Thread by @wendylyon

‘Chilling’ new direction on asylum and immigration cases
irishtimes.com/news/crime-and…

Let me just run down all the things that are wrong with this direction - or at least all the ones cited in this article ...

1. There is nothing REMOTELY similar to these requirements in the ordinary judicial review list. It's only migrants - and their families - who are subject to these rules. What does that say about how Ireland views them?

2. The requirement to exhibit "every statement/representation made by the applicant or by any other member of his/her family . . . to any immigration body in Ireland or other jurisdiction" - this could require us to make multiple SARs from multiple people to multiple countries.

3. Some of these countries might not even have provisions for sharing this info. And just because I act for a client doesn't mean I act for their whole family. If I don't have their authority to obtain representations made on their behalf, does that prejudice my client's case?

4. If these representations are irrelevant to the application that my client is making, then GDPR would suggest it's unlawful to demand their disclosure in the first place.

5. Most judicial review applications in the immigration list must be made within 28 days of the decision (a discriminatory policy in itself - doesn't apply in ordinary JR list). But data controllers have 30 days to comply with a request.

6. The requirement "to produce details of criminal or civil proceedings in which their clients have ever been involved in the State or elsewhere" could require a refugee to make contact with authorities in their country of origin. Do I need to say why this is totally untenable?

7. "solicitors must state the religion of the applicant" - no. Just no. This is none of the High Court's business. The Oaths Act does require deponent to swear affidavit in line with their religion, but that's between them and their witness. (And that law should be changed anyway

(Bear in mind that court documents are part of the public record and can now be made available to journalists - all the more reason no one should have to disclose this in an affidavit)

8. "...and that their affidavit was “sworn with the appropriate religious book in our personal presence” I cannot swear an affidavit in proceedings brought by me or any other solicitor in my firm - they have to go to another firm. I am not usually present, nor do I need to be.

9. What about my clients who live on the other side of the country? Do they have to come to Dublin every time now? (Bear in mind there is no legal aid for these proceedings) What about applicants who don't even live in Ireland?

There's more that the article doesn't even cover, but I think this is enough to show why this practice direction is *completely* unworkable.