Lawyer's Notes in Prison: Where the Line Between Security Checks and Legal Confidentiality Lies

According to a statement by the Georgian Young Lawyers' Association (GYLA), on 7 October, its lawyer met with a prisoner in a penitentiary institution as part of human rights protection activities. The organisation states that upon leaving the institution, the lawyer was not allowed to take out the notes made during the meeting, and consequently, the lawyer destroyed the notes. GYLA assesses the incident as interference in the lawyer's professional activities.

The Special Penitentiary Service denies the accusation. According to Imedi, the Service stated that the claim of obstructing the lawyer's activities is unfounded and referred to the rules for checking correspondence in the Penitentiary Code. GYLA's position is currently publicly available in the form of a statement published in the media; full internal records, written decisions, or inspection protocols have not been published. Accordingly, the descriptions from both sides cannot be considered independently established facts.

The full response from the Service, published by Imedi, also contains a more specific clarification: according to the agency's position, the law does not directly define the right to take out various notes after a meeting, while correspondence can be sent through the institution. This is the Service's legal interpretation, which GYLA disagrees with; it should not be considered an assessment established by a court.

The right to meet and the checking of letters are not the same issue

According to Article 95 of the Penitentiary Code, an accused or convicted person may use the services of a lawyer and meet with a lawyer carrying out legal activities as defined by law, without restriction or interference. An employee of the institution may visually observe the meeting but not listen to it.

Article 115 of the Code concerns a prisoner's written correspondence. The general rule provides for the checking of correspondence, however, paragraph 8 of the same article prohibits the interception and/or checking of correspondence sent to or received from a lawyer. A lawyer's personal working notes, which have neither been sent to nor received from the prisoner, do not automatically fall into the category of correspondence. Accordingly, a general reference to Article 115 cannot, by itself, explain the specific grounds applied to these notes. It is necessary to see the Service's full response and the inspection protocol. It is also important what status the lawyer had at the meeting and whether they were the lawyer for the specific individual.

What Circumstances Should Be Assessed

If the meeting was a lawyer-client meeting protected by Article 95, the practical question is not merely permission to enter the room: can the lawyer remember, note down, and subsequently take legal action based on the information received? At the same time, the institution may have security rules; their existence does not answer what specific legal basis there was for seizing the notes or demanding their destruction.

Article 31 of the Constitution of Georgia protects the right to legal defence and assistance from a lawyer. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which is binding on Georgia, protects private life and correspondence; its application to a specific case depends on the nature of the communication and the circumstances of the interference. If the meeting was also part of an ongoing criminal defence, the guarantees of the right to defence may be additionally assessed. The available public information is not sufficient for a final legal conclusion.

To establish the facts, the institution's full written explanation, the current instructions regarding a lawyer's belongings and notes, the video recording/protocol of the inspection, and the status of the lawyer's meeting are important. Without these documents, no final conclusion should be drawn regarding either lawful interference or a violation.

For general information on the right to communicate with a lawyer, see the page on lawyer involvement during police questioning and on criminal defence. This text is for informational purposes only and does not constitute individual legal advice.

Legislation checked as of 9 October 2026.