Rule of law, human rights and democracy in Georgia – the European Union Report on the implementation of the Association Agreement

On May 19, 2020, the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee discussed a draft report on Georgia’s implementation of the Association Agreement with the European Union, prepared by MEP Sven Mikser. [1]  Among other issues, the report discusses the development of the rule of law, human rights and democratic institutions, an important obligation of Georgia under the Association Agreement. The report discusses all major political events and changes in Georgia in 2019, which were important for the European integration process. One of the topics of the report is elections. In 2019, by-elections were held for a parliamentary seat and for mayoral posts in five cities. The ruling party Georgian Dream won all the races.

The report covers one of the largest political events of 2019, when on June 20 protests were sparked by the arrival of the Russian Inter-parliamentary Association on Orthodoxy (I.A.O.) delegation to the plenary hall of the Georgian Parliament, and the decision to let a Russian lawmaker, Sergei Gavrilov, temporarily sit in the chair of of the speaker. The government used tear gas, rubber bullets and ultimately water cannons to disband the protest, and riot police pursued rally participants even after the end of the protest, chasing them on various streets and using force. Ultimately, several hundred people were injured as a result of the violent dispersal, including policemen, journalists and peaceful protesters. Three rally participants lost their eyesight after being hit by rubber bullets. The report also mentions that the failure of the Parliament on 14 November to pass constitutional amendments led to further political instability and street protests.

The report discusses the criminal case against two co-founders of TBC Bank, Mamuka Khazaradze and Badri Japaridze accused by the prosecutor’s office of allegedly laundering money eleven years ago. The father of the owner of Pirveli TV, Mr. Vakhtang Tsereteli, was also charged with the same transaction. In September, Khazaradze and Japaridze founded the civil movement Lelo, which was transformed into a political party in December.

The next issue, which is also highlighted in the report, is the media environment which remains polarized and has undergone significant changes due to the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the case of the “Rustavi 2” TV-station, in July. The ECHR annulled the execution of a decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia in 2017 and returned the channel to its previous owner, which led to large-scale changes in management and staff. By September, part of the journalists had moved to work on the new TV channel “Mtavari Arkhi” created by the former director of “Rustavi 2”.

There are, however, also several instances of positive developments in Georgia. In September, the country adopted the Children’s Rights Code, which will enter into force in September 2020. This code provides legal grounds, security measures and guarantees to protect the principles, rights and freedoms of the child. It provides legal guarantees for the child to exercise and protect his or her rights independently. Although the code was originally scheduled to enter into force on June 1 and the government still has a lot of legislation to pass, it is an important step in bringing the protection of children’s rights closer to European human rights standards.

The report addresses the issue of women’s rights separately. The report finds that in 2018 Georgia brought its legislation closer to the Istanbul Convention of the Council of Europe by upgrading its laws on fighting violence against women and domestic violence. However, gender based violence remains problematic in Georgia.[2] The report mentions that while Georgia has made some progress in improving gender balance in the political, economic and social realms, gender based violence and discrimination, lack of women’s political representation, gender pay gaps and unequal access to education and health care are issues where further improvement is required.[3]

One of the biggest challenges for Georgia, according to the report, is judicial reform. During the year there were attempts at reforming the judiciary, focused on the appointment of new Supreme Court judges and the formulation of a fourth wave of reforms. Parliament approved amendments to the Law on Common Courts that established the necessary selection criteria, but these only partly reflected recommendations by the Venice Commission. The shortcomings were exacerbated in the nomination process led by the High Council of Justice (HCoJ), as also reported by the OSCE/ODIHR. The report emphasizes that on 12 December, Parliament appointed 14 candidates for life tenures to the Supreme Court in a process that overall failed to ensure the necessary transparency and merit-based appointments.[4] Georgia should follow the recommendation of the Venice Commission while implementing its ‘fourth wave’ of judicial reforms, particularly with regards to the nomination and appointment of judges and the transfer of powers from prosecutors to investigators.[5]

Although Georgia has been in a good position to fight corruption even before the Association Agreement, the report did express some concerns. According to the report, in terms of preventing and combating corruption, Georgia has continued to implement its anti-corruption strategy and action plan in line with its commitments under the Association Agenda. For example, in July, the Anti-Corruption Council adopted a new anti-corruption strategy and action plan for 2019-2020. But some concerns with regards to high-level corruption persist. In the 2018 Transparency International corruption perception index, Georgia scored 58/100 (up from 56/100 in 2017), a 2-point deterioration in the country’s rating.[6]

The report emphasizes that 2020 will be an important year for Georgia to continue to demonstrate its reform commitment, to further advance on its European path. It will be key to take forward ambitious election reforms, to tackle the increasing political polarisation[7] Responding to all OSCE/ODIHR recommendations made in the aftermath of the 2018 presidential elections should be the objective of the current electoral reform. At the same time, it will be crucial to find a solution with regard to the election system acceptable to all parties. Furthermore, an enabling environment for a free and pluralistic media will be another key factor in the run-up to the October 2020 parliamentary elections.[8]

The second important issue on which the report focuses is independence of the judiciary. The report reminds Georgia that the implementation of the fourth wave of reforms by 2020 will be significant, and that the country’s commitment to uphold the highest standards of ethics and integrity in its judiciary remains critical. Going forward, it is essential that the selection procedure for Supreme Court Judges adheres to all recommendations made by the Venice Commission and is carried out in a transparent manner, in line with a genuinely merit-based nomination process.[9]

One of the most pressing issues for Georgia ahead of the 2020 parliamentary elections is the implementation of the agreement reached between the government and the opposition on the electoral system. The report suggests that the ruling party and the opposition should adhere to the March 8 agreement on the new electoral system and should ensure its adoption and implementation during the forthcoming elections. A successfully conducted general election should be followed by measures to ensure a real independence of the judiciary.[10]

The report concludes with a series of recommendations to the Georgian government:

  • Georgia should reinforce its efforts to eradicate corruption particularly in the law enforcement bodies and should root out corrupt political interference in the judiciary.
  • The freedom of Georgian media could be improved by depolarisation and de-politicization; interferences of management in editorial policies should also be stopped.
  • Georgia should devote proper attention to labour inspections, worker’s rights, gender equality and anti-discrimination measures, including towards LGBTI+.
  • Georgia should implement structural reforms of the labour market to tackle the high unemployment rate, especially amongst the youth, and to counter the brain-drain that the country has experienced in recent years.
  • Georgia should develop ICT infrastructure in the regions, and should closely cooperate with the EU to be in line with the newest developments of the Digital Single Market and cyber security and defence of the EU.[11]

The report also provides recommendations for the EU:

  • The EU should continue to support a correct implementation of the newly agreed electoral methodology.
  • The EU should open up the prospect of an upgrading of the Association Agreement/Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas (AA/DCFTAs), considering the many ideas that Georgia submitted to the Commission’s ‘structured consultation’ in late 2019; this should, however, be conditional on a positive democratic conduct of the forthcoming elections.
  • The EU needs to make its ‘more for more’ incentive more explicit and operationally credible. The EU should set out how it might increase its assistance conditionally on progress by the partner states.
  • The EU should respond positively to the requests by Georgia and the three Associated states together to establish a joint policy dialogue on matters of common interest, of which there are many.
  • The EU should intensify its policy of ‘engagement without recognition’ with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, facilitating educational programmes and entering into dialogue over trading links to Georgia’s DCFTA with the EU.
  • In line with the most recent developments of the Digital Single Market and the EU’s cyber security and defence, the EU needs to update and upgrade its cooperation with Georgia on digital and cyber matters.

The report concludes that Georgia’s reputation as a democracy was seriously damaged by developments in 2018 and 2019, as was also reflected in the Democracy Index 2019, where Georgia saw its position downgraded to 89th out of 167 countries, falling behind both Ukraine and Moldova. It is noteworthy that the EU report has high hopes for the 2020 elections. In particular, it is said that Georgia’s reputation could be restored if all the parties adhere to the March 8 agreement and the October elections are correctly managed, in a reasonably peaceful political context.[12] Therefore, holding the 2020 parliamentary elections in a free, fair and democratic environment can be seen as a strategic task for the Georgian state to implement the Association Agreement and bring the country even closer to the European Union.


[1] Draft Report on the implementation of the EU Association Agreement with Georgia, (2019/2200(INI)), Committee on Foreign Affairs, Rapporteur: Sven Mikser, PE648.608v01-00, 2019/2200(INI), 23.3.2020 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/AFET-PR-648608_EN.pdf

[2] Association agreement between the EU and Georgia, European Implementation Assessment (update),  European Parliamentary Research Service, Editor: Anna Zygierewicz, Ex-Post Evaluation Unit, PE 642.820 – April 2020, P. 41, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/642820/EPRS_STU(2020)642820_EN.pdf [hereafter referred to as Association agreement].

[3] Association agreement, p. 42.

[4] Joint Staff Working Document, Association Implementation Report on Georgia  High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Brussels, 6.2.2020, SWD(2020) 30 final  p. 7. https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/1_en_document_travail_service_conjoint_part1_v4.pdf  [hereafter referred to as Joint Staff Working Document].

[5] Association agreement, p. 60.

[6] Joint Staff Working Document, p. 7.

[7] Joint Staff Working Document, p. 17.

[8] Joint Staff Working Document, p. 18.

[9] Joint Staff Working Document.

[10] Association agreement, p. 60.

[11] Association agreement, p. 60.

[12] Association agreement,  p. 39.

Leave a Reply