Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2016 Administrations), it is clear that in most cases, they announce their intention to seek international protection after being caught while engaged in irregular stay. Along with high percentage of procedures discontinued on the grounds of leaving or failing to arrive in the Reception Centre, the above-mentioned points to the fact that the Republic of Croatia is still a transit country for applicants. In 2016, all countries forming part of the migration routes towards the EU, started to express doubt regarding the possibility of refugees being distributed according to the principle of solidarity, because such manner of distribution turned out as slow and ineffective. Pursuant to the Decision of the Government of the Republic of Croatia on Relocation and Resettlement of Third Country Nationals or Stateless Persons who Meet Conditions for International Protection, in 2016, 19 persons have been relocated in the Republic of Croatia. Members of two families of five from Syria and nine citizens of Eritrea have been granted asylum status, whereas procedures regarding another five are still pending. Considering that 550 refugees must be relocated by the end of 2017, the process whereby only 19 persons have been relocated within one year, seems slow and inefficient. In addition, Operational Plan drafted for the purpose of implementing this Decision, which should have clarified the role of specific government bodies, was not adopted in 2016. Given the slow relocation process, considerable amount of time necessary for Operational Plan to be adopted, integration difficulties as well as large number of applications that have not been decided upon in 2016, it remains unclear how Government Decision shall be implemented by the end of 2017. Distrust of countries along the migration route when it comes to distribution of refugees and migrants, is additionally supported by the fact that European Commission proposal for obligatory relocation has not been supported by the majority of member states. Given the full reapplication of Dublin procedure, as well as renewed responsibility of countries of entry to decide upon applications for international protection or for implementing security return measures, since March 2016, countries along the so-called Balkan Route, including the Republic of Croatia, started to tighten their border control, which to a great extent implied increased number of police officers and soldiers and construction of razor-wire fences. This resulted not only in drop in the number of caught irregular migrants, but also in rise in the number of those who have risked their lives by falling prey to smugglers whereas for all those who wish to apply for international protection, the access to it has either been denied or made more difficult. It is necessary to clearly emphasize that responsibility for treatments contrary to Article 3 of ECHR is borne not only by perpetrators, but also those who knew or should have known about such treatments, but failed to prevent or report them. Along with tightened border control, in late 2016, civil society organizations and the media made certain allegations on persons who were being returned to Serbia without conducted procedure foreseen by the Foreigners Act, within the framework of which, depending on the measure employed for the purpose of ensuring the person’s return, a decision should have been reached and 46