No. 17 1 949 1 922 126 60 65 43 191 103 No. 18 104 103 0 0 125 78 125 78 No. 19 129 101 17 9 9 6 26 15 10 333 9 601 1 201 920 2 869 3 918 4 070 4 838 Total In the Parliamentary Report of 2015, the Public Defender recommended to the Minister of Corrections to ensure that disciplinary penalties were used as a last resort. However, the data in the above table shows that, in 2016, the statistics of disciplinary penalties in penitentiary establishments have been increased on average by 16%, whereas the number of placements in solitary confinement cells has decreased by 23%. The indicator for increased imposition of disciplinary penalties in establishment no. 3 is alarming: two disciplinary penalties per prisoner, in 2015; and 9 in 2016. The similar indicator has increased alarmingly in establishment no. 6 as well: in 2015, a disciplinary penalty was imposed on every second prisoner; and in 2016, two disciplinary penalties per prisoner were imposed. Compared to 2015, the number of disciplinary penalties increased by 2.5% in establishment no. 2. Besides, in comparison to 2015, the number of placement of prisoners in solitary confinement cells increased by 40.4% in establishment no. 2 in 2016. The Public Defender positively assesses the decrease in the number of imposition of disciplinary penalties in 2016, compared to 2015, in penitentiary establishments nos. 5, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 19, as well as in the number of the placement in solitary confinement cells in establishments nos. 3, 8, 14, 17, and 19. No juvenile has been punished in disciplinary proceedings in establishment no. 11 in the course of the year and disciplinary penalty was imposed on 2 inmates only in establishment no. 9. In 2016, the solitary confinement cells in establishments nos. 7, and 9 did not function; there- fore, disciplinary penalties in the form of placement in solitary confinement were not imposed on any of the prisoners. There are no solitary confinement cells in rehabilitation establishment no. 11 for juveniles and medical establishment no. 18 for remand and convicted persons, due to the specific nature of these establishments. Under Article 88.2 of the Imprisonment Code, an remand/convicted person placed in a solitary cell may not enjoy short and long visits, telephone conversations or purchase food products. The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture recommended ‘that the Georgian authorities take steps to ensure that the placement of prisoners in disciplinary cells does not include a total prohibition on family contacts. Any restrictions on family contacts as a form of punishment should be used only where the offence relates to such contacts.’187 With regard to this issue, in 2012, the Public Defender proposed to the Parliament of Georgia to amend the Imprisonment Code and in the Parliamentary Reports of 2013, 2014 and 2015 expressly pointed out the necessity to amend the Article concerned. However, the proposed change has not been made to Article 88 of the Imprisonment Code to date. 187 Report to the Georgian Government on the visit to Georgia carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), from 5 to 15 February 2010, para. 115, see the link: <http://www.cpt.coe.int/documents/geo/2010 27-inf-eng.htm> [Last visited on 20.02.2017]. 96 HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS