2. Ill-treatment and safeguards 111. The CPT delegation did not receive any recent allegations of ill-treatment of foreign nationals by police or security staff in any of the CCACs or the Fylakio RIC. Some allegations of abusive language were received, for instance by personnel of the private security company “G4S” at Lesvos CCAC, but most persons stated that the staff treated them correctly. However, there were numerous complaints that there was far too little interaction with staff. The lack of communication was one of the reasons which led to an episode of disruptive behaviour by a group of boys at the Kos CCAC. On the other hand, there were tensions among the various groups of foreign nationals, generally limited to verbal altercations but in the chaotic environment observed by the delegation they had the potential to degenerate into violence. Further, there had been a few allegations of sexual assault and sexual harassment in the CCACs visited which, in light of the absence of a structured allocation policy, was not surprising. Persons with special needs and vulnerabilities were not being identified and incompatible groups were having to share the same prefabricated containers or sleeping space. In addition, there was an inadequate number of staff to supervise the accommodation sections, notably at night. The CPT would like to be informed of the steps taken by the Greek authorities to prevent violence among residents of the CCACs and to increase staff supervision within the accommodation sections to guarantee security. 112. As regards safeguards against ill-treatment, all foreign nationals who landed on the Aegean islands after their crossing by boat from Türkiye were being deprived of their liberty within a CCAC. The law requires that a formal detention order be issued by the Hellenic Police restricting foreign nationals in their liberty to ensure their screening and registration, initially for five days, which was thereafter extended for up to 25 days. However, at the time of the visit, a great number of persons met by the delegation remained deprived of their liberty in the CCACs without benefiting from the legal safeguards related to detention, as they had still not been registered and issued with an asylum seeker card even several weeks after the 25-day-period had lapsed, and security personnel prevented them from leaving the centres during the day. 113. The CPT considers that there is a need to tighten up the procedures regulating the initial 25 days of detention. To begin with, most persons met by the delegation did not understand the paper provided to them by the police which authorised their detention. Second, foreign nationals were not issued with the detention papers at the time they were detained in a CCAC. Many persons only received the notification for the initial five days of detention 10 days after their arrival, and the notification of an extension of the detention period for a further 20 days several weeks after it was supposed to have been served. Since any appeal against the detention order had to be filed within three days, such delayed notification rendered ineffective the safeguard of an appeal. Hence, it appeared that foreign nationals were being detained without a valid authorisation and for periods in excess of the maximum legal period of 25 days, with insufficient possibilities to effectively challenge the lawfulness of detention. At Kos CCAC, the delegation documented cases of persons being deprived of their liberty for at least 43 days. At Samos CCAC, the delegation documented similar delays and gathered evidence to show that the legal provisions on detention were not being respected. For example, persons who arrived on 22 September were only provided with a paper authorising the first five days of detention on 19 October, and the paper authorising the subsequent 20-day detention period was only served on 16 November. These persons were officially registered on 16 November, that is 56 days after arriving in the centre. Other persons who were met by the delegation were not served with any detention order (for example, a group of persons who arrived on 10 October and was subsequently registered on 27 November). 35