be properly conducted without legal aid which is not provided pro bono according to the last draft of the Presidential Decree. 3. Effective remedies The asylum seekers have the right to appeal against the negative decisions issued by the police authorities at first instance, in order for their application to be re-examined by the Appeals Committees. The deadline to appeal for the normal procedure is thirty (30) days and for the accelerated procedure is fifteen (15) days and at the borders ten (10) days. In general a hearing takes place in two specific former police stations. No free legal aid is provided. Furthermore, there can be a further appeal against the negative decisions issued by the Appeals Committees, before the Administrative Court, but these appeals do not have a suspensive effect, there is no provision for free legal aid and the Court‟s fees are very high. However, there is a provision of a remedy before the same Courts in order to suspend the deportation order. But this does not constitute an effective remedy and there have been reported cases where the appellant has been deported while the remedy still pending. The above mentioned appeals (before the Administrative Court) do not constitute an effective remedy, as the ECtHR has adjudged in many cases. Access to free legal assistance for applications of annulment is in practice very limited. In particular, for the administrative courts to accept an application for legal assistance, they have to determine whether the application for annulment is manifestly ill-founded or not acceptable. It is also required that the application for annulment is prepared by a lawyer only and each lawyer can undertake only one case. If a decision to grant the aid is positive, the payment does not necessarily go to the lawyer who drafted and signed the application but to one chosen from a general list. In addition, only a tiny percentage of applications for legal aid (c. 5 %) was reportedly accepted in 2012. The only way to receive free legal assistance at the initial stage of asylum determination procedures for appeals before the Appeals Committees and for challenging a detention order is through NGOs. However, the number of lawyers who provide their services to registered asylum-seekers free-of-charge is extremely limited, (included lawyers working for refugee NGOs such as the Greek Council of Refugees, AITIMA, and the KSPM-Ecumenical Refugee Programme). The funding NGOs receive to provide legal assistance is disproportionate relating to existing needs. In addition, the capacity of these organisations is always dependent on continuity and timely distribution of funding by the European Refugee Fund by the competent Ministry or other funding sources (UNHCR, private donors, etc). Finally, their capacity to provide assistance to detained asylum-seekers who wish to challenge their detention is further challenged as a result of the large reported increase in the number of detained asylum-seekers following the increase in the maximum length detention and the sweep operations conducted since August 2012. Furthermore PD 114/2010 does not provide free legal assistance to asylum-seekers who