The use of ‘identification procedures’ to conceal detention weaponises an unknown quite overtly —the ‘restriction’ to freedom of movement is justified by the authorities because people who are newly arrived are unknown to them. I have shown that ignorance is weaponised beyond this purpose, disproportionately affecting other rights and ultimately depriving people of their freedom of movement. That the unknown is weaponised blanketly and without individual assessment evidences a colonial continuity in that a racialised population as a group is treated with inherent suspicion (31). The authorities also display an ignorance towards ways in which a person may become known, such as through other forms of identification and individual assessment. Moreover, the authorities ignore how the changes to this restriction individually and cumulatively constitute detention. These latter two changes were implemented with knowledge of the European Commission’s infringement proceedings regarding article 40. Yet, the detention of people newly arriving to Samos persists on this basis and further deprives people of access to medical and psychosocial support, essential provisions such as clothing, and legal counselling. Finally, that people are no longer issued with the ‘restriction of freedom’ order deprives people of access to the legal information and basis for their detention—despite the incorrect terminology and accompanying procedural safeguards—and creates barriers to administratively challenge detention. Ignorance is projected onto the population, refusing them information on how long they may be held in the CCAC and how long they can legally be held. 4. Waiting on the asylum procedures and in queues The detention of people within the CCAC is not only constituted by physical barriers to entry and exit, or ‘sheer blockage’ as argued by Glenda Garelli and Martina Tazzioli. Rather, J.R. and others referred to the ‘duration, degree and intensity’ of the concrete situation (22). This paper argues that detention is also constituted by what creates the ‘feeling’ of being detained, such as the pervasive social control seen in the CCAC. Throughout the previous section, people experience the ‘restriction’ upon arrival as prolonged waiting. Waiting pervasively marks the experience of the European bordering space more generally. In this section, this paper considers that the several ways in which people are made to wait in the CCAC contribute to and exacerbate experiences of detention. Ignorance is once again weaponised to make a population wait, consolidating the authorities’ control. The authorities both ignore how waiting contributes to detention, but also projects ignorance onto the population waiting. Thus, referring to Dipesh Chakrabarty, the CCAC is an ‘imaginary waiting room’ wherein the population are refused information as a tool of self-governing. We have already addressed how people wait for permission to leave and for asylum cards, the following section addresses the multiple other ways in which people wait for their asylum interview, interpretation, and medical care. Moreover, people must physically wait to enter and exit, participate in the weekly census and to receive food. In addition to the pervasive social control that creates the feeling of being detained, these aspects of waiting ultimately prevent people from leaving the CCAC. 11