A/HRC/4/33/Add.2 Page 40 remains one of the most serious problems in Georgia. There are even signs that greater numbers of newly arrived remand prisoners speaking to prison doctors are reluctant to allege ill-treatment by the police. This could be linked to the connections the senior staff in the prison service have with the Ministry of Interior and with the special security forces (most of whom have worked there previously). 212. With regard to prisons, numerous obstacles to prompt and thorough investigation and prosecution of perpetrators of abuse against detainees remain. They include the lack of identifying insignia among prison staff and special forces. Whereas the government officially introduced numeric insignia for special forces’ uniforms, it is not clear when uniforms with such insignia were issued and when special forces were to begin to use them. Moreover, prison authorities regularly deny detainees meetings with their lawyers (especially by not providing adequate facilities for such meetings), prevent detainees from making written complaints, threaten detainees who express interest in filing a complaint, and deny access to forensic and other experts (all these problems are particularly serious in Tbilisi Prison No. 7, but exist in other facilities as well, including Kutaisi Prison No. 2). 213. Even investigations opened into the possible excessive use of force, torture, and illtreatment are often ineffective. On 27 March 2006 special forces used automatic gunfire in Tbilisi Prison No. 5 to suppress “disturbances”, resulting in the deaths of at least seven inmates. Detainees also reported injuries from gunfire and beatings. The General Prosecutor’s Office opened criminal investigation N74068237 into whether law enforcement agents used force in accordance with the law only three months after the operation. Prior to this, the Ministry of Justice investigated the planning of the alleged riot only. 214. The Government informed that substantial steps forward were taken within the law enforcement bodies to establish effective procedures for internal monitoring and disciplining. “Human Rights Protection Units” were created at the Office of the Prosecutor General of Georgia as well as at the Ministry of the Interior. Both agencies have General Inspection Units in charge of ensuring internal discipline. The Prosecutor’s office has adopted a Code of ethics for prosecutors in compliance with international human rights standards and practices. The Code of ethics for the police is being finalised taking into consideration recommendations and expertise of international organisations and local NGOs. 215. Moreover, the Prosecution Service of Georgia is the only organ within the system that carries out prosecution as noted in article 55 of CPC. This article also defines that every investigation falls under the procedural guidance of the prosecutor (even if the investigation is carried out by the investigator of another law enforcement agency) and the prosecutor has full discretion to carry out preliminary investigation in the specific cases as provided by the relevant provisions of the law. Furthermore, article 62(2) of CPC provides for the cases of exclusive investigative jurisdiction of the Prosecution Service. In particular, it notes that the crime/s (any crime) committed by the following persons fall within the competence of the Investigatory Unit of the Prosecution Service: the President of Georgia, a member of the Parliament, a Member of the Government, a judge, the Public Defender, the Chairman of the Control Council, a member of the Council of the National Bank, an Ambassador, a prosecutor, an investigator, an adviser working at the Prosecution Service of Georgia, a policeman, by a high-ranking military officer or another person with special ranks holding a public post. In addition, the following articles automatically fall under the investigatory prerogative of the Investigative Unit of the Prosecution