1.3.1. Recognition rates, quality of interviews and decisions The Asylum Service issued a total of 41,667 in-merit decisions during 2025, of which 8,328 concerned the accelerated procedure.369 Decisions on the merits by the Asylum Service: 2025 Refugee status Subsidiary protection Rejected Exclusion (Article 1F Refugee Convention) 24,353 2,384 14,876 54 Source: MoMA, Statistics: Consolidated Reports – Overview, December 2025 - International Protection | Appendix A, available at: https://migration.gov.gr/statistika/, Table 8a. While recognition rates at first instance remain high (in terms of in-merit decisions), a number of first instance cases demonstrate the persistence of long-standing concerns vis-à-vis the “deterioration in quality at first instance”, inter alia due to the way in which interviews were conducted, the assessment of the asylum claims and/or the decisions delivered.” 370 There also seems to be a new evaluation of the situation prevailing with regard to Syria and Afghanistan, so that during 2025, the first rejections of international protection (refugee status as well as subsidiary protection) from persons of Syrian and Afghan nationality occurred. Regarding interviews, GCR is aware of several cases of persons that have been through their interview by a case worker appointed to a different RAO/AU responsible for the lodging application and later on a third asylum office, namely AU Nikaias, was called to access the interview and issue the decision. The practice was noticed primarily in persons residing in camps out of Attica, the interview was conducted remotely by a case worker situated in a completely different area and then the file passed on to a different authority. While the lodging of the application was at AU for international protection (Fast Track- regular procedure), the interview was conducted by persons appointed to RIC Malakasa while the case was referred afterwards to AU Nikaias for decision. The particular situation has proven to cause extreme delays since despite referral to the authority the case was pending the appointment of a case worker for months. The interview was conducted in July 2025 but the decision was still pending by the time of the writing this report.371 Long waiting and extreme delays is issuancing decisions has been noted repeatedly by the end of the year especially with regard to cases of Arabic-speaking population. Examples of such cases in 2025 include: ❖ The case of a young single man from Syria, of kurdish origin, whose application was rejected after it was found at the first instance that the situation in his country of origin does not indicate that he would face such a degree of hardship or danger upon his return meriting international protection 372 ❖ The case of a single man from Egypt, who was interviewed a year after surviving the deadly shipwreck of Pylos in June 2025. By the end of the year the decisions on his case was not issued.373 ❖ The case of a single-mother of two, survivor of SGBV from Togo. Her interview had been postponed several times since 2024 and all through 2025. 374 ❖ The case of a couple from Syria extremely vulnerable due to health issues. The interview was conducted by the end of July 2025. No decision was issued by the end of the year or early 2026. 375 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 MoMA, Statistics: Consolidated Reports – Overview, December 2025 - International Protection | Appendix A, available at: https://migration.gov.gr/statistika/, Table 8a. AIDA, Country Report: Greece, 2019 Update, pp. 58-59, available here. Case file with the author. Decision on file with the author. File with the author. File with the author. File with the author. 84