Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 police officers beat them with bats, made them take their shoes off and kneel or stand in the snow, made them pass through a cordon where they would be beaten and insulted. During such events they were not allowed to speak, and some testimonies state that their valuables were taken from them, including money and mobile phones. Considering the number and content of these allegations, which also provide the dates and places where the migrants crossed the state border, as well as the medical documentation, the Ombudswoman's Report from 2016 warned that such conduct could constitute the violation of Article 3 of the ECHR, according to which no one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and warned about the necessity of conducting an effective investigation that must be adequate, detailed and conducted with due diligence. After the warning about the need to act on an individual basis and conduct procedures in accordance with the FA and AITP, the MoI stated that legal procedures are regularly implemented, with full respect of human and refugee rights, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It also stated that it regularly implemented trainings for police officers on the protection of migrants' rights, and that the number of police officers on the border with Serbia was increased, which was primarily aimed at deterring illegal entry. However, despite repeated requests, we did not get detailed information about the conducted investigations and their results. Namely, the MoI limited the verification of such allegations only to the review of its own records, which were not kept for prevention of illegal entrance, for example, or to the records from health care institutions in the Despite repeated requests, we did not get detailed information from the Ministry of the Interior about the conducted investigations and their results, and the Ministry limited the verification of allegations only to the review of records that do not even exist, for example on prevention of illegal entrance. Vukovar-Srijem Police Administration in which migrants avoid seeking help. Moreover, when we tried to verify the allegations made by an unaccompanied child about the police use of force, by directly checking thermal imaging cameras that showed the exact date and time of the event, we found that the part of the recording made at the time of the event was missing. The MoI stated that this technical system was intended primarily for border control, and not for temporary or permanent recording of events, and therefore no special rules were prescribed regarding storing and deleting records. However, it remains unclear why the MoI did not use all means that could eliminate the suspicion about the illegal conduct of police officers, regardless of their purpose. Although in 2017 the Ombudswoman stopped receiving allegations about such conduct, there was an increase in the number of complaints and allegations from CSOs about the return of migrants apprehended close to border crossing with Serbia without using procedures provided for in the FA, as well as about preventing them to seek international protection. One of the complainants stated that he came to the RCAS with the intention to apply for international protection, however, he was instructed to report to the police station. Upon arrival, he was detained and was not able to apply for international protection, but was taken to another police station or facility in a police vehicle, and then to the border with Serbia, where he was instructed to return to Serbia, but not through the border crossing. The MoI's Report states that he was apprehended in irregular stay together with another person at the police station’s address, that he did not apply for international 39