International protection applicants from Pakistan added to accelerated processing list
The Department of Justice said applications from Pakistan have grown 'considerably' in recent years. In each of the last two quarters, Pakistani nationals ranked as the second-highest nationality for international protection applications.
As of July 24th, 905 people from Pakistan sought international protection in Ireland this year. This compares to 1,391 for the whole of 2024, 624 in 2023, 242 in 2022 and 68 in 2021.
Since November 2022, international protection applicants from certain countries receive a decision on their application in about four months. This timeline is expected to further reduce in the coming months, said a department spokesperson.
READ MORE
Accelerated processing for certain international protection applications previously focused on people from 15 'safe countries of origin': Albania, Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Egypt, Georgia, India, Kosovo, Malawi, Morocco, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and South Africa.
The process was more recently widened to include countries from where there has been a surge in the numbers seeking asylum, such as Nigeria and Jordan.
Commenting on the addition of Pakistan to the accelerated processing list, Mr O'Callaghan said he is
'committed to ensuring that the protection system works for those who genuinely need our help'.
One of the ways this is done is by prioritising applications for people from safe countries or countries with a large number of applications, he said.
'This approach allows us to adapt to the changing patterns of international protection and is a critical element of our firm but fair approach.'
Mr O'Callaghan said this approach is 'working'. He noted there has been a 43 per cent reduction in application numbers compared to this time last year.
A third of asylum seekers entering the State this year have had their applications considered under the fast-track decision-making process, according to
figures from earlier this month
.
Figures shared at a meeting of the Cabinet subcommittee on migration showed 32 per cent of applications are being accelerated.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Social media and responsibility
Sir – The random stabbing of a young member of An Garda Síochána on Capel Street in Dublin has been properly condemned. What also needs to be condemned is the fact that hours after the Garda clarified that the suspected attacker was an Irish man, social media such as X was still carrying comments claiming that the attacker was a 'foreigner'. Surely social media companies have a responsibility to take down comments which are clearly inaccurate and harmful? We should all be mindful of the vulnerability of immigrants to violent behaviour by people likely to have been motivated by false and malicious social media comments. – Yours, etc, PETER FEENEY, READ MORE (Former press ombudsman), Donnybrook, Dublin 4.
Irish Times
6 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on X's court defeat: the conflict will continue
The High Court's rejection of X's challenge to Ireland's new online safety code may come to be seen as a milestone in the enforcement of Europe's digital rulebook. It is also a reminder that the battle over online content regulation is not simply a matter of legal interpretation or child protection policy. It sits squarely in the middle of a transatlantic struggle over who sets the rules for the digital economy. Ireland's Online Safety Code, enforced by Coimisiún na Meán, requires platforms to shield children from harmful video content, introduce age checks and parental controls, and prevent the sharing of material that promotes self-harm, eating disorders or bullying. The court ruled these measures fall within the EU's Audiovisual Media Services Directive and complement the Digital Services Act, dismissing X's claims of overreach. That finding may seem straightforward from a European perspective. The EU has long sought to assert that technology companies must respect European standards if they wish to operate here. But the US views such measures through a different lens, shaped by its dominance in the tech sector and a political culture that prizes free expression in almost absolute terms. The commercial stakes are immense. The global tech services market is overwhelmingly dominated by American firms: Meta, Google, Apple and Amazon. EU regulation is therefore not just a neutral exercise in public protection but, inevitably, a rebalancing of power between the jurisdictions where these companies are based and the markets in which they operate. That tension is heightened by the fact that Ireland is home to the European headquarters of many of these firms, making it the front line in this conflict. READ MORE In Washington, the issues are often couched in the language of principle. Conservative figures such as JD Vance have been vocal in their defence of unfettered online speech, casting regulation as censorship. Such arguments, while grounded in America's First Amendment tradition, also align neatly with the commercial interests of the companies whose revenues depend on maximising user engagement. The defence of principle and the defence of profit are intertwined. The ruling against X will not end these disputes. The tech industry's legal resources are vast, and its political allies influential. But it confirms that Ireland, acting within the EU framework, has the authority to challenge the ethos of the platforms it hosts. That will not be welcomed in boardrooms in California or on Capitol Hill. As the digital economy becomes a key arena of US-EU competition, Ireland's decisions will be read not only as regulatory acts but as statements about where power lies in the online world. Tuesday's judgment suggests that, at least for now, that power may be shifting.
Irish Times
7 hours ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on the Government VAT row: tensions ahead
With many Government ministers now scattered to the beaches and byways, attention to matters in Leinster House has turned briefly quiet. But the reverberations from a row over VAT on hospitality still linger, offering a taste of fractious budgetary debates to come in September. The flare-up, pitting Fianna Fáil against Fine Gael, may seem familiar. It echoes the tensions seen earlier this summer over third-level college fees and once again highlights the uneasy balance at the heart of the Coalition. The proposal to reduce the hospitality VAT rate to 9 per cent was a Fine Gael manifesto pledge that found its way, with caveats, into the Programme for Government. But enthusiasm for the measure is not universally shared. Simon Harris, eager to demonstrate economic support for small business and the regions, has championed the move. However, his party colleague, Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe, was notably blunt in the Summer Economic Statement. The cut, he noted, would consume nearly two-thirds of the pot set aside for tax measures. READ MORE That alone was enough to raise eyebrows. More pointedly, Fianna Fáil's Minister of State Niall Collins described the proposal as an unnecessary concession to a 'price-gouging' industry. Fine Gael countered that hospitality is a major regional employer under pressure from rising costs. Both sides later sought to play down the public spat. Coalition tensions are nothing new, but the nature of this disagreement suggests tougher debates to come. While calling the 2026 budget a 'hairshirt' one would be absurd, it is clear nonetheless that the era of fiscal generosity is drawing to a close. Trade-offs are inevitable. One such compromise may involve delaying the reduction until mid-2026. That might provide enough breathing room for competing demands, though no one will be entirely satisfied. In the end, the episode may be remembered as a sideshow to more serious economic challenges. Still, it has cast a light on the limits of coalition unity in an era of fiscal tightening.
