- 20 - b. access to a lawyer 28. The right of access to a lawyer for a person deprived of his/her liberty is provided for in the Criminal Procedure Code (Articles 96 et seq.), and paragraph 3 (e) of Police Circular 4803/22/44 recalls this right and the duty on the police to facilitate it. The legal situation appears clear and, on paper, sufficient. However, in practice, the vast majority of persons detained by the police did not have access to a lawyer during the first few hours of their deprivation of liberty (including when they were being interrogated by officers of the Security Department), which is when the safeguard is most needed (see paragraph 33). Thereafter, only those persons with financial means had access to a lawyer (including the possibility to meet with that lawyer in private) while in police detention. Even when persons were brought before the prosecutor, up to 24 hours after being detained, they were not always assisted by a lawyer. Only when a person is brought before the investigative judge and the decision to remand a person in custody is being considered is a person without his own lawyer systematically provided with an ex officio lawyer. Moreover, from the interviews conducted by the CPT’s delegation in police stations and prisons in different parts of the country, it would appear that the ex officio lawyer is merely a passive spectator during the proceedings and that no effort is made to hear the views of the detained person or to challenge remand custody. In many cases, the detained person does not even speak to the lawyer, let alone in private, and when a conversation does take place and an allegation of illtreatment is raised, the lawyer usually advises the person not to pursue the matter (see paragraph 19 above). 29. For access to a lawyer to become an effective safeguard for all persons detained by the police, it is necessary to establish a system of legal aid support whereby ex officio lawyers can be contacted by the police as soon as someone is deprived of their liberty. Further, lawyers should have the right to be present during any interrogation of their clients, and not only, as provided by Article 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code, when a detained person becomes an “accused” person. To this end, several Council of Europe member states have recently introduced legal provisions following the Salduz judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.11 The time has come for the Greek authorities to act on making this fundamental safeguard effective. The CPT calls upon the Greek authorities to take the necessary steps to ensure that the right of access to a lawyer becomes effective in practice as from the outset of custody. To this end, they should elicit the support of the Bar Associations, so that all detained persons without the means to pay for their own lawyers have rapid access to ex officio lawyers who carry out their duties in a diligent manner. 11 European Court of Human Rights, Salduz v. Turkey, Grand Chamber judgment of 27 November 2008.