Reception Service, the Asylum Service and the Appeals Authority […]”. Yet a closer look at the public sources referred by the MoMA highlights that the specific data is not available. Interviews conducted through videoconferencing In GCR’s experience, interviews continued to be regularly conducted through video conferencing in 2023, either with the interviewer or the interpreter (or often both) participating through digital tools. This was particularly the case for applicants residing in camps on the mainland, who were interviewed without having to leave the camp, as well as in certain RAOs with certain interviewers being based in other RAOs. There have also been some cases where the interview was conducted remotely though telephone rather than through video conferencing. At the beginning of the interview, the caseworker requests the applicant’s consent for the use of videoconferencing to carry out the interview. The applicant gives their consent orally, which is recorded both in the audio recording of the interview as well as in the written transcript. However, applicants were not informed about possible consequences in case of refusal to use digital tools, such as rescheduling the interview at a later date. Other issues arising from the use of digital tools include technical issues such as poor internet connection and inadequate sound quality. Even under the best of conditions, video conferencing may negatively affect the quality of the interpretation and possibly the interview due to the loss of non-verbal communication cues. 1.3.1. Recognition rates, quality of interviews and decisions The Asylum Service handed down a total of 32,529 in-merit decisions in 2023:318 Decisions on the merits by the Asylum Service: 2023 Refugee status Subsidiary protection Rejected Exclusion (Article 1F Refugee Convention) 24,345 591 2,339 87 Source: Ministry of Migration and Asylum While recognition rates at first instance remain high (in terms of in-merit decisions), a number of first instance cases demonstrate the persistence of long-standing concerns vis-à-vis the “deterioration in quality at first instance”, inter alia due to the way in which interviews were conducted, the assessment of the asylum claims and/or the decisions delivered.”319 Examples of such cases in 2023 include: v The case of a conscientious objector from the Russian Federation, whose application was rejected despite the fact that the asylum service accepted as true both that he was eligible for conscription as well as his long-standing moral, political and religious reasons for refusing to be enlisted to fight. His claim was rejected solely on the fact that to his knowledge he had yet to be sent a call for conscription. Essentially saying that since his fear of persecution had not yet materialized at the time of flight it could not be considered well founded in the context of the examination of his asylum application.320 v The case of an unaccompanied trans minor from Pakistan whose claims of persecution due to their gender identity were dismissed on credibility grounds. The decision demonstrated a profound misunderstanding of the concept of gender identity and sexual orientation. It should also 318 319 320 MoMA, Statistics, Consolidated Reports - Overview: December 2023 - International Protection | Appendix A, available at: https://bit.ly/3TxX9jL, table 9a. AIDA, Country Report: Greece, 2019 Update, pp. 58-59, available at: https://bit.ly/3ozpn10. Decision on file with the author. 73