CONCLUSIONS Detention in Greece is carried out in a disproportionate manner, and under distressing conditions which do not align with upholding the dignity of detainees. In addition, the recent amendments to Greek law regarding detention have diverged considerably from EU law, allowing for the further expansion and normalised use of depriving individuals of their liberty. The removal of the obligation to examine alternatives in the amendment made to L3907/2011 by Article 5 4686/2020 is particularly concerning, reversing the use of detention for third country nationals in view of removal from an exception to the default practice. In addition, the amendments introduced by the International Protection Act which enabled the detention of individuals who had already entered the asylum procedure, normalised detaining applicants of international protection, despite it being an exceptional measure of last resort in EU law. As such, despite third country nationals subject to removal and asylum seekers sitting under different EU and Greek laws, both groups have witnessed the systematic practice of detention. The current use of immigration detention in Greece lies in breach of EU legislation. Yet, current practices in Greece do not even align with Greek law. Furthermore, the persistence of use of detention despite there being an extremely limited number of deportations from PRDCs and only for specific nationalities raises strong doubts regarding the proportionality and justification for their detention, which lies in violation of both Greek and EU law. This results in the length of detention being entirely arbitrary, with no standardised procedures for the release of individuals who are still subject to return orders. In addition, the maximum time limit of administrative detention of 18 months, or even 36 months in certain cases, is excessively used and disproportionate. Furthermore, without sufficient evidence to justify, for example, detention on the commonly given grounds of public order, applicants of international protection are held arbitrarily. Any threat to public order should not be based on vague legal terms, rather, should be evidenced with a specific accusation with given reasons.[73] Detention has become a de facto element of asylum and removal procedures in Greece, subjecting individuals to harsh conditions without lawful justification. Furthermore, the carceral environments which PRDCs physically resemble, as well as detainees consistently reporting being treated as ‘criminals’, forms part of a larger tactic by the Greek authorities to control and contain people on the move in an attempt to deter arrivals. The conditions reported and illustrated by photos throughout the report indicate the appalling hygiene, poor access to medical care, non-existence of recreational activities and extremely restricted access to legal and translation services. Despite several years of the CPT calling on the Greek authorities to urgently implement changes to the facilities, the issues persist, which was further affirmed by the Greek Ombudsman in 2021. As a result, Mobile Info Team are concerned that people in detention facilities are subject to treatment and conditions which may amount to inhuman or degrading treatment and thus a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. They give us phones, but they take the camera off, so I want to show you where I lived, how I lived but they did it on purpose in order to not record the kind of food and the place, etcetera. Youcef Paranesti We could sleep only for four or five hours and that's it. Actually, we couldn't sleep because of lots of thinking and stress that we have like... nobody explained to us. Their behaviour and reaction was like we were a criminal. It seems to us that their behaviour is as if we killed or murdered many people. Emmanuel, Corinth 19