❖ there are reasonable grounds to believe that a country can be considered as a safe third country for the minor, and if it is in line with the best interest of the minor; ❖ the unaccompanied minor has misled the authorities by submitting false documents or they have destroyed or they have lost in bad faith their identification documents or travel document, under the conditions that they or their guardian be given the opportunity to provide sufficient justification for it. 5.2. Personal interview Indicators: Fast-track border procedure: Personal interview Same as regular procedure 1. Is a personal interview of the asylum applicant in most cases conducted in practice in the accelerated procedure? Yes No ❖ If so, are questions limited to nationality, identity, travel route? Yes No ❖ If so, are interpreters available in practice, for interviews? Yes No 2. Are interviews conducted through video conferencing? Frequently Rarely Never According to Article 69 (1) Asylum Code, asylum applicants are already required at the stage of registration of their asylum application before RAOs, to give exhaustive reasons for fleeing their country of origin. If they fail to mention all reasons during registration, they have no right to develop claims which are only mentioned for the first time during their asylum interview. However, in practice, the registration of the asylum application in the islands is too succinct to provide them with the opportunity to do so, as it only focuses on very basic information. At the end of 2021, the Reception Service (RIS) at the Kos and Samos RICs (now CCACs) started carrying out the full registration of asylum applications, as opposed to it being done by the Asylum Service until then. In 2022 this practice was adopted by the RISs/CCACs in all the islands. Ever since the registration of asylum applications was removed from the missions of the Asylum Service and was undertaken by the RIS. The registration form includes very limited information. Nevertheless, in practice, asylum applicants have the opportunity during their interviews to present their full claims, including information that was not mentioned in their registration form. In cases of vulnerable applicants, according to Article 82(4) Asylum Code, if their interview is scheduled within 15 days from the submission of their application, the applicants have to be granted reasonable time to prepare themself and consult a legal or other adviser to assist them during the interview. The reasonable time for preparation is determined by the competent authority, meaning the Asylum Service, and cannot exceed three (3) days. If the interview is scheduled at a time later than fifteen (15) days from the submission of the application, no preparation time is granted. If the interview is postponed, no further preparation time is granted. This means that in the latter two cases, applicants are not given any additional time to prepare themselves for the interview from the time they are informed of their interview appointment. Article 95(3)(c) of the Asylum Code stipulates that first instance decisions shall be issued within seven days. However, in practice, based on the observations of legal and psychosocial actors operating in the field, including GCR, newcomers undergo the interview without prior adequate evaluation of their potential vulnerabilities. Most of the time, the RIS’ Medical and Psychosocial Unit (not always staffed by a doctor) proceeds with a typical medical check and records only manifest vulnerabilities. There is also no information exchange mechanism between the Vulnerability Focal Point (VFP) of the RIS and the RAO, and no relevant joint process to ensure that interviews are scheduled after the vulnerability assessment has been completed. Even when RAO caseworkers refer the case to the RIC’s Medical and Psychosocial Unit for further vulnerability assessment, they do so after the interview has been completed. No postponements have been granted for interviews despite the applicants’ and their legal 128