Accordingly, negative first instance decisions, qualifying Türkiye as a safe third country for Syrians, are not only identical and repetitive – failing to provide an individualised assessment, in violation of Articles 10 and 38 of the Directive 2013/32/EU, but also outdated insofar as they do not take into account developments after 2016, failing to meet their obligation to investigate ex officio the material originating from reliable and objective sources as regards the situation in Türkiye, and the actual regime in the country, given the absolute nature of the protection afforded by Article 3 ECHR. It is worth noting that first instance decisions rejecting as inadmissible the applications lodged by Afghans, Somalis, Bangladeshis and Pakistanis are based inter alia on the aforementioned letters from 2016 although these are not only outdated but, more importantly, only concern Syrian nationals. Considering that the same template decision has been used since 2016, the finding of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants in 2017, according to whom “admissibility decisions issued are consistently short, qualify Türkiye as a safe third country and reject the application as inadmissible: this makes them practically unreviewable”,783 remains valid. As far as GCR is aware, second instance decisions issued by the Independent Appeals Committees for Syrian applicants in many cases uphold the first instance inadmissibility decisions depending on the specific Committee handling the case.784 Throughout 2023, Greece maintained the use of the fast-track border procedure under the derogation provisions of Article 95(3) of the Asylum Code only in islands.785 In 2023, in contravention with the scope of application of the border procedure, the Asylum Service continued to systematically apply the border procedure in the CCAC of Lesvos, Chios, Samos, Leros and Kos without there being circumstances of “mass arrivals” or regulations to that end after the effects of JMD 15596/2020 ceased at the end of 2021. The Asylum Service issued 2,286 first instance decisions in the border procedure in 2022. Yet, only 462 of those were inadmissibility decisions and 74 were manifestly unfounded rejections. This means that the majority of decisions (1,750) exceed the scope of Article 95(1) of the Asylum Code and should not have been issued in that procedure.786 In 2023, the Asylum Service issued 3,454 inadmissible first instance decisions in the category “Inadmissible-Border procedure-Safe third country”.787 At the same time, the second instance decisions referred as “Inadmissible-Border procedure-Safe third country” were 1,237. It is also indicating separately that the second instance decisions in the category “Inadmissible-Border procedure-Safe third country AL” regarding Albania, were 25 while the second instance decisions in the category “Inadmissible-Border procedure-Safe third country NM” regarding North Makedonia were 57. Decisions under the fast-track border procedure [article 90(3)] and JMD 42799/2021 While JMD 42799/2021 was in force from 7 June to 31 December 2021, a total of 2,000 decisions by the Committees of the Appeals Authority were issued under the fast-track border procedure [article 90(3) IPA] regarding the five main nationalities (Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan and Bangladesh). Out of the 2,000 decisions under the safe third country concept, 1,635 considered the applications “inadmissible”, (Syria: 542, Afghanistan: 417, Bangladesh: 126, Pakistan: 498 and Somalia: 52).788 The number of applications deemed admissible under the JMD by the Appeals Committees was 216, and the number of 783 784 785 786 787 788 United Nations Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants on his mission to Greece, A/HRC/35/25/Add.2, 24 April 2017, para 81, available at: https://bit.ly/46OeNTU. For a detailed analysis of the first instance decisions rejecting applications submitted by Syrian applicants as inadmissible on the basis of safe third country, see the Admissibility section of the AIDA, Country Report: Greece, Updates 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021, available at: https://bit.ly/45vXAir. These findings are still relevant, as the same template has been used since mid-2016. Article 95(3) Asylum Code. RSA, The Greek asylum procedure in figures in 2022, Analysis of main trends in refugee protection, available at: https://bit.ly/4482hhP, p. 12. MoMA, Statistics, Consolidated Reports - Overview: December 2023 - International Protection | Appendix A, available at: https://tinyurl.com/yc2stzh7, table 9a. Information provided by the Appeals Authority, 11 March 2022. 163