<<previous  |  index  |  next>>

Conditions in Prisons and the Treatment of Prisoners

Overcrowding in Penitentiary Facilities

Overcrowding remains the most serious problem in most Georgian penitentiary facilities, particularly in pre-trial facilities, and itself may lead to serious human rights violations.⁶¹ Overcrowding has been documented for many years by local NGOs, the Council of Europe, the CPT, and the United Nations Committee Against Torture.⁶²  In 2001 the PACE monitoring committee noted, “We were shocked by the dramatic overcrowding in the pre-trial detention centres, mainly in the section of adult men. It is hard to describe without emotion the circumstances under which human beings are kept. We described the situation to Georgian officials… and explained that in the European Union it is not permitted to keep even pigs under such conditions.”⁶³  During its May 2006 review of Georgia, the CAT also noted the problem of overcrowding and recommended that Georgia should further reduce the period of pre-trial detention, expedite filling the vacancies in the court system and use alternative measures in cases where the accused does not pose a threat to society.⁶⁴ 

The space allocated for prison cells in Georgia—both in law and in practice—is significantly less than that required by regional human rights standards. According to the CPT, the space allotted in cells intended for single occupancy should be “on the order of 7 square metres, 2 metres or more between walls, 2.5 metres between floor and ceiling.”⁶⁵  In its 2001 recommendations to the Georgian government, the CPT lowered this standard suggesting, “A standard of 4 m² per prisoner should be aimed at.”⁶⁶  Georgia’s Law on Imprisonment requires that the living space for each convict in the cells of the Penitentiary Department must be not less than two square meters.⁶⁷  Detainees should each be provided with a separate bed.⁶⁸ 

Government explanations for overcrowding

The Georgian government has taken no effective measures to address overcrowding in the penitentiary system. On the contrary, the prison population has increased by over 85 percent in the last two years, as noted above. Of the two new facilities built, one replaced an existing remand prison, although added some additional capacity.⁶⁹  Furthermore, the Action Plan of Implementation of the Strategy on Criminal Justice Reforms in Georgia envisions food provision for 13,000 prisoners for the period 2007-2009, yet this figure was already effectively met in August 2006, when the official prison population stood at 12,992.⁷⁰   Senior government officials maintain that overcrowding is only temporary and caused principally by severe delays in the court system related to judiciary reforms.⁷¹  The government also claims that amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code decreasing the amount of time for suspects to be held in pre-trial detention will help alleviate overcrowding in the near future.⁷²  However, it remains unclear whether these new deadlines for review of cases can be met, given the continuing changes in the judiciary and the shortage of judges.⁷³ 

Furthermore, deliberate policy choices regarding pre-trial detention, sentencing, probation, and parole all contribute greatly to the rapidly growing prison population. The government policy of zero tolerance for crime has lead to greater numbers of arrests of suspects, and the judiciary resorts frequently to pre-trial detention of suspects, irrespective of the gravity of the offense. Limited use of both probation as an alternative to sentencing and early release on parole also contributes to overcrowding. The General Prosecutor’s Office reported that between September 2005 and March 2006, in 52 to 59 percent of cases, persons facing trial were remanded in custody.⁷⁴  Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code in December 2005 eliminated some alternatives to pre-trial detention, leaving bail and release on personal recognizance as the only alternatives to detention, which as a matter of practice are rarely granted by courts.⁷⁵  In a February 2006 speech to newly-appointed judges, President Saakashvili also strongly discouraged the use of probation, even for those convicted of petty c rime. He stated, “People should be sent to prison for every petty crime…. [P]robation sentence will be abolished and all culprits will go straight to prison, except when it is necessary for the investigation to get information from the person which will help open big and serious cases…”⁷⁶  Lawyers confirmed that probation is virtually never awarded.⁷⁷   

These developments directly contradict information provided by the Georgian government to the UN special rapporteur on torture following his visit in 2004, in which the government states that “preference shall always be given to measures of constraint not related to the deprivation of liberty.”⁷⁸  The special rapporteur on torture had noted that official government attitudes suggest that “no distinction [is made] between pretrial detention and imprisonment following conviction,” which is contrary to the presumption of innocence and the exceptional rule of deprivation of liberty.⁷⁹  The regular use of pre-trial detention also contradicts article 9(3) of the ICCPR which states, “It shall not be the general rule that persons awaiting trial shall be detained in custody, but release may be subject to guarantees to appear for trial.”⁸⁰ The UN Human Rights Committee has ruled that detention before trial should be used only to the extent it is lawful, reasonable, and necessary. Necessity is defined narrowly: “to prevent flight, interference with evidence or the recurrence of crime” or “where the person concerned constitutes a clear and serious threat to society which cannot be contained in any other manner.”⁸¹ Each case of detention must be individually assessed for the necessity of detaining the accused.

Evidence from within the prisons suggests that in practice individual cases do not benefit from assessment as to whether detention is necessary or not. Individuals within the Penitentiary Department recognize the problem and do not agree with the current policy. One official from Tbilisi Prison No. 5 expressed his opinion that government detention policies result in overcrowding and that the only solution is to change these policies. He told Human Rights Watch, “I do believe that we need to change the detention measures. There is not always a need to detain people. If this does not change, then the prisons will always be overcrowded. There are lots of other options for detention. For example, for economic crimes: someone steals a box of cigarettes. He doesn’t need to be put in prison. We have people detained here for stealing four bottles of vodka. This doesn’t make any sense. We need to examine the severity of the crime in order to determine which measures are appropriate. There are dangerous criminals, not dangerous, those who would cooperate with law enforcement, etc. We need to change the attitude towards crimes. We need to simplify the system.”⁸² 

Conditions of overcrowding

Tbilisi remand Prison No. 5 deserves particular attention owing to its severe overcrowding. For many years, overcrowding has been most acute in this facility, and the problem has only intensified over time. Following its visit in 2004, the CPT noted, “…the overcrowding in the main pre-trial establishment in the country, Prison No. 5 in Tbilisi, had reached alarming levels,” rising by 22 percent in just five months.⁸³  During Human Rights Watch’s visit in May 2006, the Tbilisi Prison No. 5 was holding 3,559 prisoners, a 60 percent increase since the CPT’s 2004 visit. The director of the prison told Human Rights Watch that the facility is designed to accommodate 1,800 prisoners and was thus operating at nearly twice the normal capacity. He also told Human Rights Watch that the facility receives 20-50 new detainees per week.⁸⁴  Inspection of the prison’s daily intake registry for April and May 2006, however, revealed an average of 18 new detainees admitted per day.

As a result of overcrowding, nearly every cell in Prison No. 5 visited by Human Rights Watch held at least twice as many detainees as there were beds, and the space allotment per detainee fell well below any recognized norms. Overcrowded cells consistently allowed for one square meter or less of living space per prisoner. For example, one cell visited by Human Rights Watch had 28 beds and held 73 detainees. Another cell with 24 beds held 53 people. A cell with 25 beds held 75 people. The Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly Monitoring Committee and the CPT found similar conditions in 2001.⁸⁵   In the absence of sufficient beds, detainees reported sleeping in turns, for four to five hours at a time, and often during the day.⁸⁶  In at least one cell, Human Rights Watch found a detainee sleeping on the floor. One prisoner detained in Prison No. 5 for several weeks in 2006 described his cell as “a wild place. There were 54 people in a room with 16 beds… Some of the guys in the cell had their own beds. The rest of us had to sleep in four rounds, during the day and night. Sometimes three people slept together in a bed.”⁸⁷   Another detainee reported, “I was on the fourth floor. There were 71 people in that cell and only 24 beds. Sleeping was a real problem. Sometimes I might not sleep for three days.”⁸⁸  Another inmate reported, “It is terrible. We can only sleep four, five, or six hours at a time.”⁸⁹ Overcrowding also takes a serious psychological toll on detainees; one inmate told Human Rights Watch, “It is so crowded here, I could go crazy.”⁹⁰

Another facility visited by Human Rights Watch, Rustavi Prison No. 1, was also overcrowded. According to the prison’s deputy director, the facility has a capacity of 1,000 prisoners and in May 2006 there were some 1,361 detainees. This prison operates both strict and general regimes for prisoners, depending on their sentences. Most of the detainees are convicted prisoners; some have appealed their court decisions. This facility is located next to an abandoned industrial complex, where in previous years prisoners worked. During the day, prisoners are able to walk in a large courtyard. The prisoners live in barracks that do not contain individual cells or rooms. Curtains and large pieces of material are hung up to partition the space at random intervals, creating “rooms” off of a narrow corridor. In these conditions, it was impossible for Human Rights Watch to determine how many detainees lived in what space allotments. The overall atmosphere was crowded and chaotic, with four, seven, or ten detainees sharing a partitioned space.

The OSCE reports that there are also severe overcrowding problems in prisons in Batumi and Zugdidi in western Georgia. The Batumi facility has a capacity of 250, but currently holds some 565 detainees. In Zugdidi, there are 407 detainees in a prison with a capacity of 305.⁹¹  At the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, the new prisons, Rustavi Prison No. 6 and Kutaisi Prison No. 2, were not overcrowded. Rustavi Prison No. 6 was operating at close to its capacity of 728 inmates, however, with 707 inmates. Kutaisi Prison No. 2, with a capacity of 1,500, but holding 1,423, was similarly operating just under capacity.⁹²  At the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, Tbilisi Prison No. 7 was not technically overcrowded, although some of the cells held more detainees than is acceptable under Georgian law and international standards, while other cells, including renovated cells on the top floor designed for up to eight detainees, held two detainees. The authorities claim that this is because certain types of prisoners (thieves in law and former police, for example) cannot be held together for security reasons.⁹³  By August 2006 the population in Prison No. 7 had increased to nearly full capacity.⁹⁴

Physical Conditions of Penitentiary Facilities

Overcrowding often leads to or exacerbates other problems, including unsanitary living conditions, poor health and hygiene among prisoners, and a lack of privacy. In several facilities, the age of the buildings combined with the lack of maintenance also result in appalling conditions. Under the Council of Europe’s European Prison Rules, “The accommodation provided for prisoners, and in particular all sleeping accommodation, shall respect human dignity and, as far as possible, privacy, and meet the requirements of health and hygiene, due regard being paid to climatic conditions and especially to floor space, cubic content of air, lighting, heating and ventilation.” ⁹⁵ Georgian law states that the living space for convicts must conform to technical and hygienic norms, “must provide maintenance of a convict’s health, [and] must have a window to provide natural illumination and ventilation.”⁹⁶  Most of the facilities visited by Human Rights Watch, with the exception of the two new prisons, did not meet these standards.

Conditions in Tbilisi Prison No. 5

Tbilisi Prison No. 5 dates to 1912. The building had been originally built and was used as a factory in the 19^th century. The facility accepts remand prisoners from the five provinces of eastern Georgia, including Tbilisi. In many parts of Tbilisi Prison No. 5, the walls and floors are crumbling and in a state of disrepair. Electrical wires are exposed in the cells and corridors. The regular detention cells are filled with as many two-tier metal bunk beds as the rooms will hold. There were no tables or chairs in the rooms at the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit. Detainees must sit on beds or on the floor when they are not sleeping. The toilets are partitioned from the rest of the cell by only a short wall or sometimes with a piece of fabric or shower curtain that the inmates have put up themselves. This design allows for very little privacy for those using the sanitary facilities. Because of the overcrowding, beds are often placed very close to the toilets. The toilets are decaying and filthy. In several cells Human Rights Watch found piles of garbage near the door. Human Rights Watch considers the conditions in which detainees are housed in this facility violate the prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment.⁹⁷

All of the cells in Tbilisi Prison No. 5 visited by Human Rights Watch smelled strongly of human sweat, human excrement, and cigarette smoke. Detainees spend consecutive days and weeks in these cells without being allowed outside (see below, “Lack of Access to Exercise”). The cells were also unreasonably hot, due to the overcrowding and lack of ventilation. Many prisoners were reduced to wearing very little clothing in an effort to stay cool.⁹⁸  Although the rooms had large windows, there was extremely poor ventilation as a result of thick shutters placed on the windows.⁹⁹ The CPT identifies “natural light and fresh air [to be] basic elements of life which every prisoner is entitled to enjoy.”¹⁰⁰ Despite repeated recommendations by the CPT to do away with these shutters, at the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, the government had yet to do so.¹⁰¹  Human Rights Watch later received information that in August 2006, during a severe heat wave in Georgia, the government had initiated the process of removing the shutters.¹⁰² 

Conditions in Tbilisi Prison No. 7

Human Rights Watch found similar conditions in Tbilisi Prison No. 7, a pre-trial facility located in the Ministry of Interior building. According to the deputy head of the prison, the facility has been functional since 2004 and can accommodate 120 detainees. At the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, there were 100 detainees, including 30 alleged organized crime bosses. The deputy director told Human Rights Watch, “All of the mafia bosses from Georgia are here.”¹⁰³  All of the prisoners in this facility are suspects, although some had been previously sentenced and at the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit were under investigation for additional charges.

Tbilisi Prison No. 7 consists of three floors of cells, with the first floor being basement cells. Cells vary in size, with capacities ranging from one to 10 people. Human Rights Watch saw several cells on the basement floor that were crowded, hot, filthy, and lacking in any natural light or ventilation. The cells contained only small windows that were covered in layers of heavy screens. After intervention by the ombudsman, the administration installed brighter artificial lights in the room, but they failed to fully address the problem of poor lighting.¹⁰⁴ At the time of our visit, the cells on this floor were still so dark that when the guards opened the doors, the detainees squinted vigorously as they attempted to adjust their eyes to the bright lights of the corridor. Detainees complained about the light: one person told Human Rights Watch, “The light is a bit better now, but it’s still bad.”¹⁰⁵ Human Rights Watch believes that to detain persons in the conditions that exist in many of these cells constitutes degrading treatment.¹⁰⁶

Cells on the third floor of Tbilisi Prison No. 7 had been recently renovated. They had large windows with proper light and ventilation and contained beds as well as a table and benches. As noted above, some of these cells were underutilized, however.

Conditions in new prisons

Human Rights Watch found the cells in the newly built prisons, Rustavi P rison No. 6 and Kutaisi Prison No. 2, to be generally clean, with plenty of natural light provided by large windows. The cells were not overcrowded and usually housed six to eight people. Each room contained bunk beds and a table and benches. Toilets are completely enclosed in small cubicles near the cell door. Ventilation remained a problem even in these cells, however, and rooms were hot and frequently smelled strongly of human sweat and cigarettes.

Conditions in quarantine and punishment cells

Human Rights Watch found the most appalling conditions to be in the basement “quarantine” cells in Tbilisi Prison No. 5, where detainees are allegedly kept for up to three days upon arrival before being transferred to a regular cell. Human Rights Watch later learned that at least one detainee had been kept in a quarantine cell for eight months (see below, “Mental Health and Psychiatric Care”). The cells visited by Human Rights Watch had no natural light or ventilation, owing to their location in the basement, and only one tiny window covered with screens. Artificial light was provided by a bright light over the door. There was no running water in the sinks. There was standing water on the floor in one cell. The bed frames consisted of bare iron planks, and there were no mattresses and only a few tattered blankets. When a Human Rights Watch researcher asked the deputy prison director, the official responsible for prisoners’ rights in the facility, why people did not have mattresses or blankets, he said that he did not know. He immediately consulted with one of the guards outside of the quarantine cells who stated, “They only stay a few days, and so they burn things or just make them all wet. So we don’t give them blankets or mattresses anymore. They always destroy them.”¹⁰⁷ 

One former detainee of Tbilisi Prison No. 5, who was held in the quarantine cell for 24 hours, struggled to describe to Human Rights Watch the conditions in which he lived. “No, I can’t talk about it, really. The conditions in this cell were indescribable. This is a very old room. The sewage from the second floor runs down into this room. There is a swamp of this stuff on the floor of this cell. [When I was there] there were 18 people kept in this cell with 16 beds. Everyone was sickly and unwashed. I really feared getting tuberculosis or some other disease. I really can’t believe that I didn’t get sick.”¹⁰⁸

In Human Rights Watch’s opinion, the detention of persons in these conditions constitutes degrading treatment.¹⁰⁹  The CPT and others have made repeated requests to abolish immediately the use of these cells, noting, in 2001, that “living space per person could be as little as 1.7 m². Further, the cells were generally dark, badly ventilated, filthy—sometimes with mounds of assorted rubbish—and damp. Their general level of dilapidation beggared description.” Following the CPT’s 2001 visit, the Georgian authorities reportedly ceased the use of the basement cells in Prison No. 5, including the “quarantine” rooms. However, by the time of the CPT’s May 2004 visit, the cells were in use again, apparently as a result of overcrowding.¹¹⁰ 

Punishment cells in the facilities visited by Human Rights Watch also frequently fell below international standards. In Rustavi Prison No. 1, punishment cells were small, with only a tiny window that provided no ventilation and absolutely no natural light. Prisoners were provided bunks made of bare slats for sleeping and had no mattresses. Many beds were not useable due to missing slats. In one cell there were 10 detainees sharing seven useable beds. Some of the rooms had functioning toilets, partitioned by a short wall. In rooms without functioning toilets, prisoners were required to knock on the cell door and request to be taken to a toilet located in an unused cell apparently used as a common toilet facility. Prisoners in the Rustavi Prison No. 1 punishment cells refused to talk to Human Rights Watch.

In the two new prisons visited by Human Rights Watch, punishment cells are limited to solitary confinement cells. In Rustavi Prison No. 6, prisoners serving punishment are held in very small cells with a toilet, sink, and with a wooden bed with no mattress or linens. In Kutaisi Prison No. 2, Human Rights Watch saw two punishment cells with similar conditions. In the Kutaisi facility, prison authorities told Human Rights Watch that ten days is the maximum time detainees are kept in punishment. One detainee told Human Rights Watch that he had been in solitary confinement for eight days as punishment for swearing at the guards. Another also reported being pu nished for swearing at the guards and was being held for a total of five days in the punishment cell. With respect to punishment, the CPT notes that it “pays particular attention to prisoners held, for whatever reason… under conditions akin to solitary confinement. The principle of proportionality requires that a balance be struck between the requirements of the case and the application of a solitary confinement-type regime, which is a step that can have very harmful consequences for the person concerned…. [A]ll forms of solitary confinement should be as short as possible.”¹¹¹  The Standard Minimum Rules prohibit punishment by close confinement.¹¹²

Hygiene

Practices relating to detainee hygiene varied widely in the penitentiary system. Most detainees reported being able to shower only once or twice a month, except in Rustavi Prison No. 1 and the Republican Prison Hospital where detainees are allowed to shower at any time. The Standard Minimum Rules require that prisoners “be provided with water and with such toilet articles as are necessary for health and cleanliness” and that “[i]n order that prisoners may maintain a good appearance compatible with their self-respect, facilities shall be provided for the proper care of the hair and beard, and men shall be enabled to shave regularly.”¹¹³ 

The deputy director of Tbilisi Prison No. 5 claimed that detainees “wash once per week.”¹¹⁴  However, detainees stated that they do not shower once per week because “[t]here are too many people.”¹¹⁵  One detainee in Kutaisi Prison No. 2 stated, “We get a shower once or twice a month. Sometimes we just wash in the cold water that comes out of our sink.”¹¹⁶  In some cells in Tbilisi Prison No. 5 detainees had acquired hoses and hardware to create makeshift showers over the toilets. One detainee demonstrated to Human Rights Watch, “We wash here in our own toilet with this hose connected to the sink faucet. We made our own shower, but we only get water every so often here.”¹¹⁷ 

Several detainees in Prison No. 7 stated that they are able to shower only once every three weeks.¹¹⁸  According to one lawyer, “When people were first brought to Tbilisi Prison No. 7, they weren’t allowed to wash for two months. People must share one bar of soap in the shower and razors are used by many people.”¹¹⁹   Another lawyer told Human Rights Watch that in Prison No. 7, for three months detainees were not allowed to shave or receive a haircut, but then one day all detainees had their heads and faces completely shaved.¹²⁰  The Office of the Ombudsman confirmed that the administration did not provide personal hygiene items (soap, toilet paper, razors, tooth brushes, toothpaste, etc.) to detainees and did not allow relatives to deliver these items.¹²¹   In response to the ombudsman’s written complaints about hygiene, lack of family visits, lack of access to exercise, and other violations of prisoners’ rights, the deputy head of the Penitentiary Department replied, “The housing conditions in Jail #7 come into compliance with minimal living standards defined by Georgian legislation and international norms.”¹²²

Detainees stated that their family members had provided bedding and that often the overcrowding required them to share it with others.¹²³  The bedding was often filthy and washed infrequently.¹²⁴  A prisoner in Tbilisi Prison No. 7 stated, “They haven’t changed the sheets in three months.”¹²⁵  International standards require that the government provide detainees with separate and “sufficient bedding which shall be clean when issued, kept in good order and changed often enough to ensure its cleanliness.”¹²⁶

Food and Nutrition

Prisoners in all facilities visited by Human Rights Watch complained about the quality and quantity of food. In several facilities Human Rights Watch saw the food being prepared for prisoners or being served to them. Detainees generally received three meals a day, but the food often lacked caloric substance and nutrition. In each case, the food consisted of watery soup with some vegetables and some meat in it. The Standard Minimum Rules state that “Every prisoner shall be provided by the administration at the usual hours with food of nutritional value adequate for health and strength, of wholesome quality and well prepared and served.”¹²⁷  The CPT notes, “[T]he provision of certain basic necessities of life must always be guaranteed in institutions where the State has persons under its care and/or custody. These include adequate food…”¹²⁸

In Tbilisi Prison No. 5, Human Rights Watch found the kitchen building to be decaying. Water was overflowing some of the food preparation containers resulting in standing water on the floor. The cooks told Human Rights Watch that that day detainees would receive soup with tomato, onion, carrot, potato, noodles, and some chicken meat. According to the cooks, the detainees also get macaroni and canned meat, peas, and buckwheat kasha. The deputy director of Rustavi Prison No. 1 told Human Rights Watch that people eat mostly soup, tea, bread, and potatoes.¹²⁹ 

Prisoners confirmed that they received a watery gruel (kasha) or watery soup for most meals. Several detainees in Tbilisi Prison No. 7 complained to Human Rights Watch about the food. One detainee said, “The food is spoiled. I don’t eat it. I only eat bread.”¹³⁰ Another detainee in Prison No. 7 stated that he had developed stomach problems from the poor food after being moved to the facility. One detainee in Rustavi Prison No. 6 told Human Rights Watch, “The food is very bad here. We get some kind of mysterious meat sometimes.”¹³¹  Detainees in Kutaisi Prison No. 2 also spoke about the inadequate food supply. One person stated, “For lunch we get soup with maybe a small amount of meat. The food is not enough. We get kasha at night, not meat. Sometimes we get sugar—a little cube of it. They [the prison officials] say that if we get sugar, we will make moonshine out of it.”¹³² Several other detainees as well as prison officials told Human Rights Watch that sugar is restricted for this reason.¹³³  

Children interviewed by Human Rights Watch generally received more nutritious food, including meat on a more regular basis, although the food was nevertheless of a poor quality overall. Two children detained in Tbilisi Prison No. 7 stated, “The food is not good. There is kasha, borsch, meat sometimes, sometimes soy protein.”¹³⁴  Human Rights Watch saw bowls full of uneaten food in the boys’ cell that they said they could not eat. Children held in pre-trial detention in Kutaisi Prison No. 2 stated that they received a meat or fish cutlet every evening. However, the boys had been given more nutritious food only after they protested. When asked about numerous cuts on the boys’ arms, one boy told Human Rights Watch, “We had a real problem with the food, and so we cut ourselves. It was the only way. The food made us sick, but now it’s better, since we cut ourselves.”¹³⁵  Nevertheless, one boy reported, “The food is not very good. Sometimes we really can’t eat it and so we feel hungry.”¹³⁶

In the Republican Prison Hospital detainees also complained about food. One person stated, “I don’t eat what they have here. There are only three foods here: watery kasha, borsch, and kasha again in the evening. Maybe there is a potato in the borsch.”¹³⁷   Another detainee stated, “No one eats the food here. It is so bad. My relatives bring packages and leave it at the entrance.”¹³⁸  When asked about the food supply for patients, the hospital’s head doctor told Human Rights Watch, “We don’t tabulate the actual number of calories. We use a table that tells us how much protein, etc. each food gives a person. Everyone gets the same food. They get bread, potatoes, macaroni, fish and meat, but not every day. But they do get protein every day.”¹³⁹

To supplement the meager prison diets, detainees have relied heavily on food delivered in packages by their relatives, but in some facilities receipt of packages has been severely restricted in recent months, with prisoners receiving no packages or a limited number of items. Under Georgian law, pre-trial detainees are allowed to receive parcels and packages with food inside.¹⁴⁰  In practice, the policy on packages varied from prison to prison and was not consistently applied even within one prison. Officials at Tbilisi Prison No. 5 reported that there is no limit on the packages that detainees can receive. “Relatives come every day. They bring food, such as fruit, vegetables, and prepared foods. They cannot bring food that will spoil.”¹⁴¹  Detainees in Tbilisi Prison No. 5 and the Republican Prison Hospital did not report having problems receiving packages.¹⁴² 

In other facilities, however, there are many restrictions on the receipt of packages and the contents of packages. In Tbilisi Prison No. 7, Kutaisi Prison No. 2, and Rustavi Prison No. 6 prisoners can now only receive limited items in packages from their relatives; some prisoners were not allowed to receive any packages at all. The restrictions on specific items appeared arbitrary; officials claimed that they sought to limit foods that might spoil, but then denied relatives’ attempts to deliver non-perishable pre-packaged or processed food. According to the director of Prison No. 7, detainees can receive packages with juice, fruit, and cigarettes,¹⁴³ but detainees reported that they did not always receive the packages delivered by relatives. One woman described her experience with trying to deliver parcels to her husband detained in Prison No. 7. “My husband was in [Tbilisi] Prison No. 5 previously. I could send food to him there regularly. Here they only take juice and fruit, newspapers and cigarettes. But they only take 30 kilograms per month total. He has lost a lot of weight. He is now very weak. I can’t send him vitamins, honey, cookies, or tea, even though these things don’t spoil. And sometimes the prison authorities allow packages, and sometimes they don’t.”¹⁴⁴  

Detainees in Kutaisi and Rustavi consistently stated that they can only receive cigarettes, juice, and fruit from their relatives, and that this is a recently enacted policy. According to one detainee, “There isn’t much food allowed in anymore. We must eat the prison food now. This all changed a month ago. In the past, we were allowed to have more foods.”¹⁴⁵ One prison expert explained the new policy on parcels: “Officials in the new Kutaisi and Rustavi prisons barred parcels because they planned to have a shop, based on a European model, where detainees could buy food, cigarettes, and other items. But there are no shops in these facilities yet. So they are allowing some parcels, but salt, coffee, tea are banned. Prisoners see this as a punishment.”¹⁴⁶ 

Medical Care for Detainees

Human Rights Watch found medical care for detainees to be wholly inadequate in all facilities. Detainees widely complained of health problems and lack of care, and the Republican Prison Hospital failed to meet basic standards for treatment. The CPT states, “A prison health care service should be able to provide medical treatment and nursing care, as well as appropriate diets, physiotherapy, rehabilitation or any other necessary special facility, in conditions comparable to those enjoyed by patients in the outside community.”¹⁴⁷  The Standard Minimum Rules place similar requirements on states to provide adequate medical care. ¹⁴⁸ The European Court of Human Rights has found that a failure to provide adequate medical treatment to a detainee in prison may contribute to conditions amounting to degrading treatment, resulting in a violation of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.¹⁴⁹

Republican Prison Hospital

Human Rights Watch visited the Republican Prison Hospital in Tbilisi on May 15, 2006. The hospital, which serves the whole prison system, takes detainees who have medical cases too serious to be treated in the medical wards of the individual penitentiary facilities. However, the facility was not built to function as a hospital nor has it been renovated to meet the technical standards of a hospital. The building possesses only basic facilities for surgery and does not meet any of the standards for hygiene or sanitation that are required in Georgian hospitals. According to an expert at the Rehabilitation Centre for Victims of Torture “Empathy,” a nongovernmental organization that provides rehabilitation for torture victims and undertakes programs within the prisons, “[t]he conditions in the prison hospital are very bad. There are no standards, no licenses, and no hygienic certificates that are required of all Georgian hospitals. In this sense, the medical system for prisoners operates completely illegally.”¹⁵⁰ 

The head doctor of the Republican Prison Hospital, David Ossetian, also admitted, “This building is not a hospital but we use it as a hospital…. Previously, it was a prison. We don’t have normal hospital departments or divisions.”¹⁵¹  He further stated, “We don’t have enough equipment and medicine here.”¹⁵² According to a report on the Republican Prison Hospital for 2005 prepared by Dr. Ossetian, the hospital gets approximately 0.30 lari ($0.14) per day per patient for medicines.¹⁵³ Prisoners often receive medicines from their relatives, although the administration has also placed restrictions on this practice. One patient suffering from multiple long-term illnesses reported, “Only with bribes can you get medicine.”¹⁵⁴

The prison hospital and regular penitentiary facility medical wards technically have the possibility to transfer patients who are in need of more sophisticated care to the city hospital. Dr. Ossetian also told Human Rights Watch, “Most people, when we can’t treat them here, we are able to move them to the city hospital. But not all of them.”¹⁵⁵ However, the deputy head of the Penitentiary Department told Human Rights Watch that in some cases, due to the Penitentiary Department’s unpaid bills, city hospitals no longer accept referrals from prisons or the prison hospital. P risoners are often expected to pay for treatment in city hospitals.¹⁵⁶  

The Ministry of Justice has plans to transfer responsibility for medical care within the penitentiary system to the Ministry of Labor, Health, and Social Affairs in September 2006. Dr. Ossetian felt that this might not be the solution to the system’s problems, as the Ministry of Labor, Health, and Social Affairs does not have the necessary budget allocations for 2006 to absorb the prison health system. He recommended transferring the prison health system to the Ministry of Labor, Health, and Social Affairs at the start of 2007, when new budgets will be in place.¹⁵⁷  The public healthcare system in Georgia also struggles to deliver quality care due to antiquated facilities and lack of resources.

At the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, the Republican P rison Hospital, with a capacity of 300, held 284 patients.¹⁵⁸   Many of the problems persisting in the regular penitentiary facilities also exist in the prison hospital. On a tour of the hospital, Human Rights Watch found many large rooms shared by up to 12 people. The majority of rooms contained only metal beds placed close together. Some of the rooms had televisions. The rooms were hot, unclean, and smelled of human sweat and cigarette smoke, but had reasonable light and windows that provided some ventilation. Patients received bedding, food, and other basic necessities including medicines from family members who delivered parcels. The receipt of packages appeared unrestricted. In several rooms, Human Rights Watch saw bedding that was unwashed and had bloodstains. Common toilet facilities, which are located in the hallways, were damp and smelled strongly of human excrement. Human Rights Watch was surprised to see that some detainees lived in starkly better conditions than others. In one room visited by Human Rights Watch, two patients enjoyed armchairs, a sofa, a double bed, and a flat screen television. The patients confirmed that these items had been brought to them by relatives and allowed by the hospital administration.

Prison medical wards

Each prison facility visited by Human Rights Watch contains a separate medical ward and has medical personnel on staff. A Ministry of Justice medical commission consisting of six doctors visits the facilities once or twice per week. A member of this commission told Human Rights Watch, “We receive complaints from prisoners or from the investigator or family member. We also will do checks in the rooms.”¹⁵⁹  Because of overcrowding in certain prison facilities, medical wards could not meet many prisoners’ need for medical care. In addition, the conditions in the rooms themselves were substandard. The medical ward of Tbilisi Prison No. 5, like the prison itself, was overcrowded, housing 88 patients in a facility with a capacity of 72. In one room there were nine patients sharing eight beds. One nurse at another facility told Human Rights Watch, “We have 17 inmates in a medical center. There are no more places. It is a bit overcrowded. A lot of inmates who need permanent supervision of a doctor and should be put in the infirmary, can’t be because we don’t have space for them.”¹⁶⁰

Conditions of the rooms in the medical wards varied greatly. In one room in the medical ward of Tbilisi Prison No. 5, Human Rights Watch found four beds in a properly lighted, clean, well ventilated room. A bigger room in the same facility had eight beds, was dirty and smelled strongly of human sweat and cigarette smoke. Human Rights Watch found similar disparity in the quality of the patients’ rooms in Rustavi Prison No. 1. Only in the new prisons, Kutaisi P rison No. 2 and Rustavi Prison No. 6, were patients’ rooms consistently clean, well lighted, well ventilated, and not overcrowded.

Prison facilities also severely lacked resources, including medicines, to properly care for patients. According to one medical employee, “The supply of drugs is very poor. We get 100 lari ($45.50) worth of supplies per month. We have very little equipment; only first aid, emergency equipment.”¹⁶¹   One detainee told Human Rights Watch that he had been in the Republican Prison Hospital for nearly a year, but was transferred to a regular prison medical ward for reasons unknown to him and that he was now unable to get the care he needed for problems related to a head trauma he had suffered many years previously. He said, “In the prison hospital I had better treatment… I got an MRI scan there. There is no equipment here. My relatives bring me medicines because there aren’t medicines here.”¹⁶² One HIV-positive detainee in Kutaisi Prison No. 2 stated, “I don’t get medicine. The others get medicine [from their relatives], but my family can’t afford to b ring me medicine.”¹⁶³  The head doctor in this facility downplayed the situation, saying, “Families can bring medicines. We will write a prescription and then the families fill the prescription and bring us the medicines. They only need to bring the kinds of medicines that we don’t have here. In general, we have enough medicines here. We can treat people as necessary.”¹⁶⁴

Human Rights Watch also encountered numerous detainees in cells who complained of or clearly suffered from a lack of medical treatment. In Tbilisi Prison No. 7, Human Rights Watch spoke with one detainee who had his arm in a sling. When asked about this detainee, the prison’s chief doctor told Human Rights Watch, “He states that he fell off his bed, from the top bunk. I believe him of course. What else am I going to do? I just believe whatever the inmates tell me. How do I know otherwise?” With respect to the injured man’s treatment, the doctor stated, “We asked for an x-ray one week ago. The [Ministry of Justice medical] commission came and also ordered an x-ray. He will maybe get it next week.”¹⁶⁵  Some detainees stated that guards refused to assist in calling in medical care. “One guy has had an awful toothache, for three days we’ve been asking for a doctor to come. One guard says, ‘Sure, I’ll take care of it.’ [But he doesn’t]. We ask at the next shift, and they say ‘Sure I’ll take care of it.’ They always say yes. When you ask the first guy what came of his promise, he says, ‘I forgot, but shut up or you’ll have problems.’”¹⁶⁶  Another prisoner told Human Rights Watch that he believed he has gangrene on both of his feet, but that the medical service had not given him any treatment.¹⁶⁷  An official from Tbilisi Prison No. 5 admitted, “We have too many prisoners; we can’t check all of them. Some write complaints. They may not be checked properly by the doctors.”¹⁶⁸  Detainees confirmed that this was the case.¹⁶⁹   

Several detainees in Tbilisi Prison No. 5 told Human Rights Watch that they feared fellow inmates who had heavy coughs had tuberculosis but were not being treated, despite repeated requests for assistance to the guards and medical personnel. The prison has a section for tuberculosis patients as part of a program run jointly by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the Ministry of Justice, and the Ministry of Labor, Health, and Social Affairs.¹⁷⁰ The ICRC and the Georgian government have been engaged in tuberculosis prevention and treatment programs since 1998. They have implemented screening programs in 14 of the 16 penitentiary facilities, as well as the World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended directly observed treatment, short course (DOTS). Currently 250 prisoners are in the DOTS program.¹⁷¹  Thus far, more than 3,000 prisoners in Georgia with tuberculosis have been treated, and the percentage of detainees suffering from tuberculosis has fallen from 6.5 percent in 1998 to 3.85 percent in 2005.¹⁷² 

Tuberculosis nevertheless remains a serious problem in the Georgian prison system. The spread of multi-drug resistant forms of tuberculosis remains a real threat, particularly in prisons, where lack of proper hygiene, lack of adequate medical facilities, insufficient medical staff, and, in particular, overcrowding, leave detainees more vulnerable to becoming infected with this highly contagious disease. Tuberculosis isolation facilities also become overcrowded and overburdened as the prison population increases; as a result, existing facilities may not be sufficient to isolate all tuberculosis patients from the general prison population. The growth of a tuberculosis epidemic in the prison system also places society at a real risk of an epidemic, as the disease can be readily transmitted from detainees to prison employees and to family members and others once detainees are released. Some experts also believe that there is a serious risk of an increase in coinciding HIV and tuberculosis epidemics in the region.¹⁷³ 

Mental health and psychiatric care

The situation for psychiatric patients within the penitentiary system is grave. The Standard Minimum Rules require that “the medical services of the institution shall seek to detect and shall treat any physical or mental illnesses or defects which may hamper a prisoner’s rehabilitation. All necessary medical, surgical and psychiatric services shall be provided to that end.”¹⁷⁴  The CPT also pays particular attention to this category of individuals.¹⁷⁵  As in other parts of the Republican Prison Hospital, conditions of detention for psychiatric patients were substandard and many detainees in need of care both in the hospital and in the regular prison facilities were clearly not able to receive it.

Rooms in the psychiatric department of the Republican Prison Hospital were in varying conditions of cleanliness and upkeep, but most were crowded, filthy, and smelling strongly of human sweat and cigarette smoke. Several of the rooms held large numbers of patients together; in at least one instance as many as 15 people lived together in one large room. There were people sleeping in beds in the hallway. The prison authorities told Human Rights Watch that these people had themselves requested to be put there because of their psychological problems. Penal Reform International (PRI) has observed that prisoners described by staff as suffering from mental health problems are sometimes located in punishment cells. During a recent visit to Batumi prison, PRI observed three prisoners described as having mental health problems in a cell (not a punishment cell) with no light or air except that which reached them through the grille in the door.¹⁷⁶

Prison authorities in various facilities acknowledged that there were detainees in their prisons with suspected or confirmed mental illnesses, but said these individuals were not transferred out of the regular prison facilities or treated within the medical wards of the facilities. Many also dismissed their conditions as not warranting special care. The deputy director of Rustavi Prison No. 1 described one inmate who had taken his bed outside into the courtyard: “Sometimes mental patients take beds out of the rooms. They are mostly normal but have strange habits.”¹⁷⁷  Irena Tsintsadze, deputy head of the Ministry of Justice’s Penitentiary Department, described one case involving a detainee who was in his eighth month in the quarantine section of Tbilisi Prison No. 5. The man was in need of a psychiatric evaluation, but doctors refused to treat him because he has lice:

[There is one prisoner who has] been in Prison No. 5 for eight months, in a quarantine cell. [We] decided he should have a psychiatric exam, but how can anyone understand him? He has a Georgian surname, [but he doesn’t speak Georgian]…. This person should be in a psychiatric hospital. We asked the penitentiary system for the medical assessment department to determine whether he is insane, but they said that it was impossible to do so. He has lice. They say that to treat his lice, they must treat the entire prison. So, the psychiatric unit won’t take him because he has lice…. [T]here are eight inmates in [his] cell. He doesn’t want to leave his room. But he’s not aggressive. Maybe he’s gotten used to it.¹⁷⁸

One lawyer described the case of one of her clients. She told Human Rights Watch, “[My client] is a very sick person. He had a psychological diagnosis a few years ago stating that he cannot answer before the law. We have asked for him to be moved to the Republican Prison Hospital—this is the absolute minimum. But they don’t let us do this.” She explained that he faces criminal charges simply because he calls himself a thief in law, despite the fact that there is no other evidence. Under the new law on organized crime enacted in December 2005, admitting to being a thief in law alone is sufficient grounds for criminal prosecution.¹⁷⁹

Access to Exercise

Georgian law also provides convicted prisoners with the right to exercise one hour per day.¹⁸⁰  Although some prisoners reported being able to exercise daily for up to an hour, this right was not guaranteed consistently across facilities or even within individual prisons. In almost all cases, exercise facilities are small, high-walled areas topped with wire that lack sufficient space for prisoners to exercise physically. Again, detainees in Tbilisi Prison No. 7 faced the harshest restrictions and, at the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, had not been outside to exercise since December 2005. One detainee stated, “We don’t get any walks. I haven’t had any exercise in five months.”¹⁸¹ Another stated, “I’ve been here since January … I’ve had no exercise yet.”¹⁸²  Children detained in Prison No. 7 also told Human Rights Watch, “We don’t go outside.”¹⁸³  The deputy director denied that there was an absolute lack of exercise, but stated, “We only have small gardens for walking. According to the rules, people should get one to two hours per day for exercise, but now it is less.”¹⁸⁴ In August 2006 one lawyer told Human Rights Watch that detainees in Tbilisi Prison No. 7 had begun to receive exercise for 30 minutes each day.¹⁸⁵

In Tbilisi Prison No. 5, detainees also complained of the lack of exercise. One former detainee stated, “While I was in Prison No. 5 we had a walk once per month for 30 or 40 minutes.”¹⁸⁶  One detainee told Human Rights Watch, “We get to go outside only once every three months or so.”¹⁸⁷  The deputy director of the prison admitted that the prisoners did not get the exercise to which they were entitled under law, saying, “For exercise, people should get one hour per day, but there are so many people and we don’t always manage to get everyone out.”¹⁸⁸

Some prisoners in Kutaisi Prison No. 2 told Human Rights Watch that their access to exercise was inconsistent. “We haven’t been outside in a week. Sometimes they take us every day; sometimes they don’t. I don’t know why they don’t take us out,” said one prisoner.¹⁸⁹ Another confirmed, “We haven’t been out for exercise for a week. They say it’s because of some sort of lock-down/quarantine.”¹⁹⁰ Women and children held in this facility did not report having problems with their access to exercise.

In Rustavi Prison No. 6, one prisoner reported some restrictions on the right to exercise, saying that he was allowed “only 30 minutes of walking” per day.¹⁹¹  The prison’s deputy director told Human Rights Watch, “There are 12 exercise yards. Everyone gets to exercise for one hour. If they don’t smoke they get 20 minutes more.”¹⁹²

The limits on exercise described above violate the Standard Minimum Rules, which require that “every prisoner who is not employed in outdoor work shall have at least one hour of suitable exercise in the open air daily if the weather permits.”¹⁹³  The CPT affirmed this requirement as a basic safeguard and emphasized that “all prisoners without exception (including those undergoing cellular confinement as a punishment) should be offered the possibility to take outdoor exercise daily.”¹⁹⁴  The CPT has repeatedly documented the Georgian government’s lack of compliance with this requirement.¹⁹⁵

Lack of Access to Family Visits and Correspondence

Prisoners in all facilities visited by Human Rights Watch complained of lack of contact with their relatives. New amendments to the imprisonment law curtailed the standard number of visits and length of visits for convicted prisoners, and the government has added a provision allowing this right to be further limited “based on security interests within the penitentiary institution.”¹⁹⁶ A member of the parliamentary legal committee, which sponsored the amendments, justified the amendments in a press interview saying, “The Penitentiary Department has decided that [these restrictions on family visits] are a necessary first step of the reform in the system.”¹⁹⁷ 

The legislative changes reduced convicts’ visits with family members to one hour at a time.¹⁹⁸ The number of visits is determined by the severity of the regime being served. Convicted prisoners serving under the general regime are allowed two visits per month, whereas previously they were allowed five short-term visits monthly and five long-term meetings annually.¹⁹⁹  Convicted prisoners serving under the strict regime are now allowed only one visit per month, and recidivists have the right to only one visit every two months. Previously, these prisoners were allowed four short-term visits monthly and three long-term visits annually.²⁰⁰ Convicts serving under the general prison regime are allowed only three visits per year and those under the strict prison regime are allowed only two visits per year under the surveillance of the administration.²⁰¹  Pre-trial detainees are allowed no more than two visits per month. Permission for a visit must be granted by an investigator, prosecutor, or a judge.²⁰²

These new limitations on family visits are overly restrictive and counter to international standards that provide for regular contact with friends and family members. The European Committee for the  Prevention of Torture states, “It is also very important for prisoners to maintain reasonably good contact with the outside world. Above all, a prisoner must be given the means of safeguarding his relationships with his family and close friends. The guiding principle should be the promotion of contact with the outside world…” ²⁰³  In its 2004 report on Georgia, the CPT recommended that the Georgian authorities “increase the official visiting entitlement of sentenced male prisoners so as to ensure that all prisoners can receive at least one short-term or one long-term visit per month.”²⁰⁴ With respect to pre-trial detainees, the CPT called on the government “to ensure that remand prisoners are entitled to receive visits as a matter of principle,” without authorization from a prosecutor, investigator or judge; any limitations on visits for pre-trial detainees should “be specifically substantiated by the needs of the investigation, require the approval of a body unconnected with the case at hand and be applied for a specified period of time.”²⁰⁵

Even before these amendments came into force, detainees told Human Rights Watch that they had not been allowed visits in several months. The lack of contact resulted in desperation for many detainees and their families. One detainee in Tbilisi Prison No. 7 stated in May that the last time he had seen his family was in January.²⁰⁶  Another stated, “I haven’t seen family in five months. I don’t have any news of them!”²⁰⁷ According to one woman, whose husband is detained in Prison No. 7, “I don’t have meetings with my husband. I haven’t seen my husband [for 5 months], since December. I got permission for a meeting from the court, but when I came they wouldn’t let me in.”²⁰⁸ Another woman reported, “Only through lots of insider contacts I was finally able to get a 30-minute meeting [with my husband].”²⁰⁹  Lawyers confirmed that there are severe restrictions on family visits for their clients located in Tbilisi Prison No. 7. One lawyer told Human Rights Watch, “The wife of one of my clients got permission and came to have a meeting with her husband, but the Prison No. 7 administration did not let her in.”²¹⁰ 

The deputy director of the prison told Human Rights Watch that family meetings do take place, and explained, “We are building meeting rooms now, but people are still able to meet now. People bring permission from the judge and we let them in.”²¹¹  Some detainees in the Republican Prison Hospital also complained of not receiving visits from their relatives, although others did receive family visits. According to one patient, “I don’t have meetings with my family members. We have made a motion for family visits. My relatives come and they just leave packages of food for me at the entrance.”²¹² 

In other facilities, detainees were able to receive family visits as guaranteed under the law, although prisoners who had been moved to facilities far from their families complained that distance made it impossible for them to meet with their loved ones. According to one prisoner recently moved from far western Georgia to the new Kutaisi Prison No. 2, “I have no meetings with my family because they don’t have the money to come here.”²¹³  A convicted prisoner protested the situation by going on a hunger strike. He told Human Rights Watch, “I am on a hunger strike because I am not able to meet with my family. I was moved here and now live very far from them. They can’t afford to come and visit. I have been on a hunger strike for three days, without food and two days also without water.”²¹⁴ The CPT emphasizes that there should be flexibility when detainees’ families live far away. Detainees should be allowed to accumulate visiting time and/or be offered more possibilities for telephone calls.²¹⁵

In the two new prisons and in Prison No. 7, the Penitentiary Department has installed small cubicles separated by glass where detainees can meet with their families. The cubicles should have telephones by which detainees and their visitors can speak. However, at the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, the telephones had not yet been installed, but meetings nevertheless took place in these rooms. As a result, detainees and their visitors were forced to shout through the glass in order to hear one another. One detainee found this situation quite humiliating. “There is a meeting place, but now they put in glass barriers. It’s terrible. You have to yell loudly through the glass such that everyone in the whole prison can hear you.”²¹⁶

Georgian law provides convicted prisoners with the right to regular correspondence and use of telephones, but most prisons restricted prisoners’ correspondence with their relatives. ²¹⁷ Moreover, Georgian law places unnecessary, blanket restrictions on communication with relatives or friends for pre-trial detainees, allowing them correspondence and telephone conversations only with permission of the investigator, prosecutor, or court, and at his or her own expense.²¹⁸  The Standard Minimum Rules require, “An untried prisoner… shall be given all reasonable facilities for communicating with his family and friends, and for receiving visits from them, subject only to restrictions and supervision as are necessary in the interests of the administration of justice and of the security and good order of the institution.”²¹⁹  

Numerous detainees in pre-trial detention described the isolation they felt in not being allowed to correspond with or call their relatives. One detainee in Rustavi Prison No. 6 stated, “We are not allowed to call anywhere. We have no contact with the outside world.”²²⁰  A detainee in Tbilisi Prison No. 7 stated, “I can’t send letters to my family. We have no pens or paper. There is no chance to write.”²²¹  In Kutaisi Prison No. 2, a woman pre-trial detainee told Human Rights Watch, “Recently, a girl from the social department came and told us that there is a new rule: we can no longer receive letters from our family, no messages.”²²²  The deputy director of Kutaisi Prison No. 2 said that people do have the right to communicate with their families: “In order for people to make a phone call, they can write a letter to the administration and then they can make a phone call. When people are moved here they each get one phone call.”²²³  However, Human Rights Watch observed that detainees were not provided with writing implements and paper for this purpose. The deputy director of Rustavi Prison No. 1 admitted, “There is no telephone working here for prisoners to use.”²²⁴

Access to Lawyers

In all penitentiary facilities except Tbilisi Prison No. 7, detainees and lawyers reported being able to have regular meetings. Georgian law states that convicted prisoners have the right to “unlimited meetings” with counsel.²²⁵  International standards also require that detainees have the right to confidential meetings with their clients.²²⁶ However, in Tbilisi Prison No. 7, several lawyers described to Human Rights Watch the increasingly restrictive policies they have faced when trying to access their clients since the fight against organized crime intensified in December 2005. According to one lawyer with several clients detained in Tbilisi Prison No. 7, “After December 25, 2005, there was an information blockade. For approximately two weeks, no lawyers were allowed to enter the prison. Only when [Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights] Elena Tevtoradze and [Ombudsman] Sozar Subari started to complain did they slowly let lawyers in again. There were similar restrictions for a few days in February and again in March. I believe this was done to isolate and scare the detainees.”²²⁷  Another reported, “I went to Prison No. 7 on December 25 and asked for permission to talk to my clients. And in writing I asked for a medical expert to come with me. They didn’t allow doctors in. No lawyers or doctors for 14 days. There were problems for lawyers again in April for three days around [April] 25to 26, and around March 27 for one week.”²²⁸  According to lawyers, “there is no response when we ask why [we are denied access]. The guards simply say ‘we have instructions.’”²²⁹ One lawyer told Human Rights Watch, “I complain to the prosecutor and investigator and the response is always that there was ‘a planned inspection or checking.’”²³⁰

Beyond these periodic obstructions at Tbilisi Prison No. 7, lawyers also reported having difficulty obtaining normal access on a regular basis. Policies introduced in Prison No. 7 in January 2006 allow lawyers to enter for only a few hours at a time during the day. Furthermore, since the facility only has two meeting rooms for lawyers and their clients, and only one lawyer can enter at a time, very few lawyers can enter on any given day. One lawyer described the situation: “From 6 a.m. the administration takes requests for lawyers to enter and they make a list. Only at the end of the day are you admitted. Only two rooms for meetings, and we’re admitted only one at a time.”²³¹  Another lawyer confirmed, “Relatives come at 6 a.m. to be the first in line only to be let in on the third day at 4:45 p.m.”²³²  He further explained, “When they were meant to open at 11 a.m. or 12 p.m., they’d only open at 1 p.m. or 2 p.m., take a break from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. that actually lasted until 3:30 p.m. or 4 p.m., so by the end of the day, only three or four lawyers would have been able to meet their clients. So it was a de facto denial of access.”²³³  The deputy director of Prison No. 7 denied that there are any particular restrictions, telling Human Rights Watch, “There are no restrictions. Lawyers are allowed in on any weekday, on weekends if needed.”²³⁴

Both of the rooms currently designated for lawyer-client meetings in Prison No. 7 have video cameras. An official from the U.S. Embassy in Tbilisi told Human Rights Watch that the embassy had helped to install these cameras as an anti-torture measure to monitor interrogations of detainees by police and investigators. They were not intended to be used to monitor lawyer-client meetings. Lawyers believe that these cameras violate lawyer-client confidentiality. According to one lawyer, “There are cameras in the rooms; everything is seen and heard.”²³⁵  Another lawyer told Human Rights Watch that he was convinced that the cameras do have audio recording, based on a revealing incident during one of his meetings with a client, when guards intervened as soon as his exchange with his client began to involve making a detailed sketch on paper—something the guards could not monitor by listening.²³⁶   The deputy director of the Prison No. 7 denied that there were any violations of confidentiality, stating, “For safety we have cameras, so nothing is transferred. The cameras don’t have audio.”²³⁷  In July 2006 the Penitentiary Department denied a request by the ombudsman to dismantle the cameras.²³⁸

Lawyers reported other restrictions and violations of confidentiality. “I couldn’t even pass on the case materials to my clients… And a member of the special forces stands in the room and sees and hears everything. They check everything that we write down. You can’t convince them to leave you alone. Nothing is confidential,” one lawyer told Human Rights Watch.²³⁹   Another lawyer stated, “When the lawyers enter, all papers are checked. Lawyers undergo a body search. Even shoes are searched. This continues to today.”²⁴⁰  The Standard Minimum Rules require that “For the purposes of his defence, an untried prisoner shall be allowed to … receive visits from his legal adviser with a view to his defence and to prepare and hand to him confidential instructions. Interviews between the prisoner and his legal adviser may be within sight but not within the hearing of a police or institution official.”²⁴¹

Access to Information

Access to information is widely restricted in the prison system, but again, not consistently. According to Georgian law, “A convict must be provided with the opportunity to familiarize [him or herself] with press and means of mass information” and the penitentiary department should provide access to radio and television.²⁴²  Pre-trial detainees are allowed access to the press, magazines, radio, and television at the discretion of the prison administration.²⁴³  However, Human Rights Watch saw televisions in only a handful of cells in each of the facilities visited, and in one common room in the “open regime” portion of Kutaisi Prison No. 2. Detainees in Tbilisi remand Prison No. 5 stated that they had televisions prior to the March 27 riot, but these were either shot by special forces during the riot or removed after the riot as punishment. Human Rights Watch saw no radios anywhere. In some instances detainees had magazines or newspapers in their cells, but these had been provided only by family members. In some cases, officials refused to allow prisoners to receive newspapers and magazines from relatives; the reasons for these restrictions are unclear. A detainee in Kutaisi Prison No. 2 described the lack of contact with the outside world: “We have no radio or television. We have nothing to do. I think I could go crazy here. It’s so boring. Our families bring us newspapers.”²⁴⁴  Several other detainees in this facility made similar statements, and complained that the limit on information is recently enacted.²⁴⁵

According to the deputy director of the Penitentiary Department, Irene Tsintsadze, “We are trying to provide them with more [televisions]. As far as I know, we will provide them. Televisions aren’t restricted. It all depends on the means of prisoners themselves to provide them. We can provide some but not all. In [Tbilisi] Prison No. 5., there are lots [of televisions]. I was there a few days ago…. Maybe some televisions were taken [after the March 27 disturbance], but there are lots of televisions still in there. I saw them on the third and fourth floors and in the quarantine.”²⁴⁶  When Human Rights Watch told her that less than one week previously we had visited the prison and had not seen televisions in the rooms, she acknowledged the possibility that they were brought out just for her visit.²⁴⁷

Lack of Purposeful Activities

Detainees in all facilities visited by Human Rights Watch complained of a lack of any kind of activity whatsoever. Detainees simply sit in cells 24 hours per day, often without even the opportunity for one hour of exercise, as described above. Although prison regulations allow for prisoners to have access to various table games, such as chess, during the early months of 2006, prisoners were not allowed to have playing cards, any other games, or other activities. None of the detainees in any of the facilities visited by Human Rights Watch had any possibility to work or study. This takes a serious psychological toll on detainees. One detainee in Kutaisi Prison No. 2 stated, “It’s so boring here, you go crazy.”²⁴⁸ Another stated, “Just sitting here 24 hours a day wrecks your nervous system.”²⁴⁹  Rustavi Prison No. 6, which is currently serving as a pre-trial facility, has a gymnasium equipped with a basketball hoop on one end and seating and a screen for film viewing. However, according to the deputy director of the facility, “Only the sentenced prisoners [who work in the prison] watch movies here. This prison was originally designed for convicts, who could have used these facilities. Remand prisoners can’t use these facilities.”²⁵⁰

Children interviewed by Human Rights Watch consistently reported that they had not had any education since being detained, despite the fact that they were already serving sentences or their pre-trial detentions had lasted for many months, perhaps even more than a year.²⁵¹  One boy told Human Rights Watch, “We don’t have any lessons. I would like to have lessons. It’s so boring here, we don’t do anything. Sometimes the guards bring some old books and we read them. Our relatives sometimes bring us newspapers.”²⁵²  Another stated, “We don’t have any lessons. I was last in school one year ago. I also didn’t have lessons in the prison for children. If you are under investigation you don’t get lessons. Only the sentenced get lessons.”²⁵³  His cell-mate stated that, in the absence of other opportunities, they had initiated some educational activities themselves: “We asked the administration to give us a book. They gave us one book in Georgian and one book in Russian. But we don’t know Russian. So, we decided to study Russian ourselves.”²⁵⁴ 

Penitentiary Department authorities told Human Rights Watch that education would not be provided for juveniles held in pre-trial detention. The deputy director of Kutaisi Prison No. 2 stated, “[Juvenile detainees] are only here for a short time so we can’t organize any education for them. A prisoner under investigation can only meet with a lawyer or family, so there is no possibility for a teacher to come in.”²⁵⁵  A senior Penitentiary Department official admitted, “It’s terrible that juveniles spend six months or a year in pre-trial detention, but that can’t be changed immediately. No teachers are willing to work in prisons; salaries are too low.”²⁵⁶  The failure to provide education to children is a violation of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, which requires states to provide “adequate academic or, as appropriate, vocational training to institutionalized juveniles, with a view to ensuring that they do not leave the institution at an educational disadvantage.”²⁵⁷ 

The overall lack of purposeful activities in Georgian prisons for convicted prisoners and pre-trial detainees violates requirements set out by the Standard Minimum Rules and the CPT.²⁵⁸  The CPT states, “A satisfactory programme of activities (work, education, sport, etc.) is of crucial importance for the well-being of prisoners. This holds true for all establishments, whether for sentenced prisoners or those awaiting trial… [P]risoners cannot simply be left to languish for weeks, possibly months, locked up in their cells…. The CPT considers that one should aim at ensuring that prisoners in remand establishments are able to spend a reasonable part of the day (8 hours or more) outside their cells, engaged in a purposeful activity of a varied nature. Of course, regimes in establishments for sentenced prisoners should be even more favorable.”²⁵⁹ 

Georgian law states that the prison administration “is obliged to create conditions aiming to provide general and professional education to convicts” and that convicted prisoners are expected to work and be paid for their work.²⁶⁰  Georgian authorities claim that the introduction of work programs in the penitentiary facilities is a priority. However, the deputy minister of justice provided only three examples of these new projects: “Beauty salon training in the women’s colony, a greenhouse in Geguti [in the Tskaltubo Strict Regime Prison No. 8], and a shoe factory in the new Kutaisi prison.”²⁶¹ One NGO, Empathy, supports craft projects in the women’s facility. There are no plans to address the lack of activities for pre-trial detainees. According to PRI, in its report to the UN Committee Against Torture on May 1, 2006, “a proposal by international NGOs to include pre-trial prisoners in a small grants programme aimed at promoting purposeful activity was turned down by the Ministry of Justice.”²⁶²

Complaint Mechanisms

International standards require that detainees have access to a confidential complaint procedure whereby they may appeal to the administration, judicial authority, or other body confidentially.²⁶³ Under Georgian law, detainees have the right to make complaints against the prison administration, prison personnel, other state agencies, or to the prison public monitoring commissions described below. However, at the time of Human Rights Watch’s visit, the prison director reviewed all detainees’ correspondence to state agencies. According to the head of the social department of the Penitentiary Department, “Detainees can write a letter and this goes to the clerical department in the prison. The director or vice director reads every letter and sends an accompanying cover letter… The clerical department then sends it to its addressee. The answer comes to the director and then the prisoner.”²⁶⁴  

According to one prison official, problems with the complaints procedure was not a crucial issue, since, “There are not complaints about the prison administration; there are only complaints about the investigation or the prosecutor’s office.”²⁶⁵  Detainees stated that they never submitted complaints, since they were not allowed pen and paper to write letters and doubted it would be an effective mechanism. PRI found that prison officials did not make available the means necessary for prisoners to make complaints to the public monitoring commissions. For example, upon visiting Kutaisi Prison No. 2 in Ap ril 2006, PRI found no paper or pens available to detainees, no locked receptacles for confidential complaints, and no information available to prisoners about the existence of this complaint mechanism.²⁶⁶ 

In May 2006 Deputy Minister of Justice Givi Mikanadze told Human Rights Watch that changes to the law remedied the lack of confidentiality in the complaints procedure. But the new rules, articulated in Order of the Minister of Justice No. 620 are contradictory: according to paragraph 8 of the order, the administration is no longer allowed to examine correspondence sent by prisoners to a court, the Penitentiary Department, the ombudsman, an attorney or prosecutor, nor may the administration prevent the correspondence from being sent. However, paragraph 16 requires that any prisoner complaint sent to “state bodies, public associations and official authorities” be accompanied by a cover letter from the administration, which briefly describes the administration’s position towards the issue.²⁶⁷

Monitoring of Prisons

Georgia has several prison monitoring mechanisms.²⁶⁸  Under law, the president, parliament, and ombudsman, and their designees have the right to enter any penitentiary facility without special permission.²⁶⁹  Representatives of the Office of the Ombudsman, including regionally based monitors, conduct periodic monitoring of places of detention. The ombudsman reported that some of his representatives had encountered interference by prison authorities in accessing penitentiary facilities.²⁷⁰ 

In August 2004 President Saakashvili established a Presidential Monitoring Board consisting of 21 members, primarily selected from nongovernmental organizations. As presidential designees, these members technically have unrest ricted access to detention facilities.²⁷¹ Several individuals interviewed by Human Rights Watch noted that while individual representatives of the board currently undertake monitoring activities in the prisons, the board does not take any collective actions within its mandate, such as producing reports or recommendations to the authorities.²⁷²  At least two members of the board had encountered difficulty when trying to enter penitentiary facilities in January and March 2006.²⁷³

The Law on Imprisonment states that each facility within the penitentiary system should also have a monitoring commission.²⁷⁴ Commissions established in 2000 ceased to function in 2004, after Saakashvili was elected president, but the Ministry of Justice recently reestablished them.²⁷⁵  On the basis of regular monitoring, the commissions will provide reports and recommendations to the Ministry of Justice and the head of the Penitentiary Department. All commissions were to have been established by June 2006, but as of this writing, commissions are functioning only in western Georgia, in prisons in Kutaisi, Batumi, and Zugdidi.²⁷⁶  Ministry of Justice officials selected the candidates for these three commissions. According to the deputy minister of justice, Givi Mikanadze, in the future, composition of the boards will be determined by a public competition, yet the criteria and process for selection are not clear. Mikanadze stated that 80 percent of the representatives will come from nongovernmental organizations, and the remainder will be religious leaders and local government representatives.

Deputy Minister Mikanadze also told Human Rights Watch that a central coordinating board for these commissions will be located in the Ministry of Justice and will be responsible for the selection of candidates of individual boards as well as distributing the funds for the individual commissions’ monitoring activities.²⁷⁷  According to Mikanadze, “The new central monitoring board will be totally independent. It will be situated in the Ministry of Justice, but it will not include ministry representatives nor will it receive funding from the ministry.”²⁷⁸  As of the writing, however, there is no central board and no publicly available information about how the board will be created and operate. The existing commissions do not meet the requirements for independence of monitoring mechanisms elaborated in the United Nations’ Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (known as the Paris Principles) and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture.²⁷⁹