ΑΛΛΗΛΕΓΓΥΗ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΕ: ΕΞΕΛΙΞΕΙΣ ΣΤΟ ΠΕΔΙΟ ΤΗΣ ΠΡΟΣΦΥΓΙΚΗΣ ΠΡΟΣΤΑΣΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΟΚΛΗΣΕΙΣ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΕ ΚΑΙ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΛΛΑΔΑ

210 Implementation of the EU- Turkey statement Union. The case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU and ECtHR follows the same track. The latter found that 9 a refusal by a national court of last instance to make a reference to the Court of Justice providing no reasoning at all when justifying its decision is a breach of Article 6 ECHR (Right to a Fair Trial). The majority’s justification for not sending a preliminary question is that there was no reasonable doubt regarding the interpretation of Article 38 of Directive 2013/33/ΕΕ on the concept of a safe third country; However, 12 out of 13 mem- bers of the Court claimed to the contrary that the interpretation of the relevant provision entails in fact reasonable doubt and were in favour of sending a prelimi- nary question. In case that a preliminary question is in fact sent in the context of other cases of Syrian refugees, which is very probable, the question remains what will be the position of the EU Court of Justice, which until this date has not interpreted these disputed matters. ECtHR currently has two outstanding cases on the same matter, i.e. Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary and JB v. Greece . The case JB v. Greece concerns a Syrian refugee that applied for asylum but his request was rejected in the second instance for inadmissibility, in accordance with the concept of a ‘safe third country’, which was Turkey. ECtHR addressed ques- tions to the Greek authorities, focusing on: A. If there is sufficient remedy in Greece to protect the applicant against arbi- trary, direct or indirect refoulement to the country that he had abandoned (Arti- cle 3 in conjunction with Article 13 of ECHR). B. If the risk was taken into account that the applicant may be subjected to de- grading treatment in violation to Article 3 ECHR in the event of his return to Tur- key, because of the country’s detention and reception conditions. C. If his detention in the police station of Mytilini constitutes a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR. The case has been prioritized by the Court and will most possibly be the first Court Judgment to decide on whether the concept of a ‘safe third country’ is applicable to Turkey. The second case , Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary concerned two Bangladeshi nation- als who transited through Greece, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia before reaching Hungary, where they immediately applied for asylum. Hun- gary then decided to send them back to Serbia, applying the concept of a ‘safe third country’. This case is still outstanding before ECtHR’s Grand Chamber, having 9. Schipani v. Italy , App. No. 38369/09, 21.7.2015.