TWO YEARS IN GOVERNMENT: GEORGIAN DREAM'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW OCTOBER 2012 – DECEMBER 2014 TBILISI MAY 2015 2 | INTRODUCTION AUTHORS: ARTICLE 42 OF THE CONSTITUTION CIVIL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CiDA) ECONOMIC POLICY RESEARCH CENTER (EPRC) GEORGIA'S REFORMS ASSOCIATES (GRASS) GEORGIAN YOUNG LAWYERS' ASSOCIATION GREEN ALTERNATIVE HUMAN RIGHTS CENTER HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION AND MONITORING CENTER (EMC) IDENTOBA INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION (IDFI) INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR FAIR ELECTIONS AND DEMOCRACY (ISFED) MULTINATIONAL GEORGIA (PMMG) OPEN SOCIETY GEORGIA FOUNDATION (OSGF) PARTNERSHIP FOR HUMAN RIGHTS (PHR) TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL (TI) GEORGIA TWO YEARS IN GOVERNMENT: GEORGIAN DREAM'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW | 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 1. GOVERNANCE SYSTEM 5 1.1 Parliament 6 1.2 Executive government 8 2. LAW-ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM 10 2.1 Prosecutor's Office 11 2.2 Ministry of Interior 12 2.3 Criminal justice legislative process 14 3. JUDICIAL SYSTEM 18 4. PENITENTIARY SYSTEM 22 5. ELECTORAL REFORM 24 5.1 Electoral system 25 5.2 Election administration 26 5.3 The voter lists 27 5.4 Legislation on the activities of political parties 28 5.5 Administrative resources 28 6. LOCAL SELF-GOVERNANCE REFORM 30 6.1 Self-governance Reform 31 6.2 Human resources management: hiring and dismissing civil servants 33 7. FREEDOM OF RELIGION 36 8. ETHNIC MINORITIES 42 9. LGBT RIGHTS 46 10. RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES 50 11. VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 54 12. LABOR RIGHTS 58 13. THE RIGHT TO HOUSING 62 14. THE CONDITION OF IDPS 66 15. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY 69 15.1 Environmental protection and natural resources 70 15.2 Energy 74 16. FOREIGN POLICY 79 17. INVESTMENT ENVIRONMENT 84 18. ECONOMY 89 18.1 Key Indicators 90 18.2 State Budget 90 18.3 Foreign debt 93 18.4 Trade and DCFTA 94 18.5 Agriculture 95 19. OPEN GOVERNANCE 98 20. MEDIA ENVIRONMENT 101 21. HEALTHCARE 104 22. MIGRATION 107 23. CULTURAL HERITAGE 111 4 | INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION The 1 October 2012 parliamentary elections established a new ruling parliamentary majority and brought the Georgian Dream Coalition in the executive power. As part of its pre-election promises, the new government pledged to undertake major reforms and changes in almost all aspects of governance, including: depolitization of the governance system, removing undue pressure from the private sector, improving protection of human rights and the welfare of citizens. Georgian nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have been following the processes since the 2012 elections very actively. Civil society representatives regularly responded to government initiatives and offered its recommendations to the respective institutions. NGOs were very often proactive about their recommendations, advocating for deep reforms in various policy fields. The report provides an overview of the reforms and changes undertaken by the Georgian Dream government in over 20 key public policy areas, independent assessment and recommendations to tackle problems. These are areas which were often discussed by civil society and the authors believe more efforts are needed: general governance, electoral reform, local self-governance, human rights and equality, economy and investment environment, foreign policy, open government and media environment. After two years of coming into power, Georgian Dream boasts to have made achievements in many of these areas. NGOs, however, believe that there are even more challenges remaining. Each chapter of the report includes the following sections: (1) the situation before the 2012 parliamentary elections; (2) what has happened since the elections – reforms undertaken by the new government and significant events that have occurred; (3) recommendations of the nongovernmental organizations in tackling any remaining or newly arisen challenges. The report covers the period since October 2012 up until the end of 2014. In particular cases, the authors also consider and discuss those significant developments that have taken place up to March 2015. Each chapter was prepared by NGOs with the expertise in respective policy areas. These NGOs have been long observing the developments in these sectors. Recommendations prepared by the civil society representatives are backed by their expert knowledge in each field as well as best international practices. NGOs that have contributed chapters to this report are: Article 42 of the Constitution, Civil Development Agency (CiDA), Economic Policy Research Center (EPRC), Georgia's Reforms Associates (GRASS), Georgian Young Lawyers' Association (GYLA), Green Alternative, Human Rights Center, Human Rights Education and Monitoring Center (EMC), Identoba, Institute For Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI), International Society For Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED), Public Movement Multinational Georgia (PMMG), Open Society Georgia Foundation (OSGF), Partnership for Human Rights (PHR) and Transparency International (TI) Georgia. Authors are responsible only for chapters authored by them and may not share the views expressed by authors of other parts of the report. While working on the report, NGOs were basing on the findings of their prior qualitative and quantitative research, publicly available information and media reports. In order to eliminate any errors and inaccuracies, the report was sent to the Government Administration, Parliament and the High Council of Justice. We would like to thank all stakeholders who provided feedback; some of the comments were reflected by the authors in the final report. Finally, we hope that addresses of this report will prioritize reform areas and recommendations provided by the civil society representatives and react upon them in the nearest future. We are ready to further consult all institutions of the government with our assessment and recommendations. TWO YEARS IN GOVERNMENT: GEORGIAN DREAM'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW | 5 1. GOVERNANCE SYSTEM Transparency International Georgia 6 | 1. GOVERNANCE SYSTEM THE SITUATION BEFORE THE 2012 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS United National Movement (UNM) government was known for effectively eliminating bribery and modernizing the country. Many successful reforms were carried out after 2004 that have enabled Georgian economy to grow after years of stagnation. Basic infrastructure was significantly improved. During the last few years of the UNM rule, however, a high number of issues surfaced concerning overall governance. The executive branch of the government clearly dominated over the others. Law enforcement agencies were especially strong and the institutions that are meant to be exercising checks of the executive – parliament, judiciary, state audit office, election administration – were rather weak and not independent. Another characteristic of the UNM governance was that personalities were at the center of it, who carried out functions also beyond their official capacity, resulting into informal interference in other areas of the system. This was a significant drawback to the process of building democratic institutions. Weakness of the parliament and the judiciary allowed for the executive to function without any proper oversight. There were, therefore, serious issues with the constitutional checks and balances. Furthermore, lack of civic engagement mechanisms in the policymaking process led to weakening of civic participation and low levels of transparency and accountability.1 2012 parliamentary elections marked the first transition of power with an election in Georgia which was widely welcomed. The new government was particularly open during the first several months after its election. Emergence of pluralism among the media was another significant development. Since 2012, in terms of governance and institution-building, a number of trends can be observed. 1.1 Parliament SINCE THE ELECTIONS The new Parliament is more pluralistic as there are a strong parliamentary opposition and multi-party majority present. As per the initiative of the Speaker, regular meetings were held with the civil society. A consultation group was established with the Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee which was a platform for NGOs and interested individuals to engage and propose recommendations. The ad hoc commissions were also very open, especially the commission investigating conflicts of interest with the former Georgia's National Communications Commission (GNCC) administration and the commission to select the Board member of Georgia's Public Broadcaster (GPB). Parliament members initiated some important amendments, including regulations to reform the secret government surveillance legislative framework. The work of the new Parliament was especially transparent during its first year, the practice which is continued to date. A new, improved website was launched. Draft legislation and the schedule of hearings have become more accessible to the wider public. However, some problems remain with the work of the legislature. First of all, the relationship between political parties is very tense and confrontational. This has made it impossible for the MPs to reach consensus on important issues. The content of the debates in Parliament is very often related to the past of the politicians and not legislation. There were instances when such heated debates turned into verbal abuse and even physical confrontation. 1 TI Georgia, National Integrity Systems Assessment, 2011, http://bit.ly/1IrUFX4 TWO YEARS IN GOVERNMENT: GEORGIAN DREAM'S PERFORMANCE REVIEW | 7 There were a number