Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 Since the adoption of a new EPSA was prescribed in the Annual Normative Activities Plan for 2015, 2016 and 2017, formation of a special working group entrusted with drafting the legal text including the representatives of our Office was regarded as a positive step. On the other hand, although the working group created a complete draft between April and September 2017, its members have not met since. Regardless of our efforts, we have failed to obtain information regarding the status of preparation of a new EPSA, but the fact that it has not been included in the Annual Normative Activities Plan for 2018 does not sound very promising. Also, we took part in the preparation of the Action Plan for the Development of the Prison System in the Republic of Croatia but we did not get any information regarding its adoption. We evaluate our cooperation with the COPSPD in 2017 as good, but there is still room for improvement. Better cooperation would result in better respect for the rights of persons deprived of liberty and prevention of torture and other acts of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Although some positive changes in some penal institutions have been registered, none of the seven recommendations from our 2016 Report have been implemented in the whole prison system, which is why we repeat them in this year’s Report. 1.2. THE POLICE SYSTEM 1.2.1. Protection of citizens’ rights, including persons deprived of liberty in police treatment Complaints to the Ombudswoman In 2017, the Ombudswoman acted in 148 cases regarding police treatment on the basis of citizens’ complaints and on her own initiative. Just as in previous years, a significant number of complaints addressed overstepping of authority in procedures involving the use of force and resulting in deprivation of liberty and infliction of injuries. In accordance with the ECHR case law, any injury sustained in detention or confinement, gives rise to suspicions about police violence, even abuse. In such cases, efficient investigation should be carried out ex officio in order to prove that police officers have not overstepped their authority, regardless of the fact whether criminal charges were brought. However, it was not initiated in cases in which the competent state attorney’s office had insights into alleged police violence, and it acted only after the aggrieved party brought criminal charges. For instance, during the questioning, a detainee reported a case of police violence to the state attorney’s office. This report did not lead to a prompt reaction, 21