Most migrants who die before reaching their destination are never identified. The Greek authorities’ response to a shipwreck in 2023, however, provides an excellent case study of successful identification.

Among the tens of thousands of migrants who have gone missing and are assumed to have lost their lives in the 10 years since 2014[1] only a small minority have ever been identified[2]. Although in many cases human remains are not recovered, along migratory routes around the world countless remains are found every year but never identified. Instead, they end up in anonymous burials, leaving their relatives permanently without answers. The reasons for this include the lack of medico-legal capacity in the countries involved, the lack of political will to address cases of missing migrants and the complexity of transnational identification processes that require the exchange of information between countries of origin, transit and destination along migratory routes.

However, the technical know-how to conduct successful identification has steadily developed. The management by Greek authorities of the cases of 82 deceased migrants recovered from the June 2023 Pylos shipwreck showed how it was possible to put into practice experience acquired over the previous decade to achieve an exceptionally high 90% rate of identification, despite the complexity of the case in terms of diverse geographic/national origin.

On 14^th June 2023, an overloaded fishing trawler sank in international waters, 47 nautical miles southwest of the Peloponnese coast near the town of Pylos. The vessel had approximately 750 migrants on board, including men, women and children from Pakistan, Syria, Afghanistan, Palestine and Egypt. The boat had departed for Italy from Tobruk, Libya, on 10^th June. Concerns about the safety of the vessel were raised by 13^th June. The next morning, at 2:30 am local time, the boat’s engine failed and within 40 minutes it capsized and sank, according to a statement released by the Hellenic Coast Guard (HCG). The Search and Rescue operation, led by the HCG and the Hellenic Police’s Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) Unit, lasted seven days, concluding on 21^st June 2023. A total of 104 men were rescued and 82 bodies recovered. By 18^th June, officials acknowledged that over 500 people were presumed dead.

The recovery and identification response

The Pylos incident was the first instance where Greek authorities decided to activate the country’s DVI team in the context of a migration-related incident. The team had been established in 2018 with the humanitarian mandate to identify disaster victims. The majority of its members are police officers, including forensic experts, forensic pathologists, forensic odontologists and forensic anthropologists. Since 2018, the ICRC has built strong cooperation with and provided support to the DVI team.

Disaster Victim Identification is an internationally recognised forensic process used to identify victims of mass fatality incidents, such as shipwrecks, natural disasters and conflicts. It follows standardised procedures to ensure accurate identification while respecting the dignity of the deceased and their families.

DVI operates under the Interpol DVI Protocol, which consists of four key phases:

1. Scene Examination – recovery of human remains, personal belongings and forensic evidence
2. Post-Mortem Data Collection – forensic examination, including autopsies, fingerprinting, odontology and DNA sampling
3. Ante-Mortem Data Collection – gathering missing persons’ records, such as medical and dental files, fingerprints and DNA
4. Reconciliation – comparing post-mortem and ante-mortem data to confirm identities[3]

The response to the Pylos shipwreck consisted of several phases. The examination of the scene and the recovery of remains lasted two days and were carried out by the Hellenic Navy and the Hellenic Coast Guard. During this phase, the DVI team assigned a unique post-mortem number to each recovered body and took fingerprints. Simultaneously, recognising that the number of rescued individuals and recovered bodies was much lower than the estimated number of people on board, the team communicated with neighbouring countries in Europe (Italy and Malta) and North Africa in case bodies were found in their waters or on their shores.

The collection of post-mortem data (PMD) lasted from 16^th to 21^st June. Official Interpol forms were completed for each body, accompanied by photographs, fingerprints and DNA samples. Autopsies were performed by forensic pathologists. Personal belongings were photographed, registered and stored. Biological samples were collected and DNA profiled by the forensic science division of the Hellenic Police.

The collection of ante-mortem data (AMD) lasted from 16^th June to 13^th October. All survivors of the shipwreck were interviewed to collect information about those on board, including the deceased. This yielded crucial information about the missing, such as their appearance, clothing and origin. A DVI call and reception centre was established immediately after the shipwreck to facilitate communication between families and Greek authorities, ensuring the proper collection of AMD. An information campaign was launched, involving all relevant national and international stakeholders. In coordination with Interpol, countries of origin such as Egypt, Pakistan and Syria, transit countries such as Libya, countries where concerned families resided such as Jordan and Lebanon, and destination countries in Europe, such as Germany and the UK, were informed about the incident in order to facilitate contact with concerned families.

Interviews with family members were conducted with interpreters in English, Arabic, Pashto and Urdu; each lasted approximately 45 minutes, with official documents submitted via email or other electronic means. The hotline remained active until the end of July 2023, with reduced operations in August. Other actors, including the Ministry of Migration and Asylum, IOM, UNHCR and the ICRC, assisted the DVI team in receiving missing persons reports. These reports, combined with the interviews with survivors and families, allowed the DVI team to create a passenger list and, subsequently, a missing persons list. By the end of this phase, 668 AMD files had been compiled. Around 50 families personally visited the Ministry of Migration and Asylum, where they were informed of the importance of DNA from first-degree relatives and submitted DNA samples.

The fourth phase focused on the reconciliation of information and identification of remains. The DVI team processed nearly 700 cases of missing persons, categorising them by nationality and the countries where their relatives resided. This facilitated the process of DNA collection and transmission. While most family member DNA profiles were collected and transmitted via Interpol channels, the DVI team also accepted DNA profiles from family members via other international organisations (such as the ICRC and the International Commission on Missing Persons) when families were unable to use State mechanisms, demonstrating flexibility that could simplify future procedures. A total of 541 families provided their DNA. A comparison between AMD and PMD was conducted, resulting in a list of hypothetical identifications, followed by official identification through primary forensic methods. In the first stage, 17 bodies were identified through fingerprints (one through Eurodac, one from a criminal database and 15 from Pakistan’s civil national database). These identifications were additionally confirmed by DNA. Furthermore, 57 bodies were identified by DNA alone. In the end, a total of 74 victims (31 Egyptian, 28 Syrian and 15 Pakistani) out of 82 were successfully identified.

Key lessons

The Pylos operation and its aftermath revealed several critical lessons to guide future efforts in handling migration-related search, rescue and identification scenarios.

1. Use a standardised approach: DVI

A standardised DVI protocol is essential for managing mass casualty incidents systematically and effectively. Greece’s decision to activate its DVI team for the Pylos incident was critical in achieving the high rate of identification. As part of a series of recommendations relating to missing migrants issued in December 2024, the UN Secretary-General has called for the systematic operationalisation of DVI responses to mass casualty events involving migrants.[4] An additional key element was the availability of Greece’s national DNA database, which served as a vital resource for matching DNA profiles.

2. Obtain all available information

The successful resolution and identification of missing migrant cases relies on the collection and processing of the maximum amount of information. This can be obtained by way of:

• Witness interviews with translators: ensuring the availability of trained interpreters is essential to overcome language barriers during interviews with survivors and family members, improving information accuracy.
• Systematic processing/autopsy of each case: a scientific and methodical approach, including full autopsies for all recovered remains, enhances the identification process and ensures no details are overlooked.
• Systematic fingerprinting and DNA profiling: conducting DNA sampling and profiling and, where possible, fingerprinting for each case ensures robust cross-referencing and verification against existing databases or familial samples.
• Communication campaigns: public awareness efforts (including establishing hotlines) in relevant countries of origin, transit and destination allow families to report missing persons and share vital information that contributes to the identification process.

3. Multi-stakeholder approach

Collaboration among various stakeholders brings together diverse expertise and resources. Utilising the knowledge and capabilities of actors such as forensic experts, law enforcement agencies, humanitarian organisations and international forensic experts maximises the effectiveness of response efforts, while such partnerships allow for better coordination and shared responsibilities, reducing the burden on any one organisation.

4. International cooperation

Missing migrant cases transcend national borders, necessitating cooperation across countries and regions; establishing well-defined avenues of transnational cooperation and information exchange is critical.[5] The DVI Protocol provides for this by using Interpol channels. However, in the Pylos case, several of the countries involved did not have designated focal points for international cooperation – as recommended in the UN Secretary-General’s 2024 report⁴ – and/or lacked established structures and processes to collect and profile DNA from families. Greek authorities therefore resorted to a more flexible approach combining police, consular and third-party channels. The latter included the ICRC and National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, who can act as intermediaries to reach families in complex contexts and facilitate cooperation with authorities. The Pylos response thus showed how opening different pathways for families to transmit information can increase chances of success.

5. Employ multiple methods of identification

Diversifying identification techniques enhances accuracy and completeness. Biometric databases, such as Pakistan’s national fingerprint database, can provide crucial identification leads when available. Many countries have biometric databases, whether for administrative, electoral, immigration, criminal or other purposes, access to which could help identification. Data protection should be an important consideration when determining access and sharing modalities. Combining multiple methods – DNA analysis, fingerprint matching, dental records and personal belongings – ensures a more comprehensive and reliable identification process.

By implementing these lessons, future operations should be better equipped to handle the complexities of migration-related tragedies of any scale, ensuring dignity for victims and closure for families while improving efficiency and collaboration in crisis response.

The response to the Pylos shipwreck illustrates how timely and well-conducted operations that rely on an ever-growing body of international best practices can yield high identification rates. However, even within Europe and in other countries with similarly developed medico-legal capacities, such successes remain the exception rather than the rule, due mostly to a lack of political will and lack of resources allocated to this purpose. This makes the Pylos case all the more important in terms of demonstrating to decision makers what is, and should be, possible.

Moreover, even for countries that lack many of the capacities that the Greek authorities could rely on, the Pylos case can hold valuable lessons. These include appointing national focal points for missing migrants to serve as points of entry for international cooperation, creating DVI teams that can improve responses to a broad range of disasters, establishing channels of communication to communicate with families and pinpointing government data that can help identify missing citizens abroad. As ever more migrants are having to opt for longer and more perilous routes, resulting in higher risks of disappearance or death, the Pylos case should inform urgent adaptions at both policy and operational levels to mitigate future disasters.

 

Antonietta Lanzarone
Deputy Protection Coordinator for Forensics, ICRC
alanzarone@icrc.org

Panthelis Themelis
Commander of the Greek DVI Team, Hellenic Police
p.themelis@astynomia.gr

Florian von König
Global Advocacy Lead – Central Tracing Agency, ICRC
fvonkoenig@icrc.org

The authors would like to acknowledge that the response described in the article was the work of many institutions and individuals and would like to mention among many others the members of the DVI team, as well as ICRC staff Sebastian Bustos, Eleni Borovilou, Konstantina Teliou and Eleni Zormpa.

 

[1] Internation Organization for Migration ‘Missing Migrants Project: Data‘

[2] ICRC studies indicate that only 7–13% of deceased migrants crossing the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean to Europe in 2014–21 were recovered in Europe and only a minority of these were identified. See ICRC (2022) Counting the Dead: How Registered Deaths of Migrants in the Southern European Sea Border Provide Only a Glimpse of the Issue and ICRC (2024) Counting the Dead – Update 2020–2021

[3] Interpol ‘Disaster Victim Identification (DVI)’

[4] UN Network on Migration ‘Recommendations on saving migrants’ lives’

[5] For detailed recommendations in this regard see ICRC ‘Guidelines on Coordination and Information-Exchange Mechanisms for the Search for Missing Migrants’.

READ THE FULL ISSUE