A legally questionable migration framework: Greece’s experiment to combat “illegal arrivals”

Last summer brought several changes to Greece’s migration framework. As the EU Migration Pact comes into effect this spring of 2026, it is timely to review the changes that have made Greece one of the strictest migration regimes in the EU.

This article focuses on the suspension of certain visa pathways and the introduction of a new voluntary departure regime, which is backed by the threat of prison sentences, as part of Greece’s increasingly hardline approach to migration and asylum. This article challenges the official claims from Greek authorities regarding the effectiveness of these measures and questions the EU’s role in allowing their implementation.

The analysis is complemented by an interview with Eleftheria Dodi, an asylum lawyer at European Lawyers in Lesvos (ELIL).

Visa suspension on paper, and visa suspension in practice?

In July 2025, the Greek government suspended the registration of asylum applications for third-country nationals, arriving in Greece on vessels, departing from North Africa for 90 days. This formally ended on 14 October, but there is no clarity on how visa applications were handled during or after this period.

People arriving were to be returned to their countries of origin or departure without their asylum claims being registered. However, according to the NGO Refugee Support Aegean (RSA), in the absence of any deportation plan for their return, Greece placed them under administrative detention, holding these people mainly in closed facilities without blankets, clothing, or hygiene products.

Rather than fully suspending asylum, authorities resorted to implementing the measure inconsistently and incoherently. On some days, in certain facilities, some people of one nationality were allowed to apply, while others were denied.  There is still confusion over whether those unable to apply have since been able to do so, or when they will be.

Although the “visa suspension” measure was not implemented as originally announced, it still entails a series of human rights violations, like blocking asylum applications, detaining people in closed facilities without meeting their basic needs, leaving them uncertain as to whether they will ever obtain protection or be sent back.

“Prison or return” on paper, and the “prison or return” in practice?

In addition to the visa suspensions, the Greek government passed a new migration law in September that, as phrased by Greek Migration Minister Plevris, sets out a “prison or return” scenario for rejected asylum seekers. Among other measures, the law reduced the voluntary departure period from 25 to 14 days and introduced prison sentences of two to five years and a minimum fine of €5,000 for those remaining in the country.

Ten days after the announcement, the law was swiftly enforced. Al Jazeera reported that three Turkish citizens were convicted of illegal residence and handed prison sentences and fines. Speaking with Eleftheria Dodi on the matter, she pointed out that the whereabouts of these individuals remain unverified, although according to some reports, two of the men negotiated their return to Türkiye and did not enter prison.

The “prison or return regime” constitutes another human rights violation: leaving people to organise their own return within an untenable timeframe and criminalising them when they inevitably cannot leave, all while providing no state help for deportation and no clarity on what would follow imprisonment or return.

Claimed benefits of the new system on paper, and the “benefits” in practice?

According to the new organization, the Greek Reporter, Greek officials argue that the new system will relieve pressure on the Asylum Service, the police, and the courts, redirecting resources toward those with “legitimate” claims.

Once put into practice, however, these claims do not hold up. A system designed to detain rejected asylum seekers inevitably creates more work for the authorities: court rulings are lengthy, additional police resources are needed, and people must be held and supervised somewhere. The September law also introduces no provisions to directly facilitate or simplify procedures for those with “legitimate” claims. Using the government’s own terminology but thinking logistically, the new system prioritises punishing those with “illegitimate” claims far more than improving procedures for those with “legitimate” ones.

Moreover, the Greek City Times pointed out that Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis argued that “the suspension” was necessary to disrupt smuggling networks. However, when considered alongside the September laws, this statement is difficult to sustain: these measures do not disrupt smuggling, they redirect it. Rejected asylum seekers become vulnerable to relying on smuggling networks to move from Greece to other European countries before they are required to leave voluntarily, detained, or deported.

No matter the “benefits” claimed by government officials, the new system rests entirely on deterring people from coming, disregarding ongoing and internationally recognized humanitarian crises such as those in Sudan and Palestine. And when people do arrive, the system is wholly unprepared to benefit anyone.

EU as deterrer on paper, but enabler in practice?

While Greece’s recent actions have been repeatedly reported to EU institutions by national and international NGOs, and while the EU itself has publicly expressed concern, no concrete repercussions for the Greek state have followed. The question then arises: to what extent is Greece being allowed to experiment with measures that may one day become EU policy? Plevris himself has stated that there is interest from other EU member states in adopting the Greek system.

A further point considers the “prison or return” system, which also includes plans to introduce electronic ankle monitors for rejected asylum seekers facing deportation. As Al Jazeera has highlighted, this involves substantial financial resources, so another question arises: how are these initiatives being funded? Can Greece support this solely through national channels, or are broader levels also involved?

A migrant inclusive future on paper, but in practice?

The Greek case sets a worrying tone for the year ahead. Territorial asylum has been failing to protect people in distress for decades. States need to recognise that limiting this already fallible system will not solve anything. Complementary pathways are indispensable to reduce the prolonged limbo experienced by people seeking safety and to ease pressure on national systems, an idea also represented by the Mediterranean Migration and Asylum Policy Hub.

In our discussion with Eleftheria, she explained that the new Greek system has so far been implemented cautiously not only because of its operational shortcomings, but thanks to constant pressure from civil society. We only hope this pressure holds and expands to help reverse Greece’s hardline approach, which seems to be spreading across Europe as a whole, particularly following the EU’s recent agreement on new migrant return measures, including expanded deportation frameworks and the externalisation of detention, developments that critics argue bring EU practice closer to the US ICE model.

Resources

Al Jazeera (https://www.aljazeera.com)

Greek Reporter (https://greekreporter.com)

Greek City Times (https://greekcitytimes.com)

Mediterranean Migration and Asylum Policy Hub (https://med-ma.eu)

Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (https://picum.org/blog/)

Refugee Support Aegean (https://rsaegean.org/en/)

Our volunteering programme is funded by the European Union through the European Solidarity Corps. For more information about our open ESC positions, visit our page.