A/HRC/4/33/Add.2 Page 36 implement it in practice, and reiterates that it is of utmost importance that the national preventive mechanisms enjoy real independence (also in financial terms). The Special Rapporteur also welcomes the efforts underway to improve conditions in places of detention through refurbishing old and building new facilities and by addressing the chronic overcrowding problem through multiplying non-custodial measures. However, he is concerned that overcrowding remains an issue, as indicated by the Government (see also Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee against Torture CAT/C/GEO/CO/3, para. 18) and that the number of inmates appears to be increasing rather than decreasing. He welcomes the recent amendments to the legislation and calls upon the Government to speed up reform, especially with regard to the use of pre-trial detention, in close cooperation with non-governmental and international partners. The Special Rapporteur is concerned about reports that high-level officials have repeatedly voiced support for the use of excessive violence by security forces and publicly exculpated officers after riots in several prisons without awaiting the results of inquiries into the events. He views that addressing impunity is a key-issue to render torture prevention effective (see also Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee against Torture CAT/C/GEO/CO/3, para. 12) and hopes to see independent and impartial inquiries in all instances of alleged use of excessive force by security forces. Impunity 195. Recommendation (a) stated: The highest authorities, particularly those responsible for law enforcement activities, declare unambiguously that the culture of impunity must end and that torture and ill treatment by public officials will not be tolerated and will be subject to prosecution; 196. According to non-governmental sources, in some contexts high- level officials declared Georgia’s commitment to due process and accountability for abuse. But when the immediate context is an incident of police use of force, including deadly force, senior officials, rather than remaining neutral or saying that the incident needs to be examined to determine whether the force was justified, or expressing concern about the consequence of the use of deadly force, instead publicly supported law enforcement agents who may have used excessive force against suspects and detainees. For example, following the government operation to quell the disturbance in Tbilisi Prison No. 5 on March 27, 2006, during which at least seven inmates were killed and at least 22 wounded, the government stated unequivocally that law enforcement agents acted lawfully before even launching any inquiries. The President hailed the Justice Ministry Staff and the Georgian police whom he claimed, “acted extremely professionally.” Similarly, the speaker of parliament was quoted as having praised the police saying they used “adequate force” to prevent a jailbreak. 197. The so-called “special operations” conducted by law-enforcement bodies are frequently characterized by excessive severity and at the end those who are supposed to be detained are often liquidated. Unlawful and excessive acts of the police are directly encouraged and supported by official statements by the President of Georgia as well as by the Minister of Interior. For example, on 23 February 2006, during the meeting with newly appointed judges, the President announced, “…policemen have instructions to fire directly because I and the public value the life of one policeman more than the lives of criminals and their accomplices.” The Minister of Interior made a similar statement: “I urge all Georgian policemen not to hesitate to use arms when a person’s or policeman’s life is endangered.”