asylum seekers are subject to a prohibition on exit from the facility. According to the
Administrative Court of Syros, such a prohibition amounts to arbitrary deprivation of
liberty.16 Yet, although the Court deemed this practice unlawful, people who lack a
valid International Protection Applicant Card remained de facto confined within the
CCAC without any possibility to exit the facility. 17 The Ministry of Migration and Asylum
nevertheless states expressly that rejected asylum seekers who have not been issued a
detention order are allowed to enter and exit the CCAC in line with its house rules
“without any general prohibition on exit from the CCAC”.18
Judicial review of immigration detention
Access to remedies
Whereas the Hellenic Police issued a total of 21,044 detention orders in return,
deportation or asylum procedures in 2021, only 2,803 “objections against detention”
were lodged before the administrative courts. This means that less than one out of
seven detention orders were brought before the courts through the remedy foreseen
in Greek law.
These figures demonstrate the chronic, serious and well-documented barriers to
refugees’ and migrants’ access to the remedy of objections against detention. 19 On
the one hand, detention orders are only written in Greek and persons concerned are
not informed in writing or orally, in a language they understand, of the reasons for their
detention or of available remedies. It is worth recalling that none of the seven preremoval centres across the territory – holding a total of 2,335 people – had interpreters
or social workers at the end of 2021. 20 On the other hand, the state continues not to
comply with its obligation to offer free legal assistance for review of immigration and
asylum detention.21 This has particularly severe repercussions on the effectiveness of
judicial review of immigration detention, as discussed below.
The Council of the European Union has highlighted systematic non-compliance in its
recent recommendations to Greece regarding systematic provision of “effective
access to linguistic assistance” and “effective access to free legal assistance”.22 The
European Commission has stated that it “is working closely with Greece to ensure the
correct implementation of this recommendation, including in the context of the
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Administrative Court of Syros, ΑΡ36/2021, 17 December 2021. See also GCR, ‘Παράνομo
έκρινε το Διοικητικό Πρωτοδικείο Σύρου το μέτρο απαγόρευσης εξόδου σε Αφγανό αιτούντα
άσυλο από την νέα Κλειστή Ελεγχόμενη Δομή (Κ.Ε.Δ.) Ζερβού Σάμου’, 20 December 2021,
available at: https://bit.ly/3EgYMJk.
GCR et al., ‘Κλειστή Δομή Σάμου: ο εγκλωβισμός συνεχίζεται’, 10 February 2022, available
at: https://bit.ly/3JEV8dD.
Ministry of Migration and Asylum, Reply to parliamentary question, 203240, 9 April 2022,
available at: https://bit.ly/3OeqTNT.
RSA & Stiftung PRO ASYL, Submission in S.D. v. Greece, October 2020, para 18 et seq.,
available at: https://bit.ly/34XtWIK.
Ministry of Citizen Protection, Reply to parliamentary question, 7017/4/25899-γ΄, 16 March
2022, available at: https://bit.ly/3jE0Od9.
Article 9(6) Reception Conditions Directive; Article 13(3)-(4) Return Directive.
Council Implementing Decision setting out a recommendation on addressing the
deficiencies identified in the 2021 evaluation of Greece on the application of the
Schengen acquis in the field of return, 13662/21, 10 November 2021, paras 1-2, available
at: https://bit.ly/3xbpgZS.
5
RSA LEGAL NOTE│ 2022