A/67/44 as soon as possible and ensure the designation of an NPM with a mandate in conformity with the provisions of the Optional Protocol. The State party should further ensure that this mechanism is provided with the necessary human, material and financial resources to carry out its mandate independently and effectively throughout the country. Access to a fair and impartial individual asylum determination procedure (18) The Committee recognizes the challenges and burdens that the State party faces as the main entry point into Europe for many migrants and asylum seekers due to its geographic location, and it welcomes the efforts made to improve the asylum procedure in terms of quality and promptness. However, the Committee notes with concern that asylum seekers face serious obstacles in accessing the asylum procedure due to structural deficiencies and non-functioning screening mechanisms at the Greek border areas and at the Attika Aliens’ Police Directorate (Petrou Ralli). Such obstacles include the absence of procedural guarantees, including free legal aid, interpretation and sufficient information, as well as the requirement of a fixed address. The Committee notes that the State party has cleared some of the backlog of pending asylum cases and appeals, including through the establishment of the second instance Appeals Committees, but it regrets that thousands of cases are still pending. It also remains concerned at the low refugee recognition rates (art. 2). The State party should fully guarantee and facilitate access to a fair and impartial individual asylum determination procedure. To this end, the State party should ensure that the important safeguards for quality and fairness of its asylum procedure as included in the recent asylum legislation be implemented in practice and supported with appropriate infrastructure, including through the prompt operationalization of the Asylum Service and the initial Reception Service. The State party should also ensure the provision of adequate information in relevant languages, legal aid and interpretative services to facilitate such access. In addition, the State party should dedicate the necessary human and financial resources to address the considerable backlog of cases of appeal of decisions on asylum. Non-refoulement (19) The Committee notes with serious concern that individuals have frequently not been able to enjoy full protection under the relevant articles of the Convention in relation to expulsion, return or deportation to another country. The Committee reiterates its concern at the State party’s implementation of its forced return procedures, including through means of direct deportation and application of its readmission agreement with Turkey. It is also concerned that persons who are subjected to forced return do not enjoy effective procedural guarantees to access legal remedies or access to the asylum procedure and that they do not have free legal aid or effective information provided through interpretation services. Consequently, they are not able to effectively appeal against orders of deportation and/or consequent detention. The Committee is concerned that these individuals are at a heightened risk of refoulement, including chain refoulement (art. 3). The State party should ensure full protection from refoulement by establishing the necessary safeguards in forced return procedures and thereby guarantee at all times that no person in need of international protection is returned to a country where he or she fears persecution or is in danger of being subjected to acts of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as well as chain refoulement. To this end, the State party should review the content of its readmission agreement with Turkey to ensure that it complies with the State party’s international law obligations. It should also ensure that appeals against return or expulsion orders have an automatic and immediate suspensive effect. GE.12-44492 145