the specific acts and behaviour62 that would be reflected positively or negatively on the decision about risk assessment. With regard to the above problem, in her 2018 Parliamentary Report, the Public Defender of Georgia recommended to the Minister of Justice of Georgia, in 2019, to take all the measures to ensure the amendment of Order no. 70 of the Minister of Corrections and Probation of Georgia of 9 July 2015 to the end of a) determining the obligation of informing a convicted person by a penitentiary establishment about risk assessment criteria and procedures when bringing to a penitentiary establishment and right before the process of risk assessment starts; and b) determining the right of a convicted person to submit his/her position and opinion about circumstances based on which risk is being assessed.63 It is noteworthy that Order no. 395 of the Minister of Justice of Georgia of 8 May 2019 invalidated Order no. 70 of the Minister of Corrections and Probation of Georgia of 9 July 2015 on Approving Types of a Convicted Person’s Risks, Risk Assessment Criteria, Procedure for Risk Assessment and Risk Reassessment, Terms and Procedure for Transferring A convicted Person to another Prison Facility of the Same or Other Type, Also the Procedure for Determining Activity and Authority of the Risk Assessment Team. The same order approved Types of a Convicted Person’s Risks, Risk Assessment Criteria, Procedure for Risk Assessment and Risk Reassessment, Terms and Procedure for Transferring A convicted Person to another Prison Facility of the Same or Other Type, Also the Procedure for Determining Activity and Authority of the Risk Assessment Team. Unlike the procedure approved by Order no. 70 of the Minister of Corrections and Probation of Georgia, the procedure approved by Order no. 395 of the Minister of Justice of Georgia lays down the authority of the risk assessment team that can be discharged in the risk assessment process, namely, the risk assessment team is entitled to meet and hear a concerned convicted person on its own motion before adopting a decision about the increased-risk or high risk.64 The Public Defender and the Special Preventive Group positively assess that this authority of the risk assessment team has been determined. However, the decision to meet a convicted person is a team’s discretion rather than an obligation and only applies to increased-risk or high-risk cases. Accordingly, this change only does not meet the Public 62 For instance, upholding legal regime of a penitentiary establishment, participation in rehabilitation activities, etc. 63 The 2018 Parliamentary Report of the Public Defender of Georgia on the Situation of Protection of Human Rights and Freedoms in Georgia, p. 53, available at: http://www.ombudsman.ge/res/docs/2019042620571319466.pdf, (accessed 10.02.2019). 64 Article 13.1 of Order no. 395 of the Minister of Justice of Georgia of 8 May 2019 Approving Types of a Convicted Person’s Risks, Risk Assessment Criteria, Procedure for Risk Assessment and Risk Reassessment, Terms and Procedure for Transferring A convicted Person to another Prison Facility of the Same or Other Type, Also the Procedure for Determining Activity and Authority of the Risk Assessment Team. 30