GREECE IRREGULAR MIGRANTS AND ASYLUM-SEEKERS ROUTINELY DETAINED IN SUBSTANDARD CONDITIONS 21 the grounds for their detention and that communication with their lawyer should be made easy. A Ministerial Decision of 27 July 2009 also stipulates that an information leaflet regarding deportation procedures and pertinent rights is provided to the foreign national against whom a deportation order has been issued.69 The Ministerial Decision also stated that authorities should prepare a document to be signed by the foreign national as proof that they had received the information leaflet. Article 13(4)(f) of the Ministerial Decision stipulates that the national authorities responsible for receiving and examining asylum applications shall take steps to inform detained asylum-seekers of the grounds for and duration of their detention. Although deportation procedures are suspended until completion of the administrative stage of the determination of an asylum application, a person who applies for asylum while in detention must challenge the detention before the competent administrative tribunal to be released, even though their deportation has been suspended. In addition, irregular migrants who decide to appeal against the deportation order to the Minister of Public Order (currently the Minister of Citizens’ Protection), or to the body authorized by the Minister as stipulated by Article 77 of Law 3396/2009, cannot challenge the detention order in the same appeal. Instead, they need to raise separate objections to their detention before an administrative tribunal.70 However, if the appeal against the deportation order is accepted, detention is also lifted. If the appeal against the deportation decision is rejected, a detainee can file an application to annul the deportation order along with an application to suspend the deportation order. In S.D. v. Greece, the ECtHR has noted that the introduction of an application to annul along with an application to suspend the deportation order does not lift detention. 71 Amnesty International notes that navigating the heavily bureaucratic and complicated legal system of administrative detention in Greece is not a realistic expectation for detained irregular migrants and asylum-seekers especially when there is no access to free legal assistance and lack of adequate interpretation during the court hearing. All the above are severe obstacles in accessing justice and being able to challenge detention effectively. In S.D. v Greece, the ECtHR concluded that Greek legislation did not permit a direct review of the lawfulness of the detention of a foreign national being held for the purpose of deportation.72 The ECtHR held that the applicant had been unable to have the lawfulness of his detention reviewed by Greek courts and found a violation of Article 5 (4) ECHR.73 Lawyers representing asylum-seekers in applications against detention noted cases where courts had rejected objections despite the applicants having submitted documentation to show that they were not at risk of absconding. In a recent case, the administrative tribunal of Thessaloniki is reported to have rejected objections to the detention of three asylum-seekers, even though they had provided an affidavit from the director of the asylum-seekers reception centre in Lavrio confirming that accommodation would be provided to them upon their release.74 In addition, lawyers told Amnesty International that neither Law 3386/2005 nor any other piece of national legislation provides for a legal remedy to which a detained migrant or asylum-seeker can resort in order to complain about conditions of detention.75 The Index: EUR 25/002/2010 Amnesty International July 2010