archive and keep the video recordings for a long time was an unequivocally illegal action. In addition, the disclosure of identifiable episodes involving both of the authorized representatives of the Public Defender violated the Law of Georgia on Personal Data Protection. On January 23, 2020, the Public Defender and the Deputy Public Defender visited Establishment No. 9 to meet with prisoners. When they left the building, representatives of the media had already been mobilized outside the facility. Information about the visit was provided to them by the Special Penitentiary Service and the Ministry of Justice confirmed the above. At approximately 8:30 pm, information about the visit was released through the web and social media page of the Special Penitentiary Service, listing the names of the detainees met by the Public Defender and the Deputy Public Defender and/or those who the Public Defender and the Deputy Public Defender wanted to meet. The Public Defender considers that Article 19 of the Organic Law on the Public Defender of Georgia was blatantly violated by the Special Penitentiary Service/Ministry of Justice: “The meetings of the Public Defender of Georgia/a member of the Special Preventive Group with detainees, prisoners or persons whose liberty is otherwise restricted, convicted persons, persons in psychiatric facilities, old people’s and children's homes shall be confidential. Any kind of eavesdropping and surveillance shall be prohibited.” The above stipulates that any meeting of the Public Defender with prisoners shall be confidential until the Public Defender makes an opposite decision. Information may be disseminated only with the prisoner’s express consent. The same requirement can be read in Article 21 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which says that no personal data shall be published without the express consent of the person concerned. Article 35 of the Constitution of Georgia stipulates that creating obstacles to the activities of the Public Defender shall be punished. The activity of the Public Defender of Georgia, as a constitutional body, is based on important and fundamental principles, such as full independence from any branch of government, impartiality, objectivity and confidentiality. The disclosure of information about the persons met by the Public Defender increases the risk of ill-treatment and/or illegal action against them and deteriorates their rights situation. The disclosure of similar information may make prisoners refrain from applying to and meeting with the Public Defender in the future. In addition, all prisoners may suspect that the details of their meeting with the Public Defender will be monitored by the Ministry of Justice/Penitentiary Service and will be made public at any time. According to Article 352 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, influencing the Public Defender in any manner, in order to interfere with his/her official duties, shall be punished. According to part 2 of the same article, the same act committed by using official position shall be punished. The identification of prisoners met by the Public Defender and/or Public Defender’s representatives represents an influence on his/her official duties. This 15