Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 a special ordinance, as is the case in terms of treatment of the arrested or detained persons. In this way, confined persons would have the same rights as those who are arrested or detained. In addition, this would decrease the risk of police officers making arbitrary decisions. Foreign citizens have to be provided with interpretation during the arrest and the relevant consulate / embassy has to be informed about the arrest. On the other hand, letters of rights informing the arrested person about his/her rights often lack the interpreter’s signature, which makes it difficult to determine whether interpretation was provided and whether, in line with the request, the consulate/embassy was informed about the case. To prevent situations in which provision of sufficient meals for the arrested persons depends on police officers’ estimates only, it is necessary to regulate the provision stipulating their right to an appropriate number of meals during deprivation of liberty, in the same way as enjoyed by detainees. In terms of meals provision, different treatments of arrested persons as opposed to detainees have been recorded. In accordance with the Ordinance, a detainee is entitled to a minimum of three meals a day, of which one must be a full meal. Quite the opposite is true: the number of meals provided to an arrested person depends on the time since the last meal was consumed and the arrest time. To prevent situations in which provision of sufficient meals for the arrested persons depends on police officers’ estimates only, it is necessary to regulate the provision stipulating their right to an appropriate number of meals during deprivation of liberty. Records on use of means of coercion were inspected during the visits and the evaluation of their justifiability was requested. The findings have shown that, in some cases, the evaluations were made after the expiry of the set deadline of 24 hours from the submission of a written report. Despite earlier recommendations issued to the Ministry of Interior, detention supervisors still perform the tasks of officials of the operations and communications centre, which is not good, because performance of two tasks can result in overburdening them. In accordance with the Ordinance, a detention supervisor is in charge of correct implementation of regulations on treatment of detained persons and must warn them of their rights and duties. Since detention units do not have detention supervisors who would be entrusted with these tasks only, it is not clear whether they can monitor how detained persons are being treated. Furthermore, since the Ordinance does not prescribe possible delegation of responsibilities to other police officers, it is questionable whether they can implement the Ordinance in full and monitor treatment of detained persons because it may pose a risk of inhuman and degrading treatment. 1.2.3. Assessment of the status of respect of rights of persons deprived of their liberty in the police system In 2017, the system of civic supervision of police work was not established since commissions to handle citizens’ complaints had not been formed in the Ministry of Interior (MoI) and police directorates because of insufficient applicants at two public calls organized for this purpose. This type of civic supervision is important because it gives opportunities to citizens to have their complaints examined 26