The Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association (GYLA) assesses the refusal to allow Lasha Bugadze’s book into a penitentiary institution as a violation of freedom of expression and censorship.

According to GYLA, the justification provided by the Special Penitentiary Service demonstrates that the existing practice is inconsistent with international human rights standards, including the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

The organization explains that the freedom of expression of persons deprived of their liberty, including the right to receive information, may only be restricted if such a restriction meets the requirements of legality, legitimacy, and necessity.

“The refusal to allow Lasha Bugadze’s novel into a penitentiary institution grossly violates the rights of persons deprived of their liberty and represents an alarming example of censorship. The justification provided by the Special Penitentiary Service demonstrates that the existing practice is clearly inconsistent with international human rights standards, including the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

In early August 2026, reports emerged that the Penitentiary Service had refused to deliver Lasha Bugadze’s novel The Observer to a person deprived of their liberty, citing the book’s political content as the reason. Later, the media and social networks circulated the Special Penitentiary Service’s response, dated August 24, 2026, to a statement by lawyer Giorgi Chkheidze, in which the Service explained the reasons for deeming the book inadmissible.

In its letter, the Service refers to Article 9 of Annex No. 2 to Order No. 1166 of the Minister of Justice of Georgia, dated January 21, 2026, approving the regulations of Penitentiary Institution No. 5. Under the provision, a defendant/convict has the right to receive books as part of a parcel ‘not more than three at a time, except for a book that may pose a threat to the safety of the defendant/convict and/or the normal functioning of the penitentiary institution.’

According to the Special Penitentiary Service’s letter: ‘The title of Lasha 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 therefore allowing it into the penitentiary institution was not deemed appropriate.’ The letter further states that ‘literature of unclear content that may pose a threat to the safety of a defendant/convict and the normal functioning of the institution cannot be brought into a penitentiary institution, regardless of who its author is.’

The position of the Special Penitentiary Service grossly violates national and international human rights law, including standards established by the European Court of Human Rights, and confirms the arbitrary restriction of defendants’/convicts’ access to information, which should be regarded as an unjustified manifestation of censorship.

Freedom to receive information is an integral part of freedom of expression. This includes the right to receive information in various forms, including access to works of fiction. Persons deprived of their liberty continue to enjoy human rights. Restrictions may be imposed on their rights only to the extent that they are inevitably necessary as a consequence of imprisonment. Accordingly, the freedom of expression of persons deprived of their liberty, including the right to receive information, may only be restricted if such a restriction meets the requirements of legality, legitimacy, and necessity.

According to the European Court of Human Rights, when refusing to deliver publications sent to prisoners, state authorities must provide sufficient grounds, taking into account the criteria that justify restricting access to publications, including incitement to or justification of violence, threats to prison security or order, or facilitating communication between members of criminal organizations.

The European Court has held that the relevant passages of a publication must be clearly identified and subjected to an analysis demonstrating a specific connection between the censored content and the aforementioned criteria. Accordingly, the European Court has deemed an abstract reference to the content of a publication insufficient where problematic passages have not been identified and analyzed.

It is unequivocal that an abstract reference to the title of a book grossly violates the above-mentioned standard. Particularly where artistic expression and fiction are concerned, it is inconceivable that the ‘ambiguity’ of a title or the ‘impossibility of interpreting it unequivocally’ could constitute grounds for banning a publication. Such an approach does not establish the necessity of the restriction and grossly violates freedom of access to information.

Furthermore, it is unclear how the Special Penitentiary Service is to determine whether a work constitutes ‘literature of unclear content that may pose a threat to the safety of a defendant/convict…’ when international human rights standards require a content-based analysis for interference with rights on the basis of such a threat and require a clear connection to be established between the threat and the prohibited text.

It is noteworthy that Lasha Bugadze’s book The Observer is a dystopian novel about nearly half a century of despotic rule in Georgia. In March 2026, the book, along with other books, became a target of vandalism at one of the branches of the Biblusi bookstore. Against this backdrop, the position of the Penitentiary Service is particularly alarming, as it effectively points to political censorship of the book because of its anti-authoritarian content,” the Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association stated.