Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 threats. Consequently, 202 lawsuits were filed before administrative courts, and 55 against decisions issued precisely due to security issues. Pursuant to the Act on the Security Intelligence THE STRUCTURE OF COURT DECISIONS BY ACTIONS BASED ON REJECTION OF INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION FOR SECURITY REASONS System of the RC, 1573 security vetting is performed for persons obtaining Croatian citizenship for whose and stay is of granted applications 266 67 12 foreigners important for the security 208 rejected applications rejected subsequently suspended procedures negative decisions the country, while the Security Vetting Act stipulates that the SIA issues to the applicant, in this case the MoI, only an opinion on the (non-)existence of security threats, which is extremely problematic in the procedure of granting international protection. Due to the circumstances and causes of leaving the country of origin, the applicants cannot return to it, so the reason for denying residence in the country of reception is particularly important. This is especially true when the MoI assesses that there is a great possibility that the applicant could be faced with the risk of suffering serious injustice, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in the country of origin. Yet, it still rejects the application, solely based on the opinion issued by the SIA, without even looking at its content. Additionally, such decisions also order them to leave the EEA, which may constitute a violation of the principle of non-refoulement. In the decisions of administrative courts it was found that the MoI incorrectly or incompletely established the facts of the case during the administrative procedure. Namely, the reasons for refusing international protection were not the ones that could be brought into connection with the exclusion from asylum or subsidiary protection, and which are prescribed by the AITP. It is therefore necessary to issue decisions on international protection on the basis of a fully established factual situation, after reviewing the opinion issued by the SIA on the existence of security threats and by stating the reasons for exclusion from asylum or subsidiary protection. This is also supported by the case law, which often annuls decisions of the MoI and sends them back into the procedure or modifies them and grants the asylum, which is also discussed in detail in the chapter on combating discrimination at national level. In addition, security vetting is carried out on the basis of Security Vetting Questionnaire, an integral part of which is the consent for the procedure which needs to be filled out in person, and voluntarily signed by the person for whom it is being used, which will be elaborated in more detail in the chapter on 37