Print
See related documents
Progress report | Doc. 14086 Addendum III | 20 June 2016
Ad hoc committee of the Bureau on the situation of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in Greece
Report on the visit to Athens and Lesvos (30-31 May 2016)
Bureau of the Assembly
1. Introduction
1. In the eyes of those who flee
war in Syria and Iraq, violence and persecution in Afghanistan and
Eritrea, or extreme poverty and destitution in many other countries
in Africa and Asia, Europe is a beacon: it is a safe and rich haven
of peace where human rights are respected and governments are accountable.
2. It takes many words to describe what migration and asylum
are for Europe. Certainly they are a challenge; a bone of contention
and a divisive matter; an unstoppable phenomenon that should be
managed but often is not; a problem for some and an opportunity
for others. The Parliamentary Assembly has already said it several
times: migration and asylum should be a responsibility, and an equitably
shared one.
3. For a country such as Greece which, because of its geographical
position, is especially exposed to arrivals, migration and asylum
have been an ongoing challenge for years. But in the past few months,
the situation has become much more of a humanitarian and human rights
emergency: following the closing of the border by “the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia”, thousands of migrants and people in need
of international protection have found themselves stuck in mainland
Greece and barred in their attempt to reach other European countries.
This has created a completely new challenge for the Greek authorities,
turning Greece from a transit into a destination country.
4. In an attempt to stop irregular migration into the European
Union, on 18 March 2016, the European Union signed an agreement
with Turkey. As a result, several thousands of people are stuck
on the Greek islands and those who do not apply for asylum will
be returned to Turkey, from where they arrived. This agreement has
reduced the flow of Syrians and other migrants and refugees transiting
via Turkey to the European Union by sea but has also provoked protests
and even eruptions of violence amongst those who are stuck on the
Greek islands.
5. The visit to Athens and Lesvos was an invaluable opportunity
for members of the ad hoc committee of the Bureau to witness the
situation in Greece, to appreciate the efforts which are being undertaken
by the authorities and many other actors, and to familiarise ourselves
with the reality of the lives of scores of migrants and refugees.
6. On 30 and 31 May, the ad hoc committee visited four camps
in Athens and the surrounding areas, without any impediments or
restrictions, being free to speak to residents, non-governmental
organisations (NGOs), representatives of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and any other actors present on-site.
On 31 May, only a small delegation of the ad hoc committee was authorised
to visit sites in Lesvos. Although this select delegation had free
access to open reception facilities on the island, for security reasons
it was not allowed to visit the accommodation area of the hotspot
in Moria. This was, in itself, an important indication of the level
of tension.
7. I would like to thank the Greek Parliament not only for the
successful organisation of a logistically complex visit but also,
and above all, for having invited the delegation at a time when
the situation is rapidly evolving: unofficial reception sites are
being dismantled while other, official camps are being built; migrants
and refugees are being transferred from the former to the latter;
a new asylum law has been introduced and the institutional framework
for its implementation is not yet completely up and running; the
consequences and impact of the EU–Turkey Agreement are not yet clear.
8. I commend the Greek authorities for the honesty with which
they have shown us what has been done and what still needs doing,
without fear of being criticised and with the hope that our visit
will be able to give a constructive contribution to their efforts.
I also wish to thank the UNHCR, especially for having volunteered
to accompany the delegation during all the visits to reception sites,
offering explanations and expert advice.
2. Scope of the present report
9. The present report reflects
the findings of the visit of the ad hoc committee to Greece and
the discussions that were held on that occasion. It is not intended
to provide an in-depth analysis of the situation of migrants, refugees
and asylum seekers in Greece, which is the subject of the report
on “Refugees at risk in Greece” (Doc. 14082) to be presented during the third part-session of 2016
by Ms Tineke Strik (Netherlands, SOC), rapporteur of the Committee
on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons, who also took part
in the visit. In spite of the limited scope of the report, I have
drawn some conclusions and formulated recommendations which I would
like to bring to the attention of the members of the Assembly.
3. Findings of the visits in Attica
3.1. Informal sites
3.1.1. Elliniko
10. On 30 May 2016, the ad hoc
committee visited the emergency reception sites of Elliniko. These
are three facilities located in an urban coastal area in the southern
part of Athens which were previously used as the arrival terminal
at the disused airport (Elliniko I), a hockey stadium (Elliniko
II) and a baseball stadium (Elliniko III). Elliniko II was the first
one to accommodate migrants and refugees in September 2015. Following
the closure of the border with “the former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia”, people also started to be sheltered in the other two
facilities.
11. The sites are managed by the Ministry of Migration Policy.
NGOs operate on the sites and UNHCR staff visit them regularly.
The three sites accommodate respectively 1 318, 1 397 and 967 people
(that is to say a total of 3 682 people), but numbers are changing
constantly. The majority of the residents (90%) are from Afghanistan,
while very few are from Syria, Iraq and Iran. 40% of residents are
men, 35% women and 25% children. The choice to separate nationalities
is made by the authorities, with a view to preventing tensions arising
between different communities.
12. The living conditions we witnessed are unacceptable. The sites
lack space to ensure privacy for families and women. Tents are overcrowded,
too close to each other, some are inside the buildings – including
the basement, which is dark and without ventilation –, others outside,
exposed to the weather. There is no medical care, and access to
water and sanitation is limited and insufficient. There are no child-friendly
area or toys, no education or recreational activity is organised
on-site and there is no special shelter for unaccompanied minors/separated
children.
3.1.2. Piraeus
13. The situation is similar –
if not worse – in the other informal site we visited, the port of
Piraeus, where around 2100 people are accommodated, the majority
of whom are from Syria (60%), Afghanistan (25%) and Iraq (15%).
35% of them are men, 35% women and 30% children.
14. Also here tents are placed very close together, mostly outdoors.
The delegation was met by the representatives of the Coast Guard,
which ensured the management of the site. They are not, however,
directly involved in any assistance activity to refugees.
15. As in Elliniko, food is distributed three times a day. It
is already cooked and most of the time the meal is cold. The issue
of food came up several times during the visit: while many refugees
complained to us about the quality of food, the authorities underlined
that they are proud to be able to meet such a basic need for all those
who are either in formal or informal camps. An issue that came to
my mind is that, being unable to cook their own food, families are
deprived of an important aspect of normality. The lack of hot water
and adequate sanitation is a major problem. There are 50 toilets
and 33 showers for the overall population of the site, with no separate
area for women.
16. In Piraeus, volunteers and NGOs strive to meet the residents’
most basic needs, and there is a lack of everything. There is no
common area for social activities; there are neither child-friendly
areas nor toys; no educational or recreational activity is organised
on-site and there is no special accommodation for unaccompanied
minors/separated children. Access to information, including legal
advice, is a daunting problem. The UNHCR does not have a permanent
presence.
3.2. Official camps
3.2.1. Eleonas
17. It was through the Eleonas
reception centre that, in April this year, Ibrahim Al-Hussein carried
the Olympic flame as part of the torch relay for the upcoming 2016
Games in Rio de Janeiro. It was a highly symbolic gesture given
that this Syrian refugee and athlete had suffered the amputation
of a leg as a result of a bombshell.
18. The ad hoc committee visited Eleonas on 31 May. The site marked
a sharp difference to the unofficial camps, being well organised
and providing good reception conditions. It had been set up by the
Greek Army in August 2015 and is managed by the First Reception
Service. It hosts 1 802 people, mostly from Afghanistan (50%) and
Syria (40%). 40% of the population of the camps are women, 33% children
and 27% men.
19. The site is located in a non-residential area – a port facility
near Athens. Accommodation is provided in 184 containers/isoboxes,
each of them with air conditioning; a bathroom with a shower, a
toilet and hot water; and a very basic kitchen without a fridge
or an oven.
20. Food is distributed to 100% of the population of the camp.
There is a health facility on-site and a referral system for hospitalisation.
The ad hoc committee visited a prefabricated building where children
were attending a French language class. Information on the asylum
and relocation procedures is provided as well as on access to other
services. Numerous Greek and international NGOs are present, as
well as the UNHCR.
3.2.2. Skaramangas
21. In April 2016, Skaramangas
was set up at great speed by the Greek army as an emergency site
to decongest the port of Piraeus which at the time hosted around
6 000 people. It consists of three camps, one of which is still
under construction.
22. Accommodation consists of 218 containers/isoboxes, each of
them with air conditioning, a bathroom and a small kitchen. While
we visited the camps, we saw people queuing to receive bed linen
and other items; at another container, children were being given
drinks; other people were waiting outside the health centre, where there
are staff and volunteers of the International Red Cross, the Greek
Red Cross and Médecins Sans Frontières.
23. There is a food distribution point. There are no problems
as regards hot water and electricity. Life on the camp seems to
be well-organised, with the UNHCR and NGOs having a stable base
and providing information and other assistance. Although there is
no school, educational courses for children are provided by the
United Nations Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) and a variety
of NGOs, including Save the Children and SOS Children’s Villages.
24. At the moment, the population of Skaramangas totals 2 889,
even if the number will certainly increase as the reception capacity
of the site expands. Currently there are 689 women, 755 men and
1 455 children. Syrians represent 75% of the population, Iraqis
and Yazidis respectively 10%, and Afghans 5%. We were told that,
in general, Syrian families have at least three children and include
members of extended families; there are also many single-headed
households with five or six children. We were also told that the
number of registered asylum seekers in the camps is steadily increasing.
3.3. The challenges faced by local and regional authorities
25. On 31 May, the ad hoc committee
held exchanges of views with Ms Rena Dourou, Governor of the region
of Attica, and Mr Giorgios Kaminis, Mayor of Athens, who was accompanied
by Mr Lefteris Papayannikis, Deputy Mayor for migration and refugee
issues, and Maria Stratigaki, Deputy Mayor for social solidarity,
welfare and equality.
26. These meetings highlighted the local and regional dimension
of migration, as well as the irreplaceable – but often underestimated
– role of local and regional authorities in the elaboration of an
adequate response to the current crisis and the design of a medium
and long-term strategy.
27. The Governor of Attica recalled that, on 12 May 2016, together
with the President of the region of Sicily and the President of
the region of Lazio, she had written to relevant EU institutions
asking them to strengthen the role of the regions and to involve
them more closely in EU decision-making in the area of migration.
28. The Mayor of Athens stressed the added value of exchanging
experience and good practice between cities, as had been the case,
for instance, during the International Forum on the reception and
integration of refugees in the European Union, hosted by the city
of Barcelona on 3 May 2016.
29. At the time of our visit, the Attica region was accommodating
14 527 migrants and refugees. Amongst the most pressing challenges
experienced by the authorities are:
- the logistical effort to co-ordinate solidarity: a Logistics Centre, the first of its kind in Greece, for the management, storage and supply of relief items has been set up by the Attica region, to assist migrants and refugees while protecting them from fraud;
- the urgent need to provide adequate housing and accommodation in different areas to avoid creating ghettos;
- combating poverty: with a view to contributing to this objective, the city of Athens has created a Reception and Solidarity Centre (KYADA), which provides support and social facilities for combating poverty in general and for refugees;
- guaranteeing access to education for migrant children, including unaccompanied minors/separated children: during the meeting, the Mayor of Athens informed us of his commitment to ensure that all migrant and refugee children have access to school starting from the beginning of the next school year;
- giving migrants and refugees the means to integrate into society, including training and access to work;
- preventing extremism and the insurgence of hostility against migrants and refugees.
30. As regards this last point, the Mayor of Athens recalled the
absence of violence which had characterised the transfer of migrants
and refugees from Eidomeni, underlining that this had been possible
thanks to the climate of trust that the Greek population and the
authorities had managed to establish with them.
31. The Greeks were sensitive to the plight of refugees and migrants.
Episodes of intolerance were rare while those of generosity and
solidarity abounded. Despite this, it was important to remain vigilant:
for instance, in the context of housing policies, the creation of
areas with a high concentration of migrants and refugees should
be avoided as it could heighten social tensions and increase support
for extremist groups.
32. Both Ms Dourou and Mr Kaminis stressed that migration and
asylum are a collective European challenge which requires a collective
response. It is a matter of credibility for the European Union to
be able to adopt a long-lasting refugee and asylum policy based
on a common approach, as well as on effective, equitable and fair
sharing of responsibility.
4. Lesvos
33. On 31 May, the ad hoc committee
split into two groups to allow a small delegation led by the President of
the Assembly, Mr Pedro Agramunt, to visit reception facilities in
Lesvos and hold exchanges of views with the local authorities as
well as with representatives of the UNHCR, the European Union, the
European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at
the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union
(Frontex) and NGOs. The findings of this visit, in which I did not
take part, are described in detail in the addendum to the report
by Ms Strik on “Refugees at risk in Greece”.
34. In this report, I would like to limit myself to mentioning
two considerations, which were reported by the delegation:
- it was not possible for the delegation to have access to the accommodation area in the closed reception site of Moria. The reason put forward by the authorities was that security could not be ensured. Tension was palpable; a demonstration took place during the visit, with residents carrying banners saying “freedom of movement”. The Moria hotspot looks like a high-security prison, with fences topped by barbed-wire. Young children were living there;
- the delegation visited two other reception sites, Kara Tepe and the Silver Bay Hotel, which provided accommodation of a good standard. There was a calm and relaxed atmosphere and a high presence of NGOs.
5. Tackling the crisis
35. During its visit to Athens,
the ad hoc delegation met several government ministers and other
key actors in the area of migration and asylum.
36. On 30 May 2016, it was welcomed by Mr Voutsis, President of
the Hellenic Parliament, and had an exchange of views with Mr Mouzalas,
Alternate Minister for Migration Policy; Mr Toksas, Alternate Minister
of Citizen Protection; Mr Vitsas, Deputy Minister of National Defence;
Ms Fotiou, Alternate Minister of Social Solidarity; Mr Vidalis,
Rear-Admiral, Greek Coast Guard; and Mr Leclerc, UNHCR Representative
in Greece.
37. On 31 May, it met Ms Stavropoulou, Director of the Asylum
Service; Mr Voudouris, Secretary General for Reception; Mr Karydis,
Acting Ombudsman; Mr Moschos, Deputy Ombudsman for Children’s Rights; Mr Christopoulos,
Vice-President of the International Federation of Human Rights,
Greece; Ms Argyropoulou-Chryssochidou, First Vice-President of the
National Commission for Human Rights; and Ms Gavouneli, Chairperson
of the sub-committee on international communication and co-operation
of the National Commission for Human Rights.
38. Our interlocutors provided a wealth of information, which
has been used by the rapporteur of the Committee on Migration, Refugees
and Displaced Persons to enrich her report. In the following paragraphs
I will limit myself to mentioning some of the key issues that emerged
during the exchanges, without claiming to be exhaustive.
5.1. The magnitude of the challenge
39. I would like to relate the
point of view that was expressed to us by the government representatives:
they are willing to take criticism on board and do not hesitate
to say that more should be done to improve the response in certain
areas; however, they also feel that criticism levelled against Greece
does not adequately take into account:
- the magnitude of the challenge that the authorities had to unexpectedly face, having managed to address the basic needs of 60 000 people;
- the fact that this has been achieved in a situation of economic austerity, without major complaints from the Greek population, without violent demonstrations from the migrant population, and without provoking loss of life or serious health emergencies;
- that what was done to handle the emergency is just work in progress, and that the authorities will not relent their efforts; on the contrary, stage 2 of the response – building reception sites of an adequate standard – has already started, and will lead to stage 3 – integration measures – for those who remain in Greece;
- that other European countries, by contrast, adopted a much more restrictive policy towards arrivals, closing borders, building walls or refusing to accept quotas.
40. The authorities said that, in only 20 days, following the
decision by the Visegrad countries to close their borders also to
Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans, Greece managed to provide shelter for
60 000 people who intended to travel to other EU member States and
were “trapped” in Greece. They would not be sent back to their countries
of origin because Greece respected the principle of non-refoulement. They were safe
to stay in Greece, where their first and foremost right, the right
to life, would be protected.
5.2. Reception conditions
41. During the exchanges of views,
the Greek authorities admitted that not all the accommodation was
of an adequate standard. However, they stressed that the majority
of the 50 reception sites which have been set up did provide adequate
accommodation and regretted that what catalysed attention were those
few sites which did not, such as Eidomeni, Elliniko and the port
of Piraeus.
42. The ad hoc committee was told that sites such as Eleonas and
Skaramangas were being used as a model for the construction/extension
of other facilities by the armed forces and that all migrants and
refugees would be transferred to accommodation of adequate standard
by September 2016.
43. The UNHCR also informed us that a limited number of migrants
and refugees lived in flats, and that more flats would be made available
for this purpose in the coming months. This solution is certainly
preferable to accommodation in large reception sites, especially
for those migrants and refugees who will remain in Greece.
5.3. Access to international protection
44. Several members of the ad hoc
committee reiterated the importance of giving effective access to
the asylum procedure to all those who are in need of international
protection, both inland and on the islands, and focused on key aspects,
such as registration of the application, admissibility of the claim,
possibility to appeal, availability of legal aid and advice, as
well as availability of general information on how to apply for
asylum and the prospects of relocation or resettlement. The issue
of whether Turkey was a safe third country – for all nationalities
composing the current flow of refugees and migrants – was also raised,
as well as the consequences of a recent decision by a Greek court
which found this not to be the case. Questions were asked about
the newly introduced “pre-registration” process launched by the
Asylum Service.
45. During the exchanges, the ad hoc committee learnt that, before
the closure of the Western Balkan route and the EU–Turkey Agreement,
between 3% and 5% of the arrivals applied for asylum in Greece whereas
at the time of our visit this figure was 99%; previously, when the
number of applications was considerably smaller, the average time
for having an asylum application registered was two months. Tackling
the workload created by the new situation required a huge commitment
of administrative resources. This was not easy to accomplish in
Greece’s economic context.
46. In the words of Maria Stavropoulou, the Asylum Service has
four Mount Everests to climb: around 50-55 000 applications from
asylum seekers who are “trapped” in Greece; the implementation of
the asylum process on the islands following the EU–Turkey Agreement;
the implementation of the relocation scheme; and maintaining the
sustainability of the ordinary asylum procedure, also considering
that there are many cases eligible for family reunion in other EU
member States and that a number of asylum seekers will not be eligible for
relocation.
5.4. Unaccompanied minors/separated children
47. Throughout the visit, the ad
hoc committee put great emphasis on the importance of a rapid and
effective screening of vulnerable cases with a view to addressing
their specific needs. The situation of separated children/unaccompanied
minors was mentioned as a special concern.
48. In this regard, we were told that in 2016, 1 600 unaccompanied
minors/separated migrants children had been registered. The real
figure may be higher. 95% of registered unaccompanied minors/separated
migrant children are boys between 13 and 17. Age assessment is normally
done through medical tests as well as in-depth interviews, which
is the best method but it is also very-time consuming. The National
Centre for Social Solidarity currently has 630 places in appropriate
structures, which is insufficient to cover the needs. In the next weeks,
however, an additional 250 places will be created.
49. The government has established close co-operation with the
UNHCR, UNICEF and many specialised international and national NGOs
in this area. The offices of the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman for Children’s
Rights play an important role in monitoring the situation of unaccompanied/separated
migrant children and drawing the authorities’ attention to situations
of concern, in particular as regards the issues of detention and
family reunion.
50. Still, there is need for assistance and resources to help
build high standard facilities and establish a platform to locate
the parents and family members of these children. The Ministry of
Social Solidarity is working closely with the Ministry of Education
to ensure access to school for migrant and refugee children, whether accompanied
or not.
6. Concluding remarks and recommendations
51. The situation that the ad hoc
committee witnessed in Greece is an emergency within a pre-existing
and deteriorating crisis: for years, their geographic location has
exposed some European countries to large-scale arrivals of migrants
and people in need of international protection; for years, the European
Union has failed to secure a mechanism by which the responsibility
for tackling this influx in respect of the 1951 United Nations Convention
relating to the Status of Refugees and other human rights obligations
could be equitably shared between its member States; for years,
it had been clear that the Dublin Regulation required a complete overhaul.
52. Now it is time for action. Tackling the present emergency
is a collective European responsibility and a collective European
response is needed.
53. I count on the members of the ad hoc committee who participated
in this visit to raise awareness in their parliaments of the situation
in Greece and mobilise resources in their countries to provide the
material assistance which we saw to be necessary. I also urge my
colleagues to exert pressure on their governments to ensure that
they respect their relocation obligations, and that they make available
specialised staff to help increase the administrative capacity of
the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) and the Greek Asylum Service.
Likewise, I call on them to ensure that their respective countries
accelerate the processing of relocation claims and family reunification
requests, especially those concerning separated children/unaccompanied
minors.
54. I think that the Council of Europe is taking a step in the
right direction by devoting greater attention to the migration issue,
as highlighted by the establishment of the office of the Special
Representative of the Secretary General on migration and asylum,
and the recent intervention by the Secretary General during the
World Humanitarian Forum in Istanbul.
55. I am also confident that, through the work of the Committee
on Migration, Refugees and Displaced Persons, the Assembly will
continue to have a leading role in this area and I look forward
to the discussion on the migration and refugee crisis which will
take place during the forthcoming European Conference of Presidents
of Parliament, organised under the leadership of the President of
the Assembly, Pedro Agramunt (Strasbourg, 15-16 September 2016).
56. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate the appeal which
was made in June 2015, when an ad hoc committee of the Bureau visited
reception centres for Syrian refugees in Turkey, close to the Syrian
border. Let us refocus our discussions and decisions on what really
matters: the lives, rights and future of people who need international
protection; we should do everything possible to avoid losing a generation
of refugees.