De jure, de facto, and arbitrary detention As will be addressed below, detention is permitted according to international, European and Greek law in certain limited circumstances. Where provided for by a written order and with legal basis, the authorities may pursue formal or de jure detention. The CCAC is not currently designated by law as a detention centre and therefore, as a whole the population held within the CCAC cannot be considered to be in formal or de jure detention. Nevertheless, people seeking international protection are often confronted with forms of de facto detention. This means that certain measures which ultimately amount to the deprivation of liberty—de facto detention—are not qualified as such but rather dubbed as 'restrictions' on the freedom. Thus, there are three categorisations: (i) restrictions on freedom of movement, (ii) de jure or formal detention with a legal basis, and (iii) de facto detention without a legal basis. Irrespective of the chosen terminology, detention of a person seeking international protection without legal basis, but also where inappropriate, unjust, lacking basis, or lacking due process, amounts to arbitrary detention in violation of Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as Article 5(1) of the ECHR. European law does not distinguish whether detention has been formally provided for in law or not in an assessment of deprivation of liberty which amounts to arbitrary detention. Thus, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles argues that: states’ transparent attempts to qualify places of detention as something else—reception centres, transit zones, camps and so forth—in order to circumvent their obligations to avoid arbitrary deprivation of liberty has been consistently struck down.[20] For example, in the case of Khalifa v Italy, the ECtHR dismissed the argument that individuals had not been deprived of their liberty because they had been received in a centre for first aid and assistance—Centro di soccorso e prima accoglienza.[21] The Court found that those held in the centre on Lampedusa __ [20] Ibid. [21] Khalifa v Italy (GC) [2016] ECHR (App No 16483/12). Page 9