who arrived via Türkiye and are considered safe there have not been implemented for more than two years.[181] Many of our respondents explained that they were rejected because they should be returned to Türkiye on the basis of the safe third country concept, and were detained for extensive periods of time. This includes a significant number of Afghan nationals - who represented over 20% of respondents - despite the ongoing critical situation in their country of origin since August 2021,[182] and the lack of prospects of return to Türkiye. In addition, neither EU Readmission Agreements or bilateral agreements have ever been formalised between Greece and a significant number of our respondents’ countries of origin. For example, despite the Commission receiving a mandate from the Council to negotiate an EU Readmission Agreement with Algeria in 2002, Morocco in 2003 and Tunisia in 2014,[183] negotiations with Morocco have been on hold since 2015, negotiations with Algeria have not yet started beyond informal dialogue and despite “good progress at a technical level in 2018”, the process was put on hold with Tunisia due to elections.[184] This means that removal must be organised individually, and the country of origin must readmit nationals being returned from Greece on a case-by-case basis. In practice, administrative and political barriers delay or even halt returns taking place at all. Nearly a quarter of our respondents were Algerian, Tunisian or Moroccan nationals, and majoritarily detained in view of removal. Yet according to European statistics on readmission procedures,[185] a very small proportion of Algerian, Moroccan and Tunisian nationals are actually returned. For the years 2018, 2020 and 2021, in total, 34 Algerians, 3 Moroccans and 4 Tunisians were forced to return. Meanwhile, 12 170 orders to leave were delivered for third country nationals from Algeria, 1 705 from Morocco and 160 from Tunisia. This data therefore indicates that only 0.28% of Algerians, 0.18% of Moroccans and 2.50% of Tunisians who were issued with an order to leave the territory were actually returned. This does not appear to justify the detention of a significant number of people who are subject to return procedures, which, in practice, will not materialise. The immediate release of detainees who lack a reasonable prospect of removal was reiterated by the ECJ judgment Kadzoev in November 2009, [186] which additionally specified that Member States cannot invoke grounds of public order or safety for detaining persons under the RD. Therefore, rejected asylum seekers can only be detained while their removal process is being carried out for six months, with an extension of up to 12 months “in cases where regardless of all their reasonable efforts the removal operation is likely to last longer owing to: (a) a lack of cooperation by the third-country national concerned, or (b) delays in obtaining the necessary documentation from third countries.”[187] Considering the systematically low number of returns from Greece, concerns are raised as to the likelihood of obtaining necessary documentation within the 18 month time-frame, and thus the justification for detention. They asked me a lot of things except the reason that I left my country [Afghanistan]. So they just asked all the things about Türkiye or why I didn't apply for asylum in Türkiye, why I came here. So, they tell me that I should have stayed there. Lots of questions and I answered them all, all of them. But after three months they gave me a rejection when I asked them, “What is the reason that I was rejected?” They said we don't know. Yes I appealed all the decisions but I don't know ... I don't have any help, I haven't heard any answer about it. I also already have the papers that show that in 2019 I was deported from Türkiye to my country [Afghanistan]. I gave this paper to my lawyer and it shows that Türkiye has already deported me in the past. But I don't think it helps my application. Hussein, Corinth 46