ACCORD Anfragebeantwortung

20. Dezember 2007

Asylverfahren und Aufnahmebedingungen für Aslywerber

a-5858 (ACC-GRC-5858)

Nach einer Recherche in unserer Länderdokumentation und im Internet können wir Ihnen zu oben genannter Fragestellung Materialien zur Verfügung stellen, die unter anderem folgende Informationen enthalten:
Aufnahmebedingungen in Griechenland - Überblick
„Weitere Probleme bereiten die Versorgung der Asylbewerber mit Bekleidung (SI, SK, LT, PL, CZ, LV, CY, NL) oder ganz allgemein die schlechten Aufnahmebedingungen (LT, EL [Griechenland, Anm. ACCORD])“ (KOM, 26. November 2007, S. 6)
„305 first instance written decisions by the Ministry of Public Order in Greece were reviewed. All 305 first instance decisions reviewed - relating to applicants from Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sri Lanka and Sudan - were negative. None of these decisions contained any reference to the facts and none contained any detailed legal reasoning. All contained the following standard phrase:
“The asylum application is rejected and the asylum applicant is not recognized as a refugee because the subjective and objective elements of the well-founded fear of persecution, necessary elements for the recognition of the refugee status according to article 1 A 2 of the 1951 Convention, are not met. In particular, the allegations are vague and cannot justify that s/he suffered or will suffer any individual persecution by the authorities of his country for reasons of race, religion, ethnic group, social group or political opinion. It is obvious that s/he abandoned his country in order to find a job and improve his living conditions. S/he neither showed nor handed in any national passport or any other travel documents”. [Author’s emphasis].
Not only was it impossible to deduce the interpretation of the law applied by the Ministry of Public Order from these first instance decisions, but it was impossible to deduce from the decisions alone whether the law was applied at all.“ (UNHCR, November 2007, S.32)
„The overall recognition rate for both refugee status and subsidiary protection in Greece has been very low over the last few years, and it remains low in spite of the entry into force of the Qualification Directive, the jurisprudence of the Council of State and the affirmation by the MPO that non-State actors of persecution and serious harm are recognized. Unlike Germany where there has been a consequent rise in the recognition rate, in Greece, during the first quarter of 2007, of the 1,915 decisions that were taken regarding applicants from Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sri Lanka and Sudan, no-one was recognized as a refugee or considered as in need of subsidiary protection.“ (UNHCR, November 2007, S.46)
„The provisions on subsidiary protection remain unavailable for the overwhelming majority of asylum applicants in Greece, due to procedural flaws which result in the fact that most applications are not assessed with regard to qualification for subsidiary protection. This appears to constitute a breach of Article 18 of the Qualification Directive.“ (UNHCR, November 2007, S.81) 
„Protection of Refugees
The law provides for the granting of asylum or refugee status in accordance with the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 protocol. However, the government largely has not implemented a 1999 presidential decree that brought the law into compliance with the standards of the UNHCR with regard to asylum procedures. In practice the government provided some protection against refoulement, the return of persons to a country where they feared persecution. Although the UNHCR observed an attempt by the government for a more realistic and humanitarian approach to refugees during the year, they, together with the Greek Council for Refugees, the ombudsman for human rights, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, AI, and the Council of Europe commissioner for human rights, expressed concern that very few applicants were granted asylum and that new arrivals that might include potential asylum seekers were at risk of refoulement. In March the ombudsman for human rights noted that the asylum application process remained problematic, primarily due to selective acceptance and processing procedures for asylum applications by the police Aliens Directorate. During 2005 the government granted refugee status to 39 out of 4,624 applicants, whereas the overall recognition rate, including humanitarian status (granted to 49 persons) stood at 1.9 percent. The UNHCR remained concerned that the refugee recognition rate remained very low.
Although the government cooperated with the UNHCR and other humanitarian organizations in assisting refugees and asylum seekers, the UNHCR and others expressed concern over the country's asylum policy and practices. They cited its insufficient reception facilities, underdeveloped systems for providing for refugee welfare, insufficient counseling to assist integration of refugees and asylum seekers, and lack of appropriate treatment for unaccompanied minors who were potential asylum seekers. In February the UNHCR issued a position paper on refugee protection with 25 recommendations for the government regarding: improvement of reception capacity and living conditions; provision of legal counseling; and protection for asylum-seeking children, women, and victims of human trafficking. In 2005 the ombudsman pointed out inadequacies in laws for detaining and deporting underage foreign nationals, including asylum seekers, and a lack of infrastructure and services for handling juvenile detainees who tried to enter the country illegally or sought asylum. In June the ombudsman recommended that the Ministry of Public Order add staff to the Aliens Directorate to handle the 50,000 pending asylum applications, simplify asylum procedures, and follow UNHCR recommendations and guidelines; the government had not responded to the recommendation by year's end.
By November two policemen were awaiting trial for allegedly subjecting a group of 40 to 60 Afghan asylum seekers to interrogation techniques that included torture in 2004.
Conditions for illegal immigrants and asylum seekers detained by authorities were sometimes unsatisfactory (see section 1.c.). The UNHCR observed an improvement of detention conditions at border areas, but this improvement was not uniform, and conditions in many areas remained substandard. Moreover, inadequate counseling to ensure the accurate identification of asylum seekers was prevalent. In May AI charged that several irregular immigrants, who arrived on the island of Chios in April 2005, were detained in conditions that amounted to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, including being held in a metal container close to the island's main harbor. In April 2005 human rights activists on the island demonstrated against the use of the metal container to hold migrants. Human rights groups reported limited provisions and medical care as well as lack of hot water at some facilities. Improvement was noted in some parts of the Evros region, but old warehouses continued to be used to house illegal immigrants.“ (USDOS, 6. März 2007, Sektion 2d)
Anhörung im Beisein von Dolmetschern
„1.3.2 Lack of access to professional interpreters
Another major problem faced by applicants is the inability to communicate with the authorities. A key factor contributing to this is the lack of adequate interpretation provisions. On the day of Amnesty International’s visit to the Asylum Unit in Athens, one Mandarin-speaker was conducting interviews with all of the applicants, regardless of nationality, often with the help of other applicants acting as interpreters in a second or third language. The Unit’s representatives present used Greek to communicate with the applicants, interspersed with English, in which the representatives displayed minimal competence.“ (AI, 5. Oktober 2005, S.7)
„In einigen Fällen wurde ein Mangel an qualifiziertem Personal (EE, EL [Griechenland, Anm. ACCORD], LT) und an Unterweisung in Fremdsprachen (EE, EL, PL) festgestellt.“ (KOM, 26. November 2007, S.11)
„Problems highlighted in the detention centres on Chios, Samos and Lesbos
Absence of interpreters
Professional interpreters, who would be able to provide information, and who are indispensable to ensure that an asylum process is fair, are completely absent. Normally, local authorities used co-detainees as interpreters. Detainees in the Samos centre report mistreatment by the shop owner who acts as an interpreter during police hearings. The practice of informally engaging any available person as an interpreter, gives rise to mistrust and fear, which can have huge consequences. In Mitilini refugees told us they had given false names, because they didn’t trust the co-detainee who was interpreting on their behalf. They did not want to recount their personal story to this individual.“ (PRO ASYL et al., Oktober 2007, S.20)
Entgegennahme von Asylanträgen
„1.4.1 Access to the application procedure
While the definition of asylum-seeker in Article 1.1 of PD 61/99 makes it clear that protection may by requested (i) in writing, (ii) orally, or (iii) indirectly, in practice the last two methods are not taken into account by authorities. During Amnesty International’s mission to Greece in January 2005, the organization’s delegation met with police officers at stations in regions where foreigners had been detained on charges of illegal entry. In all of the four stations visited (Mytilini, Ferres, Didimoticho, Soufli), the officers claimed that all of the detainees were "economic migrants". However, interviews in the two stations, where the delegates were allowed to conduct them in private with the detainees, revealed that the provisions of this Article had not been fully adhered to.
The authorities’ failure to offer people access to the asylum process at the point of entry into the country according to PD 61/99 is also illustrated by the discrepancy in the numbers of asylum applications filed in border police stations and in Athens. During interviews with regional police administrators it has emerged that only about 0.2 per cent of the detainees accommodated at detention centres in the border regions file applications for asylum. Yet there are reports suggesting that a number of former detainees from border-region centres, often released on deportation orders, apply for asylum in Athens. This fact raises concerns about access to the asylum process provided in these areas.
Further allegations received by Amnesty International suggested that officials stationed at border areas, and particularly in the area of the Greek-Turkish border, have been expelling migrants from the territory of Greece without providing those in need of international protection with the opportunity to seek asylum or providing all migrants with an opportunity to challenge their removal on other grounds, including human rights grounds. Undocumented migrants were allegedly put in military trucks, taken to the banks of the river Evros, on the land border with Turkey, and left to swim to the other side.“ (AI, 5. Oktober 2005, S.8)
„Access of asylum seekers to the asylum procedure continues to be one of the most major concerns in Greece. Unhindered access to the asylum procedure is, at the first stage, compromised by an almost complete “aversion” to people trying to cross illegally, in view of the government’s (and the wider EU) anti-migration and anti-terrorism policies. At the second stage, access is compromised both by the lack of a “screening” mechanism for illegal entrants, which could identify persons in need of international protection, and by the substandard coverage of the detainees’ right to information and legal aid. At the third stage, access is hindered by the overwhelming numbers of persons approaching the responsible authorities, particularly the Attika Aliens Police Directorate. This asylum office in Athens receives 90 per cent of the asylum claims in Greece, which is hundreds of claims every day. Towards the end of 2006, the Ministry of Public Order and the Attica Aliens’ Directorate implemented a strategy for the acceleration of the registration of asylum seekers in this asylum department, resulting in the registration of considerable numbers of asylum seekers.“ (PERCO, ohne Datum, S.3)
„In practice the government provided some protection against refoulement, the return of persons to a country where they feared persecution. Although the UNHCR observed an attempt by the government for a more realistic and humanitarian approach to refugees during the year, they, together with the Greek Council for Refugees, the ombudsman for human rights, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, AI, and the Council of Europe commissioner for human rights, expressed concern that very few applicants were granted asylum and that new arrivals that might include potential asylum seekers were at risk of refoulement.“ (USDOS, 6. März 2007, Sektion 2d)
Ausweisungsbescheide
„Illegal deportation orders and detention
·         The police arrest all new arrivals, including asylum seekers and particularly vulnerable individuals such as victims of torture and human trafficking, disabled persons, pregnant women, minors and refugees from countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia. They are all issued with automatic deportation orders – without a hearing, without any examination of their entitlement to protection. This practice effectively constitutes a denial of access to the asylum determination procedure.
·         Subsequent to the deportation order a detention order is issued. Detention is not the exception, it is the rule.
·         At the time of our fact-finding mission, there were 18 unaccompanied minors from Afghanistan and Somalia detained in Samos. In Mitilini, there were over 30 unaccompanied minors from Afghanistan in detention. The youngest detainee was ten years old. The authority responsible for minors, the »Prosecutor for Minors« had not been informed, although this is provided for by law in the case of deportation orders, detention and release of juveniles and children. In practice, unaccompanied minors are left homeless and without any protection after release.
·         Detainees are not informed about their status and their rights – not even after release from detention. They do not understand the documents attesting release. The deportation orders are handed to them in Greek.
·         There is effectively no possibility of appeal against deportation orders and detention. Although provided for by law, in practice this right can rarely be exercised.“ (PRO ASYL et al., Oktober 2007, S.7)
„All individuals apprehended by the Greek police at the Greek border are regarded as foreigners who have illegally entered the territory (lathrometanastes – illegal immigrants). As a rule the police detains all those apprehended and issues removal orders for them.
This means that all individuals with protection needs, including asylum seekers, victims of torture, minors, and those seeking protection from countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan or Somalia are handed removal orders. Decisions are not made on a case-by-case basis. This blanket issuing of removal orders violates rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and international refugee law.“ (PRO ASYL et al., Oktober 2007, S.19)
„This [suspensation of a decision], together with the fact that, as mentioned above, the Council of State has had to suspend deportation decisions on the grounds of an incorrect application of the law with regard to non-State actors of persecution and the minority view of the MPO representative mentioned above, may indicate a need for training of decision makers on this point of law, as well as the need for national legislation.“ (UNHCR, November 2007, S.46)
„Persons who enter Greece in an irregular manner, regardless of whether this occurs at the border or in Greek territory, are placed in detention pending deportation procedures.“ (UNHCR, November 2004, S. 1)
Umgang mit Altersangaben
„3.5. Besonders bedürftige Asylbewerber
Darüber hinaus besteht in einigen Mitgliedstaaten (UK, DE, AT, BE, LU, EL [Griechenland, Anm. ACCORD], IT, SK, SI) gar kein Verfahren zu ihrer Ermittlung. Die Verpflichtung steht zwar nicht schwarz auf weiß geschrieben, doch besteht berechtigter Zweifel daran, ob und wie besonders bedürftige Personen in Mitgliedstaaten, die über ein solches Instrument nicht verfügen, eigentlich ermittelt werden.“ (KOM, 26. November 2007, S.9)
“According to Greek asylum law, in cases of unaccompanied children under 14 years of age, the police are obliged to inform the Public Prosecutor for Children so that the latter may act as temporary legal guardian of the child, in following the asylum claim and process. For minors over 14 years of age, it is up to the police to decide whether to seek the Public Prosecutor’s intervention. In practice, the Public Prosecutors assume this role only on paper, and do not appear to have any further involvement with the child. Generally, minors over 14 years old are not referred to the Public Prosecutor; there have also been several cases where the police have recorded 16/17 year olds as adults (since no formal age assessment procedure is in place).” (PERCO, ohne Datum, S.4)
„Among 325 unaccompanied / separated children registered as asylum-seekers in 2003, only a few effectively reside and are assisted at reception centres in the country.Furthermore, an increasing number of separated children are not identified as such, are placed in detention, and when released are not referred to any protective institution. The whereabouts of most are thereafter unknown. Gaps in Greek legislation remain on the identification of newly arrived persons (accompanied or unaccompanied) below the age of 18, the appointment of a legal guardian and the search for durable solutions.“ (UNHCR, November 2004, S.5)
Diese Informationen beruhen auf einer zeitlich begrenzten Recherche in öffentlich zugänglichen Dokumenten, die ACCORD derzeit zur Verfügung stehen. Diese Antwort stellt keine Meinung zum Inhalt eines bestimmten Ansuchens um Asyl oder anderen internationalen Schutz dar. Wir empfehlen, die verwendeten Materialien zur Gänze durchzusehen.