ferred from a de-escalation room to a medical unit and the medical personnel did not provide him with assistance as frequently as it was needed. It is the observation of the Public Defender that somatic and mental health is not taken into consideration when placing inmates in de-escalation rooms. Therefore, long-term isolations in de-escalation rooms could provoke self-harm and suicide. It is noteworthy that in penitentiary establishments nos. 3, 6, and 8, incidents of inflicting self-harm were registered. This questions the effectiveness of these measures in terms of preventing harm to the life and limb of inmates. E.g., from January to May 2016, the inmates of penitentiary establishment no. 3 placed in de-escalation rooms inflicted self-harm in nine occasions. It is therefore evident that the mere placement in de-escalation rooms will not be an effective measure to prevent self-harm. To the contrary, the existing conditions of the de-escalation rooms, combined with isolation, are very likely to provoke self-harm in prisoners. The inspections showed that in those cases where administration is satisfied that an inmate poses risk to him/herself or others, the use of security measures, including placement in a de-escalation room, is the only intervention. It should be noted that the decision on placement in a de-escalation room is taken by an establishment’s director and there is no joint multidisciplinary assessment conducted - psychologists, social workers, medical doctors or other personnel of the establishment’s units are not involved in preventing/ decreasing the above-mentioned risks. As the results of the visits made to establishments nos. 3, 6, and 8 revealed, the inmates in these facilities have the feeling that their transfer to de-escalation rooms was punitive in purpose and occurs whenever they breach the establishment’s regulations. According to them, the placement has nothing to do with ensuring their safety. The group inspected the documentation in establishment no. 3 and found out that out of 51 instances of placement, in 22 cases, disciplinary measures (restriction of telephone calls, visits and correspondence) were imposed on the prisoners placed in a de-escalation room. The Public Defender stresses that it is impermissible to resort to security measures for punitive purposes as such measures should only serve the statutory objective, which is ensuring the safety of people in a penitentiary establishment. Under the conditions, where there are adequate rehabilitation and psychological services are not available in penitentiary establishments, the prisoners found themselves locked up in cells almost round the clock for 23 hours. The Special Preventive Group concludes that long-term placement of inmates in de-escalation rooms could amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and this measure increases the risk of self-harm or inflicting harm to other persons.64 64 42 Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment on the visit to Georgia in 2015. The special Rapporteur pointed out that he was informed the permitted time frame and practices of solitary confinement varied between days, weeks and even months and this could amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or even torture, para. 85. The report is available in English at: https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G15/273/24/PDF/G1527324.pdf?OpenElement) [Last visited on 10.09.2017]. HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS