Article 35 of the Constitution of Georgia explicitly states that hindering the activities of the Public Defender shall be punishable by law. The activity of the Public Defender's Office of Georgia - as a constitutional body is based on such important and fundamental principles as are full independence from any branch of government, impartiality, objectivity and confidentiality in the implementation of activities. Disclosure of the issue with whom the Public Defender is meeting increases the risk of ill-treatment of and/or illegal actions towards prisoners, leading to a deterioration of their rights conditions. Disclosure of such information may force prisoners to refrain from appealing to and meeting with the Public Defender in the future. Following this fact, all prisoners will suspect that their meeting with the Public Defender will be monitored by the Ministry of Justice / Penitentiary Service and that it may be made public at any time by the agency. According to Article 352 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, it is punishable to influence the Public Defender of Georgia in any form in order to hinder his / her official activities. According to part 2 of the same article, the same act committed by using official position is also punishable. Disclosure of the names and surnames of the prisoners who meet with the Public Defender and/or his/her representative is the influence on his/her activities. This contradicts the requirements of the Organic Law of Georgia on the Public Defender of Georgia, which states that any meeting shall be confidential. The purpose of this obstruction was to cause the prisoners distrust the Public Defender's Office and to limit its effective functioning. Based on the abovementioned, on January 24, 2020, the Public Defender addressed the General Prosecutor's Office of Georgia to launch an investigation under Article 352 of the Criminal Code, to conduct all necessary investigative actions in a timely and effective manner and to determine the relevant responsible persons. The reply received from the General Prosecutor's Office of Georgia on January 31, 2020 stated that the legal and factual basis for initiating the investigation could not be identified by the investigation agency. The prosecutor's office did not consider the disclosure of the secrecy of the meeting of the Public Defender with the convicts as a breach of confidentiality. The above-mentioned facts were assessed as interference in the activities of the Public Defender by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI), the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI) and the European Union.6 It is unfortunate that notwithstanding the abovementioned, in 2020 the visits to and monitoring of penitentiary institutions for the representatives of the Public Defender's Office became not only difficult, but also dangerous. In particular, in recent months, the administration of establishments and a certain group of prisoners led by "prison watchers" have been systematically carrying out verbal attacks, threats and aggression on representatives of the Public Defender's Office. 6 Available at the webpage < https://bit.ly/3cs1eyF > [last visited on 01.03.21]. 11