Α. Administrative procedures and problems however applied.125 Members of the Greek Ombudsman participated as monitors in 12 readmissions to Turkey (45% of the operations by sea or air from the Aegean islands that the Ombudsman was informed of), after the EU-Turkey Statement, and in particular from 18.5.2016 onwards. Readmissions present two aspects that are common in all forced removal operations: • The failure to inform the Syrians or citizens of other coun- tries in a timely fashion, that they are about to be included in an operation of readmission into Turkey, and • The lack of judgement on a case-by-case basis, regarding the necessity of handcuffing and the review of the means of restraint used during the operation. They also present certain new problems: • Questioning of the need to have a fit to travel medical An incomplete file is an even more worrying symptom because it might conceal a disregard of the fundamental right for examination of a request for international protection at a time when the Asylum Service and Appeals Authority are called upon to accelerate their procedures because the number of individuals candidate for readmission or return depends on the speed of examination of any asylum requests at the first and second degree. It must be noted that the Greek Ombudsman examined a report (case 220930/2016) of a five-member family of Syrian citizens who found themselves on 21.10.2016 prisoners in Adana, after their readmission from Kos by air, whereas the operation initially had as sole starting point the island of Lesvos. The Authority launched an investigation seeking evidence on the written or other information provided to the Syrians about their right to international protection, in a language they understood, as well as the fact that apparently their intention to lodge an asylum application had not been recorded (in the relevant database and the list accompanying the external monitoring of the readmission operation) at the hotspot of Leros. certificate. • Incomplete case file accompanying the detainees regard- ing the necessary evidence that they were informed in a language they understand also regarding the progress of any application for international protection (rejection at the second degree, serving of documents etc.), and • Questioning of the obligation of participation of the Ombudsman’s representative as monitor in all the briefing and debriefing meetings of the removal operation, which is imposed however by the Returns Handbook of the European Commission (2105) and the Code of Conduct (2015) and the new Regulation of FRONTEX (2016). The Ombudsman notes that the questioning of substantial guarantees (health state for which the health card from the hotspots could be used, if of course it is filled in) or procedural ones (the presence of an external monitor at each stage) is not random. It is indicative of the pressure for fast and summary procedures, due to the small number of those readmitted to Turkey after the Joint Statement (according to data of the European Commission, 810 people in total in 2016).126 The UNHCR has also investigated this matter, and it informed the Ombudsman about a case where a large group of thirdcountry citizens who were found at sea outside of Messinia in Peloponnese and were detained for readmission did not have access to information about international protection from refoulement. Following the report of their attorney, the Ombudsman is investigating the case of 6 Iraqi women from this group, who were held in Messinia for readmission even though they had allegedly declared their intention to lodge an asylum application. The Ombudsman requested that their imminent readmission was suspended until the issues of their access to the asylum procedure and family reunification with the male members of their family were fully answered, receiving a positive response of the Hellenic Police regarding the suspension of their initially scheduled readmission (case No. 220665/2016). The Administration’s internal investigation regarding both the above cases does not appear to have been completed to date, and the Ombudsman has asked for a specific time frame and to be informed about the results. In general, in order to assure the completeness of the 125 Directive 2008/115/EC, Article 4(4). 126 https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/ policies/european-agenda-migration/press-material/docs/state_of_play_-_eu- 38 turkey_en.pdf