A/HRC/45/16/Add.1 103. However, problems within the criminal justice system place defendants at risk of arbitrary detention, namely: (a) While individuals are normally presented before the Public Prosecutor within 24 hours of arrest, such presentation before the prosecutorial authorities cannot be equated with presentation before a judge as required under article 9 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; (b) The use of pretrial detention is widespread, as individual assessment of whether detention is necessary and proportionate does not take place in practice. Pretrial detainees and convicted persons are not held separately, contrary to article 10 (2) (a) of the Covenant and rule 11 (b) of the Nelson Mandela Rules; (c) There have been instances of failure to respect the right to the presumption of innocence, contrary to article 14 (2) of the Covenant, in which nonnationals in pretrial detention were detained exclusively on the basis of police testimony, including when other evidence was available; (d) There has been an inability to universally guarantee the right to legal assistance, including legal aid, as detainees accused of misdemeanours have not always been informed of this right; (e) There have been significant challenges in providing interpretation to foreign nationals, resulting in difficulty guaranteeing that anyone who is arrested is informed in a language that he or she understands of the reasons for the arrest, and is promptly informed of any charges, in accordance with articles 9 (2) and 14 (3) (a) of the Covenant; (f) Short trials have been held, giving rise to potential breaches of article 14 (1) and (3) (b) and (d) of the Covenant, under which the accused person should be given adequate time to be heard; (g) Conditions of detention, including overcrowding, at facilities related to the criminal justice system do not generally meet international standards, which may affect a detainee’s ability to participate in criminal proceedings and to present an effective defence. In some facilities, the conditions of detention appeared to be better for Greek nationals than for foreign nationals; (h) There is a general lack of awareness among detainees as to how to submit a complaint in relation to their detention and the conditions in which they are held, and few visits, if any, are conducted by relevant monitoring mechanisms. 104. Challenges with regard to respecting international human rights standards in the current context of mass migration include lack of information for detainees on their right to apply for international protection or on the procedural stages involved in seeking asylum, unaccompanied minors being held in protective custody in inappropriate facilities, deficiencies in the practical application of age- and vulnerability-assessment procedures, obstacles to the remedy of challenging detention and removal decisions, and allegations of pushbacks in the Evros region. 105. In relation to the full entry into force on 1 January 2020 of Law No. 4636/2019, the Working Group notes that the new provisions appear to introduce more restrictive procedures that may compromise the general legal principle that detention of asylum seekers is exceptional. 106. While there is an ongoing commitment to prioritizing the deinstitutionalization of persons with psychosocial disabilities, the procedure for involuntary admission is problematic, as the arrest is frequently carried out by the police rather than by qualified medical personnel. Frequent delays in consideration of involuntary admissions by the courts and lack of access to a lawyer to challenge mental health assessments were also identified. The legal basis for the involuntary admission of persons with psychosocial disabilities to private clinics is unclear owing to the absence of a ministerial decision covering private facilities. 17