In view of the above, the European Court of Human Rights has granted interim measures, pursuant to Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court, with regards to reception conditions in the Closed Controlled Access Centers (CCACs) in Samos and Kos. More specifically: ❖ In September 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) granted interim measures in a case concerning a single mother residing at the Samos CCAC along with her six-month old baby with a serious heart condition, ordering the Greek Government to ensure that the baby will be provided with medical treatment and that both the baby and mother will be provided with suitable accommodation.234 ❖ On 12 December 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has granted Interim Measures with regards to two Afghan women and their five minor children, residing at the Closed Controlled Access Centre (CCAC) of Kos in absolutely inadequate conditions, ordering the Greek authorities to ensure that the Applicants "have full access to reception conditions which respect human dignity and take into account their multiple vulnerabilities. 235 Οn 5 February 2024, the European Court of Human Rights granted Interim Measures with regards to a single woman asylum applicant and her infant child, who resided in inhuman conditions in the Samos Closed Controlled Access Centre (CCAC) ordering Greek authorities to provide her with safe and suitable accommodation.236 Hotspot transformation following the EU-Türkiye statement In March 2016, the adoption of the highly controversial EU-Türkiye Statement, committing ‘to end the irregular migration from Türkiye to the EU’, 237 brought a transformation of the so-called hotspots on the Aegean islands.238 With the launch of the EU-Türkiye Statement, hotspot facilities turned into closed detention centres. People arriving after 20 March 2016 through the Aegean islands, and thus subject to the EU-Türkiye Statement, were automatically de facto detained within the premises of the hotspots in order to be readmitted to Türkiye in case they did not seek international protection or their applications were rejected, either as inadmissible under the Safe Third Country or First Country of Asylum concepts, or on the merits.239 Following criticism by national and international organisations and actors, and due to the limited capacity to maintain and run closed facilities on the islands with a high number of people, the practice of blanket detention was largely abandoned from the end of 2016 onwards. It has been replaced by a practice of systematic geographical restriction, i.e., an obligation not to leave the island and reside at the hotspot facility, which is imposed indiscriminately to every newly arrived person (see Freedom of Movement). 234 235 236 237 238 239 HRLP, Interim measures granted by the ECtHR for a woman and her daughter on Samos, 20 September,2023, available at: https://tinyurl.com/2p3u7bcp. ECtHR, M.K. and Others v. Greece [Application no. 42416/23]. See also, GCR, Absolutely inadequate conditions in the new Closed Controlled Access Center (CCAC) of Kos: The European Court of Human Rights has granted Interim Measures,14 December 2023, available at: https://tinyurl.com/mrw65ahy. ECtHR, H.T. and M.T. v. Greece [Application no.2868/24]. See also ΙHaveRights, Degrading conditions in Samos CCAC: The European Court of Human Rights grants Interim Measures”, 7 February 2024, available at: https://tinyurl.com/3m959tz6. European Council, EU-Türkiye statement, 18 March 2016, available at: http://bit.ly/1VjZvOD. The Greens / European Free Alliance in the European Parliament, The EU-Türkiye Statement and the Greek Hotspots, a failed European pilot project in refugee policy, June 2018, available at: https://bit.ly/3sYrduD. In this respect, it should be mentioned that on 28 February 2017, the European Union General Court issued an order, ruling that ‘the EU-Türkiye Statement, as published by means of Press Release No 144/16, cannot be regarded as a measure adopted by the European Council, or, moreover, by any other institution, body, office or agency of the European Union, or as revealing the existence of such a measure that corresponds to the contested measure.’ Therefore, ‘the Court does not have jurisdiction to rule on the lawfulness of an international agreement concluded by the Member States’. The order became final on 12 September 2018, as an appeal lodged before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was rejected. See, General Court of the European Union, Cases T-192/16, T-193/16 and T-257/16 NF, NG and NM v. European Council, Order of 28 February 2017. See also, General Court of the European Union’s press release, 28 February 2017, available at: https://bit.ly/46KLkdk. See also, CJEU, Cases C-208/17 P, C-209/17 P and 210/17 P NF, NG and NM v European Council, Order of 12 September 2018. 60