Author
Asylum applicants may move freely within the territory of Greece or an area (περιοχή) assigned by a regulatory (κανονιστική) decision of the Minister of Migration and Asylum[1] (formerly, the Minister of Citizen Protection). This geographical restriction of freedom movement within a particular area should not affect the inalienable sphere of private life and should not hinder the exercise of rights provided by the law.[2]
Following the entry into force of the IPA, on 1 January 2020, and subsequently the Asylum Code that replaced it, asylum applicants’ freedom of movement can also be restricted through assignment to a specific place (τόπος), only if this is necessary for the swift processing and effective monitoring of the applications for international protection or for duly justified reasons of public interest or reasons of public order. This restriction is imposed by the Head of the Asylum Service and is mentioned on the asylum applicants’ cards.[3] Applicants who are subject to this type of restriction are provided with material reception conditions, as long as they reside within the place indicated and, in case of non-compliance, the provision of material reception conditions is interrupted in accordance with Article 61 of the Asylum Code[4].
Applicants are required to immediately notify the competent authorities of any changes to their place of residence for as long as the examination of their asylum application is pending.[5]
Finally, applicants have the right to lodge an appeal (προσφυγή) before the Administrative Court against decisions that restrict their freedom of movement.[6] However, as explained below, the remedy regulated by this provision is not available in practice.
The geographical restriction on the Eastern Aegean islands
In practice, the imposition of a restriction on freedom of movement is particularly applied to persons subject to the EU-Türkiye Statement and the Fast-Track Border Procedure, whose movement is systematically restricted to the island where they have arrived, under a “geographical restriction”. This is despite the fact that for more than 6 years now (early 2020) Türkiye has been refusing the return of asylum applicants rejected by the Greek authorities based on the “safe third country” concept,[7] thus making the Statement non-operational in practice.
Imposition of the “geographical restriction” by regulatory decision: Following the initial introduction of a regulatory Decision imposing the geographical restriction by the Director of the Greek Asylum Service in 2017, and its subsequent annulment by the Greek Council of State, following an action brought forth by GCR, throughout the years, competence for the issuance of such a decision was transferred at the ministerial level, with the latest such decisions being issued by the Minister of Migration Policy in June 2019 and subsequently, following the amendment of the IPA, by the Minister of Citizen Protection in December 2019 (currently in effect).[8]
The Decision issued by the Minister of Citizen Protection in December 2019 regulates the imposition of the geographical restriction since 1 January 2020,[9] and states the following:
‘1. A restriction of movement within the island from which they entered the Greek territory is imposed on applicants of international protection who enter the Greek territory through the islands of Lesvos, Rhodes, Samos, Kos, Leros and Chios. Said restriction is mentioned on the asylum applicants’ cards.
- The restriction on movement shall be lifted subject to a decision of the Director of the RIC, which is issued as per the provisions of para. 7, Article 39 of L.4636/2019, in cases of
- unaccompanied minors,
- persons subject to the provisions of Articles 8 to 11 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, as long as another member state, following a request by the Greek authorities, has accepted and undertaken the obligation to receive them in their territory,
- persons whose applications can be reasonably considered to be well founded and
- persons belonging to vulnerable groups or who are in need of special reception conditions as per the provisions of L. 4636/2019, as long as it is not possible to provide them with appropriate support in accordance with the specific provisions of Article 67 IPA (“applicants in need of special procedural guarantees”)’.
In line with these Decisions, the geographical restriction on each asylum applicant who enters the Greek territory through the Eastern Aegean Islands is imposed automatically when the asylum application is lodged before the RAO of Lesvos, Rhodes, Samos, Leros and Chios and the AAU of Kos. The applicant receives an asylum applicant’s card stating whether they are subject to the geographical restriction (e.g., stating “Άνευ” if no restriction is applied). No individual decision is issued for each asylum applicant.
The lawfulness of the aforementioned practice is questionable, for the following reasons:
- No prior individual decision for the imposition of the geographical restriction is issued, as the restriction is imposed on the basis of a regulatory (‘κανονιστική’) Decision of the Minister and no proper justification on an individual basis is provided for the imposition of the restriction of movement on each island, within the frame of the asylum procedure.[10] According to the relevant Decisions, any asylum applicant who enters the Greek territory from Lesvos, Rhodes, Samos, Leros, Chios and Kos is initially subject to a geographical restriction on said island. The restriction can be lifted only if the applicant falls within one of the categories provided by the Ministerial Decision. Consequently, the geographical restriction in the asylum procedure is applied indiscriminately, en masse and without any prior individual assessment. The impact of the geographical restriction on applicants’ “subsistence and… their physical and mental health”,[11] on the ability of applicants to fully exercise their rights and to receive reception conditions, by taking into consideration reception conditions prevailing on the islands is not assessed.
- No time limit or any re-examination at regular intervals is provided for the geographical restriction imposed.
- No effective legal remedy is provided in order to challenge the geographical restriction imposed by the Minister of Citizen Protection, contrary to Article 26 of the recast Reception Conditions Directive. The remedy provided under Article 118(1) (formerly introduced by the amended Article 24 L 4540/2018 in December 2018) remains illusory, since an individual cannot lodge an appeal pursuant to the Code of Administrative Procedure in the absence of an individual, enforceable administrative act. In addition, no tailored legal aid scheme is provided for challenging such decisions (see Regular Procedure: Legal Assistance). A fortiori, no legal remedy to challenge said restriction is provided by the new Asylum Code that replaced the IPA.
As has been the case since 2021, data on the number of persons who had their geographical restriction lifted during 2025 is not published by the MoMA, nor was it provided fllowing GCR’s request for information. Based on available data published by the MoMA on the number of asylum applicants transferred from the islands to the mainland throughout 2025,[12] it could be inferred that the geographical restriction might have been lifted in the case of up to 15,270 applicants.[13] However, the specific data lacks significant information, such as on the legal status or potential vulnerabilities of the people transferred (or any more specific breakdown whatsoever), thus making it impossible to draw any safe conclusions.
Since 1 January 2020, the new regulatory framework for the geographical restriction on the islands has significantly limited the categories of applicants for whom the restriction can be lifted. Thus, the implementation of this framework can further increase the number of applicants stuck on the Greek islands and serves as a constant risk for bottlenecks that can deteriorate conditions there. This was vividly showcased in the latter half of 2023 and 2024, and yet again in 2025, when, due to sustained increased arrivals, led to a drastic deterioration in the quality of reception in the CCACs —with residents, including unaccompanied minors, frequently forced to sleep on floors and in communal areas.[14]
In sum, the practice of indiscriminate imposition of the geographical restriction since the launch of the EU-Türkiye Statement has for years been a risk factor, intrinsically linked with the EU’s ongoing externalisation approach, that fosters and maintains conditions of possibility for the constant (re)emergence of overcrowded, substandard reception conditions on the Greek islands.
[1] Article 49 (1) Asylum Code.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Article 49(2) Asylum Code.
[4] Article 49(3) Asylum Code.
[5] Article 49(6) Asylum Code.
[6] Article 118(1) Asylum Code.
[7] Also see RSA, “The EU-Turkey deal is collapsing 7 years after its signing”, 16 March 2023, available at: https://bit.ly/4d9CTNj.
[8] For more, see AIDA, Country Report Greece: 2022 Update, June 2023, available at: https://bit.ly/45vXAir, pp. 153-154.
[9] Ministerial Decision 1140/2019, Gov. Gazette 4736/B/20.12.2019, available in Greek at: https://bit.ly/3Qi4K43.
[10] Article 7 recast Reception Conditions Directive.
[11] Article 17(2) recast Reception Conditions Directive.
[12] MoMA, Statistics: Consolidated Reports – Overview, December 2025 – International Protection | Appendix A, available at: https://migration.gov.gr/statistika/, Table 2.
[13] The number is based on reported transfers during 2025 from the 5 island CCACs. It does not take into consideration what is reported as transfers from “other islands” by the MoMA.
[14] Inter alia see Amnesty International et.al., Samos: Unlawful detention and sub-standard conditions must not become a blueprint for the EU Migration Pact, 25 February 2025, available at: https://tinyurl.com/2cccrnmd; Solomon, “Unaccompanied Children Sleep on the Floor in Shifts in Greece’s ‘Model Camps’”, 31 March 2025, available at: https://tinyurl.com/ytfrvhs7.