ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA 2013 As revealed by our monitoring, in the reporting period, victims of ill-treatment were not properly protected from becoming subjected to repeated violence or intimidation. One important requirement of prohibition of ill-treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights is the protection of victims. Victims of ill-treatment and their family members should be provided with additional guarantees and must be protected against violence, threat of violence and any other form of intimidation that may emerge any time during the beginning and the end of judicial proceedings. The Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) regards it a major requirement of effective investigation that, while investigation into alleged ill-treatment is ongoing, potential victims of ill-treatment not be placed under the direction or supervision of individuals who might have administered ill-treatment against them.23 The above-mentioned requirement has been violated in the above-described case of M.G. The Inspectorate-General of the Ministry of Corrections commenced internal examination of the relevant allegation on 13 December 2013. The Chairman of the Penitentiary Department ordered suspension of the director of the Penitentiary Institution No. 7. On 16 December 2012, the Inspectorate-General completed its internal examination and forwarded the case materials to the Tbilisi Prosecution Office for their response. Accordingly, a formal basis for keeping the prison director suspended from office no longer existed and therefore he returned back to his office. While this case was under investigation, a trustee of the Public Defender of Georgia met with Prisoner M.G. in the Penitentiary Institution No. 7. According to the prisoner, it was unavoidable for him to meet with the staff members of the prison administration whom he alleged to have physically and verbally exerted pressure upon him. For this reason, the prisoner explained, he was psychologically subdued and did not feel safe. With a view of ensuring effective investigation into M.G.’s case, the Public Defender recommended the Minister of Corrections to move this prisoner to some other institution but the Public Defender’s recommendation was not upheld. It should be noted that the applicable Georgian law makes it possible to suspend a civil servant provided that he/ she is not facing charges as an accused person24 and the suspension is ordered within an internal examination procedure.25 If within the examination procedure elements of crime are revealed, the internal examination procedure will end and the case will be forwarded to an appropriate investigative authority. However, where this is the case, it is no longer possible under the applicable law to suspend a civil servant from office. Accordingly, victims remain unprotected and cannot avail of the aforementioned protection measure. That is exactly what happened in the case of M.G. Unfortunately, the applicable Georgian law does not envisage proper guarantees to protect victims of ill-treatment from re-victimization – a fact that obstructs and turns effectiveness of investigation into allegations of ill-treatment questionable. Finally, it must be noted that effectiveness of investigation largely depends on whether the existing evidence are collected immediately in the beginning of the investigation. Documenting bodily injuries is crucial.26 The established practice at this point is that, whenever injuries are detected, members of the Special Preventive Group will draw up a protocol to describe the injuries but such verbal description cannot be a replacement to photography.27 Since there is a high probability of injuries fading away before a forensic examination is ordered and carried out (especially when a prisoner refuses to report about the injuries to the law enforcement bodies), it is crucially important that members of the Special Preventive Group be authorized to photograph injuries; in addition, it is highly 23 Report of the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) to the Albanian Government concerning its visit to Albania during 23 May – 3 June 2005, CPT/Inf(2006) 24, par. 52. See also Appendix to CPT’s public statement concerning the Chechen Republic of the Russian Federation, CPT/Inf (2007), par. 17, 53. 24 Pursuant to Articles 159 and 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a court may order a defendant’s suspension from his official duties (job) if there is reasonable ground to believe that, if allowed to remain in office, he/she may obstruct the investigation, hinder reimbursement of damages inflicted by crime or continue criminal activity. 25 Pursuant to Article 91 of the Law of Georgia on Civil Service, a public official who has the right impose a disciplinary sanction may suspend an official subject to disciplinary proceedings from official duties while the proceedings are ongoing. 26 Mikiashvili v. Georgia, Judgment of 9 October 2012, paras. 78-79. 27 Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“Istanbul Protocol”) (United Nations; New York and Geneva, 2001 – 2004), par. 106. NPM Report 10