CAT/C/GRC/CO/7 often used violence and have confiscated and destroyed migrants’ belongings. While noting that the Division of Internal Affairs of the Hellenic Police and the Greek Ombudsman initiated investigations into the allegations in 2017, the Committee is concerned that these administrative investigations have not included the hearing of live evidence from alleged victims, witnesses and complainants (arts. 2, 3, 11–13 and 16). 17. The State party should: (a) Ensure that, in practice, no one may be expelled, returned or extradited to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would run a personal and foreseeable risk of being subjected to torture and illtreatment; (b) Enhance efforts to ensure the criminal accountability of perpetrators of acts that put the lives and safety of migrants and asylum seekers at risk, and ensure that victims, witnesses and claimants are protected against ill-treatment or intimidation that may arise as a consequence of their complaints; (c) Guarantee that all asylum seekers have the opportunity of an individual review, with automatic suspensive effect against expulsion decisions, and are protected from refoulement and collective return. Asylum system 18. The Committee takes note of the explanations offered by the State party’s delegation regarding the legal and policy reforms undertaken during the period under review, when a new asylum system was set up in line with European and international standards. According to these explanations, the Asylum Service had registered 234,536 applications for international protection as of 30 June 2019, and the average recognition rate for refugee status and subsidiary status stood at almost 44 per cent. However, the Committee notes with concern that the implementation of the European Union-Turkey statement of March 2016 instituted an accelerated border procedure on the Greek islands, on the presumption that Turkey qualified as a safe third country. Furthermore, asylum seekers hosted in reception and identification centres at “hotspots” are obliged to remain on the islands, unless their cases are deemed eligible to be further examined under the “regular procedure” on the mainland because of their vulnerability or for family reunification purposes under Regulation (EU) No. 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (the Dublin III Regulation). Other information before the Committee indicates that access to asylum on the mainland remains problematic, largely due to difficulties in accessing the Skype-based appointment system in place for registration, which has limited capacity and availability for interpretation. The Committee regrets that the State party has not provided complete information on the procedures in place for the timely identification of victims of torture among asylum seekers (arts. 3, 11 and 16). 19. The State party should: (a) Reinforce the capacity of the Asylum Service to substantively assess all individual applications for asylum or international protection; (b) Guarantee that the accelerated border procedures under the European Union-Turkey statement of March 2016 and other readmission agreements are subject to a thorough assessment, on a case-by-case basis, of the risks of violations of the principle of non-refoulement, ensuring respect for all safeguards with regard to asylum and deportation procedures; (c) Ensure that any measures restricting the freedom of movement of asylum seekers are consistent with its obligations under the Convention and other international human rights treaties; 4