transport their household belongings and agricultural machinery free of charge. In general, repatriation from Serbia continues to function well for those wishing to return and the transportation of most personal belongings is processed in an expedited manner in keeping with the humanitarian character of the operation. Although the transfer of personal belongings and household items from Bosnia and Herzegovina (facilitated by UNHCR’s partners) was treated as common commercial cargo subject to standard customs clearance procedures, it was carried out with no major obstacles. In Montenegro, persons displaced from the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s were granted the status of “displaced persons.” Under the 2009 amendments of the Law on Foreigners, displaced persons from the former Yugoslavia were granted privileged access to the status of foreigner with a simplified application procedure to facilitate local integration. Following several years of extending the deadline for submitting applications to obtain status as foreigners under the privileged regime, the Government decided to cease the status of “displaced persons” of all persons who had not applied by 31 December 2014. Persons who acquire status as foreigners are required to obtain documents from Croatia and are also no longer recognized as displaced. As of 31 December 2017, there were only 14 persons from Croatia still holding “displaced person” status in Montenegro as their applications for the status of foreigner were still pending. Some concerns still remain with respect to the temporary residence status granted to 11 persons. C) Comments on progress on UNHCR’s recommendation regarding application of the “ceased circumstances” cessation clauses to refugees from Croatia While cessation on an individual basis on grounds of acquisition of nationality has been ongoing in Serbia, Montenegro, and Kosovo (S/RES/1244 (1999)) as outlined above, cessation for refugees from Croatia on the basis of ceased circumstances pursuant to Article 1C (5) and (6) of the 1951 Convention and in line with the recommendation contained in UNHCR’s Advisory has not been initiated anywhere in the region. Equally, no host States outside the region have indicated an intention to implement cessation on this basis to the knowledge of UNHCR.4 The Government of Serbia remains in disagreement with the cessation recommendation made by UNHCR in the Advisory. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, refugees from Croatia were never registered or formally recognized as refugees at State level, but rather at Entity level in Republika Srpska. The Ministry for Refugees and Displaced Persons of Republika Srpska continues to express willingness to de-register persons who have repatriated voluntarily to Croatia or who have fully integrated locally. However, this has not been completed by the end of 2017. The issue of naturalization of the 159 refugees from Croatia, lacking registered residence and therefore 4 The exception is Switzerland, where cessation for refugees from Croatia pursuant to Article 1C (5) and (6) was implemented prior to the issuance of UNHCR’s advisory between the period of June 2010 and August 2013. 3