"Article 42 of the Constitution" presented an alternative report to the Parliament of Georgia

On June 7, 2019 "Article 42 of the Constitution", presented an alternative report on the execution of the judgments/decisions rendered by the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as the ECtHR) against Georgia to the Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee of the Parliament of Georgia. The report includes analysis of national legislation and practices on three thematic issues. The implementation of reforms with respect to these issues is based on the judgments/decisions of the ECtHR against Georgia. The execution of these judgments/decisions is supervised by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

The first issue discussed in the report concerns the disciplinary liability of judges, which is based on applications in the ECtHR of up to ten former judges against Georgia.1 This part of the report reviews what are the obstacles the applicant judges came across in the attempt of restoration of their rights; Also, the shortcomings of the disciplinary liability grounds and mechanisms that need to be reviewed in future for the prevention of the new/same violations.

The second issue concerns the guarantees of fair trial in the case proceedings of administrative offenses. The ECtHR covered this topic when dealing with the cases concerning the dissolution of peaceful protests of June 15, 2009 by forceful methods2. This part of the report reviews only a few shortcomings of the Code of Administrative Offenses, which in all such cases result in violation of the requirements of the ECHR; namely, distribution of the burden of
proof, the importance of neutral evidence and presumption of truthfulness of the police statements.

The third issue discusses the prevention of the crime of entrapment; specifically, in connection with operative-investigative activities, that the ECtHR highlighted in the case of “Tchokhonelidze v. Georgia" (application N31536 / 07, 28/06/2018). This part of the report reviews the gaps in the national legislation that may be followed by more breaches of human rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights; also, the standards established by the ECtHR and other countries’ experience are reviewed for the purpose of preventing the crime of entrapment and for effective response to such cases.

As a result of the amendments made to the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Georgia in 2016, Parliament annually hears the reports of the Ministry of Justice of Georgia on execution of judgments/decisions rendered against Georgia by the ECtHR and the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies.

The Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Georgia also envisage the right of interested persons to present their opinions and assessments regarding the execution of the judgments/decisions of the ECtHR and UN Treaty Bodies decisions against Georgia. Within the scope of this authority, on June 10 and 18, 2019 "Article 42 of the Constitution", along with the submission of an alternative report, made an oral presentation at the meetings with the Committee on Human Rights and Civil Integration and the Committee of Legal Affairs.

The role of civil society in the process of execution of judgments/decisions rendered against the state is recognized not only nationally, but regionally and internationally. This authority of civil society has been formalized in the Council of Europe system through the amendments to relevant regulations.

It is important for the new function of the Parliament of Georgia to supervise the execution of the judgments/decisions of the ECtHR on national level not to be just formality but becomes an effective mechanism for involving interested persons and groups.

Alternative report submitted to the Parliament by "Article 42 of the Constitution" was prepared within the scope of the project: "Enhancing execution of the judgments/decisions and UN Treaty Bodies decisions through research and advocacy (concerning criminal justice and judicial system in Georgia) which was funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the program Promoting Rule of Law in Georgia "(PROLoG).



1. See Sturua v. Georgia, application 45729/05, 28/03/2017;

Gabaidze v. Georgia, application 13723/06, 12/10/2017;

Iliashvili v. Georgia, application 22715/07, 09/10/2018

Laliashvili v. Georgia, application 8710/07, 27/11/2018;

Turava and Others v. Georgia, application 7607/07, 27/11/2018

and Alasania and Bardavelidze v. Georgia, applications 12611/08 and 25500/08, 09/10/2018

2. See Studio Maestro Ltd and others v. Georgia, case N22318/10), 30/06/2015

Giorgi Bekauri and others v. Georgia , application 312/10, 15/09/2015 and Menabde v. Georgia, application 4731/10, 13/10/2015

3. See Rules of the Committee of Ministers for the supervision of the execution of judgments and of the terms of friendly settlements, Rule 9.2; available at https://rm.coe.int/16806eebf0  last accessed on 25/072019.