Coping with a Fundamental Rights Emergency

8/7/2019 Coping with a Fundamental Rights Emergency

1/46

Coping with a fundamental

rights emergency

The situation of persons crossing

the Greek land border in an

irregular manner

THEMATIC

SITUATIONREPORT


2/46

FRA - European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2011

Reproduction is authorised, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.

More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu).

Printed in Vienna, Austria.

This report was drafted in English.


3/46

CharterofFundamentalRightsoftheEuropeanUnion

Article1

Humandignityisinviolable.Itmustberespectedandprotected.

Article4

Nooneshallbesubjectedtotortureortoinhumanordegradingtreatmentorpunishment.

Article18

The right to asylum shall be guaranteed with due respect for the rules of the Geneva

Conventionof28 July 1951and theProtocolof31 January1967 relating to the statusof

refugeesandinaccordancewiththeTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanCommunity.


4/46

Contents

Mainfindings...................................................................................................... 4

Backgroundtothisreport................................................................................ 10

1. MigrationtrendsatthesouthernEUborders............................................ 11

2. MigrationmanagementinGreece............................................................. 14

3. ThehumanitariancrisisinEvros................................................................ 18

Accesstotheterritory.....................................................................................19

Processingofirregularmigrants.....................................................................21

Detentionconditions.......................................................................................25

Identificationofpersonswithspecificneeds..................................................31

Dealingwiththedeaths..................................................................................33

4. Themidterm:puttingtheActionPlanintopractice.................................35

Europeansolidarity..........................................................................................36

Solutionsfornonrefugees..............................................................................41

Tableoffiguresandtables

Figure1: Numberofdetectionsbetweenbordercrossingpoints,bymajormigrationroute,since2008 12

Figure2: Flowofnewarrivalsaccordingtothe2011law 15

Figure3: Keyactors 17

Figure4: Processingpersonsapprehendedcrossingtheborderirregularly 21

Figure5: NumberofapprehensionsinGreece,bynationality,in2010 23

Figure6: Evrosmunicipalitieswithdetentionfacilitiesforirregularmigrants 25

Figure7: Timelinesfordisbursing2009ERFfundstoNGOPraksis 38

Table1: OverviewofdetentionfacilitiesinEvrosregion 26

Table2 ExternalBordersFund2007 2008(incl.25%Greekcontributions) 37

Table3: OverviewofERFfundingforGreece 37


5/46

Copin

M

MiGre

Alba

signi

bor

atte

rout

The

Me

routTurk

irre

bor

cros

thos

On

pers

pers

Alge

Th

The

whe

cruc

Fun

In2

regi

rive

"T

w

be

an

als

su

Ce

gwithafundam

infin

ration trceisanEU

nia and the

ificant flow

ers: some

mpt to reac

eviaFYROM

strengtheni

ber States

esintotheEey.In2010,

ularborder

erintheEv

sthe12.5k

ecomingth

2 January

ons have b

ons (44%)

rians(16%),

humani

situationat

re those ap

ial concerns

amentalRi

010,at leas

n:26ofthe

and15at

e humanit

rrying. Imp

nefitingfro

dIurgethe

oneeds to

tainablesit

ciliaMalmst

entalrightseme

ings

ndsMemberSta

Former Yu

fpersonss

f them (pr

hotherEU

andSerbia

ng of bord

led to a si

UchangedtGreekexter

crossingal

rosregionr

landbord

oughtheri

011, FRON

een detecte

omes from

Pakistani(8.

tarian cri

thelandbor

prehended

regarding t

htsoftheE

a recorded

mdiedwith

ea inthevi

rian situati

roving the

European

toputall

swiftlyadop

ationcanb

rm,EUCo

rgencyThesit

tewithexte

goslav Repu

eeking inter

imarily Alba

Member St

orviaAlbani

r surveillan

nificant red

argetingfirsnalEUland

ngallEUe

achedpeak

rareanear

erhasincre

EX reporte

d crossing

Afghanista

5%),Somali

sis at the

derwithTur

crossing the

he respect

ropeanUni

45people

intheoper

cinityofAle

on of migr

reception f

solidarityth

ecessarym

t the legisla

foundtoth

missionerf

ationofpeople

nsiveseaan

blic of Mac

nationalpro

nians) seek

tes,either

a,Croatiaan

ce and oth

ction of ar

theseaanandseabor

ternal land

sashighas

thecityof

sed.

that since

the GreekT

, while th

(6%)andIra

border

keyandpar

border irr

of fundame

n.

lost their li

tionalarea

xandroupoli

ants and a

cilities is v

oughapac

asuresinpl

tion reformi

isemergen

rHomeAff

crossingtheGre

dlandborde

donia (FYR

tectionand

to remain

hrough the

dSlovenia.

r measures

rivals in Ital

thentheladersaccoun

andseabo

350persons

restiada,al

2 June 201

urkish land

other mo

qi(4%).

icularlythe

gularly are

tal rights,

es trying to

fOrestiada

s. Inthe firs

sylum seek

ery urgent.

ageoffina

acetoassist

ng itsnatio

y."

irs,Brussels

ekborderinani

rswiththir

M). Since

irregularm

in Greece,

sea route t

taken by

y,Malta an

ndborderbedfor90%

ders.Crossi

aday.The

thoughrece

0 over 38,0

border. Th

st numerou

livingcondit

held, is wo

s enshrined

cross theb

fouratthe

tweekofJ

rs in Gree

The Greek

cialandpr

thepersons

alasylum

,15Decem

irregularmanne

countries:

the early 1

igrantscros

hile many

o Italyor th

ther south

d Spain.Mi

tweenGreeofalldetect

ngsat the

ajorityofp

ntlythenu

00 undocu

largest gr

s nationaliti

ionsinthec

rrisome. It

in the Cha

order in th

banksofth

nuary2011

ce is extre

authorities

cticalassist

inneed.Gr

ystem so th

er2010

4

urkey,

90s, a

these

others

e land

rn EU

ration

ceand

ionsof

astern

ersons

berof

ented

up of

es are

entres,

reates

rter of

Evros

Evros

alone,

ely

are

nce

ece

ata


6/46


7/46

CopingwithafundamentalrightsemergencyThesituationofpeoplecrossingtheGreekborderinanirregularmanner

6

EuropeanCommission,3Greecereceivedin2008and2009,inadditiontothenormalfunding,a

further 2.2 million and 4.9 million, respectively, inemergency fundingunder theEuropean

Refugee Fund (ERF) in order to reinforce reception capacities. In December 2010, the EU

grantedanadditional9.8millionERFemergencyfundingtoGreecetocover immediateand

urgent needs related to healthcare, food and social care, improvements of accommodation

centres and construction of new ones, addressing the backlog of asylum applications and

facilitation of access to asylum procedures. However, with the exception of medical

programmes(staffweredeployedbytheMinistryofHealthtoEvroson28February2011)anda

forthcominglegalaidprogrammebyUNHCR,theFRAfoundnoevidencethattheseresources

areusedtoimprovethecurrentsituationattheEvrosborder.

In August 2010, Greece submitted to the European Commission a National Action Plan on

Asylum Reform and Migration Management, which provides a basis for the identification and

adoption of immediate, shortterm and longterm measures. On 17 December 2010, theMinisterofCitizensProtectionannouncedinParliamentthatfollowingthepresentationofthe

Greek Action Plan on asylum and migration the European Commission will provide substantial

financialsupportforitsimplementation.4

The FRA found that authorities focus primarily on the implementation of Law 3907/2011

published on 26 January 2011. The law transposed the Return Directive5and reformed the

countrysasylumsystem.ItprovidesforthecreationofanAsylumService,anAppealAuthority,

aFirstReceptionServiceandscreeningcentresfornewarrivals.Thereiswidespreadhopethat

the new law will resolve all relevant problems. Hence, most efforts in Athens focus on the

implementationofthenewlawandnotonaddressingtheimmediatehumanitariansituationat

theborder.However,implementationofthenewlawwilltakeconsiderabletime;thelawitself

allows for a 12month implementation period. In the meantime, persons in administrative

detention are held in inhuman conditions, which are also alarming from an EU public health

perspective.

Factors contributing to the current crisis

TheFRAidentifiedanumberoffactorsthatcontributetothecurrentfundamentalrightscrisisin

Evros.Theseinclude:

Fragmentation

of

responsibilities

for

migration

and

lack

of

systematic

coordination:

At anational level, responsibility for border control, migration and asylum issues is fragmented

amongfourdifferentMinistries.Formalcoordinationmechanismsformigrationissuessetup

by Law 3386/2005 have in practice not been functional. At policy level, the FRA noted

3 StatementofCeciliaMalmstrm,EuropeanCommissionerforHomeAffairs,followingthejudgmentoftheECtHRonthetransfer

ofasylumseekersundertheEUDublinRegulationon21January2011,availableat:http://europa.eu/rapid/

pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/11/35&type=HTML.

4 SeeJointstatementbyMrChristosPapoutsis,MinisterofCitizenProtectionofGreeceandCeciliaMalmstrm,EuropeanCommissionerinchargeofHomeAffairs,availableat:http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleases

Action.do?reference=MEMO/10/450.SeealsothestatementbyMinisterPapoutsis,inwhichheindicatedasumof230million,

available(inGreek)at:www.minocp.gov.gr/index.php?option=ozo_content&lang=&perform=view&id=3385&Itemid=459.

5 Directive2008/115/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof16December2008oncommonstandardsand

proceduresinMemberStatesforreturningillegallystayingthirdcountrynationals,OJ2008L348.


8/46


7

informalandadhocformsofcoordinationbetweentherelevantMinistriestobeeffectivein

some instances, but not sustainable in the long run, as they are largely based on personal

contacts and relationships. By contrast, no coordination mechanisms appear to exist

between Ministries at operational level. In particular, sharing of information, coordination

andimplementationofactivitiesinpublicadministrationatnational,regionalandlocallevel

(horizontallybetweencompetentauthoritiesandverticallywithinaMinistry)wasfound

tobehighlyproblematic.

Systematic detention practices in unsuitable facilities: In practice, no alternatives to the

deprivation of liberty of persons entering Greece in an irregular manner exist. Except for

persons requiring urgent hospitalisation, all other individuals are initially held in detention

facilities, regardless of whether there is a risk of absconding, thus contributing to the

overcrowding of facilities. Moreover, facilities to place irregular migrants are unsuitable.

Theseare either converted warehouses or purposebuilt facilities which have a prisonlike

design.

Lengthybureaucraticprocedures:Thesehamperanyeffortsoflocalpoliceauthoritiestoget

budget approval to undertake rudimentary emergency building repairs in the detention

facilities,suchasreplacingwindowsandunblockingtoilets.

Uncleardivisionofresponsibilitiesatalocallevel:followingthereorganisationofthepublic

administration system through the Kallikratis plan6implemented since January 2011, the

competencies of municipalities, regions and decentralised public administration are still

unclear,impactingsubstantiallyontheirabilitytocoveressentialneedsindetentionfacilities.

For example, in the past informal arrangements between the local police and Evros

Prefecture (administrative authority) covered the provision of food through catering

contracts,butfollowingtheabolitionofprefecturesneitherthepolicenortheregionorthe

municipalities interviewed could tell the FRA which body is now responsible. While the

cateringcompanycontinuestodeliverfood,itwasnotclearhowpaymentswouldbemade.

Otherservices,suchasthecleaningofblanketsandbuildingmaintenance,heatingandrepair,

havebeeninterruptedoraresometimespaidbyMdecinsSansFrontires(MSF)orprovided

informallybythearmyorevenpaidbyindividualpoliceofficersfromtheirownpocket.

LimitedNGOpresenceinEvros:ThedifficultiesfacedbytheGreekauthoritiesinimproving

thehumanitariansituationattheborderareaccompaniedbyavirtualabsenceofNGOsand

civil society actors that can provide services. NGOs have focused efforts on advocacy and

raising awareness. Only MSF deployed permanent teams to Evros in December 2010. The

Church distributes humanitarian assistance (primarily clothing) on an ad hoc basis and

uncoordinatedwithMSF.

6 MoreinformationavailablefromtheMinistryofInterior,DecentralisationandEgovernment(inGreek)at:

www.ypes.gr/el/Regions/programma/


9/46


8

Nosystemtotapintolocalresources:Forexample,nosupporthasbeensoughtorprovided

bytheUniversityofThrace,whichhasaMedicalSchoolinAlexandroupoliandaLawSchool

in Komotini, both at reasonable distance from the detention centres. In addition,

municipalities with capacity to host vulnerable groups or provide social service support

remainuninformedanddonotengage.

Inertiaamonglocalactors:Thereisnobodyatlocallevelwhotakesonaroleofcoordinating

a response. This results in different local actors, including the police, local authorities and

otherlocalpublicinstitutions,suchastheuniversityorthehospital,workinginparallelornot

beingaware thattheycould contribute.Key localactors, such assomemayors interviewed

bytheFRAwerenotevenawareoftheexistenceofthe2011law,whichneverthelessassigns

themresponsibilities.Theresultisanoverburdenedpolice.

UnusedinfrastructureinotherpartsofGreece:InotherpartsofGreece,forexampleonthe

Aegean islands, there are detention facilities that are no longer fully used. To alleviate the

overcrowding in Evros, migrants for whom there is prospect for removal could be

transportedbysea/air,asAlexandroupoliandthe islandshaveportsandairports.Similarly,

thepossibilitytoreferpersonstofacilitiesforpersonsrequiringspecificsupport(suchasHIV

counselling)arealsonotfullyexploited.

The dire financial situation of Greece also impacts on the management of asylum and

migration.Theavailablenationalbudgetissmall.Procedurestodisbursefundsarecomplex.

ThestaffavailableislimitedandsoisthecapacitytoabsorbEuropeanUnionfunding.

The involvement of the EU

On24October2010,FRONTEXreceivedarequestfromtheGreekMinisterofCitizenProtection

to deploy for the first time Rapid Border Intervention Teams (RABITs) groups of specialised

borderguardsby27EUcountriestodealwithemergencysituationsattheEUsexternalborders

aswellasoperationalmeanstoincreasethecontrolandsurveillancelevelsatGreecesborder

with Turkey. Five days after receiving the request, on 2 November 2010, FRONTEX finalised

arrangementsforthedeploymentof175bordercontrolspecialistsfrom26EUMemberStates

and technical resources at the GreekTurkish land border. All costs incurred in relation to the

deployment are reimbursed by FRONTEX. On 3 December 2010, the Agencys deployment ofRABITs was extended until 3 March 2011. FRONTEX will continue to be active in the region

afterwards inthe contextof theJointOperationPoseidon LandtoensurethatGreecehas the

appropriateoperationalsupporttoensureeffectivebordermanagementintheregion.

The deployment of substantial resources by FRONTEX at the border with Turkey as part of its

RABIT operation has had an overall positive impact on the initial processing of individuals. In

particular,proceduresinplaceseemtohavereducedtheriskofinformalpushbackstoTurkey

forpersonswhohavecrossedirregularlyintoGreece.


10/46


9

Theoperationalassistance provided bythe EU through FRONTEX coversonly initial processing

anddoesnotimpactonthemostcriticalfundamentalrightsconcerntheinhumanconditions

in which persons are currently being held, because the reception of persons crossing the

bordersirregularlyisseenasfallingoutsidethemandateofFRONTEX.

Greece, as an EU Member State, has an obligation to respect the EU Charter of Fundamental

Rights. In order to ensure that fundamental rights are not violated and given the apparent

inabilityofGreekauthoritiestoaddressthesituationeffectively(alreadyin1999theEuropean

CommitteeforthePreventionofTortureandInhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment

raised concerns with regards to the detention facility in Feres),7there is an urgent need to

developalternativesolutions. Suchsolutionsshallensure theprotectionoffundamentalrights

and provide humane and appropriate living conditions in reception and detention centres, as

wellasadequatelyrespondingtotheneedsofparticularlyvulnerablegroups,suchasfamilies,

pregnantwomenandunaccompaniedminors.ItisevidentthatGreekauthoritiesurgentlyneedoperationalpracticalsupport,particularlyincoordinatingactiononthegroundandineffectively

absorbingEUfunding.

7 SeeReporttothegovernmentofGreeceonthevisittoGreececarriedoutbytheEuropeanCommitteeforthePreventionof

TortureandInhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment(CPT)from26Octoberto2November1999,paragraph31.See

alsoReporttothegovernmentofGreeceonthevisittoGreececarriedoutbytheEuropeanCommitteeforthePreventionof

TortureandInhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment(CPT)from27Augustto9September2005,paragraph27(in

particularlastsentence).


11/46


10

BackgroundtothisreportConcerned byrelevant reportsofthe EuropeanCommission, FRONTEX, theCouncil of Europe,international organisations and NGOs on the fundamental rights situation in the Evros border

region,theFRAwiththeconsensusofitsExecutiveBoardinJanuary2011decidedtoinvestigate

the situation indepth. FRAs visiton siteaimed to understandthe obstaclesanddifficulties in

respondingimmediatelytothehumanitarianemergencyandtoprovideevidencebasedadvice

totherelevantauthoritiestofullyrespectfundamentalrights.

This report is based on data collected directly by FRA staff through interviewbased fieldwork

research with key actors, including all relevant public authorities, and through observation of

theactualconditions.Inaddition,secondarydatawerecollectedandanalysed.

Semistructured personal interviews with representatives of competent national, regional andlocalauthorities,theGreekNationalCommissionforHumanRights,theGreekOmbudsman,the

HellenicCentreforDiseaseControlandPrevention(KEELPNO),FRONTEX,UNHCR,aswellaskey

NGOs,suchastheGreekRefugeeCouncil,ArsisandPraksis,werecarriedoutbytwoseniorFRA

staffmembers.8Theinterviewswerecomplementedbydeskreviewofexistingmaterialaswell

as onsite visits to selected facilities, including detention centres in the Evros region. The FRA

NationalFocalPointof itsracismand xenophobianetwork,RAXEN,provided logistical support

andcarriedoutcasestudieswhichillustratetheissuescoveredinthisreport.

TheGreekauthorities,FRONTEXandallotheractorsinvolvedprovidedtheFRAwithallrelevant

data and information. In particular, the Aliens Division of the Hellenic Police granted the FRA

unimpeded access to all facilities and was completely transparent, greatly facilitating itswork.

The FRA would also like to thank the Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Security and the

GeneralSecretaryofMigrationPolicyintheMinistryofInteriorfortheirkeyinput.

The situation in Greece provides an opportunity to examine how EU standards operate under

stress.BydocumentingthesituationinGreece,thisreportintendstoillustratethechallengesin

applying EU policies in the field of immigration, asylum and return. In this sense, while the

currentreportfocusesonGreece,itaddressesanissueofEUrelevanceandimportance.

Thereportsfindingsshallprimarilyservetoidentifyandimplementimmediatesolutionstothe

plight of the thousands who cross the border and are apprehended and detained. This report

mayserve,moregenerally,toprovideevidenceforthedevelopmentofeffectivepoliciesatEU

andnationallevelforsimilarsituationsthatmayoccurinfuture.

8 Onestaffmemberisaseniorlegalexpertonasylumandmigrationissuesandonestaffmemberisaseniorsocialscientist,

expertondiscriminationandintegrationissues.


12/46


11

1.MigrationtrendsatthesouthernEUborders

In its 2010 World Migration Report, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM)9

highlightedtheglobalmismatchbetweenlaboursupplyanddemandasoneofthekeyreasons

forirregularmigration.Thereportnotestheabsenceofadequate legalchannelsformigration

especiallyforlabourmigrationofbothhighandlowskilledpersons.Asmorepeoplearemoving

to find work than the possibilities offered by labour mobility agreements, a number of them

resorttocrossingborderswithoutauthorisation.

Another category of persons crossing borders irregularly concerns those fleeing persecution

who face difficulties in obtaining travel documents from their national authorities, either

because they would need to approach the very same authority which is responsible for their

persecution or because events force them to leave the country at short notice. In addition,

lengthy procedures or bureaucratic obstacles often make it impossible for asylum seekers to

obtainlegalpermissiontoentertheEuropeanUnion.Theythereforeoftenmovealongthesame

routesasmigrants,usingthesametransportandtheservicesofthesamesmugglers.10Thishas

beenparticularlythecaseattheEUssouthernbordersandGreeceisnoexceptiontoit.

PersonsenteringGreece irregularlymaybelongtoseveraldifferentcategories:arrivals include

persons who are seeking international protection, unaccompanied and separated children, as

well as irregular economic migrants. Different legal regimes apply to these categories which

impactonthewaytheymustbetreatedatborders.Whileeconomicmigrantscanbereturned,

persons seeking international protection have to be referred to domestic asylum procedures.

Unaccompanied and separated children, in turn, require special protection measures. Thesedifferent categories must be identified upon entry to avoid undifferentiated treatment which

would violate basic fundamental rights enshrined in the EUs Charter of Fundamental Rights,

and other human rights instruments, such as the European Convention for the Prevention of

TortureandInhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment,theUNConventionontheRights

oftheChild,etc.

Over the past five years, migration routes at the southern European border underwent an

importantshift. In2006,theSpanishtownsofCeutaandMelilla,theCanaryIslands,Sicilyand

theislandofLampedusa,aswellastheGreekTurkishseaborderwereparticularlyaffectedby

arrivals.11PrimarilyasaresultofclosercooperationbetweenSpainandtransitcountriesinWest

Africa,detectionsattheseaborderofSpaindecreasedby70%in2007.12Irregularmovements

shifted to the Italian and the Greek sea borders, a trend whichcontinued in 2008.13Following

thereturnofalmost1,000personstoLibyabytheItalianauthoritiesinsummer2009,arrivalsin

9 IOM,WorldMigrationReport2010:TheFutureofMigrationBuildingCapacitiesforChange,2010,p.29,availableat:

http://publications.iom.int/bookstore/free/WMR_2010_ENGLISH.pdf.

10 Ibid.,p.41.

11 FRONTEX,AnnualReport2006,p.7,availableat:

http://www.frontex.europa.eu/gfx/frontex/files/justyna/annual_report_2006%5B1%5D.pdf.

12 FRONTEX,GeneralReport2007,p.14,availableat

http://www.frontex.europa.eu/gfx/frontex/files/justyna/frontex_general_report_2007_final.pdf.

13 FRONTEX,GeneralReport2008,p.12,availableat

http://www.frontex.europa.eu/gfx/frontex/files/justyna/frontex_general_report_2008.pdf.


13/46

Copin

Italy

201

Gre

At t

exte

RAB

rout

Figu

Sou

A g

abo

of t

200

Gre

migr

Leanot

frie

give

14 F

h

15 F

h

_

16 S

17 F

w

gwithafundam

andMalta

compared

ceaccounte

he end of 2

rnalEU lan

ITteamsby

esfromthe

re1: Numsince

ce:FRONTEneral shift

t29,000de

eEU,whic

when FRO

k external

ationmove

ing

aside

ththe finalde

dsorpeopl

nthatregul

RONTEX,General

tp://www.front

RONTEX,Currenttp://www.front

of_irregular_mig

eeFRONTEXNew

RONTEX,FRANQww.frontex.euro

entalrightseme

lmoststopp

with2009.

dfor75%o

010, Greec

, seaanda

FRONTEX.16

centraltoth

erofdetec2008

,2010rom sea to

tectionsofi

constitute

NTEX starte

land border

entshave

e

migration

tination.M

theyknow

rmigration

Report2009,p.x.europa.eu/gfx

migratorysituatx.europa.eu/do

ation_in_greece

sRelease,12Jan

uartely,Issue3,J

pa.eu/situation_

rgencyThesit

ed.Italyrep

In2009, the

theEUtota

reported

irborders,15

hisdevelop

eeasternM

ionsbetwe

landborder

regularbor

thehighes

d collecting

with Turk

oubledatt

from

Albaninytrytore

cansupport

channelsca

11,availableat:

frontex/files/ge

oninGreece(upnload/Z2Z4L2Zy

_29_11_2010.pd

uary2011athtt

ulySeptember2

at_the_external

ationofpeople

orteda96%

numberof

l.14

round 90%

althoughd

mentisthe

diterranea

nbordercr

s canalso

ercrossing

tnumbero

data.Of th

y.17Betwee

eGreekTur

a,

for

the

oachotherE

them.Som

eringforth

eral_report/200

ate29Novemb

b250ZXgvZW4vZ

f.

://www.frontex.

010,p.10,availa

border/art22.ht

crossingtheGre

dropinarri

detections

of all dete

tections fel

resultofth

.

ossingpoint

eobserved

wererepor

detections

se detectio

n the secon

kishlandbo

verwhelminUMember

personspl

formallab

9/gen_rep_2009

r2010),p.1,av

GVmYXVsdF9td

.europa.eu/rabit

bleat:

l.

ekborderinani

alsinthefi

f irregular

tions of irr

l since the

acceleratin

s,bymajor

. In the thir

tedatthee

at the land

ns, 63% we

d and third

rder.

majority

otates,wher

nhowever

urmarketa

_en.pdf.

ilableat:

x0aWxpc3RhX3

2010/news_rele

irregularmanne

stthreemo

ordercross

gular cross

deployment

gshiftinmi

igrationro

dquartero

ternalland

border sinc

re reported

quarter of

arrivals

Gre familyme

tosettlein

renotsuffic

saWtvdy8xMzY/

ases/.

12

thsof

ings in

ings at

of the

ration

ute,

2010,

border

eearly

at the

2010,

ece

is

mbers,

reece,

ientto

situation


14/46


15/46


14

2.MigrationmanagementinGreece

Fragmentation of responsibilities

At a central level, responsibility for the management of migration and asylum is fragmented.

Four Ministries play a central role: the Ministry of Citizen Protection is responsible for border

control and surveillance, asylum, and returns, including the running of screening and removal

centres.Theformulationofmigrationpolicyandtheissuanceofresidencepermitsfallunderthe

competence of the Ministry of Interior, Decentralisation and Egovernment. The Ministry of

Health and SocialSolidarity is in charge of receptionfacilities for asylum seekers, whereas the

Ministry of Labour and Social Protection has been assigned responsibility for coordinating the

governmentactionsrelatingtomigration.

The Greek Action Plan

AnActionPlanonMigrationManagementwasdevelopedbytheGreekauthoritiesin2010.The

process to develop the plan was participatory involving all main actors, including civil society

representatives. The Action Plan provides a comprehensive and wellthought structure for

addressingthegapsintheGreeksystemformanagingasylumandmigration.

Substantial efforts have been made towards the implementation of the Action Plan. Two

importantstepsweretakenatalegislativelevelsettingthebasisfortheimplementationofthe

ActionPlan.First, inNovember2010aPresidentialDecreewasadoptedintroducingimportant

changes to the asylum procedure for a transitional period.18

The Presidential Decree providesfor a number of procedural safeguards and introduces appeals boards to review the decisions

madebytheadministration.ItalsoassignsanimportantroletoUNHCR.

Secondly,anewlawwasadoptedinJanuary201119establishinganasylumserviceaswellasa

firstreceptionserviceandtransposingcertainaspectsoftheReturnDirective.Itestablishesan

AsylumServiceaswellasaFirstReceptionServiceasseparatestructureswithintheMinistryof

Citizen Protection. The law provides for the creation of screening centres throughout the

country, where persons entering the country in an irregular manner will be channelled to the

appropriateprocedure.Thescreeningcentresshallalsoidentifypersonswithspecificneedsand

refer these to the competent bodies for individual follow up. According to the law irregular

migrants will stay in the screening centres for 15 days (Article11) which can exceptionally be

extendedforanadditionalperiodof10days.Afterthat, individualsshouldeitherbereturned,

referred to reception facilities for asylum seekers, structures for vulnerable groups or pre

removaldetentionfacilitiesorotherwisebereleased.

18 PD114/2010of22November2010.

19 TheLawontheestablishmentofanAsylumServiceandaFirstReceptionService,adaptationoftheGreeklegislationtothe

provisionsoftheDirective2008/115/EConcommonstandardsandproceduresinMemberStatesforreturningillegallystaying

thirdcountrynationalsandotherprovisionswasadoptedon18Januaryandpublishedon26January2011.TheGreekversion

ofthelawisavailableat:www.hellenicparliament.gr/UserFiles/bcc26661143b4f2d89160e0e66ba4c50/IYPASYLPAP.pdf.


16/46

Copin

Ho

rece

impl

spec

Inte

deci

The

mec

non

migr

rem

susp

doccerti

rem

may

emp

con

impl

this

cent

the

with

Figu

Sou

gwithafundam

ever, infras

ption and d

ementingac

ial places f

ior,Econom

sionwasne

2011lawals

hanism to

removable

ants. Pers

oval is po

ended

mented

ficate of su

oval (Articl

also b

loyment u

itions (Arti

emented

mechanism

reswithout

numberofp

localcomm

re2: Flow

ce:FRA,201

entalrightseme

tructure an

etention ca

tion.Alsoin

r preremo

yandFinan

ertakenfor

oprovidesa

deal with

irregular

ons whose

stponed or

will be

with aspension o

e24). The

e allowed

der certain

le37(5)). I

accordingly,

will reduce

papersand

ersons livin

unities,whi

ofnewarriv

1

rgencyThesit

resources

pacities. Mo

thepast,A

al detentio

ce,Healtha

thecentres

the numbe

whoarereli

inagreyz

hrecentlye

alsaccordin

Migrantssle

ationofpeople

need to be

reover, the

ticle81ofL

to be set

ndSocialSo

inEvros.

r of person

antonthei

one,thism

mergedinc

gtothe201

epingontheg

crossingtheGre

found in o

political wi

aw3386/20

up by decis

lidarityand

living in A

nformaleco

asurecana

rtainparts

1law

oundinAthen

ekborderinani

rder to set

ll needs to

05provided

ion taken b

PublicOrde

hens, Patra

nomyforsu

lsocontribu

fthecountr

irregularmanne

up the ne

be translat

forthecrea

the Minist

r.However,

s and other

rvival.Byre

etoeaset

y.

15

essary

d into

tionof

ries of

sucha

major

ducing

nsions


17/46


16

Coordination

Implementation of the Action Plan and the 2011 law requires concerted efforts by different

governmental institutions. Four Presidential decrees are foreseen to implement the 2011 lawwhich need consultation between various ministries that is, Article5(3) on procedures for

reception and processing of asylum seekers; Article8(7) on the functioning of first reception

services;Article5(2)ontheCentralService,theRegionalAsylumOfficesandtheirstaffsduties

andArticle8(6)onthefundingoffirstreceptioncentresanddetentioncentres.Moreover,the

identification of infrastructure suitable as screening centresaswellasadequatestructures for

the reception of asylum seekers will require common efforts as will the establishment of a

functioningreferralsystemforvulnerablegroups.

Formally established coordination mechanisms have been nonfunctional.20The preparatory

work on the Action Plan as well as on the screening centres occurred outside these formal

mechanismswhichareseenbysomeinterlocutorstobeinneedofurgentreform.Aninformal

task force has been recently established under the responsibility of the Deputy Minister of

Labour in charge of coordinating action of all concerned. Hence, coordination between the

differentministriestakesplaceinformally.Whilesuchinformalcoordinationhasbeeneffective

particularly between some ministries, this was feltto beprimarily the result of good personal

relationships,somethingwhichisnotsustainableinthelongrun.Thefollowinggraphintendsto

illustrate the various actors involved and how they are interlinked to each other. The arrows

showlinesofcommunicationorcontact.

20 TheinterministerialMigrationPolicyMonitoringCommitteeanditsSpecialCommitteeestablishedbyLaw3386/2005(Art.3)

hasmetonlyoccasionallyinthepast.


18/46

Copin

Figu

Not

Sou

gwithafundam

re3: Keya

:ERF=Euroce:FRA,201

entalrightseme

ctors

peanRefug1

rgencyThesit

eFund

ationofpeople crossingtheGreekborderinaniirregularmanne

17


19/46


18

3.ThehumanitariancrisisinEvros

This chapter summarises the situation as found by the FRA in Evros. It touches upon theprocessing of persons who crossed the border in an irregular manner, the conditions of

detentionandtheidentificationofvulnerablegroupsandpersonswithspecificneeds.

FRA staff was allowed to visit the detention facilities. Living conditions there can only be

described as inhuman. In a recent interview, the responsible Minister of Citizens Protection

stated that he feels personally ashamed for the conditions for the detention of irregular

migrants,adding,however,thatpossibilities[forimprovement]arelimited.21Despitesuchopen

and unreserved agreement that suchconditions constitute a flagrant violation of fundamental

rights,littleornothingisdonetoimprovethem.

Onthebasisofinterviewswithpracticallyallrelevantauthoritiesandotherstakeholders,itwasestablished that there is a serious communication gap, on the one hand, between the centre

(Athens) and the region (Evros), and, on the other hand, between different institutions in the

Evrosregion.CommunicationandreportinglinesarealmostexclusivelyverticalwithinMinistries

and the police. Efforts at horizontal coordination exist at the highest (Ministerial) level, but

decisions cannot reach easily the operational level. Furthermore, horizontal communication

between key institutions at local level in Evros, is weak and coordination at this level is non

existent.

Crucial potential resources available at local level are not used. Many buildings in the region

appear empty, while detention facilities are overcrowded. Medical needs in the detention

facilities are acute, but no support has been requested from the Thrace University Medical

SchoolandtheUniversityHospitalofAlexandroupoliwithhundredsofhighlyqualifiedmedical

doctorsandstudents,forexample,tosetupvoluntaryschemestovisitdetentionfacilitiesand

provide basic medical care. Municipalities with key resources know of the dire humanitarian

situation of the new arriving migrants, but were never asked to contribute. There is a lack of

legal information and guidance; the School of Law in Komotini, however, was never asked to

contribute,forexample,bysettingupalegalclinicbasedonvolunteerschemes.

21 Interviewof5January2011toEpikaira,available(inGreek)at:www.epikaira.gr/epikairo.php?id=8276&category_id=0.

[, . ,

. , .]


20/46

Copin

The

The

and

Inte

Lam

Mig

specand

Ac

The

terri

of t

tran

(chacod

22 C

1

U

p

I

C

1

S

a

23

S

gwithafundam

ospitalinAlex

e isanexp

implemente

national ex

pedusabyt

ation (IOM)

ialisedactoroperational

cesstoprincipleof

torieswher

e right to l

sitcountry

inrefoulem.23

onventionRelati

967;Convention

NHumanRights

ara.6.8 6.9and

posedonStates

ommentNo.20,

992,para.9;Eur

oeringv.United

ndSoldatenkov.

chengen

Borders

entalrightseme

ndroupoliwith

ctation tha

dfromAth

erienceha

eItalianInt

, Save the

equippedlevelcontrib

heternonrefoule

theyfacet

ifeor irrepa

herethep

nt).Thepri

gtotheStatuso

AgainstTorture

Committee,A.R.J

UNHumanRight

PartiestotheC

Art.7(Prohibitio

peanConventio

ingdom(1989)

Ukraine(2008)E

Code,

recital

20

rgencyThesit

emptyspaces,

problems

ns;experie

demonstra

eriorMinistr

hildren (Ita

ithresourcutestoreso

itoryment22prohi

reatofper

rableharm.

rson isnot

cipleofnon

fRefugees,28Ju

ndOtherCruel,I

.v.Australia,Co

sCommittee,CC

venant,UNdoc

nofTorture,or

ofHumanRight

1EHRR439,Cha

CHR2440/07.

and

Art.

3(b).

ationofpeople

whichcouldb

illbe resol

ce,howeve

ted, sucha

ywiththes

ly), the Red

sandthealvingsuchis

bitstheexp

ecution,ar

This includ

protected f

refouleme

ly1951,Art.33a

nhumanorDegr

municationNo.

PRGeneralCom

.CCPR/C/21/Rev.

therCruel,Inhu

s,Art.3,asinter

halv.UK(1996)

crossingtheGre

temporarilyu

ed through

r,showstha

in thePre

pportofth

Cross (Italy

uthoritytouesquickly

ulsion,depo

alriskofto

s theprohi

omreturnt

tisalsoens

ndProtocolRela

adingTreatment

692/1996,UNd

entNo.31,The

.1/Add.13,26Ma

manorDegradin

pretedbytheEu

3EHRR413,Gar

ekborderinani

edforhosting

actionsdes

tthisisnor

idiumproje

Internatio

) that the

oordinateandefficient

rtationorr

ture,andar

bition to re

opersecuti

hrinedinth

tingtotheStatu

orPunishment,

oc.CCPR/C/60/D

NatureoftheG

y2004,para.12.

gTreatmentorP

opeanCourtof

abayevv.Russia

irregularmanne

vulnerablepers

igned,coord

allynotth

ct impleme

alOrganizat

establishme

ctionsatthly.

turnofper

bitrarydepr

turnaperso

norseriou

Schengenb

ofRefugees,4O

0December198

/692/1996,11A

eneralLegalObli

.andCCPRGener

unishment),10

umanRightsin,

(2007)ECHR384

19

onsinated

ecase.

ted in

ionfor

t of a

elocal

onsto

ivation

n toa

harm

orders

ctober

4,Art.3.;

g.1997,

ation

al

arch

e.g.,

11/02,


21/46


20

Turkey maintains the geographical limitation to the 1951ConventionRelating to the Status of

Refugees, which means that it does not consider as refugees persons coming from outside of

Europe.WhileTurkeyisworkingontheestablishmentofanasylumsystem,thecountrycannot

be considered safe for persons seeking asylum. For individuals returned from Greece, UNHCR

reported the risk of onward returns by Turkey to their country of origin without determining

whetherthesepersonsareinneedofinternationalprotectionornot.24

Respect for the principle of nonrefoulement requires that before returning a person to the

country from which he/she has crossed the border in an irregular manner, an individual

assessmentismadeinordertodetermineifthepersonseeksormaybeinneedofinternational

protection or if there are other bars to return. Once a person has crossed the border, he/she

cannotbepushedbackinformallytotheotherside.

Informationreceivedfromformerarmyconscriptsdeployedattheborderindicatedthatinthe

pastyearsinformalpushbackstookplacebothatthelandborderaswellasattheEvrosriver.

This is confirmed by a number of reports.25To the knowledge of the FRA, there are no clear

instructionsorrulesofengagementwithintheHellenicpoliceindealingwithmigrantswhohave

justcrossedtheborder.Thismaybeoneofthereasonsforpastpushbacks.

The FRA has reasons to believe that with the deployment of the RABIT operation, the risk of

informalpushbacksofthirdcountrynationalstoTurkeyhasdecreased.AsexplainedtotheFRA

bypatrollingofficers,thecurrentmodusoperandiattheborderistoapprehendandbringtothe

policestationeverysingle individualwhohascrossedintoGreekterritory.Inthepastmonths,

FRONTEX has reacted firmly to individual instances reported by deployed RABIT officers,

wherebytheGreekpoliceallegedlyreturnedmigrantsforciblybacktoTurkishterritory.26

The FRA welcomes considerations by FRONTEX to annex to the Operational Plan, which

regulates the follow up to the RABIT operation, clear guidelines in order to prevent informal

pushbacksovertheborderforpersonsalreadyonGreeksoil.Theirinclusioninanoperational

planwouldalsohaveawidereffectasitwouldcontributetofosteracommonunderstandingof

existingfundamentalrightsobligationsamongborderguardofficersintheEuropeanUnion.

While the presence ofborder police officers fromother countries may in itself discourage the

restoration of previous patterns of informal push backs, this is not sufficient to guarantee

respectoffundamentalrights.ThereisaneedfortheHellenicPolicetodevelopspecificrulesof

engagement as soon as possible clearly prohibiting any informal push back at the border anddefiningthemeasurestobetakenwhenpersonsarealreadyirregularlyonGreeksoil.

24 UNHCR,AsylumSituationinGreeceIncludingforDublinIItransferees,31January2011,page2,forthcoming.SeealsoECtHR,

M.S.S.v.BelgiumandGreece,paras.192,334.

25 UNHCR,ObservationsonGreeceasacountryofasylum,December2009,p.4,availableat

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/4b4b3fc82.pdf;HumanRightsWatch,StuckinaRevolvingDoor:IraqisandOtherAsylum

SeekersandMigrantsattheGreece/TurkeyEntrancetotheEuropeanUnion,November2008,availableat

http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2008/11/26/stuckrevolvingdoor0;Migreurop,Europeanborders:Controls,detentionand

deportations,2009/2010report,availableathttp://www.migreurop.org/IMG/pdf/rapportmigreurop2010en__2121110.pdf,

p.101.

26 SeeSpiegelOnline,11December2010:GrenzpolizistenjagenFlchtlingeinMinenfeld,availableat

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,734123,00.html.


22/46

Copin

Pr

Fropers

thre

irre

Pers

whe

resi

The

(e.g.

phodete

Fig

Sou

27 U

st

h

28 C

3

29 A

fi

w

t

gwithafundam

cessin

afundameonsistoens

at of perse

arableharm

ons appreh

re they are

enceandso

process incl

mobile ph

os

and

fingntionand/o

re 4: Proc

ce:FRA,201

NHCRProtection

andardsandpoli

tp://www.unhcr

odificationoflegi

386/2005(asam

procedureobser

ngerprintsisavai

rittenandneedt

is

does

not

indic

entalrightseme

ofirrentalrightspurethatno

cution, a r

.27

nded after

interviewe

cialintegrat

udesessent

nes), a brie

erprints

29

,

ardeportatio

essing per

1

PolicyPaperM

cyconsideration

.org/refworld/ca

islationontheen

ended).

vedandtimedb

lableandlaste

obesubsequent

ate

an

optimal

u

rgencyThesit

gularerspective,aoneisretur

al risk of

crossing th

d and proc

ionofthird

iallysearch

f interview

nd

sending

ndecision.

sons appr

aritimeintercepti

swithrespectto

tegory,POLICY,,,,

try,residencean

theFRAduring

approximately

lytypedtoaPC

e

of

the

scarce

p

ationofpeople

igrants

centralgoaeddirectly

orture, arb

border ar

ssed on th

ountrynati

nd tempor

by the Hell

he

(paper)

hended c

ionoperationsa

extraterritorialp

cd12d3a2,0.ht

dsocialintegrati

itsvisit.Itwasca

0fortwoperso

ypoliceofficers,

olice

human

reso

crossingtheGre

lofallprocerindirectly

itrary depri

brought to

e basis of

nals.28

ryconfiscat

nic police,

file

to

the

P

ossing th

dtheprocessing

rocessing,availa

l.

onofthirdcount

rriedoutbypolic

nsprocessedsim

asnocivilianad

urces.

ekborderinani

ssingarrangtoterritorie

ation of t

the compe

Law 3386/2

ionofselec

a nationalit

olice

Direct

border ir

ofinternational

bleat

rynationalsonG

eofficersmanua

ultaneously.The

inistrativestaff

irregularmanne

ementsforwherethey

e right to

tent police

005 on the

tedpersona

screening,

orate

to

pre

egularly

protectionclaim

reekterritory,La

llynoelectroni

reportsarealso

isavailable. Evid

21

rrivingfacea

life or

station

entry

l items

taking

pare

a

:legal

w

cscanof

hand

ently,


23/46


22

During this time these persons are held on the basis of Article76(3) of Law 3386/2005. This

provision allows for temporary detention up to three days if, on the basis of the general

circumstances,thereisariskofabscondingorifthepersonconstitutesadangerforpublicorder

or if he/she avoids or obstructs the procedure for expulsion or return. After the three days

deadline, detention can be extended, if a decision of deportation is issued. These provisions

have not changed with the recent Law 3907/2011. Hence, the Hellenic police has a certain

degree of discretion in deciding whether to detain a person crossing the border irregularly. In

practice, however, except for cases requiring immediate hospitalisation, everyone is detained

temporarily for the initial period required for identification and processing in one of the

detentioncentres,includingpersonsbelongingtovulnerablegroups,suchaspregnantwomen,

babiesandunaccompaniedminors.

TheprocessingofirregularmigrantsisprimarilycarriedoutbytheHellenicpolice,exceptforthe

nationalityscreeningwhichisdonejointlybyFRONTEXandHellenicpoliceteams.Thescreeningby the joint teams is the only extensive interview carried out with an irregular migrant at the

border, unless he/she is interviewed by FRONTEX to obtain information about patterns of

organisedcrime(debriefinginterview).

Intheabsenceofaninterviewfocusingonreasonsofflightitisprimarilyduringthescreeningor

debriefing interviews with FRONTEX that a migrant may raise international protection

considerations as well as any other specific needs. If such considerations and needs are

mentioned,theFRAwasinformedthatFRONTEXofficerswouldreportthistotheHellenicpolice

for follow up. However, the FRA noted that the limited human resources, the absence of

interpreters within the Hellenic police and its extremely heavy workload, constitute serious

obstacles to undertake individual follow up measures. While the FRA was informed that they

could and do exceptionally ask FRONTEX to use their interpreters, this is clearly not a

sustainablesolution.

The lack of interpreters and, more importantly, the absence of specialised NGOs providing

independent social and legal counselling frustrate the limited efforts made to provide

information to the migrants about their legal status, the reasons for detention and the

possibilitytorequestasylum.Whenspeakingtothemigrantsheldinthefacilities,theFRAwas

confrontedwithageneralisedlackofunderstandingaboutwhytheyweredetainedandforhow

long they would remain there. This resulted in heightened stress and could contribute to the

frequentviolentactswithinthefacilitiesthatwerereportedtoFRA.

Suchlackofinformation,combinedwiththeabsenceofindependentlegaladvicealsoexplains

whyindividualsfollowallegedinstructionsobtainedbysmugglersnottoapplyforasylumatthe

border.Inaddition,mostinterlocutorsstressedthatthosewhoseekasylumarelikelytoremain

in the border detention facilities for a much longer period of time, as the police waits for a

decision by the refugee commission before ordering their release. In one case, the additional

burdenthatasylumseekerscreateonthepolicewasalsostressed,astheyneedtobeescorted

to the police directorate for asylum interviews, which takes away resources from other tasks.

Thesereasonstakentogetherexplainwhythenumberofasylumseekersattheborderremains

low, in spite of a considerable number of persons coming from refugeeproducing countries,


24/46


23

such as Afghanistan, Somalia or Iraq: Figure 4 shows that in2010, over 28,000 Afghans, 7,500

Palestinians, 6,500 Somalis and nearly 5,000 Iraqis were apprehended after having entered

Greece in an irregular manner, many of whom at the border in Evros. Some try to lodge an

asylum application after their release from detention and arrival in Athens, which creates

additionalresourceproblemstotheAliensDirectorateinAthens.

Figure 5: Number of apprehensions in Greece, by nationality, 2010

Source:HellenicMinistryofCitizenProtection,2010

ThenationalityscreeningcarriedoutbyjointFRONTEXandHellenicpoliceteamshasdecreased

the number of migrants registered under the wrong nationality. Since the deployment of

screenersbyFRONTEXundertheAttica30projectthenumberofpersonsregistered,forexample,

asPalestiniansdecreasedsubstantially,asmanyofthemwereidentifiedascomingfromNorth

Africancountries.

TheFRAisoftheviewthataproperidentificationofnationalityishelpful,bothforsubsequent

asylumproceduresaswellasreturnprocedures,includingavoidingthedeprivationoflibertyof

individualswhentherearenotangibleprospectsforremoval.31However,givenitsimplications

forthefurthertreatmentofamigrant,theevidenceusedtodeterminethenationalityshouldbe

recorded,soastoallowthepersontorebutit,whenchallengingthedetentionordeportation

decision. The FRA welcomes that a standardised form has been introduced to document this

30 See

http://www.frontex.europa.eu/download/Z2Z4L2Zyb250ZXgvZW4vZGVmYXVsdF9tdWx0aWxpc3RhX3BsaWtvdy8xMzY/operatio

nal_activity_in_greece.doc.

31 SeeReturnDirectiveArt.15(4)15(6).Art.15(4)providesthatWhenitappearsthatareasonableprospectofremovalno

longerexistsforlegalorotherconsiderationsortheconditionslaiddowninparagraph1nolongerexist,detentionceasestobe

justifiedandthepersonconcernedshallbereleasedimmediately.IntheGrandChambercaseSadShamilovichKadzoevv.

DirektsiaMigratsiapriMinisterstvonavatreshniterabotiof30November2009,theCJEUclarifiedthattheconceptof

reasonableprospectofremovalmustbeinterpretedasmeaningthatonlyarealprospectthatremovalcanbecarriedout

successfully,havingregardtotheperiodslaiddowninArticle15(5)and(6),correspondstoareasonableprospectofremoval,

andthatthatreasonableprospectdoesnotexistwhereitappearsunlikelythatthepersonconcernedwillbeadmittedtoathird

country,havingregardtothoseperiods,(para.72(5)).

Iran; 1,133

Others; 9,704

Bangladesh; 3,264

Eritrea; 1,628

Georgia; 1,456

Iraq; 4,968

Somalia; 6,525

Algeria; 7,336

Palestine; 7,561

Pakistan; 8,830

Afghanistan;

28,299

Albania; 50,175

Morocco; 1,645


25/46


24

process, which is signed by the Greek officer as well as the migrant (but not as yet by the

interpreter,whoselanguageexpertiseisusedtoassistinthedeterminationofnationality).

The determination of nationality also assists the Hellenic Police in enforcing the readmissionagreement with Turkey.32While overall, readmission to Turkey was defined as difficult, some

500 persons, mainly from countries neighbouring Turkey were accepted back in 2010.

ReadmittedpersonsalsoincludenationalsfromcountriessuchasIranorIraq,whereprotection

needsarenotunlikelytoexist.33Giventheobstaclestoaccessasylumprocedures intheEvros

region, there is a serious risk that persons returned under the readmission agreement with

Turkey might indeed be in need of international protection. While the Greek authorities are

responsibleforthereadmissionprocess,thefactthatnosystemexiststodetermineifaperson

proposedforreadmissionisinneedofinternationalprotection,alsoputstheEuropeanUnionat

a grave risk: EU assistance is provided to determine nationality and hence to facilitate

readmission without having a parallel assistance provided to identify whether persons to bereadmittedareinneedofinternationalprotection.

Intheshorttermanduntilthescreeningcentresareestablished,theGreekauthoritiesshould

establish an ex officio examination, based on a thorough interview, to establish whether an

individual, whose readmission is requested from the Turkish authorities, is in need of

internationalprotection.TheGreekauthoritiescouldalsoconsiderassistancebyUNHCRandthe

EuropeanAsylumSupportOffice(EASO)forthispurpose.

32 ProtocolofreadmissionbetweenGreeceandTurkeytocombatirregularmigration,adoptedon8November2001andentered

intoforceinApril2002.33

AccordingtoinformationreceivedfromtheMinistryofCitizenProtection,outofthe501personsreadmittedbyTurkeyin2010,

therewere334Iraqinationals,70Syrians,37Iraniansand35Georgians.


26/46

Copin

De

Thedete

for

and

incl

The

usu

Nos

facil

peri

over

Fere

migr

The

long

byl

Fig

Sou

The

NG

Rap

gwithafundam

tention

most problntioninthe

eriodsrangi

therelated

dingpregna

majority of

llyheldint

imilarfacilit

ities in Fere

ds longer

nightata f

s.Thisfacili

ants.

vastmajori

erthanthe

wtoeffect

re 6: Evro

ce:FRA,201dire conditi

s,including

orteur on

entalrightseme

conditmatic fundfacilitiesin

ngfromafe

racticetod

ntwomena

migrants ar

edetention

existsinS

s, Tychero

than a few

cility inPo

yaswellas

yofperson

threedayte

deportatio

s municip

1ons in thed

theCPT,the

Torture, U

rgencyThesit

onsmental righhichperso

wdaystos

etaineveryb

ndfamilies

e held in fo

centreforf

uthernEvro

nd Soufli,

hours. Dur

oswhichw

otherpolice

sheld in th

mporaryde

n.Mostare

lities with

etention fa

Councilof

HCR, as

ationofpeople

ts concernsapprehen

veralmont

odywhoha

ithsmallch

ur facilities.

reignersin

s,whereirr

hich are cu

ing the FR

asprovided

stationsar

fourdete

ention,but

otdeporte

detention

ilitieshave

uropeCom

ell as by

crossingtheGre

at the borddedcrossing

s.Theabse

crossedthe

ildren,furth

In Norther

Fylakioesta

gularmigra

rrently inad

visit, irreg

by theArm

usedforini

tion facilitie

fewarehel

.

facilities f

beendescri

issionerfo

Amnesty In

ekborderinani

r relates totheborder

ceofaltern

borderina

rexacerbat

Evros, irre

lishedbyth

tsareheld

equate to

ular migran

y to thepo

tialdetentio

s in theEvr

thefullsix

r irregular

bedbymon

HumanRig

ternational

irregularmanne

the conditiirregularlya

ativestode

irregularm

esthesituat

gular migra

eEvrosPref

inpolicede

ost individu

ts were als

lice comma

nandscree

os regionar

monthsper

migrants

itoringbodi

hts,theUN

and Pro A

25

ons ofeheld

ention

anner,

ion.

ts are

cture.

ention

als for

o held

der in

ningof

eheld

mitted

esand

Special

yl. As


27/46


26

summarisedbytheEuropeanCourtofHumanRights,thesereportsdescribeasimilarsituation

to varying degrees of gravity: overcrowding, dirt, lack of space, lack of ventilation, little or no

possibility of taking a walk,noplaceto relax, insufficient mattresses, dirtymattresses,nofree

accesstotoilets,inadequatesanitaryfacilities,noprivacy,limitedaccesstocare[][aswellas

complaints] of insults, particularly racist insults, proffered by staff and the use of physical

violencebyguards.34

ThetablebelowprovidesasnapshotofthesituationfoundbytheFRAinthesefacilities,either

basedondirectonsiteobservationsbytheFRAduringthemissionorobtainedfrominterviews

and further research. All facilities are seriously overcrowded, making it difficult to ensure

separation by sex as wellas separation of children from unrelated adults. Nor is it possible to

separatepersonskeptintemporarydetention,fromthosewhohavealreadyobtainedaremoval

decisionandareheldbeyondthreedays.

Table 1: Overview of detention facilities in Evros region

FacilityCapacity

(persons)

Detained

duringFRA

visit

(persons)

Noof

cellsSpaceinm

2Separation

ofsexes

(except

families)

Separation

ofunac

companied

minors

Feres 30 140 150 3

Onecell of48m,one

of30mandoneof

approx.40m

yes no

Tychero 45 140 150 2Twocellsof35m

(CPT,2005)no no

Soufli 38 140 150 1 Onecell,approx.110m

duringFRA

visitonlymenwere

held

no

Fylakio 374 Approx.450 7

Womencellapprox.

40m2andother6

cellsapprox.100m2

each

no no

Source:FRA

TheEuropeanCommitteeforthePreventionofTortureandInhumanorDegradingTreatmentor

Punishmentrecommends4mofspaceperdetaineeinmultioccupancyaccommodation.35

TheHellenicFederationofBorderGuardson22January2011protestedonitswebsite36about

theconditionsofdetention:Theconditionsofdetention,butalsotheconditionsofworkinall

receptionanddetentioncentresareunacceptable.Thedetentionfacilitiesattheborderregion

are not suitable for long term stay in detention. The conditions are dangerous both for the

irregular migrants detained, as well as for the staff, who stay there for several months. An

immediatesolutionmustbefound,sothatalargenumberofborderguardscurrentlyengaged

34 ECtHR,M.S.S.v.BelgiumandGreece,No.30696/09,21January2011,para.162.

35 CPT,ReporttothegovernmentofGreeceonthevisittoGreececarriedoutbytheEuropeanCommitteeforthePreventionof

TortureandInhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment(CPT)from17to29September2009,2010,p.38.

36 Available(inGreek)at:www.posyfy.gr.


28/46

Copin

in d

insu

mus

On

for

the

deci

stati

lega

De

The

of t

110

at

akept

37 F

r

38 S

o

a

b

a

e

39 R

E

t

Sou

gwithafundam

etention du

ficient and

tbeaddress

1Decembe

alletterto

improvemen

sionof2001

on.Thesef

lrequireme

scription

situation

in

e FRA visit2.39

ound

0

Celtheresince

ormalregistered

dopis.gr/index.p

eealsoECtHR,S.

inhumanordeg

pplicanthadbee

ecauseoftheunl

ailableat:http:/

n&action=html&t

egardingthesize

uropeanCommit

9

September

20

lidetentionfac

entalrightseme

ties can ret

contagious

edimmedia

r2010 the l

theHellenic

tofthedet

irregularim

cilitieshave

ts,andcons

of conditi

oufli

38

can

on 29 Janu

sius.

Some

12August2

letter,available(

hp?option=com

.v.Greece:initradingtreatmen

detainedinhol

awfulnessofhis

/cmiskp.echr.co

able=F69A27FD

ofthecellsseea

eeforthePreve

05,

available

at:

ility

rgencyThesit

urn to bord

diseases m

ely!

ocalPolice

Policehiera

entionfacili

migrantsar

notasyet

equentlyar

ons duri

e

taken

to

iary 2011, 1

ersons

wer010,which

inGreek)at:ww

content&view=a

sjudgment,theC

)oftheEuropea

ingcentresforf

detentionandth

.int/tkp197/vie

FB86142BF01C1

lsotheReportto

ntionofTorture

ww.cpt.coe.int/

ationofpeople

er patrol [

y spread to

fficersUni

rchyandth

ies inthet

temporaril

eenconver

inappropri

g the vi

llustrate

ho44 persons

The

cell

on

oth

bo

sle

ind

toil

The

wit

full

the

onl

ofi

lift

col

evidently

eansmore

.eayn

rticle&id=112:20

ourtheldunani

nConventionon

oreigners;anda

efactthatheha

hbkm.asp?sessi

166DEA398649&

thegovernment

ndInhumanor

documents/grc/

crossingtheGre

] sanitary c

officers an

nof theRo

Ministero

wnofVenn

detainedin

tedforhum

teanddan

it to the

extreme

owere held i

FRA staff

s.Personsw

the floor ti

er. The FR

iestogetin

tinanonf

ividuals sle

et/shower.

airwasfilt

h cardboard

withrottin

cellforano

every thir

tshingeslea

d inorder

waterwit

ick.

An

asylthansixmon

1012111649

ouslythatthere

HumanRights,b

iolationofArt.5

beenunableun

nId=66126107&

key=5409&highli

ofGreeceonth

egradingTreatm

2006

41

inf

eng.

ekborderinani

onditions a

d their fami

dopi region

tlining13s

a:[...]Foll

oldwareho

anhabitatio

erousforsu

entre in

ercrowding

n one roo

ere allowe

erelyingon

htly packed

staff had

andmovea

nctionings

t in a dar

y.Thewin

and rubbis

garbagebu

thertwoda

day.The t

ningonthe

o close.Th

freezing te

m

seeker

clths.

1&catid=34:ne

hadbeenaviola

causeofthecon

(1)and5(4)(ri

derGreeklawto

skin=hudoc

ght=.

visittoGreece

entorPunishme

tm.

irregularmanne

d health c

lies. This si

nearEvros,

ecificpropo

wingaMin

usesofthe

naccording

chuse.37

Soufli

can

be:

on

t measuring

d to go insi

thebedsas

one next t

to climb ov

round.One

ower.Thre

k hole abo

owswerec

h. A large b

thadtore

s,asitisre

oiletdoor

wallandha

showerha

mperature

aimed

that

s&Itemid=29.

tionofArt.3(pr

ditionsinwhich

httolibertyand

challengeitslaw

arriedoutbythe

nt(CPT)from27

27

re are

uation

senta

salsor

isterial

ailway

tothe

he

day

about

de the

wellas

o each

er the

person

other

e the

overed

in was

ain in

moved

asout

tobe

donly

utside

e

was

hibition

the

security),

fulness,

August


29/46


28

Attitudes

Policecommandersinthefacilitiesvisitedseemedtobeoverwhelmedbythesituationandfelt

abandoned. Police officers with whom the FRA spoke, stressed that the police should only beresponsibleforguardingthefacilities.Themanagementandrunningofthefacilitiesshouldbe

donebyotherstaff,suchassocialworkers,whoareappropriatelytrainedforthiswork.

Indeed, the FRA staff noted overall a tense atmosphere between the police officers and the

migrants. In Feres, for example, police officers guard the facility by walking on the roof and

lookingthroughtheironbarscoveringthesmallyard.

The police appeared particularly concerned about migrants absconding, as this would

apparentlybetreatedasanescapeofprisonersandleadtoseriousdisciplinarymeasures.Asa

result of this fear of disciplinary measures,the police is reluctant to take any risk, resulting in

reducingaccesstofreshairortheyard.Fearofabscondingappearsexcessiveinlightofthefactthatalargenumberofmigrantsarereleasedafterafewdays.

Policeguardthefacilityfromtheoutsideandarereluctanttoenterthecells.Food,forexample,

iseitherprovidedthroughthebarsorafewmigrantsareallowedtoexitthecellstobringthe

foodinside.Distributionisorganisedbythedetaineesthemselves.Policeofficersdonotseemto

betrainedonhowtointeractwithmigrantsandappearedfearfulofinfectiousdiseases,partly

alsobecauseofamisperceptionofexistingrisks.GiventhepresenceofKEELPNO40intheregion,

a training on infectious diseases as well as training on intercultural communication would be

helpfulinreducingsuchtensions.

Responsibility for the operation of detention centres

A second major difficulty that local police stations are facing is the absence of a dedicated

budgetforeachcentremanagedbythelocalpolicecommandertocoverrunningcosts,suchas

catering, cleaning, disinfecting blankets and mattresses or the provision of soap or sanitary

items. Apparently, the absence of such a dedicated budget coupled with a slow application

processforfundingrunningcostsandanuncleardivisionofresponsibilitybetweenthevarious

authoritiesonwhoshouldcoverwhichcostsresults inacuteproblems,particularlywhensuch

costsescalateduetoanincreaseinthenumberofdetainees.

NoneoftheofficialrespondentsprovidedtheFRAwithaclearanswerregardingtheauthority

thatisresponsibleforthedetentioncentres.However,thisseemstohavebeenacomplexissue

alreadyin2005,whenthethenDeputyMinisterstated inareplytoaParliamentaryquestion:

[]AccordingtotheplansdevelopedforaddressingirregularimmigrationtheInteriorMinistry

is responsible for the oversight of the prefectural local authorities for the establishment and

operation of Temporary Residential Centres and for providing the necessary funds for the

provisionofaccommodation,food and medical care forthe irregular immigrants.Our services

areresponsibleforguardingtheCentres,transportingdetaineesandgenerallysupportingplans

in this area. Also, according to Article48 of Law 2910/2001, the responsibility for the

40 CentreforDiseaseControlandPrevention(www.keel.org.gr,websiteinGreek)hasasmalltaskforceinEvros.


30/46


29

establishmentofdetention spacefor irregular immigrants lieswiththeservicesofthe Interior

Ministry. Specifically, aliens awaiting deportation are detained by the local police authorities

and until deportation procedures are concluded may remain in special facilities, which are

established by decision of the General Secretary of the Region and operate under the

responsibility of theRegion. This decision also establishes the specifications and terms for the

operationofthesefacilities,whiletheHellenicpolicehasonlytheresponsibilityforguardingthe

facilities.41

Article81ofLaw3386/2005foreseesthatspecialpremisestodetainpersonspendingremoval

shouldbeestablishedbyajointdecisionoffiveministrieslayingdownthestandardsandterms

ofoperationofsuchcentres.However,nosuchdecisionwasevertakenforthecentresinEvros.

It seems that arrangements were made in the past at a local level between the police

directoratesandthePrefecture,wherebythelatterundertooktopaythebillsforcertaincosts,

suchascateringandcleaning.AccordingtoapressstatementofthePrefectthecostforcatering

was 250.000 monthly.42Such arrangements have been overtaken by the reorganisation of

local administrations which abolished the Prefectures and moved their tasks either to the

municipalities or the regions.43Although the Prefectures already stopped to function on

1January 2011 with the entry into force of the Kallikratis reform, at the end of January 2011,

therewasnoclarityastowhowouldberesponsibleatleastforthosecostswhichwereinthe

past covered by the Prefecture. While the Head of the Thrace and Macedonia region (who is

responsibleforEvros)wasawareofthe issue,thishadnotyetbeendiscussedwithanyofthe

threemunicipalitiesthattheFRAvisited.Twooutofthreemunicipalitieswereevennotaware

ofthenewlawandofpossiblenewtasksthatcouldderivefromitforthem.

With the 2011 law, the use of these facilities is assigned to the Ministry of Citizen Protection

whichcanregulatethemthroughaMinisterialdecision(Article15).Inaddition,thebudgetline

usedbythePrefecturestocoversuchcostsisbeingmovedfromtheMinistryofInteriortothe

MinistryofCitizenProtection.Itremains,however,tobeseenwhetherthenewlawcanresolve

thecurrentstalemateastowhoshouldpayforwhat.

As a result, essentially only the catering contract continued tobe implemented without major

interferences, as the catering company agreed to continue to deliver the food even if it

remained unclear who would cover the invoices. Cleaning services have been substantially

reducedandotherservicesstopped.Asanillustration,inFylakio,thepolicehadanarrangement

with a local laundry service to clean the blankets. The bill was paid by the Prefecture. As the

latterisnotexistentanymore,thecompanydoesnotanymoreaccepttocleananddisinfectthe

blanketsastheyfearthatnobodywouldcoverthecosts.Blanketsremaindirty.Theinterruption

ofsuchservicesfurthercontributestoadeteriorationoftheconditionsinthedetentionfacility,

creatingtensions.

41 DeputyMinisterresponsetoparliamentaryquestion(7017/4/4975/7405),available(inGreek)at:

www.hellenicparliament.gr/Praktika/SynedriaseisOlomeleias?sessionRecord=72a2403480094d51bea78811b08bba69.

42 See(inGreek):http://news.kathimerini.gr/4dcgi/_w_articles_ell_1_15/10/2010_418795.

43 ThesocalledKallikratisreformwasadoptedon2June2010.TheGreekversionofthelawisavailableat:

www.ypes.gr/UserFiles/f0ff9297f51640ffa70eeca84e2ec9b9/KALLIKRATIS12.pdf.


31/46


30

AthirddifficultyidentifiedbytheFRArelatestorepairworks.Thepolicedoesnothaveabudget

lineforrepairworksthattheycanusewithoutrequestingauthorisation.Wheneverrepairworks

are required, thepolice station has toprepare a report which is sent tothecompetent Police

Directorate which forwards it to the Ministry of Citizen Protection for approval. The approval

hastobeendorsedbytheMinistryofFinancebeforeitissentbacktothePoliceDirectorateand

from there to the requesting police station. As an illustration, the FRA was informed that a

request for 1,500 to repair windows in one facility took two months to be approved. Urgent

repair works (e.g. such as plumbing to repair sanitary facilities) are either advanced by police

officersfromtheirownpocketorcoveredexceptionallybyMSF.

While in general terms everybody to whom the FRA spoke agreed that the conditions of

detentionintheEvrosregionwerealarming,limitedornoactionhasbeentakentoaddressthe

situation.Detentioncapacity inEvroshasnotbeen increased, inspiteofmanypremisesbeing

emptyorabandonedinthemunicipalitiesvisited.Norhavecontainerstemporarilybeenputup,suchasforexampleinthebasketballfieldnexttoFylakio.Lackoffundsandlikelyresistanceby

the municipalities to use infrastructures or ground which was not assigned to the police were

mentionedasobstaclestoincreasedetentioncapacity.OnlyinFeresdidthepolicecommander

obtaintheuse of an army facility in Poros for initial processing ofmigrants. This arrangement

which is based on good local cooperation seems to have been possible as it did not require

additionalfunds.

Transfer of migrants from the Evros regions to reception centres for asylum seekers or other

detention facilities in Greece also appeared difficult. Upon requestbytheFRA whypersons in

preremovaldetentioncouldnotbetransferredtotheislands,wherecurrentlyarrivalsaremuch

lower, the Ministry of Citizen Protection informed that although space would be available in

SamosandChios,thestaffrunningthesefacilitieswaspaidbythePrefectureandtheircontracts

havebeenterminated.TheMinistryalsoraisedtheissueoftransportcosts,indicatingthatthese

couldnotbecoveredbytheReturnFund.

Sufferingcouldbereducedifarrangementsforalternativestotemporarydetentioncouldbeput

in place for persons assessed to be at low risk of absconding. Such alternatives could include

placement in open facilities run by NGOs, the Greek Red Cross or the local authorities, where

migrants surrender their documents and mobile phones and remain at the disposal of the

authoritiesuntiltheinitialprocessingunderthealienslawiscompleted.Asanillustrationofthe

type of cases for whom such options should be considered, the FRA would like to mention apregnant Afghan woman with a twoyear old child detained with her husband in a ward in

Fylakiotogetherwitharound70otherpersons,primarilysinglemales.


32/46


31

Identificationofpersonswithspecificneeds

It is generally acknowledged that overall the process at the border is not suitable to identifypersonswithprotectionneeds,norpersonswithspecificsocialormedicalneeds.Thenewlaw

aims at addressing this gap by establishing screening centres where persons seeking

international protection are separated from other migrants and which establishes a referral

systemtothecompetentbodiesforpersonsbelongingtovulnerablegroups.

The 2011 law lists at Article11(2) seven categories of people who are defined as vulnerable.

Theseinclude:

a. unaccompaniedminors;

b. peoplewithdisabilities;

c. elderly;d. womeninpregnancyorpostpartum;

e. singleparentswithminorchildren;

f. victimsof torture,rapeor other seriousforms of psychological, physicalor sexual

violenceorexploitation;

g. victimsoftrafficking.

The competent bodies to whom vulnerable individuals will be referred to will depend on the

type of vulnerability and on the whether the response required is medical, social or legal. For

example,avictimoftraffickingorofseriousformsofsexualviolenceorexploitationwillrequire

asafehaven,medicalandpsychosocialsupportaswellaslegalsupportincasehe/shewishes

toobtainjustice.Bycontrast,asingleparentwithminorchildrenmayrequireadequatehousing

and access to education or child care facilities. Different bodies at central, regional and

municipality level are likely to be involved. Effective informationsharing and collaboration

mechanisms will need to be set up in order to ensure a successful housing, medical and legal

response.

An example on the need for coordination is access to antiretroviral treatment (ATR) for HIV+

patients,whichtheUniversityHospitalinAlexandroupolihighlightedasnotbeingabletocover

undertheirownfunds.ThedoctorsinformedtheFRAthatinorderfortheMinistryofHealthto

beabletocoverthecostsforsuchtreatment,migrantsarerequiredtoprovideacertificationby

their country of origin that such treatment is not available there. As hardly any migrant canprovidesuchacertificate,suchmedicalneedsremainformallyuncovered,althoughthehospital

continuestoprovide treatment. At thesame time, KEELPNO informed the FRA that they have

lists of countries where such treatment is usually not accessible and that therefore persons

originatingfromthesecountriescanreceiveATRfromtheGreekstate.

Inthediscussionswiththelocalmunicipalities,thelatterconfirmedtotheFRAtheexistenceof

localstructuresforsocialcare,indicatinghoweverthattheirresourcesarelimitedastheyhave

to cater for a local population often composed of older persons who are themselves in need.

Nevertheless,allthreemayorsmetbytheFRAindicatedtheirwillingnesstoconsideropeningup

existing social services to migrants, provided additional funds would be allocated. One mayor


33/46


32

stressed,however,thatanysuchsupportprovidedbythemunicipalityshouldbeofatemporary

natureandthatmigrantsshouldnotbekeptintheEvrosregionforprolongedperiodsoftime.

ApartfrominformalmeetingsinOrestiadabetweenthemayorandthepolicedirector,theFRAwasinformedthatnomeetingstookplacewiththefourmayors,coveringtheborderregionto

Turkey,todiscusstheroleofthemunicipalitiesandtoidentifyconcreteresourcesthatcouldbe

used to alleviate the suffering during the current crisis. In his discussion with FRA the newly

electedHeadoftheRegionalAdministration(Perifereiarchis)promisedtoholdsuchameeting

verysoon.

The current lack of coordination and cooperation between the various agencies and bodies is

unlikely to be overcome, unless a specialised actor entrusted with coordination and the

necessaryauthority is established. Within the Greek administrationreporting lines are vertical

and there is little experience in horizontal coordination at an operational level. The following

casecanserveasanillustrationoftheimpactofsuchlackofcoordination:KEELPNOidentifieda

placeinacentreforpsychosocialcounsellingforaHIV+migrantwhowashospitalisedinEvros.

One day before the transfer was organised, the police handed out a deportation order to the

migrant.Fearingofbeingdeported,thepersonfledfromthehospital.


34/46


33

Dealingwiththedeaths

Alreadyinthelate1970sthefirstdeadimmigrants,mostlyTurkishKurds,werefoundinEvros.According to the Coroner of the Thrace region, several dozens of immigrants are found dead

each year in or near the Evros river. The vast majority has not been identified. As mine fields

havebeencleared,hypothermiaanddrowningarethemaincausesofdeaths.

Whenanimmigrantsbody isfoundthepoliceare immediatelynotified.Allcrucialevidence is

gathered and the scene is photographed. Subsequently the corpses are transferred to the

mortuaryoftheGeneralUniversityHospitalofAlexandroupoli.TheretheCoroneroftheThrace

region with the help of the police keeps a record of the personal data of the deceased

(fingerprints,clothes,personalbelongingsofallsorts)andtakesaDNAsamplewhichislateron

sent to theCriminologyLaboratory of theGeneral Police Directorate ofAttica. If thecorpse is

identifiable,photographsarealsotakenandthepolicetrytoestablishhisidentity.

Thelawprovidesforunidentifiedcorpsestoremaininthemortuarysfreezersforthreemonths.

However, due to the lack of available freezers (only four with a maximum capacity of eight

corpses), the coroner requests an order by the Public Prosecutor of Alexandroupoli for

immediateburial.Thecoronermentionedthatwithoutmorefreezersitispracticallyimpossible

toabidebytheprescriptionsofthelaw.

Thebodiesareplacedinabodybagandhandedovertothefuneralundertaker.Allunidentified

deceased immigrantsareconsideredtobeMuslimsforpracticalreasons.Each bodybagbears

theprotocolnumberofthefileofthedeceasedwrittenwithapermanentmarkerpen.Thisway

each body can be linked to the DNA sample and the other personal data gathered during the

autopsy.

In the past around 20 deceased immigrants were buried in the Muslim cemetery of

Alexandroupoli,andothersinDidimotihoandAgriani.ThefewwhowereidentifiedasPakistanis

were buried by the Pakistani Community of Greece. As the number of deaths increased, the

placeinexistingcemeterieswasdeemedasnotsufficient.Around2000,theMuftiandthelocal

Muslimcommissionofthemosquessearchedforasuitableplacetoturnintoacemeteryforthe

immigrants.ApublicsiteonahillnearthevillageofSidirowasselected,wherecurrentlyallnon

identifiedimmigrantsareburiedaccordingtotheMuslimritual.Thecemeterywasfencedthree

orfouryearsagoafterconcernsthatwildanimalscoulddigoutthecorpses.Thelegalproceduresfortheestablishmentofanewcemeterywerenotfollowed,althoughthis

seemstobeageneralf

Coping with a Fundamental Rights Emergency

Documents

Transcript of Coping with a Fundamental Rights Emergency