lacked information on the authorities responsible for the implementation of certain actions and for monitoring the implementation of those actions (European Commission, 2016c). While not all facilities used to confine people in the aftermath of 2015 were detention centres per se, the line between open accommodation and confinement often became difficult to draw in practice. The spatial logic of refugee camps was that they were as physically remote as possible. This fact, when combined with severely restricted access to the asylum process in these places, rendered most people inside them invisible and immobilised in overcrowded and unhygienic conditions. People were not only stuck inside camps; under the EU-Turkey deal and in view of walls being literally and metaphorically built across Europe they were also physically prevented from leaving Greece.76 As a 2016 report by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles argued, there is little official clarity as to what can be presented as detention facilities or reception structures in Greece (Mouzourakis and Taylor, 2016). It is explained that the highly misleading representation of the country’s reception capacity, including detention places, can be attributed to the effort to reach the EU target of 30,000 reception places and satisfy other member states. At the same time, the number of detainees was wrongly presented as smaller than the actual one, failing to include the number of people detained in hotspots. This is further reflected in another report by Access Info and the Global Detention Project (2015), which aimed to obtain a true picture of the number of migrants and asylum seekers being held in detention around the world. Greece failed to provide complete information on the names and locations of detention centres and offered invalid answers to questions about the number of (asylum seeker) detainees and the number of minors in detention. Greek authorities, in their beloved tactic, did not include the many police stations, where migrants were known to be detained, thus, invisibilising a great number of detainees and directed the researchers to the Greek police’s website that contains limited information in order to avoid directly responding to questions. In effect, Greece’s detained migrants were going uncounted and hence unaccounted for. In stark opposition to this framing, people on the move across Greece found ways to circumvent containment practices and, albeit in smaller numbers, managed to leave Greece. However, this means that they increasingly depended on smuggling networks and attempted risky journeys (See further Stierl, 2019). 76 120