“The evidentiary standards used in decisions on life sentences issued before 2012 are inadequate. I strongly recommend a thorough review of these cases,” stated Georgian Public Defender Levan Ioseliani during the “Actual Topic with Maka Tsintsadze” program on GPB’s First Channel.

According to Ioseliani, the Public Defender’s Office has examined all relevant decisions and will submit its findings to the appropriate authorities.

“The group of individuals serving life sentences remains stigmatised and largely excluded from reforms and policies affecting prisoners over the past 12 years. The 2012 amnesty covered nearly all categories, reducing sentences by half or a third for many, including those with life sentences. However, because these reductions were not reflected explicitly in legal terms, the law did not impact their sentences,” Ioseliani explained.

He further noted that the government recognised the unfairness of this situation. In 2012, the Justice Ministry developed a commendable program allowing life-sentenced prisoners to be considered for early release: penitentiary authorities recommend parole if inmates successfully complete a two-year training program. Despite some prisoners having served 15 to 20 years, courts have yet to approve any parole applications.

Ioseliani emphasised that “although serious crimes were committed, similar offences today would likely result in different sentencing.”

He called on the government to pay closer attention to the circumstances of these individuals.

“I believe that the focus of the justice system should not be retribution; that is not the purpose of punishment. It aims to restore justice, eliminate threats, and prepare individuals for reintegration into society. If a person no longer poses a danger, they should not remain in prison. This is a fundamental principle—punishment should not be perpetual retribution,” he asserted.

The Public Defender highlighted that in many developed countries, mechanisms exist for reviewing life sentences. Typically, after a set period, such as 15 or 20 years, automatic reviews are conducted, and in cases where positive evaluations are received, such as a recommendation from penitentiary authorities indicating the individual is no longer a threat, parole is granted.

He concluded by urging the government to consider the future and rights of these individuals, emphasising the importance of humane and just sentencing practices.