CCPR/C/118/D/2242/2013 to send the 2014 inspection report to the tax authorities,49 in order to avoid exorbitant fines. At the time that they made their comments, the Prosecutor had not replied. 7.13 The authors reiterate that all the demolition decisions issued by the authorities contravene international and national law, as the authors have not been consulted and no effective measures have been taken to relocate them. They also reiterate that they waited for over 15 years to be provided with adequate housing and security of tenure by the State party, in breach of its international obligations. Further submissions by the State party 8.1 In its further submission dated 25 April 2014, the State party reiterates that the authors did not exhaust all available domestic remedies. It advises that on 12 March 2014, the Secretary-General of the Decentralized Administration of Attica rejected the administrative remedy submitted by the authors against the second relocation decision. It submits that the authors have not used any other remedy against that decision, even though it could be challenged before the Council of State through an application for annulment. 8.2 The State party indicates that the execution of the new demolition decision of 8 November 2013, scheduled for 25 February 2014, was postponed to 17 June 2014 by a decision of the Secretary-General of the Decentralized Administration of Attica of 19 February 2014, to allow for the demolition and relocation to be conducted simultaneously. The postponement was also caused by delays to the works due to appeals lodged by the Municipality of Megara, 50 and to some difficulties involving Megara’s department of construction and its forest service, as well as the department responsible for the rehabilitation of earthquake victims. 8.3 The State party submits that it continues to follow the two-way approach. It also states that the decision of 13 December 2013 of the Secretary-General of the Decentralized Administration of Attica, amending the second relocation decision dated 18 October 2013, was issued in order to clarify the administrative borders of the ABK 354 plot of land, shared by the Megara and Mandra municipalities. This decision fulfilled all legal requirements, and several technical preparatory measures for the relocation were taken. The Ombudsman and the Secretary-General of the Decentralized Administration of Attica consulted the Roma population affected with regard to their relocation, but the Roma population never submitted their views. 8.4 With regard to the owners of the land where the settlement is located, the State party submits that they were compensated for the State’s failure to relocate the Roma community, but their claim to regain possession of their land has not been satisfied.51 Regarding the authors’ request for relocation of the settlement as a whole, the State party submits that this is incompatible with the limited resources of the programme. 8.5 The State party reiterates that it invested €856,283 up until July 2013 to improve living conditions in the settlement, and that it never approved the Roma community remaining there but has taken every measure to relocate them and to return the properties to 49 50 51 12 In that report, issued in 2014, it was found that, with some exceptions, the buildings registered in the Halandri Roma settlement in 1995 did not coincide at all with those in 2014. A motion of annulment was pending by the time the observations were submitted. On 22 September 2014, the State party provided a letter from the non-profit organization “Lawfulness”, representing the owners, requesting that the Committee take into account the violation of their rights. They advise that they have initiated several legal actions aimed at evicting the Roma from the area, but that the Government has failed to enforce judicial decisions in their favour. They also indicate that the settlement is causing great harm to the local community, as those living in it carry firearms and sell narcotic substances.