While there are many pending cases269 which address detention under Covid-19, the Court has so far only examined one case concerning immigration detention. In Feilazoo v. Malta, the Court examined an issue of automatic placement of new arrivals in Covid-19 quarantine.270 The Court held that because the application had undergone de facto isolation during the first 45 days of his detention in Malta, there was no need for another quarantine period, especially if such quarantine is done together with other detainees and exposes the applicant to a new risk of contracting Covid.271 3. Special Conditions for Vulnerable Persons Under EU and domestic Greek law as well as under European human rights law, the state must provide special preconditions for particularly vulnerable persons. While Greek and EU law define certain groups of people as vulnerable (cf. above), human rights law does not distinguish different groups in the same way, but rather, acknowledges vulnerabilities by taking them into account when examining if the threshold for a human rights violation is met. a. Under EU and Greek Law The minimum standards under Greek and EU Law have been mostly set out above. Additionally, EU and Greek law establish specific condition standards for minors. Article 11 RCD, transposed into Article 48 IPA, states that minors should be placed in accommodation suitable for minors and that unaccompanied minors “shall never be detained in prison accommodation. Article 11 also states that “Where minors are detained, they shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age.” For rejected minor asylum seekers, Article 17 RD, transposed in Article 32 3907/2011, proscribes the following standards: • Minors in detention shall have the possibility to engage in leisure activities, including play and recreational activities appropriate to their age, and shall have, depending on the length of their stay, access to education. • Unaccompanied minors shall as far as possible be provided with accommodation in institutions provided with personnel and facilities which take into account the needs of persons of their age. b. Under European Human Rights Law Other than domestic and EU Law, human rights law – particularly the ECHR – does not provide specific, additional guarantees to vulnerable persons. This is due to the broad nature of human and fundamental rights. The ECHR focuses instead on when persons are vulnerable enough to actually suffer a human rights violation. Indeed, a state measure must meet a minimum level of severity to constitute a violation of human rights, including Article 3 ECHR in the context of the detention of asylum seekers. The determination of this threshold must be relative. One should consider all circumstances of the individual case such as the duration of the detention measure, physical and psychological consequences, and, in some cases, the gender, age and state of health of the respective beneficiary of fundamental rights. However, the ECtHR does not solely v. Georgia. 269 See for example Hafeez v. the United Kingdom (no. 30379/20); Maratsis and Others v. Greece (no. 30335/20) and Vasilakis and Others v. Greece (no. 30379/20); Fenech v. Malta (no. 19090/20). For a complete overview of Covid-19 related jurisprudence, see ECtHR, Factsheet – COVID-19 health crisis, June 2021, available at https://bit.ly/3BKw9BV. 270 ECtHR, 11/03/2021, No. 6865/19, Feilazoo v. Malta, para. 92. 271 Ibid. 42 DETENTION OF MIGRANTS ON THE ISLAND OF KOS