Granting of regular leave to cases of repeat offenders As regards the issue of granting regular leave in cases of repeat offenders, it is considered advisable that the possibility of adopting a previous opinion of the committee of experts is examined, as well as the provision on the special terms for granting regular leave, in the direction of the prisoner's supervision, always aiming at a smooth reintegration. This proposal has already been submitted to the competent legislative committee, in the framework of the processing a new draft Penitentiary Code. Possibility of appeal to members of the Prison Board against a leave granting decision (Article 55(3) of the Penitentiary Code) Law 3772/2009 established the possibility for the Public Prosecutor participating as a member in the Prison Board to exercise the legal remedy of appeal within a 5 day deadline (from the issue of the relevant decision, which was taken with his participation), to the competent first-instance judicial council, in case he is in the minority, with regard to the satisfaction of a request for leave. This provision appears to be incompatible in principle with fundamental regulations of operation of the administrative bodies, since it rather suits the character of a legally imposed "introverted trial". In this case there is a clear and almost certain risk, which is the final, as a rule, and irrevocable rejection of the request that had initially been accepted by the majority, according to the Ombudsman's experience in investigating similar reports, and also from discussions with prisoners and members of the Prison Administrations. The Ombudsman does not dispute the guarantees of the judicial judgement which in the end support, in this case, the decision on granting regular leave and also realises any reasons there are for ensuring that the overriding public interest is protected, which seemed to have imposed this legal provision. However, and with the special note that the content of the legality of the criminal enforcement must be interpreted under a rule of law, liberal and humanitarian light, it considers that this provision must be reviewed. At this point it emerges that the possibility of activating the legally provided function of the Penalty Enforcement Courts must be studied and evaluated. Drug addicted persons deprived of their liberty The correct implementation of alternative penalty measures in these cases is of paramount importance, with the goal of effectively implementing all new relevant provisions of Law 4322/2015, as well as supporting consulting and promptly launching therapeutic programmes for the physical and psychological rehabilitation in all Detention Facilities of the country, aiming at the exclusive operation of therapeutic or detention facilities specific for this purpose. An important related development is the operation, within the year, of a Rehabilitation Unit in the Diavata Detention Facility. To this end, of the rational and decent treatment of the country's drug addicted prisoners, the NPM underlines that among other things, there is urgent need for the prompt completion of the rehabilitation unit at the Kassandra Rural Detention Facility. Tripoli Detention Facility The NPM continues to stress (see Annual Report 2014, pp. 158) the vital necessity of significantly improving the living conditions of the prisoners in the Tripoli Detention Facility, while it intends to monitor the implementation of the Ministry of Justice's assurances for the transfer of a significant number of prisoners in a wing of the Grevena Detention Facility as well as the measure's usefulness in substantially improving the current situation. ADMINISTRATIVE DETENTION OF THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS The administrative detention of third-country nationals issue has specifically and repeatedly been of particular interest to the Ombudsman in the past as regards its lawfulness and the detention conditions. In 2015 the State appeared to be willing to adopt an approach that is in line with the mandates of national and international law, as regards e.g. the duration of the detention. Characteristic is the case of Art. 18 of L. 4332/2015, as specialised with order No. 1604/15/1423412/10.8.2015 of the Hellenic Police Headquarters, which adopted the Ombudsman's recommendation regarding a clear, protective and realistic framework for postponing the removal of persons whose removal is impossible. Specifically, these are third-country nationals who are coming from not only Syria, but also from Eritrea, Somalia, Palestine, Myanmar and Mauritania. The State reserved the same treatment in 2015 for citizens from Iraq, by virtue of Hellenic Police order No. 1604/15/2189144/30.11.2015 (see "Returns of third-country nationals"), since order No. 71778/14/482251/22.3.2014, issued in implementation of Ministerial Decision 4000/4/5-62/28.2.2014 and Opinion 44/2014 of the Legal Council of State on general detention for 18 months ceased to apply, even though it was not expressly revoked, This new policy seem to initially lead to a significant decrease in the number of administrative detained third-country nationals, both in detention centres and in police station cells. However, the administrative detention of third-country nationals remains a critical subject, its non-negotiable goal being the legality of the detention (considering that any lack of a legal basis for the deprivation of liberty is a direct violation of the prohibition of torture without further explanation and in irrefutable manner), the assurance of dignified conditions, the necessity for the broad adoption of measures alternative to detention and the individualised decision on the imposition of the measure and its duration. This issue was of particular concern to the Ombudsman, in the light of the recent developments as regards the management of the particularly high number of mixed (refugee and migration) flows, and with the goal of completely eliminating the repeated phenomenon of using detention as an haphazard tool for managing mixed flows and as a counterbalance for the 6