The Silent Humanitarian Crisis in Greece: Devising Strategies to Improve the Situation of Migrants in Greece WORKSHOP REPORT Recommendations Input from Workshop Discussion Concerns on current asylum, detention and border policies and their impact on the rights of migrants23 • Increasingly limited access to the asylum procedure, particularly at the borders. This, in addition to the direct application of the ‘Returns Directive,’24 means that asylum seekers cannot avail of adequate reception facilities, are hindered in filing their asylum applications and so, can often not even have their claims registered. • Asylum seekers are detained instead of accommodated in reception centres without having given the opportunity to submit their legitimate asylum claim under international law requiring their protection and reception, meaning that existing legal provisions which safeguard migrants’ rights are not applied such as the nonrefoulement principle.25 • Prolonged detention periods following recent the amendment of the Presidential Decree 114/2010. The Greek Government has extended the maximum period of detention for asylum seekers to the same extent as the maximum period of detention for irregular migrants under a deportation process. During a parallel workshop session, participants formulated the following recommendations to address concerns relating to asylum and the rights of migrants in detention and at Europe’s borders. 1. Involve the local community to develop their own initiatives (e.g. initiative in Lesvos28) whilst pressing the authorities for permanent and sustainable solutions. 2. Build a dialogue with police officers and border guards (especially decision makers) to inform them of regulations relevant to them when carrying out their duties including individual penal responsibility for rights violations. Participants during parallel workshop session on “Asylum, detention and borders” • Police as the competent authority to deal with claims for asylum in the first instances whilst they have also been identified as perpetrators of racially motivated crimes. • Lack of institutionalized procedures for registering and screening migrants in Greece. In every single part of the Greek territory the local police department follows its own process and protocol. Sharp differences exist between the treatment of asylum in the mainland and in the islands. • No safe routes to cross borders to claim asylum due to strict external border protection practices and the implementation of Frontex operations in the region, which are used as a tool to deter migrants from entering Greece. • Limited access for NGOs to the new detention centres. 3. Create alliances with prosecutors within the judicial system who would be open to addressing the violations taking place inside and outside detention centres. 4. Establish dialogue with the Director of the reception authority and use civil society actions to foster change29. 5. Create a specialised body within or complementary to the Ombudsman institution to facilitate the complaints of asylum seekers, third country nationals, and irregular migrants against administrative and enforcement authorities violating their rights, with the additional aim of collecting best practices and stimulating strategic litigation. 6. Need for the Greek ombudsman to take on a monitoring role in the implementation of the new process on access to asylum, as envisaged in the new legislation 3907/201130. 7. Maintain contact with EU institutions to inform them of the situation in Greece to ensure they make informed decisions and develop adequate measures to address the situation whilst noting that the change must come from within Greece if it is to last. 8. Improve cooperation amongst NGOS through the creation of a solidarity network to develop joint actions in Greece but also at the European and international level through umbrella organisations. In establishing these networks, consideration must be given to challenges and limitations faced by NGOs in terms of minimal human resources and funding opportunities. • In the midst of the financial crisis, lack of will by society to support migrants. Civil society organisations are currently working in a public and political context in which Greek society is challenging why migrants should be assisted to stay in Greece, and so there is overwhelming feeling that migrants should not be helped considering the hardship faced by Greeks. • Whether the police would still be responsible for processing asylum claims under the structure of the new process on access to asylum26, as envisaged in the new legislation 3907/2011 of the Greek Republic. • The detention of unaccompanied children27 in detention centres unsuitable for them until a place is found in reception centres for unaccompanied children or are released without any referral to reception centres for unaccompanied children. 23 24 25 26 27 14 These reflect the concerns raised in recent decisions by the European Court of Human Rights (Bygylashvili v. Greece of 25.September 2012, Ahmade v. Greece of 25. September 2012, Lin v. Greece of 6 November 2012) and the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), Report to the Government of Greece on the visit to Greece from 19 to 27 January 2011 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals “Non-refoulement” refers to the legal principle concerning the prohibition of transfer from a Contracting State to another State where there is a risk of such ill-treatment, developed under human rights law in relation to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights Convention (ECHR). 3907/2011 on voluntary returns, “Establishment of an Asylum Service and a First Reception Service” Greek Council for Refugees, Unaccompanied Minors (2012) 28 29 A network of volunteer organisations and active civilians was set up in Lesvos “Village of All Together” in solidarity with migrants on the island to provide them support and assistance. Ibid. 30 3907/2011 on voluntary returns, “Establishment of an Asylum Service and a First Reception Service” 15