Ending direct provision

Summary

‘Direct provision’ is the system that Ireland uses to accommodate and provide limited social and economic rights for people seeking asylum.  When introduced in April 2000, the government stated that people would be in the system for a maximum of six months. Some 22 years later, over 7,000 people are in direct provision, often spending years waiting for their asylum claim to be processed. The Irish Government has finally committed to ending direct provision by 2024.

Dr Thornton’s research has enhanced legal and policy analysis of the system, assisting protection seekers, activists, civil society and politicians in advocating for the end to direct provision. His research informed public discourse on the human rights violations caused by direct provision, and contributed to enabling legal change to end it.

Research description

Dr Thornton’s academic research on direct provision shows that this system significantly and unjustifiably (opens in a new window)limits the human rights of persons seeking international protection in Ireland. His research has identified several core features of direct provision:

• Limited access to (opens in a new window)social welfare rights.
• Limited access to the (opens in a new window)labour market.
• Limited protection of rights to (opens in a new window)family and home life, the rights of (opens in a new window)the child, and the rights of those who arrive in Ireland as (opens in a new window)unaccompanied children and after turning 18 are placed in the direct provision system.

While reforms have helped lessen some of these rights violations, the (opens in a new window)wholescale institutionalisation of asylum seekers in the direct provision system  violates human rights. Until 2018, the system of direct provision was not set out in legislation. Because of this, Dr Thornton resorted to innovative use of the Freedom of Information Act to analyse how high-level policymakers in the Government and civil service engaged with questions of law and human rights of people in the direct provision system. After 2018, Dr Thornton’s research focus shifted to analysing asylum seekers’ rights under proposed and implemented reforms to direct provision.

Together, these activities led to the UCD-funded project (opens in a new window)Exploring Direct Provision, which provides wider access to otherwise unavailable (opens in a new window)government decisions and policy discussions on the system of direct provision. Through his research, Dr Thornton has engaged with legal and political systems in search of a desirable outcome: core protection of human rights for people seeking international protection and an end to direct provision.

What is clear from Thornton’s research is that over the past 20 years, the purpose of direct provision has been to deter people from coming to Ireland to claim asylum.

—Bulelani Mfaco, Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland

Research impact

Dr Thornton’s research contributed to policy analysis and legal understanding of the system of direct provision. He has helped shape public discourse on the issue, and has provided expert analysis to enable legal change, which ultimately seeks to protect the human rights of people currently in direct provision.

Legal and policy analysis

The non-legislative nature of direct provision until 2018 meant that there was limited public documentation on the legal basis for system. There was also little information on how the system was operated. Even after 2018, the need for information on legal aspects of direct provision remains. Hence, the (opens in a new window)Exploring Direct Provision Project provides protection seekers, civil society organisations and activists with key information on the formation and development of the direct provision system.

The project also acts as a key tool for other researchers in disciplines beyond law that may provide further insights into law and policy aspects of the direct provision system. On three occasions before the project’s launch, Dr Thornton provided legal practitioners with documents as part of ((opens in a new window)potential and actual) legal challenges to aspects of the direct provision system – most notably in the (opens in a new window)2014 direct provision case in the Irish High Court.

Enabling legal change

Significant lobbying by asylum seekers and NGOs led to a systemic review of the direct provision system in 2014-2015 and 2020-2021. Dr Thornton’s research contributed by highlighting concerns with direct provision from a human rights legalistic standpoint. In fact, he conducted the first systemic legal evaluation of the system of direct provision.

He engaged with policy actors in Ireland and internationally, by providing ad-hoc research support and public information, drafting a Bill of the Oireachtas, and informing UN human rights committees about Ireland’s lack of compliance with its freely accepted obligations under international human rights law. His research – along with protest by protection seekers and significant engagement by civil society – continues to highlight the need for Ireland to end direct provision to ensure proper rights protections for persons subject to the system.

Informing public discourse

Public communication of Dr Thornton’s research findings and analysis has been a key aspect of his work on direct provision. This is most readily provided through (opens in a new window)his website, and through his significant contributions (opens in a new window)in the media on this issue, with dozens of appearances across radio, TV, podcasts and mainstream newspapers. His research has been relied upon extensively by media in various ways:

• Explaining the system of direct provision.
• Critiquing the system on the basis of human rights legal obligations.
• Articulating the needs for legal change to ensure the end of the system of direct provision.

This has contributed in a major way to wider public debates on how human rights protections of private life, family life, the right to work and the right to social welfare need to be embedded into any system that replaces direct provision.