•• Amend the Code of Imprisonment to provide that meetings of the Public Defender/Special Preventive Group members with accused and convicted persons are confidential and no eavesdropping or observation is permissible. •• Amend Article 571 of the Code of Imprisonment to expressly prohibit use of tear gas in confined areas. •• Amend Article 571 of the Code of Imprisonment to provide a clear definition of what non-lethal weapons mean and stipulate that they should only be used when and to the extent strictly necessary to maintain security and order. 2.4.  DETENTION CONDITIONS 2.4.1.  PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT; SANITATION AND HYGIENE According to the European Prison Rules, the accommodation provided for prisoners, and in particular all sleeping accommodation, shall respect human dignity and, as far as possible, privacy, and meet the requirements of health and hygiene, due regard being paid to climatic conditions and especially to floor space, cubic content of air, lighting, heating and ventilation.81 In all buildings where prisoners are required to live, work or congregate: a. the windows shall be large enough to enable the prisoners to read or work by natural light in normal conditions and shall allow the entrance of fresh air except where there is an adequate air conditioning system; b. artificial light shall satisfy recognised technical standards; and c. there shall be an alarm system that enables prisoners to contact the staff without delay.82 According to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, Article 3 of the European Convention can be violated by not only undue or inhuman treatment but the environment in which a person is kept. Also, one of the principles of the European Prison Rules is that “prison conditions that infringe prisoners’ human rights are not justified by lack of resources”.83 The European Court has been consistently stressing in its judgments that Article 3 of the Convention requires of the States to ensure that a person is detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for his human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately secured.84 The Court has also mentioned that when assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of these conditions, as well as of specific allegations made by the applicant.85 81 82 83 84 Rule 18.1 Rule 18.2 Rule 4 Valašinas v. Lithuania, no. 44558/98, § 102, ECHR 2001-VIII; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 94, ECHR 2000-XI; 85 See Dougoz v. Greece, no. 40907/98, § 46, ECHR 2001-II. 54 NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM OF GEORGIA