Survivors of gender-based violence in Greece are routinely denied international protection. As Greece tightens its migration policies, survivors will face prolonged detention and criminalisation instead of safety. Urgent civil society intervention and dedicated philanthropy are essential to ensure protection and dignity for those in need.
Around the world, women and girls flee persecution due to gender-based violence, ranging from forced marriages and female genital mutilation to domestic violence and trafficking. Yet, many get trapped in vicious cycles of violence, from perilous transit routes to life in refugee camps.
Greece is a key entry point to Europe for those seeking safety. With over 73,000 asylum applications lodged, 2024 has seen the second-highest rate of arrivals since 2016. One in four of these applications is submitted by women and girls. However, in most cases, stories of gender-based violence experienced in their home countries, during travel or upon arrival remain hidden deep within the intimate realm.
Even though Greece has signed the Istanbul Convention and recognises gender-based violence as a reason for asylum, the system still fails to protect survivors. Overcrowded camps and poor vulnerability assessments mean that authorities often ignore the needs of survivors, leaving them without safety or dignity.
Insights from civil society
In the absence of disaggregated data on rejection rates by gender and vulnerability, only insights from civil society can provide a clear picture of the situation on the ground. Since 2020, Equal Legal Aid (ELA), a non-profit organisation based in northern Greece, has supported 82 survivors of gender-based violence (GBV) with their asylum procedures. This experience has highlighted systemic flaws that lead to the unjust rejection of GBV-related claims. However, this work also demonstrates that survivor-centred, independent legal assistance can significantly improve outcomes, increasing the likelihood that claims will be considered fairly.
Systems that fail the most vulnerable
The asylum process for GBV survivors is marked by superficial vulnerability assessments, degrading living conditions, inadequate recovery services, limited legal aid and ill-founded rejections.
A recurring issue is the credibility and risk assessment. Many applicants are dismissed as ‘not credible’ with the reasoning that their experiences ‘do not appear to be lived’ or lack sufficient detail. Others are deemed credible, yet rejected because the violence occurred in the past or is framed as a ‘private matter,’ therefore not linked to a current risk. This approach reflects a profound ignorance of the gendered nature of persecution, and it contradicts three landmark rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2024, which affirmed that women facing gender-based violence, including forced marriage or lack of state protection against domestic abuse, can qualify for refugee status as members of a ‘particular social group.’
Systemic shortcomings are also at fault. For instance, the personal interview is intended to be the cornerstone of the asylum determination, enabling applicants to share their fears and reasons for seeking protection. Yet, most interviews are held remotely, without assessing whether this method is appropriate. Technical issues often occur, making it almost impossible to maintain privacy, compromising the ability to speak freely. Due to poor vulnerability assessments, survivors frequently lack medical or psychological documentation to submit. Additionally, they are often interviewed by caseworkers or interpreters of the opposite sex, making disclosure even harder, and they rarely ask follow-up questions or address inconsistencies with sensitivity.
Applicants from ‘safe countries of origin’ face an even greater challenge. They are subjected to accelerated procedures with shorter deadlines and fewer procedural guarantees, which often results in swift rejections. Furthermore, labelling a country as ‘safe’ from the outset can bias decision-makers—consciously or not—leading to a superficial examination. This is particularly detrimental for applicants who are survivors of GBV. The scale of this procedure should not be underestimated—of the 82 survivors represented by ELA, 12 are from ‘safe’ countries, including Albania, Gambia, Ghana, Morocco, Nepal, Pakistan, and Senegal.
Since 2021, Greece has also expanded the ‘safe third country’ concept. In practice, this means that applicants from Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Somalia who entered Greece via Turkey must undergo an additional preliminary procedure: They must prove that Turkey was unsafe for them on an individual basis. Failure to do so may result in their return to Turkey, a prospect made especially concerning by Turkey’s withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention in March 2021. In 2022, Albania and North Macedonia were also declared safe third countries for all nationalities. This procedure has affected over 50 percent of all asylum applications submitted in Greece each year since 2022. Among the 82 survivors supported by ELA, 22 were subjected to it.
But the ordeal doesn’t stop there. In theory, rejected applicants can appeal against the decision, but the extremely high rate of second rejections (over 90 percent) means this process is ineffective. In most cases, the second decision is made without properly considering the legal arguments or conducting a new interview, even when the initial rejection cites insufficient evidence.
Following a second rejection, applicants lose their legal status and access to essential services. The only remaining option is a judicial review, which is an expensive and lengthy process that few can afford, due to the limited availability of free legal aid. Besides, courts cannot grant refugee status directly; they can only annul flawed decisions and send cases back to the second instance. Yet most successful annulments reveal serious systemic failings in decision-making and highlight the importance of legal assistance. Since 2020, ELA has submitted 23 such applications in support of GBV survivors. So far, only four decisions have been issued, three positive and one negative.
A gender-blind system
One survivor’s journey shows both the injustice of the system and the self-reliance required from survivors.
Twenty-seven-year-old M. arrived in Greece in 2019, fleeing forced marriage and the imminent threat of an honour killing. Although the authorities deemed her account credible, her claim was rejected as ‘unfounded,’ as authorities held that the violence she had suffered by her family was not severe enough to make her fear for her life ‘credible and likely.’ Her appeal was rejected with the very same reasoning. Refusing to give up, she filed an application for annulment. The court accepted her application, recognising that the previous decision lacked legal justification. Her case was referred back to the second instance, which finally granted her refugee status, five years after her arrival.
M’s story reflects the perseverance of countless women navigating a system that too often disbelieves and retraumatises those it should protect. To end this cycle, it is our duty to ensure guaranteed access to legal aid and gender-sensitive asylum procedures.
The roles of civil society and philanthropy
When governments step back, civil society and philanthropy play a decisive role in ensuring that those in need find protection, safety, and justice. Protecting the rights of displaced women is both a legal and moral responsibility.
Addressing the needs of asylum seekers in Greece has been a major struggle since the so-called ‘refugee crisis’ in 2016. Yet civil society in Greece continues to shrink as needs grow, due to funding cuts, new global policies, ongoing humanitarian crises, as well as rising xenophobic policies. Currently, in northern Greece, a region that hosts more than 10,000 asylum seekers, there are only five NGOs with a total of ten lawyers. At this turning point, it is essential for philanthropic investment to step in and support life-changing services that sustain a rights-based framework, holding governments accountable.
