Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 not contain documents that would prove that these actions were taken in the procedure, whereas they were precisely what the MoI stressed as particularly important and thus justified the motivation for change in the treatment of migrants. From the file documentation one can conclude that migrants are being transported for hundreds of kilometres, only to have police officers ask them about the manner in which they crossed the state border, although they were asked the same question at the police station where they were apprehended, and again during a procedure in which an interpreter was not provided. Additionally, migrants who were apprehended close to the state border with Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia, for example at Beli Manastir or Stara Gradiška border crossings, were brought to the Tovarnik Police Station and Bajakovo Border Crossing, and it was assumed that they had crossed the border at Tovarnik or Bajakovo. Also, after reviewing individual summary procedures taken at the Tovarnik Police Station, in relation to all the police administrations from which irregular migrants were brought, we found that none of the files contained fingerprints, which were not even taken at the police station at the place of apprehension. Besides browsing through albums with hundreds of photographs, there is no other way to clearly identify persons to whom return decisions were issued after they left the Tovarnik Police Station or Bajakovo Border Crossing. This leads to the conclusion that in the RC there is no system that could be used to monitor their movement and status, i.e. see whether they crossed the state border towards Serbia or stayed in Croatia, which certainly does not contribute to the protection of their rights, let alone the protection of security and Croatian national interests, which the MoI constantly calls for. This is especially important because, according to the records of the MoI, on the basis of 3,107 issued return decisions only 1,025 persons left the RC legally. Thus, according to the data of the Vukovar-Srijem Police Administration, from February to November 2017, 1,116 irregular migrants were brought from other police administrations to the premises of the Tovarnik Police Station, designated for the treatment of irregular migrants and applicants. For example, 303 migrants were brought in from the Osijek-Baranja Police Administration. However, the review of cases from November, October and September showed a significant disparity between these data and established facts, because 401 irregular migrants were brought to the Tovarnik Police Station only from the Beli Manastir Border Crossing. By visiting the Tovarnik Transit and Reception Centre we found that irregular migrants were placed there after the treatment at the Tovarnik Police Station, i.e. after decisions on expulsion and the restriction of freedom of movement had been issued. Pursuant to the Regulation amending Regulation on the Internal Organization of the MoI, irregular migrants with restricted freedom of movement should be placed in reception and transit centres, such as Trilj and Tovarnik, because they were apprehended at illegal border crossing, until they are transferred to the Foreigners Reception Centre or forcibly returned on the basis of readmission agreement. However, the FA refers exclusively to the Foreigners Reception Centre, so it is not clear how the competences of police stations were extended to transit and reception centres. The explanation given by the MoI, that the concept of foreigners reception centre in the FA is a generic one since it was used in plural and with a small first letter, and that it refers to all centres in which restriction of the foreigners' freedom of movement is imposed, is not correct. Namely, Article 115(1.8) states that the provisions of the FA refer to the “Foreigners Reception Centre“ 43