Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 can live in such conditions for years without a legal basis and without possibility to leave, that is, their freedom of movement is limited without judicial review. In accordance with the APPMD, coercive measures against people with severe mental disorders placed in social care homes can be used in the same way and under the same conditions as in psychiatric institutions. This means, inter alia, that the decisions on their use, except in emergency situations, are made by psychiatrists who also monitor the use of the measure. Since social care homes do not employ psychiatrists, the use of coercive measures is not legal and can result in unnecessary limitation or violation of the rights of persons with mental disorders. Additionally, social care institutions do not keep records on the use of coercive measures, which they refer to as restrictive procedures, so it was not possible to determine the frequency of their use. Although they are rarely used, non-compliance with legal procedures violates the rights of users with mental disorders. The use of various security measures is not regulated, either, such as immobilization and fixation during night-time sleep, which is justified with the need to prevent falls. However, the conditions and methods of their use should be regulated, because inappropriate use can lead to health issues and death. 1.5. APPLICANTS FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION AND IRREGULAR MIGRANTS Modern migrations are characterized by their diversity, both in terms of permanence of residence and forced, i.e. voluntary migrations. Political instability and increasing differences in the level of development of individual countries have strongly influenced international political and economic migrations. In the last couple of years, all the countries on the migration routes have been faced with many challenges; transit countries with a large number of people who want to pass through their territory and destination countries with challenges posed before the system of application for international protection and integration. Border EU countries, as the states of first entry, have been the most exposed in the process, especially Italy and Greece. The EU relocation mechanism based on solidarity tries to mitigate the pressure on these countries. This mechanism implies a relocation of the Although faced with further insisting on the application of the Dublin Regulation and principle of solidarity in the distribution of migrants, i.e. refugees, the competent authorities of the Republic of Croatia still do not find it necessary to adopt a new migration policy. agreed number of persons, who meet the criteria for granting international protection, to other member states. Transit countries, especially the second in line on the migration route, are trying to prevent irregular entries through stricter border control. By doing so, they are also trying to avoid being competent for resolving applications for international protection or applying return measures by implementing Dublin and Eurodac Regulations. On the other hand, after the agreement between the EU and Turkey and the end of migration crisis, seen as refugee crisis because of the structure of people in it, the countries had to deal with a large number of migrants who remained after the route was closed, as well as with an increased number of people who were returned to these countries because of the application of the Dublin Regulation, and the ones who, although in smaller numbers, were still coming through the so-called Balkan Route and across the Mediterranean. 34