DOCSLIB.ORG

Security Council Distr.: General 17 July 2000

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Security Council Distr.: General 17 July 2000 United Nations S/2000/697 Security Council Distr.: General 17 July 2000 Original: English f Report of the Secretary-General concerning the situation in Abkhazia, Georgia I. Introduction the Government of Georgia by President Eduard Shevardnadze following his re-election (on 9 April 1. The present report is submitted pursuant to 2000) and inauguration (on 30 April 2000). On 4 July Security Council resolution 1287 (2000) of 31 January 2000, President Shevardnadze named the newly- 2000, by which the Council decided to extend the appointed State Minister, Giorgi Arsenishvili, as head mandate of the United Nations Observer Mission in of the Georgian delegation to the Coordinating Georgia (UNOMIG) until 31 July 2000. It provides an Council. In addition, the President created a new update of the situation in Abkhazia, Georgia, since my post — Minister for Special Assignments — with report of 24 April 2000 (S/2000/345). direct responsibility for conflict settlement in Georgia, and appointed to it Malkhaz Kakabadze, Georgia’s 2. My Special Representative for Georgia, Dieter former Ambassador to the Russian Federation. Mr. Boden, continues to head UNOMIG, and he is assisted Kakabadze now works closely with my Special in this task by Chief Military Observer Major General Representative. Anis Ahmed Bajwa (Pakistan). The strength of UNOMIG, as at 1 July 2000, stood at 102 military 5. In pursuance of Security Council resolution 1287 observers (see annex). (2000), my Special Representative continues to work closely with the group of Friends, whom he meets at least once a month, to further refine the draft document II. Political aspects dealing with the distribution of competences between Tbilisi and Sukhumi on the basis of the principles of 3. During the reporting period, my Special Georgian sovereignty and territorial integrity (see Representative continued his consultations, within the S/2000/39, para. 7). In addition, on 9 and 10 May 2000, framework of the Geneva peace process, with my Special Representative travelled to Moscow for representatives of the Georgian and Abkhaz sides, the consultations on this matter with representatives of the Russian Federation as facilitator, the members of the Russian Federation, in its capacity as facilitator. A group of Friends of the Secretary-General for Georgia version of the draft document, dated 25 May 2000, was and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in produced and circulated among the Friends in the Europe (OSCE). However, progress was slow, mainly expectation that it might serve in the near future as a owing to a lack of sufficiently energetic efforts on the basis on which to open a political dialogue between the part of the two sides to achieve tangible results. Only Georgian and Abkhaz sides. However, differences of on 11 July 2000, when the Coordinating Council was views have since arisen among the Friends themselves convened, was the machinery of the peace process concerning both content and strategy, and strong reanimated. concerted efforts are now urgently needed to produce a coordinated draft and approach. 4. Some of the delays encountered during the period were also caused by the reshuffling of key players in 00-51037 (E) 190700 ````````` S/2000/697 6. Meanwhile, the Georgian side continued to resumption of hostilities, which have been discussed express its eagerness to commence negotiations on the intermittently since June 1998. Furthermore, the critical issue of Abkhazia’s future status on the basis of Council took note of a number of suggestions the document on the distribution of competences submitted by my Special Representative to improve between Tbilisi and Sukhumi currently being worked implementation of confidence-building measures, out by my Special Representative. The Abkhaz side, including the creation of a database of existing for its part, maintained its position that it would not projects. engage in a dialogue with the Georgian side on this 9. During the reporting period, a number of projects issue. However, at the same time, it gave indications within the confidence-building measures component of that it does not wish to be left out of the debate the Geneva peace process were carried out. Early in completely. In consultations with my Special June, my Special Representative brought to Sukhumi Representative, the Abkhaz side has renewed its the Director of the Georgian National Library, Levan expressions of interest in the convening of a conference Berdzenishvili, who reached an agreement with the of experts to discuss legal aspects of the conflict. Abkhaz side that books and materials pertaining to 7. On 3 May 2000, on the ceasefire line, my Special Abkhazia would be sought among Georgian holdings Representative chaired a high-level emergency meeting and given to the Abkhaz side as a partial replacement of the Georgian and Abkhaz sides, convened to address for the Abkhaz Archives destroyed during the 1992- a rapidly deteriorating security situation on the ground 1993 war. The first presentation of materials was made in the wake of the killing of some 12 members of the by the Georgian side during the session of the Abkhaz militia in a series of ambushes in the Gali Coordinating Council held on 11 July 2000, and further district. The meeting was remarkable for the frankness cooperation in this area is planned. From 16 to 19 May with which participants discussed the growing problem 2000, Georgian and Abkhaz non-governmental of organized criminality. Following the meeting, a draft organizations whose members are elders and war Protocol of the Gali meeting of the Georgian and veterans convened at Sochi (Russian Federation) and Abkhaz sides on the stabilization of the situation in the agreed on a series of measures designed to help security zone was produced which provides for the participants to move from confrontation to peace and monitoring by UNOMIG and the peacekeeping force of accord. In mid-June, on the basis of an agreement the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) of an reached during the Istanbul Meeting of 1999 on agreed ceiling in the number of armed law enforcement confidence-building measures, the United Nations personnel stationed in the security zone, and for the Human Rights Office in Sukhumi hosted a training creation of a new structure of increased cooperation by session offered by journalists from the BBC for their the two sides in the fight against crime. The signing of Georgian and Abkhaz colleagues. The Georgian/ the Protocol was delayed as a result of the reshuffling Abkhaz Coordinating Commission and its Executive in the Government of Georgia (see para. 4). Secretary Zurab Lakerbaia have continued to make concerted efforts to realize projects in the economic, 8. On 11 July 2000, my Special Representative social and humanitarian fields. convened the tenth session of the Coordinating Council of the Georgian and Abkhaz sides in Sukhumi. The sides were represented by delegations led by their III. Operations of the United Nations respective prime ministers. At this session, the Protocol Observer Mission in Georgia of 3 May was signed by the two sides, my Special Representative and the Commander of the CIS 10. The United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia peacekeeping force. The Council itself decided that continues to perform its mandate without structural or Working Group I, under the chairmanship of my Chief operational change, on the basis of the concept of Military Observer, should in future meet on a monthly limited patrolling described in previous reports. By basis to monitor its implementation. The Council also means of daily ground patrols from the mission decided that the two sides would accelerate work on headquarters in Sukhumi and the two sector the draft Protocol on the return of refugees to the Gali headquarters in Gali and Zugdidi, as well as weekly district and measures for economic rehabilitation and helicopter patrols, UNOMIG is able to cover its whole Agreement on peace and guarantees for the non- area of responsibility, with the exception of the upper 2 S/2000/697 Kodori Valley where patrolling has been suspended for doubling of the regular air and ground patrolling, thus security reasons. creating a far more visible presence and providing the ability to dispel rumours through accurate reporting. 11. The Joint Fact-finding Group established on 19 January 2000, which includes representatives of the 14. There was one confirmed violation of the CIS peacekeeping force, as well as of the Georgian and Moscow Agreement during the reporting period. On 12 Abkhaz sides, and is chaired by the Chief Military June 2000, a UNOMIG helicopter patrol spotted a Observer, continues to meet on a weekly basis. While BMP 1 armoured vehicle at an Abkhaz observation the Abkhaz side formally refuses to work with the post within the restricted weapons zone. This sighting representatives nominated by the Georgian side — all was followed up and, after two more visits to the post of whom are members of the Abkhaz government-in- by UNOMIG ground patrols, the armoured vehicle, exile — there is satisfactory cooperation on the ground which had apparently been deployed in response to an with local officials from Zugdidi representing the armed attack on the post several days earlier, was Georgian side. UNOMIG has successfully introduced withdrawn to a heavy weapons storage site. the concept of “quick reaction investigators”, military 15. During the reporting period, there were few observers posted in both sectors whose task is to go to exchanges of fire across the ceasefire line, but a the scene of an incident as quickly as possible after it number of ambushes were carried out in which 25 occurs to record evidence before it is lost or people were killed. The Abkhaz militia in particular contaminated. UNOMIG continues to stress to the was targeted. Mine accidents continued to occur with representatives of the two sides the need for regularity, but there were no proven cases of new transparency and cooperation and an improvement in mines laid.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Georgia: What Now?
    GEORGIA: WHAT NOW? 3 December 2003 Europe Report N°151 Tbilisi/Brussels TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................. i I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 II. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................. 2 A. HISTORY ...............................................................................................................................2 B. GEOPOLITICS ........................................................................................................................3 1. External Players .........................................................................................................4 2. Why Georgia Matters.................................................................................................5 III. WHAT LED TO THE REVOLUTION........................................................................ 6 A. ELECTIONS – FREE AND FAIR? ..............................................................................................8 B. ELECTION DAY AND AFTER ..................................................................................................9 IV. ENSURING STATE CONTINUITY .......................................................................... 12 A. STABILITY IN THE TRANSITION PERIOD ...............................................................................12 B. THE PRO-SHEVARDNADZE
    [Show full text]
  • DP/2000/CRP.2 21 January 2000 ORIGINAL
    DP/2000/CRP.2 21 January 2000 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH First regular session 2000 24-28 and 31 January 2000, New York Item 6 of the provisional agenda FIELD VISITS MISSION REPORT Field visit to Bulgaria and Georgia (25 August-5 September 1999) 1. The present report outlines the findings of the field visit undertaken by nine members of the Executive Board to Bulgaria and Georgia. The visit took place from 25 August to 5 September 1999. The team was composed of representatives from the Permanent Missions to the United Nations of Antigua and Barbuda, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo (Georgia only), Ethiopia, Germany (Georgia only), Jamaica, People's Republic of China, Thailand and Ukraine.1 2 2. The team was accompanied by Mr. Richard Snyder, Chief, Executive Board Branch, UNFPA. 1 H.E. Dr. Patrick Lewis, Permanent Representative of Antigua and Barbuda to the United Nations, was elected team leader. 2 The rapporteurs were Mr. Atoki Ileka, Second Counsellor, Permanent Mission of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the United Nations, for the visit to Georgia, and Mr. David Prendergast, Counsellor, Permanent Mission of Jamaica to the United Nations, for the visit to Bulgaria. -2- GEORGIA (25 August-31 August 1999) I. INTRODUCTION 3. The visit to Georgia, which was successful, was very well organized by the UNDP field office in Tbilisi. The Mission would like to express its sincere appreciation to the Government and the people of the Republic of Georgia for their hospitality, which made the task more pleasant. 4. The team would also like to thank in particular Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Incentives and Capacity for Poverty Reduction and Good Governance in Georgia
    This is a public document. The views expressed here reflect those of the author(s) and not that of official DFID policy. Analysis of Incentives and Capacity for Poverty Reduction and Good Governance in Georgia This is a public document. The views expressed here reflect those of the author(s) and not that of official DFID policy. Analysis of Incentives and Capacity for Poverty Reduction and Good Governance in Georgia 1. Introduction Among the newly independent states (NIS) of the former Soviet Union, Georgia has undergone one of the most turbulent paths to independent statehood, second only to Tajikistan in terms of the extent of violence and fragmentation. The symptoms of this fragmentation are multiple. Two successful bids for secession in 1990-1993 have literally fragmented the state, resulting in the death over of 20,000 combatants and civilians and the forced displacement of some 250,000 internal refugees. At the Georgian centre, the republic’s first legally elected president was forcefully deposed in 1992 by a coalition of former apparatchiks, liberals and warlords, leading to the complete collapse of state institutions and civil peace. Parallel to these developments the Soviet Georgian economy endured a near-total collapse, recovery from which has to date been limited. Political practice in the post-Soviet Georgian state continues to be dominated by legacies from Soviet rule: venality, corruption and weak institutions of civil society, resulting in a pervasive disillusionment with democratization. Georgia’s experience of integration into the world international system has been that of a rump state, subject to external influences and dependent on the goodwill of Western donors.
    [Show full text]
  • Power Elites in Georgia: Old and New
    Chapter 9 Power Elites in Georgia: Old and New Zurab Chiaberashvili and Gigi Tevzadze ‘Elites’, as referred to in this Chapters, follows Pareto1 and Mosca2, who defined the condition of elitism as the exercise of state control by those individuals with personal and/or group resources disproportionate to those necessary for management of the state. The terms used to describe these resources differ, but theories have in common the fact that such societies the management of a minority over the majority/masses, even in cases of democratic systems (Schumpeter3). Other classical theories about the state and society4, such as Marxism (struggle of classes) and pluralism (inter-balanced sources of authority), describe various types of authority and, accordingly, different social structures. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, newly-formed states began to emerge in the Soviet Union. New forces came to power within these states and their ‘new order’ moved in different directions. In this Chapter, we argue that due to different conditions in these new states, different social structures and state-society relations evolved and, accordingly, fulfilled different theories. The differing levels of legislative activity and the rules by which executive authority was administered both affected the eventual roles of elites. Our investigation focuses on how the state system in Georgia developed according to a theory of elites. Below we give concrete examples showing that, in Georgia, the legislation was developed according to the interests of strong elite groupings, based on the premise of permanently implanting 1 Pareto, The Rise and Fall of the Elites, (New Jersey, 1968). 2 Mosca.
    [Show full text]
  • Law of Georgia on Remuneration in Public
    LAW OF GEORGIA ON REMUNERATION IN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS Chapter I - General Provisions Article 1 - Scope of the Law 1. This Law regulates issues of the remuneration of persons employed in public institutions and the determination of the number of persons employed on the basis of an agreement under public law and persons employed on the basis of an employment agreement, and establishes the conditions for the remuneration of persons working part time, during night hours, on days off and holidays and in working conditions containing health risks, and determines the procedure and conditions for paying remuneration for the fulfilment of temporarily assigned functions. 2. This Law shall apply to: a) state servants; b) public political officials; c) political officials; d) qualified public officers ('an officer’); e) persons employed on the basis of an agreement under public law; f) persons employed on the basis of an employment agreement. 3. This Law shall also apply to all other persons employed in public institutions, unless otherwise determined by this Law. 4. Unless otherwise determined by this Law, remuneration shall be determined by the respective legislation of Georgia, and this Law shall not apply to: a) employees with a military or a special rank in the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia; b) employees with a military and a special rank of the Emergency Management Service, a special-purpose state institution directly subordinated to the Prime Minister of Georgia; c) employees with a special rank of the Investigation
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution of Georgia
    CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA We, the citizens of Georgia – whose firm will it is to establish a democratic social order, economic freedom, and a legal and a social state; to secure universally recognised human rights and freedoms; and to enhance state independence and peaceful relations with other peoples – drawing on the centuries-old traditions of the statehood of the Georgian nation and the historical and legal legacy of the Constitution of Georgia of 1921, proclaim this Constitution before God and the nation. Constitutional Law of Georgia No 1324 of 13 October 2017 – website, 19.10.2017 Constitutional Law of Georgia No 2071 of 23 March 2018 – website, 2.4.2018 Chapter One – General Provisions Article 1 – State sovereignty 1. Georgia is an independent, unified and indivisible state as confirmed by the Referendum of 31 March 1991 held in the entire territory of the country, including the Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of Abkhazia and the former Autonomous Region of South Ossetia, and by the Act of Restoration of State Independence of Georgia of 9 April 1991. 2. The territory of the state of Georgia was determined on 21 December 1991. The territorial integrity of Georgia and the inviolability of the state border is confirmed by the Constitution and laws of Georgia, and recognised by the world community of nations and by international organisations. The alienation of the territory of the state of Georgia shall be prohibited. The state border may be changed only by a bilateral agreement with a neighbouring state. Constitutional Law of Georgia No 1324 of 13 October 2017 – website, 19.10.2017 Constitutional Law of Georgia No 2071 of 23 March 2018 – website, 2.4.2018 Article 2 – State symbols 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Bilingual Educational Policy in Georgia: Can It Benefit the Process of the Integration of Society?
    c e p s Journal | Vol.9 | No1 | Year 2019 61 doi: 10.26529/cepsj.660 Bilingual Educational Policy in Georgia: Can it Benefit the Process of the Integration of Society? Shalva Tabatadze1 • This article reviews the educational policy for the integration of society in Georgia. It is an analytical research paper on the current situation of ethnic minority education in Georgia. The problems and opportuni- ties of bilingual education policy are analysed in the article. The content analysis research method was utilised in the study. The author argues that bilingual education is a crucial tool for the integration of Georgian society; however, local control, involvement, and context are crucial in the implementation of a national bilingual educational programme. The changes on the political, institutional and pedagogical levels of bilingual education are necessary for the successful implementation of bilingual education reform. Keywords: bilingual education, ethnic minorities, non-Georgian language schools, Georgia 1 East European University, Georgia ; [email protected]. 62 bilingual educational policy in georgia Ali lahko politika dvojezičnega izobraževanja v Gruziji prispeva k integracijskim procesom v družbi? Shalva Tabatadze • Članek obravnava izobraževalno politiko za integracijo družbe v Gruzi- ji. Gre za analitični znanstveni članek o trenutnem stanju izobraževanja etničnih manjšin v Gruziji. V njem so analizirane težave in priložnosti dvojezične izobraževalne politike. V raziskavi je bila uporabljena razi- skovalna metoda, ki zajema analizo vsebine. Avtor trdi, da je dvojezično izobraževanje ključno orodje za integracijo gruzijske družbe, čeprav so lokalni nadzor, vključenost in kontekst ključnega pomena pri imple- mentiranju nacionalnega dvojezičnega izobraževalnega programa. Za uspešno izvajanje dvojezične reforme izobraževanja so nujne spremem- be na politični, institucionalni in na pedagoški ravni.
    [Show full text]
  • Trans-Territorial Energy Networks in Georgia, 1993-2003
    LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE State Weakness in Perspective: Trans-territorial Energy Networks in Georgia, 1993-2003 Stacy Renee Closson A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in International Relations 2007 UMI Number: U226529 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U226529 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 M Library British Library of Political aod .Economic Spence ______ AUTHOR DECLARATION I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Stacy Renee Closson The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without prior consent of the author. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I understand that in the event of my thesis not being approved by the examiners, this declaration will become void.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments of the Government of Georgia on the Third Opinion On
    Comments of the Government of Georgia on the Third Opinion on Georgia of the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities adopted on 7 March 2019 Executive Summary- the fifth paragraph; Para. 13 The Office of the State Minister of Georgia for Reconciliation and Civic Equality kindly clarifies that the State Strategy for Civic Equality and Integration and Action Plan for 2015-2020 which is the main document of the state civic integration policy very well demonstrates that minority issues are not considered through security perspective but human rights approach. The State Strategy is based upon the principle of equality and “more diversity, more integration” approach and aims at contributing to the provision of equality; ensuring ethnic minorities’ full-fledged participation in all spheres of public life; preserving national minorities’ culture, further strengthening of a tolerant environment. Executive Summary- Issues for immediate response, the second paragraph The State Agency for Religious Issues of Georgia clarifies that freedom of religion and belief in Georgia is recognized and guaranteed by the Constitution of Georgia, international agreements to which Georgia is assigned and domestic legislation. According to the acting legislation of Georgia, religious organizations have full freedom to define their legal status. Religious associations acquire their rights and obligations in accordance with their legal status and they have freedom of choice to determine their status under the Civil Code of Georgia (Article 1509 and 15091). In particular, religious associations can be registered as a legal entities of public law (LEPL) and as a legal entity of private law, and may also conduct activities as unregistered unions.
    [Show full text]
  • Panel Survey of the Population of Georgia
    Political Profiles of the Georgian Electorate: Panel Survey Data Nana Sumbadze & George Tarkhan-Mouravi Institute for Policy Studies Tbilisi 2003 Foreword This brief report was prepared within the framework of the extensive research project of the Institute of Policy Studies, supported by the Local Governments Initiative (LGI) of the Open Society Institute and the Citizens Advocate! Program funded by the US Agency for International Development. Here are presented some findings related to political profiles of the Georgia’s electorate made during the first two rounds of the panel survey, which was carried out in October- November 2002 and June 2003 on most of the territory of Georgia, with exception of Abkhazia and South Ossetia (we concentrate here mostly on the June 2003 results, bringing the 2002 data mainly for comparison to illustrate change). The total of 1100 persons have been interviewed, selected so as to take into account demographic variables such as urban/rural settlement type as well as gender and age groups, considered to be a representative sample of the Georgia’s population. While two authors, Nana Sumbadze and George Tarkhan-Mouravi, actually wrote this report, many other persons contributed to actual research and the fieldwork, preparation of the questionnaire, interviewing respondents, and processing the results. We would like to acknowledge the especially valuable contribution and support provided by IPS research assistants – Ana Kitiashvili and Ekaterine Pirtskhalava, to whom we extend our sincere gratitude. While interviewers involved in the fieldwork are too numerous to be listed here, all of them deserve our gratitude as well. Tinatin Eristavi did excellent job of entering complicated statistical data.
    [Show full text]
  • 06/06/2019 CONSTITUTION of GEORGIA | სსიპ ”საქართველოს საკანონმდებლო მაცნე” Consolidated Version (Final) CONSTITUTION of GEORGIA
    06/06/2019 CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA | სსიპ ”საქართველოს საკანონმდებლო მაცნე” Consolidated version (final) CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA We, the citizens of Georgia – whose firm will it is to establish a democratic social order, economic freedom, and a legal and a social state; to secure universally recognised human rights and freedoms; and to enhance state independence and peaceful relations with other peoples – drawing on the centuries-old traditions of the statehood of the Georgian nation and the historical and legal legacy of the Constitution of Georgia of 1921, proclaim this Constitution before God and the nation. Constitutional Law of Georgia No 1324 of 13 October 2017 – website, 19.10.2017 Constitutional Law of Georgia No 2071 of 23 March 2018 – website, 2.4.2018 Chapter One – General Provisions Article 1 – State sovereignty 1. Georgia is an independent, unified and indivisible state as confirmed by the Referendum of 31 March 1991 held in the entire territory of the country, including the Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of Abkhazia and the former Autonomous Region of South Ossetia, and by the Act of Restoration of State Independence of Georgia of 9 April 1991. 2. The territory of the state of Georgia was determined on 21 December 1991. The territorial integrity of Georgia and the inviolability of the state border is confirmed by the Constitution and laws of Georgia, and recognised by the world community of nations and by international organisations. The alienation of the territory of the state of Georgia shall be prohibited. The state border may be changed only by a bilateral agreement with a neighbouring state.
    [Show full text]
  • Law of Georgia on Public Service Conforms to This Law
    [(Repealed – 27.10.2015, No 4346) (Shall become effective on 1 July 2017)] LAW OF GEORGIA ON PUBLIC SERVICE This Law lays down legal basis for the organisation of public service in Georgia, regulates relations related to the performance of public service and determines the legal status of public employees. Chapter I - General Provisions Article 1 - Concepts of public service and public office 1. Public service ('the Service') is employment within state and local self-government public (budgetary) institutions – public authorities. 2. Public office is a primary structural unit of state government bodies that determines the place and socio-labour status of citizens in the public service system, as well as their rights and obligations. 3. A State-Political office is the political public office provided for by the Constitution of Georgia, the Constitutions of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia and the Autonomous Republic of Adjara and the election or appointment procedures which are contained in the Constitution of Georgia, the Constitutions of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia and the Autonomous Republic of Adjara, respectively. State-Political officials are: a) the President of Georgia b) Members of the Parliaments of Georgia c) the Prime Minister and other members of the Government of Georgia d) members of the Supreme Representative Bodies of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia and the Autonomous Republic of Adjara e) the Heads of the Governments of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia and the Autonomous Republic of Adjara. 4. Service in public office shall mean labour relations in elected or appointed positions at institutions that exercise legislative, executive and judicial authority, state supervision and control, as well as state defence under the legislation of Georgia.
    [Show full text]