THE CASE OF T.P. A counselor representing the interest of a convict T.P. filed an application to the Public Defender. According to the application and attached materials, the convict has been placed in the Centre of Cellular Technologies and Therapy (K. Mardaleishvili Medical Centre) since October 22, 2013. The convict suffers a serious and incurable illness. In spite of this circumstance, the convict is not allowed to be visited by the family. In the correspondence dated March 24, 2014 and July 29, 2014 (MCLA31400131729 and MCLA11400358221 respectively) the Unit of Legal Regime at the Lead Unite of Security at the Penitentiary Department justified such restrictions with security protection. It is worth noting that on September 24, 2014 the Public Defender’s Office addressed in writing (letter #03-2/12006) the Penitentiary Department of the Ministry of Corrections to follow up with the above described issue. With the correspondence MCLA91400497739 dated September 27, 2014 the Penitentiary Department notified the Public Defender’s Office that as the convict was still in the Centre of Cellular Technologies and Therapy, there was no relevant infrastructure for short-term visits, the Department could not provide security and therefore had to refuse the convict the possibility to meet with the family. With regard to T.P’s right to respected personal and family life, the Public Defender’s Office appealed to the Ministry of Corrections (recommendation 048/14884). As a response to the recommendation the Ministry notified the Public Defender that granting the right to the convict to a short-term visit was found inexpedient on the security grounds. A decision on the restriction of rights must be subject to accurate and in-depth revision. In addition, due attention must be paid to a prisoner’s right to maintain a certain type of contact with his/her family members in light of protecting important and sensitive public interests. The state bears the responsibility to undertake relevant measures for the protection of security not infringing at the same time prisoners’ rights to family life. In addition, due attention must be paid to measures for the protection of privacy during visitations. More specifically, family members and friends of prisoners should be able to visit prisoners in adequate conditions considering prison conditions and maximum protection of confidentiality. Findings of the monitoring missions indicated to infringement of confidentiality because of inadequate infrastructure in short-term visitation rooms. According to the Article 46, Part III of the Imprisonment Code of Georgia, a convict shall serve a sentence in an institution closest to his/her place of residence or that of his/her close relative except for the cases outlined in Clause 4 of Article 46. 144 NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM OF GEORGIA