourists in home while homeless and refugees are in hotels.
@Emma Meehan: never sure on this “huge” impact in Ireland. Never saw any figures.
12,000 rental units – what a load of cobblers. As a former Airbnb host, I know that most rural hosts have a couple of rooms in their own house or a granny flat and they are definitely not viable accommodation long term. It’s probably different in the cities. But now the rules mean getting planning permission, registration fees, etc. So it’s an end to the farming community or elderly people getting the chance of a few quid in summer time and bringing much needed tourism to the regions. When something is not broken, why try to fix it? As the hosts I’ve been listening to are just getting out. Same as with small landlords, there’s too much hassle, beaurocracy and expense.
@Shelley Keary: As someone who uses Airbnb regularly for accommodation in rural parts of Ireland, I’d definitely agree that most places even those at the higher end in terms of standards are definitely not suitable for long-term renters. They are often in beautiful parts of the country and ideal for some quiet time away but located in very isolated areas, with limited access to services such as schools, medical centres etc, and only having a one shop village nearby that requires driving to. Flaky internet so not suitable for remote work etc, prone to dampness in winter, no childcare available & absolutely no transport options. A blanket approach to classifying all Airbnbs in the same way is ludicrous. The reality of available, suitable, properties is much less then the projections given.
@Shelley Keary: and taxes
Ireland, behind the curve as usual. https://www.nyc.gov/assets/buildings/pdf/MultipleDwellingLaw.pdf
@zephyrum: what has US laws got to do with Irish and EU laws?
The change of use planning rules which have not been announced for Short Term Rentals by the Housing Minister but form part of the proposed Tourism Register is the reason thousands of self catering tourist accommodation providers voiced their concerns to the EU via the TRIS submission process. Rural and coastal tourist accommodation is being put in the same boiling pot as urban short term let’s who are capitalising on higher rental rates and should be the target of the government but all offering these services will be put into the same net. This will have a significant impact on rural businesses that provide benefit to all local businesses whether food and bev, tourist attractions, etc. These rural businesses are already reeling from reduced numbers if accommodation in Summer 2022 due to 35 percent of accommodation contracted to the government for refugees.
Not sure why a Tourism Register is being linked to housing policy that hasn’t been announced? TRIS requires that such policies should be transparent. There was no indication either on what the registration annual cost would be, so I’m wondering why the Govt is surprised that this proposed legislation is at a standstill till Dec 23. Maybe Housing Dept should be looking at their shortcomings rather than trying to pin the homelessness problem on anyone and everyone but themselves.
have your say