This is, about the paper and the procedure…like you spend the whole year and then you take a paper for 25 days… as soon as you are out, they catch you and they bring you back again. Manzoor, Xanthi Source: Xanthi PRDC, MIT respondent Detention of Applicants of International Protection Despite individuals being considered applicants of international protection after just an oral expression of willingness[192] in EU and Greek law, due to a lack of access to asylum procedures, many third country nationals are unregistered as applicants and detained under the assumption of being on Greek territory without legal formalities. Upon their application for asylum being lodged inside the PRDC, respondents reported their detention being prolonged, despite their entrance into the asylum procedure. Central to European law is the guarantee that individuals should not be detained for the sole reason of being an applicant of international protection.[193] However, in practice, a significant number of applicants are detained on the excessive and arbitrary attribution of legal grounds, particularly since the implementation of the IPA and its subsequent amendments. Specifically, the grounds for detaining an applicant who had lodged their application prior to detention was introduced,[194] resulting in a considerable number of individuals being apprehended and detained in spite of their expression of willingness, or even asylum seeker status and documentation. In October 2011, the ECtHR judgment on the application Aud v. Bulgaria ruled that where the deprivation of liberty is concerned, legal certainty is required in respect of each and every element relevant to the justification of the detention.[195] However, the ambiguous reasons our respondents were held for were often reportedly justified by the risk of being a threat to public order, or in the context of ‘suspicion of absconding’; justification that relies on the opinion of a competent authority rather than tangible evidence. The frequent and excessive adoption of public order grounds for depriving individuals of their liberty by Greek authorities, whilst they should be beneficiaries of material reception conditions, is alarming, and breaches the central pillars of the CEAS. 48