The NPM staff all appeared competent and professional and asked searching questions. However, during their work, they generally stayed together in one group and monitoring could have been extended to other parts of the facility if they had worked separately. A wide variety of problems were evident at Gaziantep, and the lack of time to see the whole centre was a concern. The NPM took individual allegations against staff seriously, and obtained evidence relating to each incident, including CCTV and witness statements, and asked the director to investigate and report back. We did not see the important next steps: report writing, recommendations, publication, institutional action and follow-up to show that recommendations were being taken seriously. Immigration detention and monitoring in Greece The number of people subject to immigration detention in Greece increased from 14,864 in 2016 to 31,126 in 2018, a rise of 109%. Over 18,000 were asylum seekers[13]. At the end of 2018, 2,098 detainees were held in the eight preremoval facilities, including 1,619 asylum seekers[14]. The Greek NPM was designated in 2014 and sits within the Greek Ombudsman’s office (Fili and Bosworth, 2019). At the time of our first visit in 2016, it was regularly visiting the hotspots, while other Greek Ombudsman staff were routinely monitoring removal flights. They were now monitoring about 10 prisons and 7 to 10 immigration facilities a year. We accompanied the NPM to two facilities in Athens, the special holding facility of the Police Directorate of the Athens Airport and Petrou Ralli pre-removal detention centre. As in Turkey, our role was to observe and we were permitted to take photographs (see appendix one). The Athens Airport facility had nine multi-occupancy cells for adult males who had broken the criminal law, usually as a result of passport offences. It also had a small unit for women and families, and a separate unit for detainees in transit. There were no in-cell toilets. In the men’s corridor, detainees knocked on the door to be let out to use the toilet. They told the NPM they had very little time out of cell. They were not allowed to go into the open air and had no direct view of the outside. The cells were dirty and cramped, but not as overcrowded as had previously been documented (CPT 2017a; Fili 2013). The family/women’s area and transit zone were cleaner and the doors were left open to allow some freedom of movement. The main concern of most detainees was a lack of legal support and not knowing what was happening with their cases. NGOs visited the facility but not on a regular basis. Petrou Ralli was considered by the NPM to be the worst of the facilities in Athens. The average stay was six months according to the director. The men’s wings in Petrou Ralli were oppressive and had a frantic atmosphere. The NPM staff were quickly surrounded by frustrated detainees as they entered a wing and could not walk any further than a few metres. Police officers positioned themselves between the NPM staff and detainees, and listened to their discussions. We could not see past the detainees into the cells. After about 10-15 minutes, NPM staff left the wing. [13] Asylum Information Database Country Report: Greece, 2018 Update. Last accessed 18.7.19 and available at: http://www.asylumineurope.org/sites/default/files/report-download/aida_gr_2018update.pdf [14] This information was provided in a communication from the Directorate of the Hellenic Police during a meeting on 22.03.19 05