case,  the  Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union  held  that  pre-­removal  detention  cannot   be  justified  solely  on  account  of  public  order  considerations.  Thus,  Greek  legislation  is   not  compatible  with  EU  law.     Law  4375  provides  that  non-­citizens  must  not  be  detained  purely  because  they   submitted  an  application  for  international  protection,  entered  the  country  or  stayed   without  documentation  (article  46(1)).  Yet,  Greek  legislation  does  allow  for  the  detention   of  asylum  seekers  who  apply  for  asylum  while  already  detained  under  Law  3386  or  Law   3907.  Reflecting  the  EU  Reception  Conditions  Directive,  article  46(2)  of  Law  4375   provides  five  grounds  justifying  the  detention  of  asylum  seekers:  (1)  when  there  is  a   need  to  determine  the  person’s  identity  or  nationality;;  (2)  when  authorities  need  to   determine  those  elements  of  the  asylum  application  which  could  not  be  otherwise   obtained,  in  particular  when  there  is  a  risk  of  absconding;;  (3)  when,  on  the  basis  of   objective  criteria,  it  is  ascertained  that  there  are  reasonable  grounds  to  believe  that  the   individual  applied  for  international  protection  purely  in  order  to  delay  or  hinder  the   enforcement  of  a  return  decision;;  (4)  when  the  person  constitutes  a  danger  to  national   security  or  public  order;;  or  (5)  when  there  is  a  serious  risk  of  the  applicant  absconding,   in  order  to  ensure  the  enforcement  of  a  transfer  according  to  the  EU  Dublin  III   Regulation.  The  Greek  Council  for  Refugees  (GCR),  however,  observed  that  detention   decisions  often  lack  individual  assessment  and  asylum  seekers  are  frequently   detained.11   The  risk  of  absconding,  justifying  both  pre-­removal  and  asylum  detention  is  addressed  in   Law  3908.  Article  18  provides  a  list  of  criteria  which  may  indicate  such  a  risk.  These  are   not  exhaustively  enumerated  and  include  such  criteria  as  non-­compliance  with  a   voluntary  departure  obligation;;  an  explicit  expression  of  intent  to  avoid  removal;;   possession  of  false  documents;;  providing  false  information  to  authorities;;  convictions  for   criminal  offences,  a  pending  prosecution  or  serious  indications  that  the  person   concerned  has  committed  or  is  about  to  commit  a  criminal  offense;;  a  lack  of  travel   documents  or  identity  documents;;  prior  absconding;;  and  non-­compliance  with  an   existing  entry  ban.   According  to  the  GCR  and  AITIMA,  the  justification  of  pre-­removal  and  asylum  detention   on  public  order  grounds  is  excessively  and  unjustifiably  relied  on  by  the  authorities  and   served  as  a  basis  for  the  June  2016  police  circular  ordering  that  non-­citizens  who   commit  “law-­breaking  conduct”  on  Greek  islands  be  transferred  to  pre-­removal  detention   centres  on  the  mainland.  In  2016,  approximately  1,600  persons  were  transferred  to  pre-­ removal  detention  centres  on  this  basis.12                                                                                                                             11  Greek  Council  for  Refugees,  “Country  report:  Greece,”  Asylum  Information  Database  (AIDA),  European  Council  on   Refugees  and  Exiles  (ECRE),  December  2016,  http://www.asylumineurope.org/reports/country/greece.   12  Greek  Council  for  Refugees,  “Country  report:  Greece,”  Asylum  Information  Database  (AIDA),  European  Council  on   Refugees  and  Exiles  (ECRE),  December  2016,  http://www.asylumineurope.org/reports/country/greece;;  AITIMA,   “FORGOTTEN:  Administratively  detained  irregular  migrants  and  asylum  seekers,”  October  2016,   http://www.aitima.gr/index.php/en/news/324-­10-­october-­2016-­new-­aitima-­report-­forgotten.     Global  Detention  Project  ©  2018   4