KEY TREND OF ANALYSIS Despite the fact that detention should be used as a measure of last resort for applicants of international protection according to EU and Greek law, in Greece applicants of international protection are arbitrarily detained without other less coercive avenues being exhausted first. In addition, Greek law overturned the principle of exceptional detention for third country nationals in view of removal, which is a breach of EU law, and has resulted in the de facto detention of third country nationals subject to return order. However, without reasonable prospects of removal from PRDCs in Greece - which is a legal requirement under EU law [68] - people are detained for arbitrary periods of time which raises strong doubts regarding both the reasonable prospect of removal or proportionality of their detention.[69] Considering that there have been no formal readmissions to Türkiye since March 2020, and that CSOs have substantially argued against Türkiye being considered a safe country particularly due to active deportations taking place to Afghanistan and Syria, [70] the detention of those held in view of their removal to Türkiye does not appear to be justified. We spoke with 15 people from Syria and Afghanistan who were detained on the grounds of inadmissibility and held for up to 10 months . According to European statistics on readmission procedures,[71] a very small proportion of third country nationals with return orders are actually returned; for example, across 2018, 2020 and 2021 0.18% of Moroccans were returned, 0.28% of Algerians were returned and 0.26% Iranians were returned. This corroborates our research whereby respondents detailed the cycles of arbitrary detention and release without readmissions taking place. There is a critical lack of information and understanding regarding the asylum procedure or third country nationals’ rights in detention. Our research indicates that over 90% of respondents did not receive any information regarding their status, the reason for detention or how to proceed. In addition, nearly 40% of respondents were not provided with translation, and at least 30% were forced to sign documents in a language they did not understand. Despite Art. 50,7 of Law 4939/2022 stating that free legal assistance should be offered to applicants if the detention order is contested, in practice, no free legal aid system has been set up to challenge detention. Over 80% of respondents did not have access to free legal assistance, with over a quarter of respondents resorting to paying up to 2,000 euros for private lawyers. Detention conditions across facilities are consistently reported as poor. The structures were described as dilapidated, unfit for animals and unhygienic, as well as more than 50% of respondents comparing PRDCs to prisons. The carceral environment, use of surveillance equipment and cell like rooms in Fylakio, Tavros (Petrou Ralli) and Corinth are alarming, and has been raised by CPT reports following country visits as utterly inappropriate.[72] This has an evidently detrimental impact on the psychological wellbeing of detainees - who described being treated as criminals - which was amplified by the critical lack of access to functioning toilets, showers, beds, mattresses, clothing and recreational activities, which are non-existent. In Xanthi and Corinth, one toilet was reportedly shared by around 50 people. Access to medical care, including psychological care, was extremely limited across PRDCs, and only for urgent cases, which was reported by 80% of respondents. Our case analysis of 151 enquiries additionally emphasised that lack of access to medical care is one of the most challenging issues clients face in detention. Respondents also highlighted that at certain time periods, there were no doctors present whatsoever, and that delays of two months to get an appointment were not uncommon. Translation was rarely provided with medical care, forcing patients to request support from fellow detainees breaching patient confidentiality. Finally, respondents reported the insufficient and untimely response by medical actors, as well as extremely dismissive attitudes, leading to negligence regarding certain cases including with suicide incidents. Nearly a quarter of respondents referenced the prevalence of severely deteriorating mental health in PRDCs including depression, suicidal thoughts and of self harm. 18