A convicted person serving a sentence in a low risk prison facility may have 6 long visits a year, and 3 additional long visits a year as an incentive.231 A convicted person serving a sentence in a semi-open type prison facility may enjoy 3 long visits a year, and 2 additional long visits a year as an incentive.232 A convicted person serving a sentence in a closed type prison facility may enjoy 2 long visits a year, and 1 additional long visit as an incentive.233 There is no infrastructure for long visits in penitentiary establishments nos. 7, 8, 9, 18, and 19. It should be positively mentioned that, in 2016, the prisoners of establishments nos. establishments nos. 8, 9, 18, and 19 were periodically transferred to other establishments for long visits. As regards the prisoners of establishment no. 7, they are not transferred to other establishments for long visits. In the Parliamentary Reports of 2014 and 2015, the Public Defender of Georgia recommended to the Minister of Corrections to ensure requisite infrastructure for long visits in penitentiary establishments. Concerning the Recommendations Determined by the Resolution of the Parliament of Georgia Adopted with Regard to the Report of the Public Defender of Georgia on Human Rights Situation in Georgia in 2015, the Ministry of Corrections of Georgia submitted that the necessary measures under underway for arranging the infrastructure in establishment no. 8, which is welcomed. However, it remains problematic to provide infrastructure for long visit in closed-type establishments234 and medical establishments.235 Maintaining family ties is a fundamental human right, which means that the visit of family members is not prisoners’ privilege. Under Rule 43.3 of the Nelson Mandela Rules, disciplinary sanctions or restrictive measures shall not include the prohibition of family contact. The means of family contact may only be restricted for a limited period and strictly for the maintenance of security and order. Under Article 172.6 of the Imprisonment Code, convicted persons placed in a high risk prison facility shall not be granted the right to a long visit. This clause of the Imprisonment Code prohibiting convicts in high risk prison facilities to use long visits is a blanket restriction not leaving room for factoring a legitimate aim. In the case of Khoroshenko v. Russia, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights held that the prison regime that only allowed two short visits during ten years was in violation of a prisoner’s right to respect for private and family life. The Court has particularly pointed out that, as is well established in the Court’s case-law, during their imprisonment prisoners continue to enjoy all fundamental rights and freedoms, save for the right to liberty. The principle of proportionality requires a discernible and sufficient link between the application of such measures and the conduct and circumstances of the individual concerned. 231 232 233 234 235 Imprisonment Code, Article 6022.e). Imprisonment Code, Article 62.2.e). Imprisonment Code, Article 65.1.d). Penitentiary establishments nos. 7, 8, 9. Penitentiary establishments nos. 18 and 19. 110 HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS