explore them, before plunging further into this venture. This is, after all, prescribed by the Returns Directive, that requires States to inscribe alternatives to detention in their national legislation. Counting already two years of operation, the pre-removal center Amygdaleza — a direct product of this new practice — offers an appropriate first basis to demonstrate the financial non-sustainability of this policy and evaluate its cost-effectiveness. The 'high' standards of Amygdaleza. Highly publicised before it had even opened, Amygdaleza pre-removal centre has become by now Greece's largest detention facility. With a record capacity of 2,000 places, it is a massive facility that hosts primarily adult men, both irregular migrants and asylum seekers. The average detention time is 4-5 months, since it is primarily used as a transit center among the different detention facilities. Impressively large and with a very different layout than the rest of Greece's detention establishments, it is less of a center and more of a camp. The actual living conditions however inside the facility, admittedly better than the average Greek detention center, can hardly be characterised as 'high standards'; in fact Amygdaleza is quality-wise a rather modest facility that has faced some serious operational problems during its first two years of functioning. The camp comprises of 300 prefabricated containers spread around a field of 30,000m2 and divided along three sections (Section A', B' and C'). The 250 containers are being used for accommodation purposes. In the table below we outline the structure of the facility: Table 2.: Layout of Amygdaleza Accommodation Size Capacity Layout 25-32m214 8 detainees 2 bedrooms 2 showers 2 toilets Communal Areas A/C Heater Metallic Bunk Beds Wardrobe Plastic Chairs and Table  Laundry  Pray area  Yard Apart from security which is run by the police, all other services have been allocated to NGOs or are subcontracted private companies. Compared to other detention establishments in Greece, Amygdaleza provides undoubtedly better facilities. Even the mere fact that detainees have unobstructed access to a private bathroom is a significant improvement. However, being “relatively better” in a country with admittedly substandard facilities does not render Amygdaleza either “exemplary as regards accommodation and security”15 or in compliance with international human rights standards. While the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) still needs to publish its first impressions, it is doubtful whether Greece's “exemplary” facility will spare the country from one more conviction by the European Court of Human Rights. 14 15 See http://static.diavgeia.gov.gr/doc/Β4121-ΓΒΠ. See Communication from Greece concerning the case of M.S.S. against Belgium and Greece (Application No. 30696/09), Memorandum DH-DD(2012)1157, available at https://wcd.coe.int/com.instranet.InstraServlet?command=com.instranet.CmdBlobGet&Instra netImage=2204818&SecMode=1&DocId=1964830&Usage=2. 4