The authority of criminal subculture is used in the informal categorisation of prisoners. This way, certain group of prisoners enjoying a privileged position establish informal rule through repressive methods, which often cause violence among prisoners and are manifested in punitive measures towards those prisoners that disobeyed the said informal rule. Considering the fact that it is within the interest of administrations of penitentiary establishments to maintain order, there is a temptation on their part to allow to a certain degree, or even foster, informal rule in their facilities. In 2015, in penitentiary establishment no. 17, the treatment inflicted by the privileged prisoners upon one of the inmates was qualified by the investigative authorities and court as torture. It is noteworthy that in this case the court also held the director of the penitentiary establishment as guilty on the account of exceeding official powers, which was manifested in allowing unlimited movement for privileged prisoners within the premises of the establishment at night hours. Those very privileged prisoners tortured the victim at night. It is necessary that the Ministry of Corrections of Georgia understands the challenges posed by the existence of criminal subculture in penitentiary establishments and elaborates the strategy to overcome these problems. The issue needs to be addressed by a complex approach comprising relevant legal actions to be taken against those inmates violating the rights of other prisoners. The Public Defender observes that for changing the existing situation it is necessary to take task-oriented complex measures, including the practical implementation of dynamic security concept, fighting impunity, enhancement of rehabilitation services, creation of adequate prison conditions, raising awareness among prisoners, offering incentives to inmates and giving them opportunities to be involved in various meaningful activities. All these measures taken together will weaken the authority of criminal subculture in penitentiary establishments. It is also necessary to take measures aimed at overcoming criminal subculture under the conditions, where inmates’ rights and safety are secured. Violent and repressive methods should not be applied in order to avert possible torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Protection of human rights and security in penitentiary establishments necessitates a complex and systematic approach. The following important organisational aspects57 should be taken into account: relevant normative regulation; accountability; personnel’s operational capacity and competence (correlation of the number of personnel and inmates, organisational structure, personnel’s skills and experience, the Code of Conduct for the staff, establishment’s statute, and disciplinary proceedings); elements of dynamic security (interactions with inmates, monitoring, collecting information and knowledge of each inmate’s personality, conflict management, mediation, etc.); and provisional plan for the management of incidents and emergencies. The aforementioned and other relevant issues are further discussed in the subsequent chapters. 57 Idem., [Last visited on 09.02.2017]. NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM (NPM), 2016 37