In 2019, the Protector of Citizens received many complaints referring to the application of the Law on Weapons and Ammunition157. It is necessary to mention also that the MoI extended the deadline for preregistration of weapons until March 2020. The dissatisfaction of citizens referred both to the content and application of the provisions of this law and complicated procedure of weapons preregistration and to a certain extent also to the actions of police officers upon filed requests. The dissatisfaction of citizens also referred to passing of the decision on confiscation of weapons and gun license for “safety reasons”. The Protector of Citizens believes that in the following period the MoI should dedicate special attention to decisions in which the request is denied or weapons are confiscated and whose basis is exclusively “security verification”, all with the aim of the improvement of the content of decision explanation taking into account that the competence of the person who performs the security verification is not regulated by a law or bylaws. One part of complaints referred to the failure to make decisions on the requests of citizens for the removal of data from operational records of the MoI. Taking into consideration that in 2018 the Law on Records and Data Processing in Internal Affairs158 was passed in 2018, the Protector of Citizens believes that continual education of police officers and more complete perception and oversight of the application of the stated Law within the MoI is necessary. The complaints of citizens who expressed their dissatisfaction because, according to their opinion, the MoI filed against them requests for the initiation of the misdemeanor proceedings without any grounds were handled. Even beside the fact that the competent misdemeanor court decides on the responsibility of these persons and that the Protector of Citizens is not authorized to oversee the operation of judiciary, in certain cases, after performed insight, it was estimated that the requests were executed upon assumptions, instead of clearly and completely confirmed factual state and that in certain cases articles of the law were wrongly stated in relation to the factual description of the misdemeanor. The Protector of Citizens believes that it is necessary for the MoI to continually follow the outcome of initiated misdemeanor proceedings as well as the court practice of misdemeanor courts, taking into account that the burden of costs of unsubstantiated conducted misdemeanor proceedings is borne by budget funds, i.e. all citizens. In comparison to the previous reporting period, in 2019 there was a smaller number of complaints of the employees at the Ministry of Interior indicating the violations of rights on the basis of labor relation. With regards to the identified omissions related to actions upon requests of police officers for passing of the decision on annual work evaluation, the Protector of Citizens issued to the Ministry of Interion the recommendation159 upon which the authority acted after the expiration of the deadline for action. Furthermore, the Protector of Citizens was contacted also by police officers who had their labor relation terminated in compliance with formerly valid regulations, due to safety obstacles or initiation of demeanor proceeding and who were not finally convicted for the offence they were accused of, i.e. they were absolved from their responsibility. In their communication with the Protector of Citizens former police officers asked for re-entrance into employment. Acting upon the complaint of the citizen who expressed dissatisfaction with the operation of the MoI since the decision was not made upon her request for the return of paid funds to the account of the MoI, the Protector of Citizens initiated the procedure after which the MoI “Official Gazette of RS“, no. 20/15. “Official Gazette of RS“, no. 24/18. 159 Recommendation available at: https://ombudsman.rs/index.php/2012-02-07-14-03-33/6098-up-n-d-sl-d-n-pz-h-vi-p-lici-s-ih-sluzb-ni. 157 158 - 87 -