The Greek government is introducing a new framework for initial legal counseling provided to asylum seekers. A recent Joint Ministerial Decision (JMD) assigns the task exclusively to a special registry of state-certified attorneys that is yet to be created. Registered lawyers will be entitled to a fee of 160 euros per counseling session, conducted individually or in groups of up to 15 applicants, or even up to 50 during mass arrivals or other exceptional circumstances. They will also receive a bonus of 250 euros if the asylum seeker chooses “voluntary” departure within 2 months after the counseling session upon the completion of the return.

Building upon the initial statement of the Coordinating Committee of the Plenary of the Presidents of the Greek Bar Associations (4 July 2026), we share the condemnation of the “voluntary return” financial bonus (Article 9(3)) and the Ministry’s surveillance of counselling sessions (Article 13(1)-(2)) as fundamentally incompatible with lawyers’ independence and legal professional privilege. The National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) has likewise called for the withdrawal of Article 9(3), warning that it creates an incentive to influence the content of legal guidance and objectively undermines the independence and neutrality of the information provided. 

The bonus paid to lawyers upon an applicant’s confirmed departure (Article 9(3)) is explicitly triggered for applicants pre-categorized as lacking a “strong refugee profile” based on nationality-linked recognition rates below 20% (Article 2(1)(d)), which structurally incentivizes lawyers to steer people on the move toward accepting return before any individualized assessment of their protection needs has taken place. The same provision compounds this pressure by requiring lawyers to warn these applicants of the severe criminal penalties for ‘illegal stay’ under Law 5226/2025 – a minimum two-year sentence, suspended only upon departure. Given that the alternative is imprisonment following rejection, consent obtained under these conditions amounts to coercion, rather than a “voluntary” decision, raising serious concerns under the non-refoulement principle. 

The JMD repurposes legal counseling as an instrument of the state’s “prison or return” doctrine. The regulation explicitly excludes interview preparation, drafting of memos or documents, case-specific advice, and file access from the scope of the guidance session itself – and separately bars the same lawyer from later formally representing the applicant in the administrative or judicial examination of their claim. “Legal guidance” is structurally hollowed out of any substantive and individual content from the start. This inverts asylum lawyers’ role from independent advocates meant to safeguard the rights of people on the move against state violence into agents executing the EU’s and Greek state’s deterrence policies of criminalization and forced return.

The JMD is the latest in a series of authoritarian measures that have systematically narrowed, surveilled, and criminalized the space in which legal and humanitarian solidarity with people on the move can operate in Greece – most notably Law 5275/2026 (“Promotion of Legal Migration Policies”, 5 February 2026), which Human Rights Watch describes as a bill that “demonizes civil society”. The JMD should also be read alongside Minister Plevris’ announcement of “redefining” NGO’s role, ensuring they do not act as a “pull factor”. 

Seen in this light, the JMD is part of a broader strategy that combines the repression of independent actors with the absorption of remaining professional space into state logics – criminalizing those who provide independent legal information while installing a state-controlled substitute designed to further obstruct effective legal support and serve the returns policy. 

On 10 July 2026, the Coordinating Committee of the Plenary suspended its call for abstention, following the Minister’s public commitment to amend Articles 9(3) and 13(1)-(2) and a related circular issued by the Secretary General for Migration Policy on 9 July 2026. The Plenary has conditioned its continued participation on these provisions being properly amended before the process is completed, reserving the right to withdraw entirely if they are not.

We note that the underlying provisions remain unrepealed, and their amendment remains merely a commitment rather than a fact. We unequivocally condemn these provisions and call for their immediate repeal. The undersigning organizations recall that the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) has stressed the need to guarantee the full independence of lawyers in the field of migration and to prevent undue interference with their professional duties.

Legal guidance to people on the move must serve their rights, not the state’s deterrence policies. It must remain independent, confidential, and effective.

_____________

Signatories:

• I Have Rights
• Equal Legal Aid
• Samos Volunteers
• Avocats Sans Frontières France 
• Collective Aid 
• Human Rights Legal Project
• Changemakers Lab
• Community Peacemaker Teams - Aegean Migrant Solidarity
• InterEuropean Human Aid Association
• Mobile Info Team
• ECHO100PLUS
• EmpowerVan
• Refugee Legal Support (RLS)
• Centre for Gender Rights and Equality DIOTIMA
• Center for legal aid - Voice in Bulgaria
• Greek Forum of Migrants 
• Border Violence Monitoring Network 
• Legal Centre Lesvos
• Symbiosis

We have contributed to the new issue of the Asylum Case Law Bulletin, covering the 1st half of 2026, coordinated by RSA (Refugee Support Aegean), the Greek Council for Refugees, and HIAS Greece.

Issue 1/2026 presents excerpts from 59 decisions issued by administrative, civil, and criminal courts, Independent Appeals Committees, and the Asylum Service during the first half of 2026, covering topics such as the assessment of the admissibility and merits of asylum applications, the revocation of international protection status, the criminal treatment of refugees, and administrative detention.

Contributors

1. Greek Council for Refugees (GCR)
2. HIAS Greece
3. Refugee Support Aegean (RSA)
4. Equal Rights Beyond Borders
5. Equal Legal Aid,
6. Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid,
7. European Lawyers in Lesvos,
8. Refugee Legal Support,
9. Legal Centre Lesvos
10. The HOME Project,
11. lawyers of the Legal Aid Registry of the Asylum Service

The collection comprises 103 decisions and procedural documents:

• 21 applications for annulment (Administrative Courts of Athens, Thessaloniki & Piraeus) including 16 granted
• 60 applications for provisional measures with 85% success rate (52/60)
• 9 Independent Appeals Committee decisions
• 2 ECtHR Rule 39 interim measures
• 11 Greek Ombudsman letters on access to administrative files and nationality verification
  
  Key legal issues addressed include:
• Safe Third Country / Safe Country of Origin: admissibility procedures under L. 4939/2022, including post-Council of State annulment of the Türkiye JMD and subsequent redesignation
• Arbitrary nationality determination: systematic misclassification of Eritrean nationals; Ombudsman interventions and judicial scrutiny of administrative practices at Lesvos CCAC
• Single-member Appeals Committees: unconstitutionality findings and implications for pending caseloads
• SGBV and LGBTQIA+ claims: credibility assessment standards, vulnerability identification failures, and evidentiary gaps in interview records
• Procedural irregularities: unlawful notification by email, right to a prior hearing, non-compliance with prior annulment decisions
• Subsequent applications: new and substantial evidence thresholds; non-refoulement considerations where readmission is de facto impossible

Decisions are indexed chronologically and thematically by keyword. An introductory analysis contextualises the case law within current procedural trends in the Greek asylum framework.

Working for an organisation registered in the “NGO Registry” of the Ministry of Migration and Asylum becomes a punishable offence with the proposed changes to Articles 24 and 25 of the Migration Code.

After five years of constant recommendations from the European Commission, the Council of Europe and the UN to put an end to arbitrary restrictions on the work of civil society organisations supporting refugees and migrants, the Ministry continues to target the organisations deemed inconvenient solely for carrying out their work.

The mere membership of an organisation registered in the NGO Registry elevates misdemeanours such as facilitation of illegal stay, or refusal to hand a travel document, to felonies punishable by up to ten years’ imprisonment and fines of tens of thousands of euros. It is thus considered an aggravating circumstance sufficient to reclassify the offence as a felony, in an affront to fundamental principles of criminal policy and legislation. Mere criminal prosecution suffices for removal of the organisation from the Registry.

These provisions are intended to intimidate civil society. They are introduced only a few months after the Minister of Migration and Asylum made threats against the legal representatives of people who arrived in Crete during the unlawful three-month asylum ban and were protected from deportation by interim measures of the European Court of Human Rights. These attacks were immediately condemned by international and national institutions, yet the competent Minister refuses to retract them.

SIGNATORIES

1. ART HUB Athens
2. Association of Greek Conscientious Objectors
3. Association of Greek Small- and Medium CSOs
4. Boat Refugee Foundation
5. Centre Diotima
6. Changemakers Lab
7. Civil Society Alliance Greece
8. Collective Aid
9. Community Peacemaker Teams-Aegean Migrant Solidarity
10. Doctors of the World – Greek Delegation
11. ECHO100PLUS
12. Emfasis Non-Profit
13. EmpowerVan
14. Equal Legal Aid (ELA)
15. Equal Rights Beyond Borders
16. FemArtAct
17. Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid
18. Greek Council for Refugees (GCR)
19. Greek Forum of Migrants
20. Greek Forum of Refugees
21. Greek Helsinki Monitor
22. Greek Housing Network
23. Hellenic League for Human Rights (HLHR)
24. HIAS Greece
25. HIGGS
26. The HOME Project
27. Human Rights Legal Project
28. I Have Rights
29. Ithaca Laundry
30. Inter Alia
31. Intereuropean Human Aid Association 
32. InterMediaKT
33. INTERSOS HELLAS
34. Irida Women’s Center
35. iSea
36. Legal Centre Lesvos
37. Mazí Housing
38. Médecins Sans Frontières Greece
39. Melissa Network of Migrant Women in Greece
40. Mobile Info Team
41. Nimertis Action Art
42. Northern Lights Aid
43. PΕkAmeA
44. Police Violence Observatory – Copwatch GR
45. PRAKSIS
46. Project Armonia
47. Reading to the Others 
48. Refugee Support Aegean (RSA)
49. Safe Passage International Greece
50. Samos Volunteers
51. SHE – Society for Help and Empowerment
52. Symbiosis-Council of Europe School of Political Studies in Greece
53. Symplexis
54. Velos Youth
55. VIOZO – Greek Union of Consumers
56. Women’s Self Defence Group
57. Vouliwatch

We have contributed to the new issue of the Asylum Case Law Bulletin, covering the 2nd half of 2026, coordinated by RSA (Refugee Support Aegean), the Greek Council for Refugees, and HIAS Greece. 

Issue 2/2025 of the Greek Case Law Report compiles excerpts from 72 decisions by administrative, civil and criminal courts, the Independent Appeals Committees and the Asylum Service, issued mainly in the second half of 2025. These decisions cover topics such as assessment of credibility and of the merits of asylum applications, nationality determination of people seeking asylum, the criminal treatment of refugees, and immigration detention.

Contributors

1. Greek Council for Refugees (GCR)
2. HIAS Greece
3. Refugee Support Aegean (RSA)
4. Equal Rights Beyond Borders
5. Equal Legal Aid,
6. Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid,
7. European Lawyers in Lesvos,
8. Refugee Legal Support,
9. Legal Centre Lesvos
10. The HOME Project,
11. lawyers of the Legal Aid Registry of the Asylum Service

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.

A full report on “Greece’s asylum system fails survivors of gender-based violence: How to break the continuum of violence” will be published on July 2026.

On 11 March 2025, the European Commission presented a new proposal for a Return Regulation to replace the current Return Directive. Behind the euphemistic name, the proposal outlines coercive, traumatising, and rights-violating measures premised on an imperative of increasing deportation rates. Instead of focusing on protection, housing, healthcare and education, the Regulation is premised on punitive policies, detention centres, deportation and enforcement.  

The “Deportation Regulation,” as it would be more aptly called, is part of a broader shift in EU migration policy to characterise human movement as a threat to justify derogations from fundamental rights guarantees. EU institutions and Member States have increasingly made criminalisation, surveillance, and discrimination the default tools of migration governance – as opposed to protection, safety, social inclusion measures, the expansion of safe and regular routes and rights based residence permits. 

Our organisations are unequivocal: this Regulation must be rejected. It is driven by detention, deportation, externalisation, and punishment, particularly of racialised people, and will result in more people being pushed into legal limbo and dangerous conditions. We call on the European Commission to withdraw the proposal and urge the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union to reject it in its current form.  

The Regulation must be rejected for the following reasons:   

1. DEPORTATIONS TO COUNTRIES WITH NO PRIOR TIES AND OFFSHORE DEPORTATION CENTRES (Arts. 4, 17)  

This proposal – together with proposed changes to the Asylum Procedures Regulation – would make it possible, for the first time, to deport a person against their will to a non-EU country to which they have no personal connection, either through which they have only briefly transited, or in which they have never set foot.  

Sending someone against their will to a country to which they have no link can in no way be considered reasonable, just, or sustainable. Such measures would tear apart families and communities across Europe, undermining the fabric of solidarity that people rely on to live with dignity. Expanding the options for “return” raises serious concerns about fundamental rights, including the risk of people being stranded in third countries, the safety and dignity of removal, the sustainability of inclusion and reintegration, and access to support, rights, and services. Such measures also apply to families and children, with limited exceptions. 

The proposed Regulation also enables the establishment of so-called “return hubs”; highly likely to become prison-like detention centres hosting those awaiting deportations, outside of EU territory. This is an egregious departure from international law and human rights standards. These are likely to result in a range of rights violations, including automatic arbitrary detention, direct and indirect refoulement (in return hubs or through onward deportations), and denial of access to legal and procedural safeguards. At the same time, they would reinforce discriminatory practices as well as raising substantial challenges in monitoring human rights conditions and determining legal responsibility and jurisdiction. The current provisions in the Regulation are, moreover, alarmingly vague and set no binding standards, exacerbating these concerns. In line with past attempts to offshore or externalise asylum responsibilities, such as those by Australia, the UK, or Italy, such proposals are likely to be exorbitant in cost, carry significant diplomatic and reputational risks, and widen the gaps and divergences between EU countries’ asylum and migration policies. They would divert resources to punitive modes of migration governance instead of policies prioritising protection, care and safety.  

2. NEW OBLIGATIONS ON STATES TO ‘DETECT’ AND SURVEIL (Art. 6)   

The proposal requires States to put in place measures to detect people staying irregularly in their territory. Over 80 organisations warned that similar provisions in the 2024 Screening Regulation would result in increased racial profiling and discriminatory treatment. Such provisions pave the way for the expansion of racist policing practices and immigration raids that foster fear in racialised and migrant communities. Moreover, detection measures tied to immigration enforcement create serious human rights risks, including those related to the right to health, labour rights, and human dignity, as fear of authorities discourages undocumented people from seeking healthcare, reporting abuse, or accessing protection. Such measures could raise ethical conflicts for professionals and undermine trust in public services. Finally, they risk threatening privacy rights through the unsafe sharing of sensitive personal data, including health data, breaching EU data protection standards and eroding the freedoms of society as a whole. 

3. MORE PEOPLE PUSHED INTO IRREGULARITY AND LEGAL LIMBO (Arts. 7, 14)  

The proposal requires states to issue deportation orders alongside any decision ending regular stay, without prior consideration of other national-level status options (such as permits for humanitarian, best interests of the child, medical or family reasons, as well as during statelessness determination procedures or in other cases where deportation is not possible). Combined with similar rules in the Pact on Migration and Asylum that link negative asylum and deportation decisions, this would raise further barriers to accessing national residence permits. Alarmingly, it even foresees issuing deportation orders listing multiple potential countries of return when a country of return cannot be identified. 

The proposal also weakens protections for those who cannot be deported – often through no fault of their own. Although it allows for postponement of “removal” in cases where there is a risk of refoulement, it removes the current requirement to identify and assess other individual circumstances, ignoring that in many cases “return” may not be appropriate or even possible, such as if a person is stateless, or for other human rights reasons. 

This highlights the inconsistency of a proposal developed with the flawed objective of “increasing return rates”, but which at the same time artificially inflates the number of people issued a deportation order. As a result, many more people will be pushed into irregularity and legal limbo, denied basic rights like healthcare, and exposed to destitution, homelessness, exploitation, or prolonged detention. These policies do not only harm individuals: they destabilise and create further fear and insecurity, particularly for migrant and racialised people, as well as the wider communities they are part of. 

4. SEVERE EXPANSION OF DETENTION (Arts. 29-35)  

The proposal promotes the systematic use of detention by states. It significantly extends the maximum length of detention, from 18 to 24 months. This extension is disproportionate and ineffective, and would only deepen harm to people’s rights, dignity and health. It also expands the grounds for detention, including criteria that, in effect, cover most people who have entered Europe irregularly or who are in an undocumented situation, against the principle of proportionality and necessity. For instance, a lack of documents or experiencing homelessness would be sufficient grounds for detention. The proposal allows for the detention of children, despite international human rights law and standards indicating that it is always a child rights violation and never in a child’s best interests, and global commitment by governments to work to end the practice. Other vulnerable groups, as well as people who cannot be deported, would also be subject to detention. The proposal appears to allow for indefinite detention of individuals deemed to pose “security risks”, by judicial decision. It also allows Member States to deviate from basic guarantees around detention if systems face a vaguely defined “unforeseen heavy burden.” The expansion of detention capacity will create lucrative opportunities for private contractors running detention centres, incentivising the growth of a detention industry at the expense of people’s rights and dignity. 

The “alternatives to detention”, or non-custodial measures, as proposed by the Commission would not serve their purpose as genuine alternatives, and would not need to be considered before applying detention. Rather, they could now be used in addition to detention and after its time limits have been exceeded. Together, these developments amount to a significant expansion of immigration detention, whereby it would no longer even be treated as a measure of last resort or imposed for the shortest possible time, in clear tension with international law requirements. 

5. PUNITIVE AND COERCIVE MEASURES (Arts. 10, 12, 13, 16, 22, 29)  

The proposal introduces extensive, disproportionate and unrealistic cooperation requirements on people issued a deportation order, such as having to provide identity documents they may not possess, having their bodies and belongings searched, or cooperating with third countries to obtain travel documents. These are coupled with punitive and heavy sanctions in cases of ‘non-compliance’, including financial penalties, entry bans, restrictions on voluntary departure, as well as refusal of benefits, allowances or work permits. With no effective way to challenge the determination that they are not cooperating sufficiently or to ensure that people are not penalised for circumstances beyond their control – such as statelessness, digital or literacy barriers, age, health or trauma – these measures risk being applied arbitrarily and disproportionately punishing people in vulnerable socio-economic situations.  

The proposal introduces a further shift from “voluntary departure” to “removals”, making deportation the default option. Even though the notion of voluntariness in such circumstances remains questionable, the proposal restricts people’s options and agency further. It does so by introducing broad grounds on which forced “returns” would be mandatory and by removing even the current minimum period of seven days for voluntary departure, or compliance with a deportation order.   

Specific derogations are foreseen for people who “pose a threat to public policy, to public security or to national security” – grounds that are vaguely defined and may be applied abusively. Any cases posing a security risk or concerning a criminal conviction should be dealt with in the context of criminal justice proceedings with the fair trial safeguards required. 

6. EROSION OF APPEAL RIGHTS (Art. 28)  

In continuity with the erosion of these rights under the Pact, the proposal removes the automatic suspensive effect of appeals against the enforcement of a deportation decision. The suspensive effect will have to be requested together with the appeal, or granted ex-officio. This creates an additional layer of complexity for people at risk of being deported as well as judicial authorities, and removes an essential safeguard to the right to an effective remedy. With no mandatory minimum time for appeals (the proposal specifies only that the deadline shall not exceed 14 days), Member States could make it impossible for people to effectively challenge deportation orders in practice, against the established jurisprudence of European courts.  

7. EXPANDED DIGITAL SURVEILLANCE AND DATA PROTECTION VIOLATIONS (Arts. 6-9, 23, 38-41)  

The proposal expands the digital surveillance of people in deportation procedures, denounced by digital rights experts and the European Data Protection Supervisor. This includes the broad collection and sharing of personal data, including sensitive health and criminal records, between EU Member States and with third countries which may be lacking adequate data protection. It also enables the use of intrusive surveillance technologies in detention centres, and the use of digital “alternatives to detention”, such as GPS tracking and mobile phone surveillance, which, while supposedly considered an alternative to detention, remain highly intrusive and can amount to de facto detention. Such technologies also create profitable new markets for surveillance companies. 

The creation of a ‘European Return Order’, stored in the Schengen Information System (SIS), further conflates migration management and policing, with foreseen data sharing with law enforcement. There are documented patterns of data abuse and non-compliance with legal standards on privacy and protection of personal data by authorities under SIS, increasing the likelihood of data breaches and misuse.   

8. LACK OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND CONSULTATIONS  

Like other recent legislative proposals on migration, this European Commission proposal was issued without a human rights impact assessment or formal consultations, including social partners, in an area in which evidence-based policymaking is especially crucial. This is contrary to the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making and the Commission’s own Better Regulation Guidelines when a legislative proposal has significant social impacts and where a choice of policy options exists. A prior fundamental rights impact assessment is essential to ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, non-refoulement, the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, personal liberty, the rights of the child, effective remedy, private and family life, privacy and data protection, and non-discrimination.  

9. OVERLOOKING ALTERNATIVES TO PUNITIVE MIGRATION CONTROL   

The proposal reflects a false assumption that deportation should be the only option for people whose asylum application has been rejected or whose residence permits have expired or been revoked. To reduce the number of people trapped in irregularity, EU states should uphold access to existing human-rights-related permits, and expand avenues to a broad range of residence permits that allow people to plan their lives, engage in regular work, study, and fully participate in all the economic, social, and cultural facets of the societies in which they live.  

SIGNATORIES

International

1. #DiasporaVote!

2. 11.11.11

3. Abolish Frontex

4. Acli – Associazioni cristiane lavoratori italiani

5. Academics for Peace-Germany

6. Access Now

7. ActionAid International

8. Africa Advocacy Foundation

9. AlgoRace

10. All Included

11. Alternatif Bilisim

12. Amnesty International

13. Apna Haq

14. ASAM Greece

15. Aspiration

16. Avocats Sans Frontières (ASF)

17. Border Violence Monitoring Network

18. borderline-europe – Menschenrechte ohne Grenzen e.V.

19. Bridge EU

20. Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)

21. CCFD-Terre Solidaire

22. Changemakers Lab

23. Civil Rights Defenders

24. Collective Aid

25. COFACE Families Europe

26. Correlation-European Harm Reduction Network

27. COSPE

28. CPT – Aegean Migrant Solidarity

29. de:border // migration justice collective

30. DeZIM, German Centre for Migration and Integration Research

31. EAPN European Anti-Poverty Network

32. ECCHR European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights

33. ELC – Eurocentralasian Lesbian Community

34. EmpowerVan

35. EPSU

36. Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice

37. EuroMed Rights

38. European Alternatives

39. European Movement

40. European Network Against Racism (ENAR)

41. European Network on Religion & Belief

42. European Network on Religion and Belief

43. European Network on Statelessness

44. Famiglie Accoglienti

45. FEANTSA

46. Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid

47. Forum per Cambiare l’Ordine delle Cose

48. Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women (GAATW)

49. Global Asylum Seeker Human Rights Defenders Committee (GASHDC)

50. Hoffnung leben e.V.

51. Human Rights Watch

52. Humanity Diaspo

53. I Have Rights.

54. Inter Alia

55. InterEuropean Human Aid Association Germany e.V.

56. International Planned Parenthood Federation – European Network (IPPF EN)

57. International Women* Space e.V

58. iuventa

59. Kerk in Actie

60. La Strada International

61. Liga Española de la Educación y la Cultura Popular

62. Madera Creation

63. Médecins du Monde International Network

64. Médecins Sans Frontières

65. Mediterranea Bruxelles

66. Mediterranea Saving Humans

67. Migreurop

68. Migration Policy Group (MPG)

69. Missing Voices (REER)

70. Mission Lifeline International eV

71. Movimiento por la Paz (MPDL)

72. Mujeres Supervivientes

73. Mundo en Movimiento

74. Network Against Migrant Detention

75. New Horizons Project

76. New Women Connectors

77. No Name Kitchen

78. Northern Ireland Council for Racial Equality

79. Oxfam

80. Oxfam Italia

81. Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants – PICUM

82. Protestantse Kerk Nederland

83. Quaker Council for European Affairs (QCEA)

84. Recosol

85. Rete delle Comunità Solidali (Re.co.sol.)

86. Roma Feminist Collective

87. Romnja Feminist Library

88. SCI Catalunya

89. Sea-Watch e.V.

90. Service Civil Internation Austria

91. Service Civil International

92. SOLIDAR

93. SOS Humanity

94. SOS Racism Denmark

95. Spectrum

96. Statewatch

97. Symbiosis-Council of Europe School of Political Studies in Greece

98. Syrian Justice and Accountability Centre

99. Transnational Institute

100. UNESCO Inclusive Policy Lab – People of African Descent & SDGs E-Team

101. Validity Foundation – Mental Disability Advocacy Centre

102. WeMove Europe

103. Women Against Violence Europe (WAVE) Network

104. Yoga and Sport with Refugees

National

105. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Migrationsrecht des Deutschen Anwaltvereins

106. Ariadni AMKE

107. ARSIS Association for the Social Support of Youth

108. ASGI

109. ASKV

110. Asociación Por Ti Mujer

111. Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos de Andalucía

112. Association for Integration and Migration (SIMI)

113. Associazione Arturo

114. Associazione Progetto Accoglienza

115. AWO Bundesverband

116. Ban Ying e.V. coordination and counseling center against trafficking in human beings

117. Boat Refugee Foundation

118. Brot für die Welt

119. CEAR – Comisión Española de Ayuda al Refugiado

120. Center for legal aid – Voice in Bulgaria

121. Centre Avec

122. Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD)

123. Centre for Labour Rights, CLR

124. Channel Monitoring Project

125. CIEs NO MADRID

126. CIRÉ

127. CNCA – Coordinamento Nazionale Comunità di Accoglienza

128. CNCD-11.11.11

129. Community Rights in Greece

130. Congolese Anti-Poverty Network

131. CONVIVE Fundación Cepaim

132. coop. soc. APE06 – AlterProjectEmpowerment2006

133. Coordinadora CIE No Cádiz

134. Coordinadora Obrim Fronteres

135. Council of Churches Amsterdam

136. Danes je nov dan, Inštitut za druga vprašanja

137. Diaconaal Centrum De Bakkerij

138. Diakonie Deutschland

139. DIKUNTU ODV

140. Diásporas Association

141. Dutch Council for Refugees

142. ECHO100PLUS

143. Equal Legal Aid

144. Europasilo

145. FairWork

146. Famiglie accoglienti Bologna e Torino

147. FEDERACIÓN ANDALUCIA ACOGE

148. Federación SOS Racismo

149. Feministas en Holanda

150. Finnish Refugee Advice Centre

151. Flüchtlingsrat NRW e.V.

152. Flüchtlingsrat Schleswig-Holstein e.V.

153. forRefugees

154. GAT – Grupo de Ativistas em Tratamentos

155. Greek Council for Refugees (GCR)

156. Greek Forum of Migrants

157. Greek Forum of Refugees

158. Greek Housing Network

159. Hermes Center

160. HOTM

161. Huize Agnes

162. Human Rights Initiatives

163. ICS (Italian Consortium of Solidarity)

164. IHA – Intereuropean Human Aid Association

165. INTERSOS HELLAS

166. Irídia – Centre per la Defensa dels Drets Humans

167. Italy Must Act

168. Jeannette Noëlhuis

169. Jesuit Refugee Service Belgium

170. Jesuit Refugee Service Greece

171. JRS Malta

172. KISA – Action for Equality, Support, Antiracism

173. KOK – German NGO Network against Trafficking in Human Beings

174. Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia (KAAX)

175. La Cimade

176. LDH (Ligue des droits de l’Homme)

177. Legal Centre Lesvos

178. M.oV.I Caltanissetta

179. Meldpunt Vreemdelingendetentie

180. Migrant Rights Centre Ireland

181. Migrant Tales

182. Migrant Voice UK

183. Mobile Info Team

184. MOC

185. Move Coalition

186. Movimento Italiani Senza Cittadinanza

187. Naga Odv

188. Nazione Umana

189. Network for Children’s Rights (Greece)

190. NOF

191. Nomada Association

192. ONE PEOPLE

193. Pauluskerk Rotterdam

194. POUR LA SOLIDARITE

195. PRO ASYL, National Working Group for Refugees

196. Project Armonia

197. Racism and Technology Center

198. RADIO BULLETS APS

199. Red Acoge

200. RED AMINVI, SPAIN

201. RED ESPAÑOLA DE INMIGRACION Y AYUDA AL REFUGIADO

202. Red Interlavapies

203. RECIPROCA ODV

204. Refugee Council of Lower Saxony

205. Refugee Legal Support (RLS)

206. Refugees Platform In Egypt-RPE

207. Refugees Welcome Italia

208. Rotterdams Ongedocumenteerden Steunpunt

209. S.P.E.A.K (moslim woman collectif)

210. SAAMO Antwerpen

211. Salud por Derecho

212. SCI Switzerland

213. SNDVU Seguro

214. Siempre

215. SolidarityNow

216. Solidary Wheels

217. Stap Verder

218. Stem in de Stad

219. Steunpunt Ongedocumenteerden Pauluskerk

220. Stichting Jeannette Noëlhuis

221. Stichting LOS (NL)

222. Stichting ShivA

223. Stichting Vluchteling Kansen

224. Stichting Vluchtelingen in de Knel

225. STIL Utrecht

226. Stowarzyszenie Interwencji Prawnej (Association for Legal Intervention)

227. The Norwegian Centre Against Racism

228. Tierramatria mujeres migrantes y Refugiadas en Andalucía

229. Toevlucht Utrecht

230. Turun Valkonauha ry, Finland

231. URGG

232. Villa Vrede

233. Vluchteling Onder Dak

234. Vluchtelingenwerk Nederland

235. Waterford Integration Services, Ireland

236. Wereldhuis – World House (STEK)

237. Wereldvrouwenhuis Mariam van Nijmegen

Greek below

On the 17th of July, the Greek Ministry of Migration and Asylum announced a draft law on the “Reform of the framework and procedures for the return of third-country nationals – Other provisions of the Ministry of Migration and Asylum”. The draft law will be voted on in the Hellenic Parliament in August, with a reduced composition of one-third of its members, raising concerns about the lack of democratic scrutiny. This is particularly concerning since Article 72, paragraph 1 of the Constitution, states that the exercise of individual rights must be discussed by the full composition of the Parliament. 

This draft law substantially restricts and further circumvents a number of minimum conditions and guarantees of the Returns Directive (2008/115/EC) that are already inadequately addressed in the current Greek legislation, thereby exacerbating the existing shortcomings(1) and violating the principle of legality.  The draft law invokes the guidelines of the proposal for a new Returns Regulation [COM(2025) 101 final] as the legal basis while this regulation does not constitute a binding text of secondary EU law. It only demonstrates the political intention of the Commission and it has not yet been adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with the legislative procedure (Articles 289-294 TFEU). Therefore, any attempt to transpose these ‘guidelines’ into national law circumvents Directive (2008/115/EC), and creates a contradictory regulatory environment that undermines legal certainty and EU law.

Moreover, the draft includes elements from the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, which are still in the implementation phase and will become applicable only after transposition into national law by June 2026, further violating the principle of legal certainty.

In terms of substantive restrictive changes, the draft law criminalises and further reduces rights guarantees for undocumented people on the move. Of particular concern, the draft law:

• Reduces the period of voluntary departure. Until now the time limit has been between 7 and 25 days, and the draft law aims to reduce this period from 7 to a maximum of 14 days; 
• Introduces electronic monitoring on people on the move during the period of voluntary departure to prevent the risk of absconding, raising significant privacy concerns.

• Aims to increase the maximum detention limit in pre-removal detention centres, from the current provision of 18 months to 24 months; 
• In cases of the suspension of a removal order, the original provision obliges the individual to appear regularly before the authorities, deposit an appropriate financial guarantee and deposit documents or the obligation to stay in a certain place. With the new provision, an individual can be subjected to electronic monitoring and if they violate their obligations during this period of suspension, they shall be punished with 2 years imprisonment and a fine of 10,000 euros;
• Any effort by individuals who are in the list of “undesirable aliens” to re-enter the country will be punished with up to 3 years imprisonment and a fine of at least 10,000 euros. In this time the exercise of legal remedies for accused individuals will no longer have a suspensive effect. This is another restrictive move from the current provision of 3 months imprisonment and the option of suspension during legal recourse;
• Another change regards a historic legislative move to criminalise people that remain in Greek territory without legal documentation. Currently, third-country nationals who enter or exit the country irregularly face penalties of 3 months’ imprisonment and a €1,500 fine. However, the new draft law expands these penalties. It increases the prison sentence for irregular entry or exit and introduces new penalties for those who remain in the country without valid documentation. Entering, in combination with exiting or remaining in Greek territory will amount to a minimum sentence of two years’ imprisonment and a fine of at least €5,000. 
• This sentence will be inconvertible and will not be suspended.The court can only order the suspension of the execution of the sentence, on the condition that the convicted person will voluntarily depart immediately from the country. Under the same condition, the execution of the remainder of the sentence, which has already begun, may be suspended by a decision of the court that imposed the sentence, following a request from the prosecutor or the convicted individual. The period of suspension begins from their departure from Greece.
• If this new provision passes, any undocumented person on the move in Greek territory will be under flagrante delicto procedure and imprisoned, with the only prospect of release being deportation. This is particularly concerning as thousands of people on the move who have lived and worked in Greece for many years but have lost their legal status due to various circumstances are at risk of imprisonment. 
• The new draft law also abolishes the issuance of residence permits for exceptional reasons. People on the move who have stayed for seven years in Greece will no longer be able to access regularisation procedures and an application for international protection will  be the exclusive ground for legal stay of people on the move in Greece. This also risks violating persons’ established family and private lives, including disrupting employment relationships, which may carry adverse consequences for employers and the labour market. 
• The new draft law also proposes the use of artificial intelligence in the interpretation services for the asylum interview. When AI is used to record and automatically transcribe the interview, the preparation of a formal report and transcript will no longer be required. This is particularly concerning, as it disregards the importance of cultural mediation since trained interpreters play a crucial role in overcoming cultural and linguistic barriers and ensuring fair, accurate asylum procedures. Additionally, the use of AI interpretation services in handling sensitive personal data raises serious concerns about data protection and privacy.  
• Finally, the draft aims to  increase the legal fee to submit a second subsequent asylum application. The fee expands from 100 euro to 300 euro per application creating an additional financial barrier for people on the move.

The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has underscored the Returns Directive’s exclusivity as the framework for removal, following the applicable administrative procedures, in several landmark rulings. It has ruled that member states cannot criminalize illegal stay prior to the completion of the procedures specified in the Directive. Through the provision of suspending the execution of the sentence only under the condition of ‘voluntary departure,’ the new draft law employs the criminal process as a means of pressure that circumvents the intended administrative escalation. In this context, departure will not be ‘voluntary’ as defined by the Directive, but rather stems from a coercive dilemma: ‘leave or face imprisonment.’ The shift towards crimmigration by the Greek government exposes people on the move to criminal proceedings which deny them the rights to administrative return procedures. Therefore, the new draft law does not aim to establish a common, fair, and effective return policy, but rather to facilitate the removal of undocumented individuals by any means. 

This draft law does not represent a mere ‘reform’ of Directive 2008/115/EC; it amounts to a de facto annulment of the Directive and constitutes a clear contra legem legislative initiative, diverging significantly from both the letter and the spirit of EU and international law. Marked by a disproportionate criminalization of matters that are administrative in nature, it undermines fundamental rights and the principles of the rule of law.

The undersigned organisations urge Greek Members of Parliament to raise the concerns outlined above in the Greek Parliament and to exert pressure on the Greek government to withdraw the proposed draft law. This law introduces significant restrictions on fundamental rights, criminalises undocumented people on the move, seeks to increase returns without guarantees and does not include any provision for integration and regularization of status of people on the move.

Signatories

1. I Have Rights. 
2. Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid
3. Refugee Legal Support (RLS)
4. Human Rights Legal Project 
5. Equal Legal Aid (ELA)
6. Mobile Info Team
7. Avocats Sans Frontières France

1. European Commission, Report of the 2024 Revisit of Greece related to the serious deficiencies identified in 2021 in the field of return, C(2025) 4342, 3 July 2025, Annex, 1-2.
2.  

Κοινή Δήλωση: Έκκληση προς την Ελληνική Κυβέρνηση για απόσυρση του Σχεδίου Νόμου σχετικά με τις Επιστροφές

Στις 17 Ιουλίου, το Υπουργείο Μετανάστευσης και Ασύλου ανακοίνωσε το νομοσχέδιο με τίτλο: «Μεταρρύθμιση του πλαισίου και των διαδικασιών επιστροφής υπηκόων τρίτων χωρών – Λοιπές διατάξεις του Υπουργείου Μετανάστευσης και Ασύλου». Το σχέδιο νόμου πρόκειται να τεθεί σε ψηφοφορία στη Βουλή των Ελλήνων τον Αύγουστο, με μειωμένη σύνθεση του ενός τρίτου των μελών της (θερινό τμήμα), γεγονός που εγείρει σοβαρές ανησυχίες για την έλλειψη δημοκρατικού ελέγχου. Αυτό είναι ιδιαίτερα ανησυχητικό, καθώς το άρθρο 72, παράγραφος 1 του Συντάγματος ορίζει ότι νομοσχέδια και προτάσεις εκτελεστικών του Συντάγματος νόμων για την άσκηση και προστασία των ατομικών δικαιωμάτων συζητούνται και ψηφίζονται στην Ολομέλεια της Βουλής.

Το σχέδιο νόμου παραβιάζει πλήθος των ελάχιστων προϋποθέσεων και εγγυήσεων της Οδηγίας 2008/115/ΕΚ, οι οποίες δεν ενσωματώνονται επαρκώς στην ισχύουσα ελληνική νομοθεσία, επιδεινώνοντας τις ήδη υπάρχουσες ελλείψεις και παραβιάζοντας την αρχή της νομιμότητας. Το σχέδιο νόμου επικαλείται ως νομική/ νομιμοποιητική βάση τις «κατευθύνσεις της πρότασης νέου Κανονισμού επιστροφών» [COM(2025) 101 τελικό], οι οποίες ωστόσο δεν αποτελούν δεσμευτικό κείμενο δευτερογενούς ενωσιακού δικαίου. Εκφράζουν απλώς την πολιτική πρόθεση της Επιτροπής και δεν έχουν ακόμη εγκριθεί από το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και το Συμβούλιο, σύμφωνα με την προβλεπόμενη νομοθετική διαδικασία (άρθρα 289-294 ΣΛΕΕ). Επομένως, οποιαδήποτε προσπάθεια ενσωμάτωσης αυτών των «κατευθύνσεων» στην εθνική νομοθεσία παρακάμπτει την Οδηγία 2008/115/ΕΚ και δημιουργεί ένα αντιφατικό κανονιστικό πλαίσιο που υπονομεύει τη νομική ασφάλεια και το ενωσιακό δίκαιο.

Επιπλέον, το σχέδιο ενσωματώνει άτυπα προβλέψεις από άλλες Οδηγίες του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμφώνου για τη Μετανάστευση και το Άσυλο, οι οποίες δεν έχουν ακόμη τεθεί σε ισχύ, με ημερομηνία εφαρμογής έως τον Ιούνιο του 2026, παραβιάζοντας περαιτέρω την αρχή της ασφάλειας του δικαίου.

Στο ουσιαστικό επίπεδο των προτεινόμενων νομοθετικών αλλαγών, το σχέδιο νόμου ποινικοποιεί την «παράτυπη μετανάστευση» και περιορίζει περαιτέρω τα δικαιώματα και τις ελάχιστες εγγυήσεις για τα άτομα χωρίς νομιμοποιητικά έγγραφα στην Ελλάδα.

Ιδιαίτερη ανησυχία προκαλούν τα εξής σημεία:

• Μειώνει την προθεσμία οικειοθελούς αναχώρησης: Μέχρι σήμερα, η προθεσμία κυμαίνεται μεταξύ 7 και 25 ημερών. Το σχέδιο νόμου μειώνει το ανώτατο όριο της προθεσμίας από 7 σε 14 ημέρες.
• Εισάγει την ηλεκτρονική επιτήρηση κατά τη διάρκεια της περιόδου οικειοθελούς αναχώρησης με σκοπό την αποτροπή κινδύνου διαφυγής, εγείροντας όμως σοβαρά ζητήματα προστασίας προσωπικών δεδομένων.
• Αυξάνει το ανώτατο όριο διοικητικής κράτησης από τους 18 στους 24 μήνες.
• Σε περιπτώσεις αναβολής της απομάκρυνσης, το άτομο μπορεί να υποβληθεί μεταξύ άλλων και σε ηλεκτρονική επιτήρηση και, αν παραβιάσει τις υποχρεώσεις του, θα τιμωρείται με ποινή φυλάκισης δύο ετών και πρόστιμο 10.000 ευρώ.
• Όποιο άτομο συγκαταλέγεται στον κατάλογο των «ανεπιθύμητων αλλοδαπών» και επανέρχεται παράτυπα στη χώρα, θα τιμωρείται με ποινή φυλάκισης έως 3 έτη και τουλάχιστον 10.000 ευρώ πρόστιμο, χωρίς το ανασταλτικό αποτέλεσμα άσκησης ενδίκων μέσων – περιορισμός σε σχέση με την τρέχουσα ποινή φυλάκισης των 3 μηνών.
• Ποινικοποιείται η παραμονή χωρίς νομιμοποιητικά έγγραφα στην ελληνική επικράτεια. Σύμφωνα με την ισχύουσα νομοθεσία, οι κυρώσεις για παράνομη είσοδο και έξοδο είναι 3 μήνες φυλάκιση και 1.500 ευρώ πρόστιμο. Με το νέο σχέδιο νόμου, η παράνομη είσοδος, παραμονή και έξοδος τιμωρείται με τουλάχιστον δύο έτη φυλάκισης και πρόστιμο τουλάχιστον 5.000 ευρώ. Η ποινή αυτή δεν θα μετατρέπεται και δεν θα αναστέλλεται. Το δικαστήριο θα μπορεί να αναστείλει μόνο την εκτέλεση της ποινής υπό την προϋπόθεση της άμεσης «οικειοθελούς αναχώρησης» από τη χώρα. Η αναστολή θα ξεκινά με την αναχώρηση από την Ελλάδα.
• Αν αυτό το σχέδιο νόμου ψηφιστεί, κάθε άτομο χωρίς νομιμοποιητικά έγγραφα στην ελληνική επικράτεια, θα υπόκειται σε αυτόφωρη διαδικασία και φυλάκιση, με μόνη προοπτική για την αναστολή εκτέλεσης της ποινής να είναι η «οικειοθελής αναχώρηση». Αυτό είναι εξαιρετικά ανησυχητικό, δεδομένου ότι χιλιάδες άνθρωποι που ζουν και εργάζονται στην Ελλάδα πολλά χρόνια, αλλά απώλεσαν το νομικό καθεστώς τους λόγω διαφόρων περιστάσεων, κινδυνεύουν με φυλάκιση.
• Το σχέδιο νόμου καταργεί επίσης τη δυνατότητα χορήγησης άδειας διαμονής για εξαιρετικούς λόγους. Άτομα που δεν έχουν ρυθμίσει το νομικό καθεστώς τους και ζουν στην Ελλάδα επί επτά συναπτά έτη, δεν θα έχουν πλέον δυνατότητα νομιμοποίησης και η διαδικασία ασύλου θα αποτελεί τη μοναδική οδό νομιμοποίησης τους στη χώρα. Κάτι τέτοιο θέτει σε κίνδυνο την ιδιωτική και οικογενειακή ζωή των ανθρώπων, ενώ διαταράσσει την αγορά εργασίας.
• Στο σχέδιο νόμου προτείνεται η χρήση τεχνητής νοημοσύνης στις υπηρεσίες διερμηνείας κατά τη διάρκεια της συνέντευξης ασύλου. Ορίζεται ότι σε περίπτωση χρήσης πληροφοριακών συστημάτων τεχνητής νοημοσύνης ηχογράφησης και αυτόματης έγγραφης αποτύπωσης της συνέντευξης, δεν θα συντάσσεται πλέον πρακτικό συνέντευξης ασύλου. Αυτό παραγνωρίζει τη σημασία και το ρόλο της πολιτισμικής διαμεσολάβησης και εγείρει σοβαρά ζητήματα προστασίας ευαίσθητων προσωπικών δεδομένων και ιδιωτικότητας.
• Τέλος, αυξάνεται το ύψος του παραβόλου για την υποβολή δεύτερης μεταγενέστερης αίτησης ασύλου από 100 σε 300 ευρώ, προσθέτοντας ένα σημαντικό εμπόδιο στην πρόσβαση στη διεθνή προστασία.

Το Δικαστήριο της ΕΕ (ΔΕΕ) έχει επανειλημμένα τονίσει πως η Οδηγία 2008/115/ΕΚ αποτελεί το αποκλειστικό κανονιστικό πλαίσιο για τις επιστροφές. Επίσης, το ΔΕΕ έχει κρίνει ότι τα κράτη μέλη δεν μπορούν να ποινικοποιούν την «παράτυπη μετανάστευση» πριν ολοκληρωθούν οι διοικητικές διαδικασίες της ως άνω Οδηγίας. Η νέα πρόβλεψη, που αναστέλλει την εκτέλεση της ποινής μόνο υπό τον όρο της «οικειοθελούς αναχώρησης», μετατρέπει τη διαδικασία επιστροφής σε εκβιασμό, ήτοι: «φύγε ή πήγαινε στη φυλακή». Η χρήση του ποινικού δικαίου για διοικητικά ζητήματα στερεί από τους ανθρώπους τα δικαιώματα και τις εγγυήσεις της διοικητικής διαδικασίας και ποινικοποιεί τη μετανάστευση.

Το σχέδιο νόμου δεν συνιστά «μεταρρύθμιση» της Οδηγίας 2008/115/ΕΚ, αλλά αποτελεί de facto κατάργησή της και νομοθετική πρωτοβουλία contra legem, η οποία αποκλίνει σαφώς από το γράμμα και το πνεύμα του ενωσιακού και διεθνούς δικαίου. Με την υπέρμετρη ποινικοποίηση διοικητικών στην ουσία ζητημάτων, υπονομεύονται θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα και αρχές του κράτους δικαίου.

Καλούμε τους Έλληνες/νιδες βουλευτές/τριες να αναδείξουν τις ανησυχίες αυτές στο Ελληνικό Κοινοβούλιο και να ασκήσουν πίεση στην κυβέρνηση για την απόσυρση του νέου σχεδίου νόμου καθώς εισάγει σοβαρούς περιορισμούς στα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα, ποινικοποιεί την «παράτυπη» παραμονή, επιδιώκει την αύξηση επιστροφών χωρίς εγγυήσεις και δεν λαμβάνει καμία πρόνοια για την ένταξη και νομική τακτοποίηση των ανθρώπων χωρίς νομιμοποιητικά έγγραφα στη χώρα.

Read the full statement here

Between 10 and 12 June 2025, the Council of Europe’s (CoE) Committee of Ministers (CM) met to review and assess the implementation of the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) judgements on the M.S.S. and H.A. and Others v. Greece groups of cases. The CM examined the current state of the Greek asylum system, the living conditions of asylum seekers in Greece and their access to effective complaint mechanisms and healthcare provision, as well as the conditions of detention of asylum seekers and undocumented migrants.

We appreciate the Committee’s decision to continue monitoring asylum seekers’ living conditions in Greece, detention conditions for people on the move both in pre-removal detention centres and police facilities, as well as the implementation of effective complaints mechanisms.

We regret, however, the Committee’s decision to close supervision of the M.S.S. case regarding asylum procedures. This is despite the fact that most issues raised during the last supervision in September 2023 remain unresolved, if not worsening.

Contributors

1. Mobile Info Team
2. I Have Rights
3. Border Violence Monitoring Network
4. Border Criminologies
5. Equal Legal Aid

Κατεβάστε το Δελτίο Νομολογίας Ασύλου | Τεύχος 1, 2025 / Download the case law collection in Greek here

Η Equal Legal Aid συνέβαλε με 11 αποφάσεις στο νέο τεύχος του Δελτίου Νομολογίας Ασύλου , που καλύπτει το πρώτο εξάμηνο του 2025.

Η  συνεισφορά μας περιλαμβάνει:
📄 3 αποφάσεις επί αιτήσεων ακύρωσης
⚖️ 6 αποφάσεις επί αιτήσεων αναστολής
📝 2 αποφάσεις από Επιτροπές Προσφυγών

Το τεύχος περιλαμβάνει 82 σημαντικές αποφάσεις από διοικητικά, πολιτικά και ποινικά δικαστήρια, τις Ανεξάρτητες Επιτροπές Προσφυγών και την Υπηρεσία Ασύλου.
Καλύπτει  κρίσιμα νομικά ζητήματα όπως:
• Ερμηνεία της έννοιας της «ασφαλούς τρίτης χώρας»

Αξιολόγηση της αξιοπιστίας του αιτούντος και της ουσίας της αίτησης
•  • Διαδικαστικές εγγυήσεις και εκτίμηση ιθαγένειας
• Λειτουργία των ένδικων μέσων και της δικαστικής προστασίας
• Διοικητική κράτηση

Η πρωτοβουλία ανήκει στους GCR, RSA και HIAS Greece και εμπλουτίστηκε με τη συμβολή οργανώσεων της κοινωνίας των πολιτών και νομικών επαγγελματιών.

Είναι τιμή μας να συμμετέχουμε  σε αυτή τη συλλογική προσπάθεια για την ενίσχυση της νομικής προστασίας και την υπεράσπιση των δικαιωμάτων των αιτούντων διεθνή προστασία.

We are proud to have contributed 11 decisions to the newly released Greek Asylum Case Law Report, covering the first half of 2025.
Our submissions include:
📄 3 decisions on applications for annulment
⚖️ 6 decisions on provisional measures
📝 2 decisions from the Appeals Committee

This important edition features 82 key decisions by administrative, civil, and criminal courts, the Independent Appeals Committees, and the Asylum Service.
It addresses critical legal issues such as:
• Interpretation of the “safe third country” concept
• Evidence assessment & refugee status determination
• Procedural safeguards & nationality assessment
• Functioning of appeals & judicial protection
• Immigration detention

This project was initiated by GCR, RSA, and HIAS Greece, and received contributions from other civil society organisations and legal professionals.

We are honoured to have contributed to this collective effort to strengthen legal aid and uphold the rights of people seeking international protection.

Contributors

1. Greek Council for Refugees (GCR)
2. HIAS Greece
3. Refugee Support Aegean (RSA)
4. METAdrasi
5. Equal Rights Beyond Borders
6. European Lawyers in Lesvos (ELIL)
7. Equal Legal Aid (ELA)
8. Refugee Legal Support (RLS)
9. Human Rights Legal Project (HRLP)
10. Legal Centre Lesvos
11. The HOME Project
12. SolidarityNow
13. lawyers of the Legal Aid Registry of the Asylum Service

Read the letter in Greek and English here

Athens, 16 July 2025: We, the undersigned civil society organisations, condemn the unlawful and impermissible legislative provision adopted by the Hellenic Parliament on Friday 11 July 2025 (Article 79 of Law 5218/2025) which imposes a three-month suspension on the making of asylum applications for people arriving in Greece from North Africa and orders their immediate deportation without registration.

The right to seek asylum and protection from refoulement are fundamental principles that may never be restricted. Both are enshrined in international and EU law instruments that supersede any domestic legislative provision, as already highlighted by reputable institutions at Greek and international level, including the Greek Ombudsman, the Greek National Commission for Human Rights, the Union of Greek Administrative Judges, the Plenary of Greek Bar Associations, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights and UNHCR.

Signatories

1. Αλληλεγγύη Λέσβου
2. Σωματείο ΑΜΟΚΑ / Αθηναϊκό Μουσείο Κουηρ Τεχνών
3. ΑΝΤΙΓΟΝΗ – Κέντρο Πληροφόρησης και Τεκμηρίωσης για το Ρατσισμό, την Οικολογία, την
   Ειρήνη και τη Μη Βία
4. ΑΡΣΙΣ Κοινωνική Οργάνωση Υποστήριξης Νέων
5. Γιατροί Χωρίς Σύνορα – Ελληνικό Τμήμα
6. Διεθνής Αμνηστία
7. Διεθνής Ομοσπονδία για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου (FIDH)
8. Δίκτυο για τα Δικαιώματα του Παιδιού
9. Δίκτυο για το Δικαίωμα στη Στέγη και την Κατοικία
10. Δίκτυο Νέων Μεταναστευτικής Καταγωγής «ΟΡΙΖΟΝΤΕΣ»
11. Κέντρο Διοτίμα
12. Ελληνική Ένωση για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου (ΕλΕΔΑ)
13. Ελληνικό Παρατηρητήριο των Συμφωνιών του Ελσίνκι (ΕΠΣΕ)
14. Ελληνικό Φόρουμ Μεταναστών
15. Ελληνικό Φόρουμ Προσφύγων
16. Ελληνικό Συμβούλιο για τους Πρόσφυγες (ΕΣΠ)
17. Θάλασσα Αλληλεγγύης
18. Ίριδα Κέντρο Γυναικών
19. Κάριτας Ελλάς
20. Καμπάνια για την Πρόσβαση στο Άσυλο
21. ΚΙΣΑ Κίνηση για Ισότητα, Στήριξη, Αντιρατσισμό
22. Κοινότητα Πάπα Ιωάννη 23ου
23. Κυπριακό Συμβούλιο για τους Πρόσφυγες
24. Παρατηρητήριο Ανθρωπίνων Δικαιωμάτων (HRW)
25. Σταγόνα / Drop in the Ocean
26. Σύλλογος Αλβανών Μεταναστών «Μητέρα Τερέζα»
27. Συμβίωση – Σχολή Πολιτικών Σπουδών του Συμβουλίου της Ευρώπης
28. Υποστήριξη Προσφύγων στο Αιγαίο (RSA)
29. Φάρος
30. Action for Women
31. aditus foundation
32. Alma Community Therapies
33. Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos de España (APDHE)
34. Associazione Ricreativa e Culturale Italiana (ARCI)
35. Association for Legal Studies on Immigration (ASGI)
36. Athens Pride
37. Avocats Sans Frontières France
38. Boat Refugee Foundation
39. Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN)
40. Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
41. Changemakers Lab
42. Collective Aid
43. Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ)
44. CPT – Aegean Migrant Solidarity
45. CRIBS International
46. Defence for Children International Greece
47. Dråpen i Havet
48. Dynamo International Social Street Workers Network
49. ECHO100PLUS
50. Emantes – International LGBTQIA+ Solidarity
51. EmpowerVan
52. Equal Legal Aid (ELA)
53. Equal Rights Beyond Borders
54. Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice
55. EUROCEF
56. EuroMed Rights
57. European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE)
58. European Lawyers in Lesvos (ELIL)
59. European Observatory for Non-Discrimination and Fundamental Rights (EONDFR)
60. Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid
61. Fondation pour la Promotion des Droits en Algérie
62. HIAS Ελλάδος
63. The HOME Project
64. Human Rights Association (IHD)
65. Human Rights Legal Project
66. InterEuropean Human Aid Association
67. International Rescue Committee (IRC) Hellas
68. Internationale Liga für Menschenrechte
69. I Have Rights
70. Inter Alia
71. INTERSOS HELLAS
72. Iridia Association – Centre for the Defence of Humans Rights
73. Ithaca Laundry
74. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Europe
75. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Greece
76. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Malta
77. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Portugal
78. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Serbia
79. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Switzerland
80. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) UK
81. Legal Centre Lesvos
82. Licra Bas-Rhin
83. Lighthouse Relief
84. Ligue des droits de l’Homme (LDH)
85. Médecins du Monde International
86. Migrant Voice
87. Mobile Info Team
88. Mouvement International d’Apostolat des Milieux Sociaux Indépendants (MIAMSI)
89. Northern Lights Aid
90. Office international de l’enseignement catholique (OIEC)
91. PAX Romana (ICMICA- MIIC)
92. Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM)
93. PRAKSIS
94. PRO ASYL
95. Project Armonia
96. Refcheck point (Θετική Φωνή)
97. Refugees International
98. Refugees Welcome, Denmark
99. RENATE Network (Religious in Europe Networking against Trafficking and Exploitation)
100. Safe Passage International Greece
101. Safe Place Greece
102. Samos Volunteers
103. SAO Association Hellas
104. Save the Children
105. Second Tree
106. Servicio Jesuita a Migrantes España
107. Terre des hommes Hellas
108. Velos Youth Centre
109. Vouliwatch

In October 2024, 70+ migrant-led organisations and 140 supporters wrote to EU institutions to demand alternatives to the EU’s deadly border regime. Following further announcements of rollbacks on asylum rights and of deportation plans, and in a context of an ever-accelerating global fascist shift, we reiterate our call for EU leaders to change course and end their war on migrants.

Attacks on migrants’ rights are the beginning of attacks on everybody. Anti-migrant politics and the subsequent degradation of rights have opened the door for rollbacks in women’s rights and the right to abortion, anti-gender movements, youth movements, anti-worker shifts and the widespread repression of civil liberties. Collectively, these trends disproportionately impact communities at risk of state violence, including poor people, (undocumented) migrants, women, racialised, queer and trans people, young people, and sex workers.

—

We, organisations led by migrants and racialised people, along with our supporters, reiterate our call to European leaders to condemn the violent, punitive and immoral turn in European migration politics in recent weeks. 

In recent months, we have watched the acceleration of a global fascist shift. Trump’s victory in the United States and the electoral breakthrough of the far right in Germany further legitimise hate narratives and exclusionary politics all over the world. By imposing their racist and imperialist agenda, far right forces normalise attacks on migrant and racialised communities, including in countries governed by alleged centrist governments. These trends spur the erosion of international law and of the protection of human rights. 

In Europe, we already see the rights of asylum seekers severely harmed. From the suspension of the right to asylum in Poland, to Austrian plans to halt family reunifications for refugees, Germany’s reintroduction of the payment card for asylum seekers, Italy’s attempt at offshore processing of asylum applications, and to the hasted freeze of Syrian asylum requests in several countries, European governments have reached a point of no return. 

The demonisation and the criminalisation of our communities is also embodied in plans to facilitate the deportation of migrants. Germany’s new deportation centre for asylum seekers at the border with Poland, as well as its pilot programme to transfer refugees to Greece, along with the Netherlands’ proposal to send failed asylum seekers to Uganda are just a glimpse into the wider EU strategy to accelerate the pushback of migrants. 

On March 11, the EU announced a new legal proposal called the “Return Regulation” which is another brick in Fortress Europe’s inhumane and punitive approach to human movement. Under the guise of “efficiency” and “innovation”, it proposes an insidious new approach that increases racial profiling and surveillance to ‘detect’ migrants, promotes off-shore detention centres, and even allows child detention. 

The EU is not only declaring a war on migrants within its own boundaries, but also turning neighbouring countries, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt and Morocco into yet another frontline, with devastating consequences for those seeking safety and those showing solidarity. For instance, the Tunisian government, bolstered by EU funding under the guise of migration control and economic development, has escalated its repression, targeting not only migrants and people on the move but also those who dare to help them. Activists, aid workers, and even ordinary citizens offering assistance and denouncing racism, are being imprisoned and are facing charges of treason and conspiracy against state security. 

This criminalisation of solidarity mirrors the EU’s own growing hostility towards humanitarian action, as Member States vilify and obstruct those who challenge their inhumane policies and endorse authoritarian governments in doing so as well. The EU’s new Facilitator’s Package presented in November 2023 further criminalises migration and acts of solidarity with migrants, using the fight against people smugglers as pretext for police power grabs and punitive laws that target migrants and humanitarian actors. In general, Member States are increasingly repressing and policing activists showcasing solidarity. Recently, Germany has weaponised migration laws to order the deportation of three European and one American citizens over their alleged actions at pro-Palestinian, anti-genocide demonstrations. Police brutality is also escalating during protests, with threats to the right of peaceful assembly across Europe. These attacks against those who organise are facilitated by increased spending on policing infrastructures, including on surveillance and digital tools. 

Instead of wasting billions on new offshore detention centres, illegal and costly deportation procedures, and the militarisation of borders, European leaders could implement policies in compliance with human rights, toward economic wellbeing, safety and community care, and invest in long-term solutions to address climate degradation, conflict, and economic decline. 

SIGNATORIES

Signatories

1. Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice
2. International Women* Space
3. Greek Forum of Migrants
4. #DiasporaVote!
5. ACAT Belgium
6. Africa Advocacy Foundation (Mi-HealthEurope)
7. Afrosocially
8. AlgoRace
9. All African Women’s Group
10. All Faiths and None
11. Anti-Racist Forum ry
12. Antizionist Jewish Alliance in Belgium
13. Apna Haq
14. APROSEX
15. ASAMBLEA PLAZA DE LOS PUEBLOS
16. Asociación Por Ti Mujer
17. Association Tunisienne des Femmes Democrates
18. Avocats Sans Frontières
19. BARAC UK
20. Chaska asbl
21. Chkoun Collective
22. Climate justice Berlin kollektiv
23. Collectif des Femmes
24. Comitato 3 Ottobre
25. Dalla Parte Giusta della Storia
26. DeZIM
27. Diaspora Climate Platform
28. Documatism
29. European Network against Racism
30. European Sex Workers Rights Alliance
31. Feminist Collective of Romani Gender Experts
32. Feministas en Holanda
33. Flüchtlingshilfe Iran e.V
34. Garaldea Ecofeminista
35. Glitch
36. Global Asylum Seeker Human Rights Defenders Committee (GASHDC)
37. Global Women Against Deportations
38. Greek Forum of Refugees
39. Hidden Goddess
40. Humanity Diaspo ONG
41. Infokolpa
42. International Civil Society Working Group for the PFPAD
43. International Coalition for People of African Descent ICPAD
44. Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia (KAAX)
45. Migrant Tales
46. Migrationsrat Berlin e.V.
47. Missing Voices (REER)
48. Mouvement Uplited Africa -MUA
49. Movement of Asylum Seekers in Ireland
50. New Horizons Project
51. New Women Connectors
52. Northern Ireland Council for Racial Equality
53. Pacific Migration Partners
54. Racism and Technology Center
55. Refugiados Bienvenidos España
56. Revibra Europe
57. Romanian Women’s Association in Italy (Associazione Donne Romene in Italia – ADRI)
58. Romnja Feminist Library
59. Siempre ong
60. Sobre los Margenes
61. Soectrum
62. SOEPIC
63. SOS Racismo
64. Sos Racismo Madrid
65. Space2Grow
66. TAMPEP Network
67. The Channel Monitoring Project
68. UNESCO IPL- People of African Descent & the SDGs E-Team
69. VERVERIPEN
70. We Are Monitoring Association
71. WIDE+ Gender and Migration Working Group
72. Women of Colour in the Global Women’s Strike
73. Supporters
74. Abolish Frontex
75. Abolish Frontex Belgium
76. Academics for Peace-Germany
77. Access Now
78. Agora Association
79. Ariadni Lesvos
80. Aspiration
81. Avocats Sans Frontières
82. BIDs Belgium
83. borderline-europe – Human Rights without borders e.V.
84. Catalyst Institution of Arts and Technology
85. Center for Legal Aid “Voice in Bulgaria”
86. Centre for Peace Studies
87. CITAD
88. Collective Against Environmental Racism (CAER)
89. Comisión Legal Sol
90. Coordinadora Obrim Fronteres
91. Dreaming Beyond AI
92. EAPN – European Anti-Poverty Network
93. Egala
94. Equal Legal Aid
95. Equinet
96. European Alternatives
97. European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR)
98. European Civic Forum
99. Flüchtlingshilfe Iran e.V
100. Flüchtlingsrat Niedersachsen
101. Flüchtlingsrat Schleswig-Holstein
102. forRefugees
103. Fundacja Inicjatywa Dom Otwarty
104. Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women
105. Guerrilla Foundation
106. Hoffnung leben e.V.
107. ILGA Portugal
108. Infokolpa
109. InterAlia
110. InterEuropean Human Aid Association 
111. Kif Kif vzw
112. KISA – Action for Equality, Support, Antiracism
113. KOK German NGO Network against Trafficking in Human Beings
114. La Cimade
115. Life Quality Improvement Organisation FLIGHT
116. Louise Michel
117. Migrant Tales
118. Migration Consortium
119. Mobile Info Team
120. Network for Children’s Rights
121. No Name Kitchen
122. Nomada Association
123. Ocalenie Foundation
124. Panoptykon Foundation
125. Podróżnych Ugościć
126. Polish Migration Forum Foundation
127. Pour la Solidarité 
128. Queerowy Maj (Queer Maj)
129. ReFOCUS Media Labs
130. Refugee Legal Support (RLS)
131. Samos Volunteers
132. SCI Catalunya
133. Sea-Watch
134. SOLIDAR
135. Solidary Wheels
136. Steunpunt Asielzoekers Lubbeek
137. STOWARZYSZENIE EGALA
138. Students for Palestine Finland
139. TAMPEP, European Network for the Promotion of Rights among Migrant Sex Workers
140. To Proste Foundation
141. Transitional Justice Institute
142. Transnational Institute
143. Über den Tellerrand e.V.
144. URGG
145. We Are Community
146. WeMove Europe
147. Women Against Fascism
148. Women Against Violence Europe
149. Yoga and Sport with Refugees
150. Alexandra Keiner 
151. Alyna Smith
152. Andrea Soler 
153. Andreas Beyer Gregersen
154. Angeliki Polatidou
155. Ann Singleton
156. Anna Troeng
157. Barbara Pomfret
158. Cecilia Wachter
159. Clementine Zill
160. Denisse Vasconez
161. Dorrie Wilson
162. Erika Piazza
163. Francesca Spinelli
164. Gisela Murillo Guinart
165. Ilaria Aversa
166. Ioana Turcan
167. Jasmina Al-Qaisi
168. Josefine Laule
169. Joseph-Éléazar Duhot
170. Juliette Goulet
171. Klara Körbi
172. Kloé Marin
173. Kristiāna Bruce
174. Lea Höppner
175. Leïla Dimou
176. Leticia García Fons
177. Lisa-Marlen Gronemeier
178. Lucy Alice Thomas
179. Marga Burgui Artajo
180. Maria Pisto
181. Marina Pico Cabiro
182. Marlene Scholkmann
183. Nidzara Ahmetasevic
184. Peter Ebbinghaus
185. Sarah Diedro Jordão
186. Theresa Klettke
187. Viliam Matomäki
188. Zina Weisner

Download the letter in Greek and English here.

ELA joins the 117 humanitarian, medical, and human rights organisations in urging the Greek government to take immediate action to stop the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. We condemn the ongoing blockade, the collapse of the health system, and the targeting of civilians and aid workers, and call for a permanent ceasefire and unimpeded access to humanitarian aid.

Dear Prime Minister,

Honorable President and members of the Greek Parliament,

We are witnessing, in real time, the creation of conditions for the extermination of Palestinian life in Gaza. The Member States of the European Union and the members of the United Nations must urgently exert their influence to allow the uninterrupted delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza. Every day lost reinforces complicity in the systematic extermination of a people who are permanently excluded from any aid that would allow them to survive.

The obstruction of humanitarian aid is a flagrant violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 2720, which calls for the unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid to civilians. Claims that aid is being diverted by Hamas remain unconfirmed and can in no way justify such measures.

An insufficient amount of humanitarian aid is being allowed to enter the Gaza Strip, merely as a facade to make it appear that the siege has ended. Israel’s plan to instrumentalise humanitarian aid is a cynical response to the humanitarian crisis itself has created.

Before October 2023, about 500 aid trucks were entering Gaza every day, according to the UN. Today, only 100 are allowed in daily, in a time of extreme crisis.

According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, all public hospitals in northern Gaza are now out of order. At least 20 medical facilities in Gaza have been damaged or forced to partially or fully suspend operations in recent days due to the advance of Israeli ground forces, the intensity of aerial bombardment and extensive evacuation orders. As people are still in urgent need of medical care and assistance, the Israeli authorities must immediately stop the deliberate blockade of Gaza and the destruction of its health system, which is supporting the campaign of ethnic cleansing.

The evacuation orders issued by Israel and the military blockade zones now cover 70% of Gaza. The population has been forcibly transferred from one place to another, and no area of Gaza has been unaffected by the attacks.

The depletion of fuel supplies is limiting the ability to desalinate and distribute water. Health facilities that are still functioning – already insufficient in number and capacity for the population – continue to come under attack and face rapidly diminishing stocks of medicines and other essential supplies.

The civilian population has nowhere to find safe shelter, patients are condemned to death, the right to asylum is non-existent, family reunifications are literally impossible and medical leave is less than minimal.

Victims include medical and health personnel, hospital workers and humanitarian workers who are targeted and are not protected, but instead lose their lives in targeted attacks.

SIGNATORIES

1. Γιατροί χωρίς Σύνορα – Ελληνικό Τμήμα
2. Άρσις Κοινωνική Οργάνωση Υποστήριξης Νέων
3. Γιατροί του Κόσμου Ελλάδας
4. Ελληνικό Συμβούλιο για τους Πρόσφυγες
5. Ελληνική Ένωση για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου
6. ActionAid Hellas
7. Κέντρο Διοτίμα
8. Ελληνικό Γραφείο Greenpeace/ Greenpeace Greece
9. HIGGS – Higher Incubator Giving Growth and Sustainability
10. Safe Passage International Greece
11. Ελληνικό Φόρουμ Μεταναστών /Greek Forum of Migrants
12. SolidarityNow
13. INTERSOS Hellas
14. Symbiosis-Council of Europe School of Political Studies in Greece
15. Κέντρο Παιδιού και Εφήβου
16. SAMS Ελλάς – Syrian American Medical Society ΑΜΚΕ
17. Legal Centre Lesvos
18. ΜΕΤΑδραση- Δράση για τη μετανάστευση και την ανάπτυξη
19. Project Armonia
20. ZEUXIS
21. Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid
22. Ελληνικό Φόρουμ Προσφύγων/Greek Forum of Refugees (GFR)
23. HumanRights360
24. The Home Project
25. Κέντρο Ημέρας Βαβέλ/Συν-ειρμός ΑμΚΕ Κοιν. Αλληλεγγύης
26. Δίκτυο Μέλισσα / Melissa Network
27. Αλληλεγγύη Λέσβου
28. Δίκτυο για τα Δικαιώματα του Παιδιού
29. Samos Volunteers
30. Σωματείο PRAKSIS
31. Changemakers Lab
32. Equal Rights Beyond Borders
33. Irida Women’s Center
34. Mobile Info Team
35. ΚΑΛΛΙΣΤΩ, Περιβαλλοντική Οργάνωση για την Άγρια Ζωή και τη Φύση
36. YouBeHero ΑΜΚΕ
37. Δίκτυο Προσβασιμότητας για Όλους/ες (Network for an Accessibility for All)
38. Cotranspose ΑΜΚΕ
39. Mazí Housing
40. STEWARDS Αστική Μη Κερδοσκοπική Εταιρεία
41. TEN MILLION HANDS Αστική Μη Κερδοσκοπική Εταιρεία
42. ΚοινΣΕπ “Ζείδωρος”
43. ΣΥΝΕΡΓΕΙΕΣ ΚΟΙΝΟΤΗΤΑΣ ΣΠΕΤΣΩΝ ΑΜΚΕ
44. Σύλλογος “Νοσηλεία”
45. Science United Project Μη Κερδοσκοπική Οργάνωση
46. Inter Alia
47. Πάνος & Χρυσηίδα βοήθεια στα παιδιά
48. Artifactory
49. “Μπουλούκι” – Περιοδεύον Εργαστήριο για τις Παραδοσιακές Τεχνικές Δόμησης
50. Openous Αστική Μη Κερδοσκοπική Εταιρεία
51. ECOGENIA – Αστική Μη Κερδοσκοπική Εταιρεία
52. Liminal – Πρόσβαση στον Πολιτισμό
53. ELIX
54. ΑΝΤΙΓΟΝΗ – Κέντρο Πληροφόρησης και Τεκμηρίωσης για τον Ρατσισμό, την Οικολογία, την Ειρήνη και τη Μη-Βία
55. DIVERSITY UNITED
56. ΑΜΚΕ Ρόδακας
57. Yoga and Sport with Refugees
58. Τεχνοδρομώ
59. Stagona
60. Dråpen i Havet / Σταγόνα
61. Refugee Legal Support
62. Σχεδία-Κέντρο Παιδαγωγικής και Καλλιτεχνικής Επιμόρφωσης
63. AMURTEL Greece
64. Better Days Greece
65. Πολιτιστικός Σύλλογος Οίας Σαντορίνης, ΠΟΛΙΤΕΣ ΤΗΣ ΟΙΑΣ
66. Ελληνική Ορνιθολογική Εταιρεία
67. Διεπιστημονικό Δίκτυο Ειδικής και Διαπολιτισμικής Αγωγής “Include”
68. ΕΞΙΣ – ΣΥΜΠΕΡΙΛΗΠΤΙΚΗ ΟΜΑΔΑ ΧΟΡΟΥ
69. ΙΣΟΝ ΘΕΑΤΡΟ-ΧΟΡΟΣ
70. Πανελλήνια Ένωση Πιλότων
71. Πρωτοβουλία Νέων
72. ΠερίΑστρον
73. Steps Αστική μη Κερδοσκοπική Εταιρεία
74. Refugee Support Aegean – Υποστήριξη Προσφύγων στο Αιγαίο
75. Bizrupt ΑΜΚΕ
76. Europe Cares e.V
77. Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) Greece
78. Common Ground Greece
79. Δίκτυο Τέχνης και Δράσης, οι άνθρωποι με τα μπαλόνια
80. Equal Legal Aid
81. The Hives Project/Κυψέλες ΑΜΚΕ
82. Women Do Business
83. Αστική Μέλισσα
84. Σύλλογος Βοήθειας Παιδιών – Lalibela
85. Communitism – Ένωση Πολιτών για την Διατήρηση της Νεότερης Πολιτιστικής Κληρονομιάς
86. ECHO100PLUS
87. Διεθνής Κοινωνική Υπηρεσία – Ελληνικός Κλάδος
88. Οργανισμός Ανοιχτών Τεχνολογιών – ΕΕΛΛΑΚ
89. Home-Start Ελλάς
90. Περιβαλλοντική Οργάνωση iSea
91. Σωματείο «Αντιμετώπιση Παιδικού Τραύματος»
92. I Have Rights
93. HIAS Ελλάδος
94. Flying Cross Hellas
95. CULTUREPOLIS
96. Σώμα Ελληνικού Οδηγισμού
97. Terre des hommes Hellas-Γη των Ανθρώπων
98. Παιδικά Χωριά SOS Ελλάδος
99. Vouliwatch
100. WWF Ελλάς
101. GIVMED
102. Defence for Children In Greece (DCI Greece)
103. We Need Books
104. Το Χαμόγελο του Παιδιού
105. Κίνηση Υπεράσπισης Δικαιωμάτων Μεταναστών και Μεταναστριών
106. Κέντρο Στήριξης Οικογένειας
107. Μαμαγαία
108. We are Community
109. Refugee Week Greece
110. Περιβαλλοντική Πρωτοβουλία Κέρκυρας
111. Βιο7νησα Eco7νησα
112. Ελληνική Εταιρία Προστασίας της Φύσης (ΕΕΠΦ)
113. MEDASSEΤ (Μεσογειακός Σύνδεσμος για τη Σωτηρία των Θαλάσσιων Χελωνών)
114. Ithaca
115. Σύλλογος Μερίμνης Ανηλίκων και Νέων
116. Tandem
117. Σπίτι Θηλασμού Μητέρα- Βρέφος-Οικογένεια
118. Caritas Hellas