New arrivals to the CCAC For new arrivals, the RIS of the Ministry of Migration and Asylum automatically de facto detains every asylum seeker in the main sections of the CCAC "for up to 25 days"[151] or until they are provided with an applicant’s card. Despite not being provided for in law, until November 2022, the RIS maintained that people were not ‘identified’ until they were provided with a red card. However, the notion that identification is not confirmed until an asylum applicant receives their card is highly questionable, particularly as every asylum seeker has three interviews with authorities before they are provided with a card, while many even have their fourth full asylum interview, without the card. In each of these interviews, the authorities were aware of the identity of the applicants, yet they remained de facto detained. Redacted example of the "restriction of freedom" order provided to every asylum seeker that enters the CCAC. Since the opening of the CCAC, every newly arrived asylum seeker is automatically issued with a "restriction of freedom" order, which applies for up to 25 days. This is in addition to the quarantine period which is detailed in Section 3.2 above. This systematic practice of de facto detention contravenes both domestic and EU law. First, this practice is in contradiction with Article 40 of Law 4939/2022, which provides for the detention of third country nationals or stateless persons who have entered the CCAC for five days for identification purposes, which can be extended to up to 25 days, only if factual and legal justifications are given.[152] Secondly, it contradicts the principle that "detention should always be used as a measure of last resort", a principle which has been repeatedly confirmed by the CJEU.[153] In fact, this practice of detention and Article 40 of Law 4939/2022 itself forms the basis for the European Commissions’ recent infringement proceedings against Greece. [151] Greek Law 4939/2022, Article 40. [152] Law 4939/2022,Articles 39(4)(a), 40). [153] See for example the CJEU’s ruling C-72/22 PPU, on 30 June 2022 against Lithuania. Available here. Page 43