В Грузии отказали в доставке книги в тюрьму, назвав это цензурой

The Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association (GYLA) says the refusal to allow a novel by Georgian writer Lasha Bugadze into a penitentiary institution constitutes a serious violation of prisoners’ rights and represents a concerning example of censorship. GYLA says the justification provided by the Special Penitentiary Service demonstrates that the existing practice clearly contradicts international human rights standards, including the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). In a letter explaining its decision, the Special Penitentiary Service stated that the title of Bugadze’s novel, *The Observer*, “creates ambiguity regarding the content of the novel and does not allow for an unequivocal interpretation, particularly in relation to a penitentiary institution,” and that, for this reason, allowing the book into the facility was not considered appropriate. The letter further stated that “literature of unclear content that could potentially pose a threat to the safety of an accused or convicted person or to the normal functioning of the institution cannot be admitted to a penitentiary facility, regardless of who its author is.” GYLA criticized the reasoning, arguing that it violates both domestic and international human rights law and demonstrates an arbitrary restriction on prisoners’ access to information. “The position of the Special Penitentiary Service grossly violates national and international human rights law, including the standards established by the European Court of Human Rights, and confirms the arbitrary restriction of access to information for accused and convicted persons, which should be regarded as an unjustified manifestation of censorship,” GYLA said. The organization stressed that people deprived of their liberty continue to enjoy fundamental human rights. Their freedom of expression, including the right to receive information, may therefore only be restricted when such limitations meet the requirements of legality, legitimacy and necessity. Citing ECHR case law, GYLA noted that when state authorities refuse to provide prisoners with publications sent to them, they must offer sufficient justification based on specific criteria that could warrant restricting access. Such grounds may include incitement to or justification of violence, threats to prison security or order, or facilitating communication between members of criminal organizations. GYLA says authorities must clearly identify the specific passages considered problematic and conduct an analysis demonstrating a concrete connection between the censored material and the relevant security concerns. The ECHR has previously found that abstract references to the content of a publication, without identifying and analyzing problematic passages, are insufficient grounds for restricting access. “It is clear that an abstract reference to the title of a book grossly violates the above-mentioned standard. It is inconceivable, particularly when artistic expression and fiction are concerned, that the ‘ambiguity’ of a title or the ‘impossibility of its unequivocal interpretation’ could serve as grounds for banning a publication,” GYLA said. “Such an approach does not demonstrate the necessity of the restriction and grossly violates the freedom to receive information.” Bugadze’s *The Observer* is a dystopian novel depicting the nearly half-century rule of a despot in Georgia. In early August, Rustavi No. 5 Women’s Penitentiary Institution refused to allow the book to be delivered to Nana Sandery, who was convicted in connection with the October 4 case and has been imprisoned since 2025 under a seven-year sentence. Activist Giorgi Romelashvili attempted to deliver the novel to Sandery on August 6. According to what he later told Bugadze, prison officials said the book was “political” and therefore “could not be given to a prisoner.”