prison cell between the Public Defender's representative and a detainee and then she criticized the ombudsman's actions. By doing so, she tried to discredit the Public Defender personally as well as the entire institution, to reduce trust towards her and to provoke aggression by radical groups. On January 22, 2020, the Public Defender addressed the State Inspector and requested the investigation of the legality of the Minister of Justice's action of publishing of the video recordings at the sitting of the Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee on January 21, 2020, in the Parliament of Georgia. Two of the video recordings showed specific parts of the Public Defender's visits to penitentiary establishments. The recordings were published on the same day on the official Facebook page of the Ministry of Justice. In the published video recordings the faces of Public Defender's representatives are not covered and they can be easily identified. It is noteworthy that the Organic Law of Georgia on the Public Defender of Georgia prohibits the Ministry of Georgia to carry out any kind of surveillance or eavesdropping of the meeting between the Public Defender's representative and a prisoner.5 According to the decision N1/100/2020, the State Inspector found that the Ministry of Justice as well as the Special Penitentiary Service had violated the Law of Georgia on Personal Data Protection in the part of publishing the video recordings and fined both agencies for it. In addition, the State Inspector's Office accepted the request of the Public Defender and made a decision to study the legality of data processing through the electronic surveillance in penitentiary institutions. After the inspection, the Special Penitentiary Service was given 16 recommendations and instructions to eliminate the existing problems. On January 23, 2020, the Public Defender and her deputy visited N9 establishment to meet with prisoners. Upon completion of the visit, when leaving the building, the representatives of the media were mobilized at the N9 establishment. Information about the visit to the establishment was provided to them by the Special Penitentiary Service and it was approved by the Ministry of Justice. At approximately 20:30, information about the visit was posted on the Special Penitentiary's web and social media pages, listing the names and surnames of the inmates whom the Public Defender and her deputy had met and/or expressed the wish to meet. The Public Defender considers that the Special Penitentiary Service / Ministry of Justice grossly violated Article 19 of the Organic Law on the Public Defender of Georgia: ,,The meeting of the Public Defender of Georgia / member of the Special Preventive Group with imprisoned or otherwise detained persons and convicts, as well as with persons in psychiatric institutions, nursing homes for elder persons and children’s homes shall be confidential. No surveillance or eavesdropping of any kind shall be allowed. This provision stipulates that any meeting of the Public Defender with prisoners must be confidential until the Public Defender makes a decision to the contrary. Against this requirement, information may be disseminated only with the clear consent of the prisoner. The same requirement is laid down in Article 21 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which states that personal data should not be disclosed without the clear consent of the party concerned. 5 Organic Law on the Public Defender of Georgia, Article 19(3). 10