17 because those were reserved for men. These police as soon as they were able to prove their conditions will be discussed in further detail in vulnerability, for example by submitting their Section III. vulnerability As explained in the first edition of this report, However, as reported in the second edition of both EU and Greek asylum law provide additional protection for women in detention, among which include considering gender when making housing assignments.31 Not only did the detention conditions in the Kos PRDC raise questions around the lawfulness of detaining women, the reintroduction of the detention of women raised concerns among Equal Rights and civil society actors that previous successful advocacy was at risk of regressing on Kos. 2. Detention of Vulnerable Persons EU and Greek asylum law both require that health be of primary concern of competent authorities when detaining vulnerable asylum seekers,32 and when detention is ordered, authorities must ensure regular monitoring and adequate support accounting for the physical and mental health of the person. Where rejected asylum seekers are detained subject to a return order, the authorities must also pay particular attention “the situation of vulnerable persons”.33 assessment to the police. this report, individuals often did not receive copies of their vulnerability assessments and the police were otherwise unaware that they were categorized vulnerable.35 For example, one of the female clients Equal Rights represented was officially recognized as vulnerable during her asylum procedure on Leros as being a survivor of GBV but was detained for five days nonetheless in the same section as men. Only after Equal Rights and UNHCR intervened to inform the police that client was vulnerable was she released. Further, Equal Rights represented numerous detained clients who suffered from vulnerabilities that were not recognized, including additional survivors of GBV, individuals with severe mental health concerns including suicidal ideation, and individuals with severe medical problems.36 Moreover, as explained in further detail in the conditions section, access to healthcare in the PRDC is practically non-existent. As the facility is not able to provide individuals – and particularly On that basis, the police on Kos generally did those categorized as vulnerable – with medical not detain individuals who were officially care, the PRDC is therefore not equipped to recognized as vulnerable detain vulnerable persons. Further, during the reporting period.34 individuals who were officially recognized as vulnerable were typically released by the For one particularly worrisome case, Equal Detained and Forgotten, supra note 1, at 16; Art. 11 (1) Directive 2013/33/EU, Art. 53(4) L. 4939/2022. Art. 11(1) Directive 2008/115/EC; Art. 52(1) L. 4939/2022. 33 Art. 16(3) Directive 2008/115/EC; Art. 31(3) L. 3907/2011. 34 Vulnerable persons include minors, unaccompanied or immediate relatives of shipwrecked parents (parents and siblings), persons with disabilities, the elderly, pregnant women, single parents, children, victims of human trafficking, people with serious illnesses, people with mental disabilities and those who have been tortured, raped, or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, such as victims of genital mutilation or organs. Art. 20(3) IPA, transposing Art. 20 Directive 2011/95 EU. 35 Still Detained and Forgotten, supra note 2, at 15-16. 36 Our previous research shows that authorities have failed to conduct vulnerability procedures and have routinely overlooked serious physical and mental health illnesses. Detained and Forgotten, supra note 1, at 18; Still Detained and Forgotten, supra note 2, at 17. 31 32 ‘Still detained and forgotten’ – Update on Detention Policies, Practices, and Conditions on Kos 2023/24