Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2016 asked them to be treated with respect. In addition, despite the legally prescribed possibility that a person under surveillance performed by at least two police officers may have their hands cuffed in the front, the woman was deprived of her liberty by having hands cuffed behind the back. In this case, police intervention was provoked by a blocked driveway! Furthermore, means of coercion were imposed upon a 71-year-old man, completely deprived of legal capacity. In its Report, Ministry of the Interior states that while collecting bottles, he started insulting police officers, after which the latter resorted to means of coercion in order to arrest him and bring him to the police station. In the meantime, another 71-year-old man shouted that he did not approve of such treatment of elderly people, after which means of coercion were applied on him as well. Citizens who had gathered protested out load, pointing to inappropriateness of such treatment by the police, which resulted in two more interventions, which points to the fact that lives of neither police officers nor any other person, were directly threatened. Although police officers should treat members of vulnerable groups with special care and apply their police powers in such a manner that a person’s rights and freedoms are interfered with as little as possible, examples such as these prove that it is still not so. In addition, Police Directorate’s position on the legality of application of means of coercion to elderly citizens, is also worrying, which is something that we pointed out in the Report for 2015. Even though it is indeed true that they acted pursuant to the law, the question regarding effectiveness of Ordinance provisions, remains unanswered, given that police officers do not comply with them and that Police Directorate is willing to justify such conduct. These examples show that police officers are still not familiar enough with human rights protection, especially when performing their duties or implementing powers with respect to vulnerable groups, in particular elderly people. Moreover, the fact that almost trivial offences result in employment of the measure of deprivation of liberty, is also worrying. Complaints also referred to application of powers when it comes to establishing and verifying a person’s identity because, when doing so, many officers resort to the measure of bringing a person to a police station, even though there are measures that interfere with human rights and freedoms to a somewhat lesser degree. Pursuant to Police Duties and Powers Act, when verification of a person’s identity is impossible to perform by inspection of identity card or other public document, this may be done on the basis of a statement, which means that verification of identity by bringing the person to a police station should be the last option when authenticity of the document or of data used by the person is uncertain. Policing oversight An efficient civilian oversight of the policing system still does not exist, and neither does the Ministry of the Interior’s Commission for Reviewing Complaints, foreseen by the Police Act as a form of civilian oversight. 26