to the prisoner’s physical integrity, of which the authorities had or ought to have had knowledge.8 A positive obligation of the State to protect individuals from being subjected to torture and other ill-treatment by definition implies the taking of measures by the State that would help protect individuals against ill-treatment. As an international standard, the requirement of implementing such preventive measures can be found in international human rights treaties as well as in the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights and reports of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and the United Nations Committee against Torture. Torture prevention is a global strategy that aims at reducing risks and establishing an environment where torture and inhuman treatment are not likely to happen. A general obligation envisaged by Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights requires the States to launch effective investigation even if the alleged illtreatment has been administered by private persons.9 According to the European Court, the obligation on the High Contracting Parties under Article 1 of the Convention to secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention, taken together with Article 3, requires States to take measures designed to ensure that individuals within their jurisdiction are not subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including ill-treatment administered by private individuals.10 In this respect, we would like to mention the case of loss of his life by prisoner G.F. in the penitentiary institution no. 14 – a fact that has gained an extensive publicity. G.F. died on 4 March 2014 as a result of argument among the prisoners in the penitentiary institution no. 14. As the Chief Prosecution Office informed us,11 on 4 March 2014, at about 2:20 am, in the penitentiary institution no. 14, prisoners Sh.Sh., L.M. and G.S. from the cell no. 322 of the sixth regime building had an argument with their fellow inmate G.F. The argument grew into a physical fight. Acting together, Sh.Sh., L.M. and G.S. managed to knock G.F. down on the floor who lost his consciousness and could no longer fight off the attackers. Instead of stopping the violence, Sh.Sh., G.S. and L.M. continued to beat G.F. who lied unconscious with their legs and hands in the chest, neck and face. They were bumping unconscious G.F. with his head against the concrete floor. As the prison staff heard swearing and noise, they rushed to enter the cell where Sh.Sh., L.M. and G.S. were physically abusing G.F. and stop the violence. G.F. was transferred to the medical unit of the institution but, despite the assistance provided by the prison healthcare staff and an ambulance team that arrived on call, prisoner G.F. died. 8 9 10 11 See the following judgments of the European Court of Human Rights: Pantea v. Romania, no. 33343/96, §190, ECHR 2003‑VI and Premininy v. Russia, no. 44973/04, §84, 10 February 2011. M. and Others v. Italy and Bulgaria, Judgment of 31 July 2012, par. 99. Denis Vasilyev v. Russia, Judgment of 17 December 2009, par. 98 Letter no. 13/23626 dated 12 April 2014 16 NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM OF GEORGIA