GAPs: Legal and policy infrastructures of returns in Greece - Country dossier (WP2)

The present Country Dossier discusses the legal and institutional framework governing returns in Greece and highlights a number of gaps. The legal framework is characterised by ambiguity, mainly due to preceding legal arrangements on ‘administrative expulsion’ that remain in force. Particularly, Law 3907/2011 which transposed the Return Directive 2008/115/EC into the Greek legislation and determines the operation of returns, coexists with Law 3386/2005 concerning the administrative expulsions of Third Country Nationals. An additional complexity also arises as regards the multiple national, supranational and international actors involved in returns. 

While the responsibility to design and implement migration policy as a whole lies with the MMA, the police authorities also have wide legal competences in return migration governance, especially in what concerns administrative expulsions, return decisions, detention and the management of the detention system. Existing legal safeguards against return are implemented under the provision that a TCN is not considered dangerous for national security reasons, something which is again decided by the police. As a result, a number of inconsistencies emerge, including the fact that the respective state administration is often able to bypass the procedures of the Directive and apply the deportation procedures. 

Furthermore, the implementation of return, in most of its forms, is usually closely linked to detention as detention is the rule rather than the exception when there is a decision for return or deportation. This becomes evident as administrative detention is used extensively, on the grounds of public order and national security reasons, in some cases solely on the grounds of illegal entry, and despite numerous reports evidencing that the existing detention conditions severely violate detainees’ rights and dignity.

Existing legal inconsistencies are accompanied by poor data availability on returns. Data inconsistencies exist among different data categories (e.g. between administrative procedures and actual enforcement of returns), different data sources and different terms used. These observations may partly point to shifts in systems of recording and reporting on data over the years, alongside (in)consistency between statistical and legal categories and (lack of) convergence with EU terminology.