In a significant legal turnaround, Ireland's Court of Appeal has ruled that the government did not infringe the rights of single male asylum seekers by failing to provide adequate accommodation. This decision overturns a prior ruling by the High Court, which had identified a violation of Article 1 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights concerning human dignity.

The appeal emerged from actions initiated by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC), which argued that the lack of government-provided shelter for approximately 2,800 single male asylum seekers from December 2023 to May 2024 subjected them to inhumane conditions. However, the appellate court found that the testimonies from about a dozen of these men did not conclusively prove that all individuals in the group suffered harm to their human dignity.

Justice Anthony Collins, who delivered the judgment, pointed to an "evidential deficit," suggesting that while the men faced "extreme material poverty," there was insufficient proof that this amounted to a systemic degradation of dignity across the board. The government had previously admitted to accommodation shortages due to fiscal constraints and rising asylum seeker numbers, leading to emergency measures that prioritized families and vulnerable individuals over single men, who were instead given minimal financial support and directed to seek help from charities.

The High Court had earlier criticized these emergency measures as grossly inadequate, stating that the lack of shelter and basic sanitation exposed the men to severe vulnerability and danger. Nonetheless, the Court of Appeal differentiated between experiencing hardship and the legal breach of rights, concluding that the evidence did not demonstrate a widespread violation.

While the decision has denied the specific legal claim of rights violations under the EU Charter, it affirmed the right of IHREC to bring forward group claims. This aspect of the ruling highlights the commission's role and potential challenges in maintaining its perceived independence, especially when contesting government policies during financial downturns.

In response, IHREC has acknowledged the court's recognition of the hardships endured by the asylum seekers and pressed for enhanced legal protections to prevent similar situations in the future. This case adds to the broader discourse on asylum rights within the EU, especially in light of recent judgments such as the High Court of Northern Ireland’s ruling against the UK's Rwanda deportation policy, advocating for the judiciary's crucial role in protecting vulnerable populations against harmful policies.