Decision on Athlone asylum seeker site delayed by change of Government

The formation of the new Government has delayed a court's decision over whether the State can continue housing asylum seekers at the recently-built accommodation centre in Lissywollen, Athlone.

The High Court had to push back a decision on the site's future for a second time on Monday of this week, with the case now adjourned until Monday, February 17.

Late last year, lawyers for the State conceded a challenge brought by Athlone councillor Paul Hogan, on behalf of himself and council colleagues, on the basis that the site was unsuitable to house 1,000 people as planned.

There are 180 residents who will remain on site at what's formally known as the Midlands Accommodation Centre but Judge Richard Humphreys granted a request that no further works to expand the site can take place, except for "urgent" maintenance works.

The judge was told that officials responsible for the international protection (IPAS) system within the Department of Children, Equality, Disability and Youth are being moved to another department. Although not said in court, it is likely this will become part of the revised Department of Justice and Home Affairs.

But this changeover has resulted in a delay to the State formulating its position on the Athlone site.

Aoife Carroll, senior counsel for the State, told the court that with the formation of a new Government, the "unit that deals with these issues is intended to be transferred between departments".

"Because of that, we're not as advanced as we had hoped," Carroll said.

Carroll requested an adjournment, saying it would "allow the ministers who are taking responsibility for this to consider the issues and consider the next steps," around the future of the centre.

The court heard that legal costs had also been conceded by the State for the case.

Oisin Collins, senior counsel for Cllr Hogan, requested that there be no "intensification" of use at the site or further works.

This was granted by Judge Humphreys. He accepted points from the State that the accommodation centre had been affected by Storm Eowyn and clarified that any maintenance arising from the weather would be allowed.

Following queries from Cllr Hogan's counsel, Carroll said she could confirm that the number of residents staying at the site "is not going to change" ahead of the next court hearing. "The State is maintaining the status quo," she added.

The legal challenge over the centre, which is being brought on environmental grounds, was announced prior to the general election in November, and at that stage it was stated that it was being taken on behalf of Cllr Hogan and his colleagues Frankie Keena, John Dolan, Aengus O'Rourke and Kevin 'Boxer' Moran.

In the aftermath of Monday's hearing in the case, Cllr Keena said the councillors' legal team “felt that we need to be understanding of the circumstances presented, with the change of Government, and to work with the court.”

“We were happy to take the advice from our legal team and are now looking forward to this next hearing (on February 17),” said Cllr Keena.

Cllr Aengus O’Rourke commented: “While I am disappointed that there has been another adjournment, I am satisfied that on the next occasion we are very likely to finally have our case heard in full.

“That, then, will determine our next steps. Most likely, we will then apply for a section 160 order to have the (Lissywollen) site reinstated to its original condition.”

Cllr John Dolan was present at the High Court for Monday’s hearing and said that, from the local councillors’ perspective, the proceedings appeared to be “heading in the right direction”.

“The legal process is not fast, but we are hopeful that on the next occasion the order (to establish the centre) should be quashed fully,” he said.

A GoFundMe appeal to pay the costs of the local councillors’ legal action has raised more than €52,000.

When asked about the mention in court on Monday of the State paying legal costs in the case, Cllr Dolan said this would have to be teased out in greater detail.

“We will have to get that fully confirmed - we will probably know more on the next day. My information on that is that, if the State are paying costs, they will debate the costs involved.

“There are some costs they will cover, but they probably won’t cover all our costs. We just don’t know that yet. And we may face the costs of another (legal action), if we have to apply for the section 160 order to restore the site to its original condition.”