Greece submitted on October 24th 2010 an official request to the European Union for further assistance, resulting in the deployment of RABIT teams11 for the first time on European soil and eventually replaced by an extended JO Poseidon land operation throughout 2011 that included the Greek-Bulgarian border. Greece had to bear the brunt of arrivals, largely a result of Turkey’s visa liberalization regime, which made initial access to Turkey easier for transit populations, geopolitical tensions in the broader region and a successful-albeit temporary at the timefencing of the Italian and Spanish borders. A ‘holistic’ management approach? The year 2010 was a milestone in the construction of a new approach to managing irregular migration and asylum. Greece, under pressure from member states but also international organizations and NGO’s, instituted a series of changes in its reception, screening and asylum processes. Added to this, a combination of deterrence measures, detention and expulsions meant that for the first time in almost 20 years the country made a conscious effort to institute a holistic approach in managing mixed irregular arrivals. The National Action Plan of 2010 drew from other EU Member States as well as Greece’s European and International obligations and proposed the creation of a new Asylum Service, an Appeals Committee (for rejected asylum applications) and a First Reception Service. The Asylum Service and the Appeals Committee would be autonomous and impartial, while the First Reception Service would be responsible for the ‘management’ of new arrivals, bringing together a team of ‘first contact points’ in the maritime and land borders. This was a radical and much needed change in the system. In the years up to June 2013, asylum was under the sole purview of the Hellenic Police and there was no reception service to accommodate and care for new arrivals. This meant that it was impossible to separate and identify people in need and/or protection at entry points. As regards access to asylum, migrants were asked to travel to Athens to the Asylum service headquarters (also known as “Petrou Ralli”) to submit their asylum claim. The endless queues and waiting conditions discouraged many. The First Instance degree (of asylum) was the responsibility of the Police and the majority of claims were rejected irrespective of country of origin and individual circumstances. This, in turn, transferred the burden on the appeal process, which suffered from similar systemic weaknesses. The end result was that when the new asylum service came into being, 45,000 pending applications were due examination. This dysfunctional system produced a contrast; on the one hand asylum became a way for many to temporarily legalize their stay in the country (as they were issued the pink card – a six month stay permit while awaiting for their case to be processed), and on the other hand, it discouraged those in need to access it effectively (because detention in the country violated articles 3 and 13 of the European Convention for Human Rights and deprived the asylum seeker of his right to an effective remedy, thereby challenging the per se assumption of safety. 11 Rapid Border Intervention Teams, i.e. rapidly deployable border guards. Page 8