GREECE IRREGULAR MIGRANTS AND ASYLUM-SEEKERS ROUTINELY DETAINED IN SUBSTANDARD CONDITIONS 53 Declaration signed between the Minister of Citizens’ Protection and his Turkish counterpart, regarding the readmission of irregular migrants back to Turkey (see Press Release of Ministry of Citizens’ Protection, 14 May 2010, at http://www.yptp.gr). Amnesty International has called on the EU Member States to suspend returns of asylum-seekers and others in need of international protection who have transited through Turkey until such time as reception and protection standards meet international standards and offer adequate protection from refoulement and a real possibility for local integration (see Stranded: Refugees in Turkey denied protection, AI Index: EUR 44/001/2009). 38 See Ministerial Decision 4000/4/46-a/2009 determining the details for implementation of judicial and administrative deportation decisions of aliens (Government Official Gazette 1535/B/26.7.2009). In 2007, Greece was found to be in breach of Article 5(1) ECHR for the unlawful extension of the detention of a foreign national who was subjected to administrative deportation. The applicant, a Nigerian national, was held for the whole three-month period that Greek legislation required for detention of foreigners under deportation and was rearrested immediately after the expiry of that period (John v Greece, Judgment of 10 May 2007 (Application No. 199/2005)). 39 Amnesty International sent letters to the Greek authorities expressing its concerns over these reported practices on 27 August 2009 and 20 December 2009. 40 Common principles on removal of irregular migrants and rejected asylum-seekers, Joint Statement by Amnesty International, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and other NGOs, August 2005. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has observed that “...there are situations in which a removal order cannot be executed because, for example, the consular representation of the country of origin of the migrant does not cooperate or there is simply no means of transportation available to the home country. An example of a legal limitation for removal is the principle of non-refoulement. In such cases, where the obstacle to the removal of the detained migrants does not lie within their sphere of responsibility, the detainee should be released to avoid potentially indefinite detention from occurring, which would be arbitrary” (see Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, A/HRC/13/30, 15 January 2010, para 63). 41 Council Directive 2005/8/EC of 1 December 2005. 42 According to UNHCR, the percentage of asylum applications who are submitted at the country’s points of entry remains particularly low (only 8.8 per cent in 2009; see UNHCR Office in Greece, press release, 16 June 2010). 43 Jesuit Refugee Service – Europe, Becoming Vulnerable in Detention, National Report: Greece, op.cit., p 211 44 Interview with Mr Kordonouris, Police Director, Samos, 26 June 2009. 45 Police authorities at the Ferres borderguard station informed delegates that following the registration of their asylum application, asylum-seekers remained in detention while police authorities at the Soulfi borderguard station said that they release asylum-seekers once they lodged their application (Interviews, 13 June 2009). 46 On 19 January 2010, Amnesty International sent a letter to the Greek authorities expressing their concerns over the pending deportation of the six asylum-seekers and the lack of an effective right of appeal under the existing legal regime on asylum determination procedures. 47 Amnesty International understands that, with the assistance of two volunteer lawyers, two of the asylum-seekers subsequently filed applications for judicial review against the rejection of their asylum applications. The organization understands that no application requesting suspension of the deportation orders was lodged, and thus the deportation orders against them still stand. 48 According to the NGO AITIMA the detention of Dublin II returnees who apply for asylum in Greece for the first time until their fingerprints have been examined to establish that they do not already have a file, has no legal basis (see AITIMA, Programme for the provision of legal and social support to asylumseekers transferred to Greece under the Dublin II Regulation, 22 February - 14 April 2010, First Conclusions and Recommendations, 12 May 2010, at http://www.aitima.gr. 49 Reply of Attika Aliens’ Directorate of 7 July 2010 on letter sent to by Amnesty International on 16 Index: EUR 25/002/2010 Amnesty International July 2010