- 16 21. Several irregular migrants complained about the physical force used by members of the Greek Police during deportations. The CPT is not in a position to verify these allegations, but it is concerned that there still appear to be no guidelines in place concerning the use of force in the context of deportations.11 Reference should be made to standards developed by the CPT in its 13th General Report, in this context.12 The CPT recommends once again that the Greek authorities draw up a comprehensive protocol regulating deportations, in particular as regards the use of coercive measures. c. investigations into allegations of ill-treatment 22. On several occasions the CPT has provided the Greek authorities with detailed information on allegations of ill-treatment it has received during visits, in the expectation that these allegations would be investigated by an independent body, in a thorough, comprehensive, and reasonably expeditious manner. Regrettably, from ex-post examinations into the action taken by the Greek authorities, the CPT has learned that all too often such an investigation did not take place in that manner. In its reports on the 2005, 2007 and 2008 visits, the CPT highlighted flaws in the investigation of allegations of ill-treatment, such as, for example, the lack of promptness and expeditiousness in carrying out investigations13 and the poor quality of the forensic medical examinations.14 In addition, the CPT has repeatedly pointed to the passive role of prosecutorial or judicial authorities as regards starting an investigation into allegations of ill-treatment.15 The CPT’s criticism has been echoed by other bodies, both national and international, such as the Greek Ombudsman16 and the European Court of Human Rights.17 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 The issue of ill-treatment in the context of deportations was raised by the CPT in the report on its 2007 visit to Greece (see CPT/Inf (2008) 3, paragraph 14). See CPT/ Inf (2003) 23, paragraphs 27 to 45 (“deportation of foreign nationals by air”). See CPT/ Inf (2009) 20, paragraphs 13 and 14. See, for instance, CPT/ Inf (2006) 41, paragraphs 53 to 56; CPT/ Inf (2008) 3, paragraph 20; CPT/ Inf (2009) 20, paragraph 14. See, for instance, CPT/Inf (2008) 3, paragraphs 12 and 15; CPT Inf (2009) 20, paragraphs 15. See, for instance, Greek Ombudsman, 2006 Annual Report, page 12 and Greek Ombudsman, 2007 Annual Report, page 12. For instance, see: - Makaratzis v. Greece (2004), where the Court found that the Greek Police had not carried out a proper investigation into the basic facts of the incident; - Celniku v Greece (2007), where the Court criticised the fact that an investigation into allegations of illtreatment was carried out by officers working in the same department as the incriminated officers; - Zelilof v Greece (2007), where the Court questioned the quality and impartiality of the internal investigations carried out by the Thessaloniki Internal Investigations Department after a citizen was injured by police bullets: the internal police investigation relied on the statements made by the incriminated officers and the results of a forensic medical investigation were not taken into account; - Alsayed Allaham v Greece (2007), where the Court found that an ill-treatment complaint made by a citizen against the police had not been properly investigated by the Prosecutor and Court; - Petropoulu-Tsakiris v Greece (2008), where the Court found that no forensic-medical investigation had been carried out into the injuries of the complainant and that the internal investigation had not been carried out promptly (that is, 10 months after the complaint had been lodged).