κατά κράτησης), before the President of the Administrative Court.27 Several bodies, including the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), have consistently criticised the objections procedure as ineffective,28 as well as inaccessible due to the fact that detention orders tend to be standardised and available only in Greek.29 Detention decisions – both initial and prolongation – issued to persons subject to the Decree made reference to the available remedies but were exclusively written in Greek and were not properly notified to them with interpretation in a language they understood. In some cases, it was reported to RSA that the authorities refused to provide the document of the decision to the applicants when they requested an interpreter to explain its contents. Yet, the decisions incorrectly stated that the individuals concerned had been informed of the reasons for their detention in a language they understood.30 1. Administrative appeal before the Police RSA lodged administrative appeals against deportation decisions taken by the Lesvos Police Directorate in 12 cases concerning persons detained on Lesvos prior to their transfer to the Malakasa detention facility. The Northern Aegean Regional Police Directorate rejected all 12 appeals through identical decisions, initially on the ground that they had not been submitted within the requisite time limits, despite the fact that in several cases notification had never taken place and that the 5-day deadline to lodge the appeal had not expired.31 Following the Ombudsman's intervention, the Police Directorate reviewed their negative decisions and re-examined the appeals, only to reject them again on 7 April 2020.32 None of the decisions issued conducted an individualised assessment of the circumstances of each case and the lawfulness of either deportation or detention. The decisions merely stated that the persons in question were arrested for irregularly entering the territory pursuant to domestic legislation and that “the Director of the Lesvos Police Directorate acted lawfully upon issuing the [contested] act and in line with the provisions in force.” 33 It should be noted that, contrary to the deportation and detention decisions, the Regional Police Directorate decisions on the appeals cited the Decree, albeit without further explanation. 2. Appeal (“Objections”) against detention before the Administrative Court A number of appeals against detention have been submitted before the Administrative Court of Athens on behalf of the asylum seekers detained initially in Lesvos and later in Malakasa in light of the Decree. In cases represented by RSA, concerning nationals of Syria and of Afghanistan, among whom pregnant women and young children, the Administrative Court of Athens upheld the detention orders through identical judgments. The rulings made a highly objectionable interpretation of the legal status of the Decree and its effect on Greece’s obligations to guarantee access to asylum under EU and international law. In three cases, The Court reasoned that the Decree was 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 Article 76(3) et seq. Law 3386/2005; Article 46(6) International Protection Act. See e.g. ECtHR, Rahimi v. Greece, Application No 8687/08, 5 April 2011; R.U. v. Greece, Application No 2237/08, 7 June 2011; C.D. v. Greece, Application No 33468/10, 19 March 2014. ECtHR, O.S.A. v. Greece, Application No 39065/16, 21 March 2019. See e.g. Administrative Court of Athens, Decision 358/2020, 7 April 2020, para 2. Given that a general suspension on all administrative deadlines was imposed on 11 March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Northern Aegean Regional Police Directorate, Decisions 9760/20/4/1002-α-1 to 9760/20/4/1007-β-1, 7 April 2020. Unofficial translation from the author. RSA LEGAL NOTE │ 2020 6