Since the official launch of the Greek Asylum Service in 2013 as the national authority responsible for processing asylum applications and other forms of international protection, the Greek asylum system has often “fueled” public debate and generated sharp controversy stemming from individual cases that carry a strong political charge and diplomatic ramifications.
Such cases, depending on the circumstances and the government in office at the time, have become the subject of parliamentary debate, with some opposition parties attributing an intention to instrumentalize the authorities in charge (or even manipulate them) to the political leadership, and in particular to successive ministers of Migration and Asylum, in order to “serve” their political agenda. These include the cases of the eight Turkish military officers who fled to Greece in the summer of 2016 following the failed coup attempt in neighboring Turkey; the extradition of Alexander Vinnik, the so-called “Mr Bitcoin;” the cases of Javed Aslam and Yannis Vasilis Yaylali; and the Turkish citizen who allegedly opened fire on intelligence personnel in Thessaloniki.
Every time a case of similar gravity to those mentioned above comes to public attention, some political groups and sections of public opinion return, whether out of ignorance or political expediency, to the central question: Who decides who will be granted asylum and who is responsible for the final outcome, whether that outcome is the granting of international protection or the rejection of the asylum application?
