DOCSLIB.ORG

Human Rights in Georgia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Human Rights in Georgia 200 7 The Public Defender of Georgia Report of the Public Defender of Georgia 1 Human Rights in Georgia Report of the Public Defender of Georgia 2007Second half of TBILISI 2008 The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent those of the United Nations or UNDP. UNITED NATIONS PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT DEFENDER PROGRAMME OF GEORGIA THE REPORT WAS PUBLISHED WITH FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (UNDP) CONTENTS 1. POLITICAL PERSECUTION 9 2. FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND MANIFESTATION 18 3. FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION 47 4. PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE 78 5. 5 JANUARY 2008 EXTRAORDINARY PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS: FACTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 85 6. THE STATE OF HUMAN RIGHTS CONDITIONS IN PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTIONS AND THE RIGHTS OF PATIENTS PARTICIPATING IN ELECTIONS 100 7. RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL 104 8. ENFORCEMENT OF COURT JUDGMENTS 113 9. PROSECUTORS OFFICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS 117 10. MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND HUMAN RIGHTS 125 11. MONITORING OF TEMPORARY DETENTION ISOLATORS AND POLICE UNITS OF THE MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND GUARDHOUSE OF THE MINISTRY OF DEFENSE OF GEORGIA 129 12. PENITENTIARY SYSTEM 133 13. CAUSES AND FACTORS AFFECTING MORTALITY RATE AT GEORGIAN PENITENTIARY INSTITUTIONS 138 14. PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE LIVING IN CONFLICT ZONES 170 15. PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDP) 174 16. PROTECTION OF REFUGEES RIGHTS 180 17. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION 185 18. VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO PROPERTY 187 19. SOCIAL PROTECTION 191 20. RIGHTS OF DISABLED PEOPLE 196 21. THE RIGHTS OF A CHILD 201 22. GENDER EQUALITY ISSUES 209 23. VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN GEORGIA 211 24. PROBLEM OF TRAFFICKING IN GEORGIA 215 25. FREEDOM OF RELIGION 218 26. RECOMMENDATIONS 220 27. ANNEX #1. POLITICAL PERSECUTION 227 28. ANNEX #2. FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND MANIFESTATION 233 29. ANNEX #3. FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION 269 30. ANNEX #4. RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL 287 31. ANNEX #5. ENFORCEMENT OF COURT JUDGMENTS 298 32. ANNEX #6. PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS 307 33. ANNEX #7. MINISTRY OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS AND HUMAN RIGHTS 316 34. ANNEX #8. PENITENTIARY SYSTEM 324 6 35. ANNEX #9. PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS (IDP) 327 36. ANNEX #10. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION 343 37. ANNEX #11. VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO PROPERTY 350 38. ANNEX #12. SOCIAL PROTECTION 371 39. ANNEX #13. THE RIGHTS OF A CHILD 382 40. ANNEX #14. FREEDOM OF RELIGION 384 200 7 Report of the Public Defender of Georgia 7 8 The number and intensity of ap- plications received by the Public Defenders office indicate that af- ter the unification of opposition forces in October 2007 events of political persecution reached their peak. The main aim of this perse- cution was to frustrate the oppo- sition actions and to influence the pre-election process. 1 POLITICAL PERSECUTION After analysing the applications, the impression gained was that a certain circle of individuals was mobilized to identify and exert pressure upon oppositionists and other cases, the persecution con- their families. Often it is difficult sisted of propaganda campaigns to assert whether governmental against leaders in the opposition. officials directly participated in such actions, but it is clear that the All means and methods of threat authorities appear to be the inter- and political neutralization were ested party in this matter. The sta- applied towards individuals belon- tements and demands of the as- ging to opposition forces. Several sailants towards the oppositionists applications received by the Pub- give grounds to this claim. As a lic Defenders office serve as proof rule, the demands were identical to such behaviour. Members of in each case oppositionists or opposition parties Kakha Kukava, their family members were to dis- Koba Davitashvili and Bezhan continue their political activities Gunava repeatedly talked about and law enforcement officers were being persecuted and shadowed, also asked to take part in the pressu- yet none of their statements ever re, often through direct participa- became the object of interest to tion, as evidenced by statements law enforcement officials and no made by victims and witnesses. legal action followed. Accounts of such persecution are included in 200 Practically all means of intimida- this chapter, as well as the chap- tion were applied against politi- ters entitled, Freedom of Rallies cally active persons, including phy- and Mass Demonstrations and sical threats, shadowing, office Freedom of Expression. raids, insults, kidnapping, pressure upon families, and detentions, both Pursuit of individuals for their po- administrative and criminal. Po- litical opinion is unacceptable and litical persecution became the nor- impermissible in a democratic so- mal tendency for the time period ciety. According to Article 14 of directly before and after the No- the Georgian Constitution, ev- vember riots. Individual members eryone is free by birth and is equal of opposition parties speak about before the law regardless of race, 7 their problems related to their tra- colour, language, sex, religion, vel, as well as receiving anonymo- political and other opinions, na- us telephone calls and insults. In tional, ethnic and social belong- Report of the Public Defender of Georgia 9 POLITICAL PERSECUTION ing, origin, property and title, and place of residence; and Article 156 of the Georgian Criminal Code provides for protection from and punishment for persecution for speech, opinion, conscience, religious denomination, faith or creed, and political, public, professional, religious or scientific pursuits. SHADOWING AND TELEPHONE THREATS TOWARDS MEMBERS OF OPPOSITION PARTIES Representatives of opposition parties state that they and their offices were frequently shadowed. In most cases, the shadowing including videotaping, which was probably used to identify persons involved in the opposition, or who had close ties to the opposition. Police representatives, admittedly, participated in the shadowing. The above action, if not authorised, is an illegal interference into peoples private lives. According to Article 20 of the Georgian Constitution, everyones private life, place of personal activity, personal records, corre- spondence, communication by telephone or other technical means, as well as messages received through electronic means shall be inviolable. Restriction of the aforementioned rights shall be permissible by a court decision or also without such decision in the case of the urgent necessity provided for by law. Information gathering about the activities and movement of representatives of political parties by means of unauthorised shadowing is not provided for by any rule, or exception to it. Hence, it cannot be justified as an urgent necessity provided for by law. Several facts point to the police representatives participation in shad- owing opposition party members. The case of Tsisia Dolidze: Tsisia Dolidze, chief of the Patarkatsishvili Ajara Regional organizations press office notified the Public Defenders Office that local police authorities were shadowing the Batumi office of presidential contender Patarkatsishvili, No. 16, Gamsakhurdia St. On October 4, 2007, the Public Defenders representative visited Batumi to verify the claim. Near Patarkatsishvilis electoral headquarters, the repre- sentative noticed an official from the 3rd division of the Batumi Interior Administration in a red Mercedes. The Public Defenders representative asked the official the reason for his presence, to which he responded that the area was his responsibility and he was controlling it. After being informed about Badri Patarkatsisvhili electoral staffs suspicion of being shadowed, the official left the territory. The case of Nino Gelashvili: Ms. Nino Gelashvili, chairperson of the Conservative Partys Khashuri regional organization, also talks about her office being shadowed. During the pre-election period, a white car, license plate number SSS 329, was constantly shadowing near her office. Unknown persons in the car were videotap- ing party members and their associates. On 14 December 2007, Conservative Party members were spreading information about the visit of Levan Gachechiladze, leader of the joint opposition to Khashuri. Not far from the village of Natsargori, people who were traveling in the above-mentioned car stopped them. As it later became clear, the people in the car were representatives of criminal police, though they did not identify them- selves at the time and neither presented any identification. They took down the names of the party members and their associates, checked the boot of their car and warned them not to use megaphones. During the offices reporting period, threatening telephone calls were frequently made; unidentified persons often called opposition party members using psychological threats, damaging words and death threats. The above-mentioned calls were politically motivated, and the caller demanded the person who answered the call to discontinue their political activity, abstain from any political activities, etc. Though these facts were brought to the attention of the appropriate bodies, no investigations or proceedings have as yet been taken. On 25 December 2007, members of the joint opposition held a press-conference where they presented a recorded telephone conversation between Bezhan Gunava and an unknown person. The conversation was 10 also broadcast on Imedi TV. The unknown person confirms he repeatedly called Bezhan Gunava and in- sulted him. The opposition members claim
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]
  • Georgia Between Dominant-Power Politics, Feckless Pluralism, and Democracy Christofer Berglund Uppsala University
    GEORGIA BETWEEN DOMINANT-POWER POLITICS, FECKLESS PLURALISM, AND DEMOCRACY CHRISTOFER BERGLUND UPPSALA UNIVERSITY Abstract: This article charts the last decade of Georgian politics (2003-2013) through theories of semi- authoritarianism and democratization. It first dissects Saakashvili’s system of dominant-power politics, which enabled state-building reforms, yet atrophied political competition. It then analyzes the nested two-level game between incumbents and opposition in the run-up to the 2012 parliamentary elections. After detailing the verdict of Election Day, the article turns to the tense cohabitation that next pushed Georgia in the direction of feckless pluralism. The last section examines if the new ruling party is taking Georgia in the direction of democratic reforms or authoritarian closure. nder what conditions do elections in semi-authoritarian states spur Udemocratic breakthroughs?1 This is a conundrum relevant to many hybrid regimes in the region of the former Soviet Union. It is also a ques- tion of particular importance for the citizens of Georgia, who surprisingly voted out the United National Movement (UNM) and instead backed the Georgian Dream (GD), both in the October 2012 parliamentary elections and in the October 2013 presidential elections. This article aims to shed light on the dramatic, but not necessarily democratic, political changes unleashed by these events. It is, however, beneficial to first consult some of the concepts and insights that have been generated by earlier research on 1 The author is grateful to Sten Berglund, Ketevan Bolkvadze, Selt Hasön, and participants at the 5th East Asian Conference on Slavic-Eurasian Studies, as well as the anonymous re- viewers, for their useful feedback.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Elites in the Years of Independence (The Example of Gurjaani District, Georgia)
    DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTS IN TBILISI, SAME PEOPLE IN REGIONS: LOCAL ELITES IN THE YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE (THE EXAMPLE OF GURJAANI DISTRICT, GEORGIA) Giorgi Gotua he ruling political regime in Georgia has changed three times since 1990. Twice the government was replaced through non-constitutional means. None of these regimes were able to consolidate and reach consensus with different groups vying for power regarding basic insti- Ttutions and rules of game. Researchers studying the transition from autocracy to democracy point out various structural factors (culture, socio-economic factors) which they say deter- mine the successful consolidation of new democratic regimes. In recent years, more and more attention has been paid to political elites as essential actors able to decisively influence the direction of state development. Choices made by elites at certain stages of state development, the level of power and authority they ex- ercise in society and the character of relations among various factions determine the success of the process of forming and consolidating a new regime. Studies by G. Field, M. Burton and D. Higley demonstrate that the stability of a regime is directly linked to the degree of consensus among its various fac- tions regarding existing institutions and rules of game (another way to guaran- tee relative stability of the regime, dominance of one group over another, is not discussed as an option within the framework of this research).1 Georgia’s case can serve as a good example demonstrating the correctness of this thesis. During the period of independence three political regimes have changed in Georgia. The regime of President Zviad Gamsakhurdia – which followed the 1 This thesis is presented in: Field G., Hihley J., Burton M., National Elite Configurations and Transitions to De- mocracy // Classes and Elites in Democracy and Democratization: A Collection of Readings / ed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Situation in Human Rights and Freedoms in Georgia – 2011
    2011 The Public Defender of Georgia ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DefeNDER OF GeorgIA 1 The views of the publication do not necessarily represent those of the Council of Europe. The report was published with financial support of the Council of Europe project, “Denmark’s Georgia Programme 2010-2013, Promotion of Judicial Reform, Human and Minority Rights”. 2 www.ombudsman.ge ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GeorgIA THE SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN GEORGIA 2011 2011 THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GeorgIA ANNUAL REPORT OF THEwww.ombudsman.ge PUBLIC DefeNDER OF GeorgIA 3 OFFICE OF PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA 6, Ramishvili str, 0179, Tbilisi, Georgia Tel: +995 32 2913814; +995 32 2913815 Fax: +995 32 2913841 E-mail: [email protected] 4 www.ombudsman.ge CONTENTS INtrodUCTION ..........................................................................................................................7 JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND HUMAN RIGHTS ........................................................................11 THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL ........................................................................................11 ENFORCEMENT OF COUrt JUDGMENTS ...............................................................37 PUBLIC DEFENDER AND CONSTITUTIONAL OVERSIGHT ...........................41 LAW ENFORCEMENT BODIES AND HUMAN RIGHTS .......................................46 CIVIL-POLITICAL RIGHTS ..................................................................................................51 FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND MANIFESTATIONS ............................................51
    [Show full text]
  • Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2001 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 4, 2002
    Georgia Page 1 of 19 Georgia Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2001 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 4, 2002 The 1995 Constitution provides for an executive branch that reports to the President and a legislature. The President appoints ministers with the consent of Parliament. In April 2000, Eduard Shevardnadze was reelected to a second 5-year term as President in an election marred by numerous serious irregularities. International observers strongly criticized the election, citing interference by state authorities in the electoral process, deficient election legislation, insufficient representative election administration, and unreliable voter registers. The country's second parliamentary elections under the 1995 Constitution were held in 1999 and were characterized by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) as a step toward Georgia's compliance with OSCE commitments. The civil war and separatist wars that followed the 1992 coup ended central government authority in Abkhazia and Ossetia, and weakened central authority in the autonomous region of Ajara and elsewhere in the country. The Constitution provides for an independent judiciary; however, the judiciary is subject to executive pressure. Internal conflicts in Abkhazia and South Ossetia remained unresolved. Ceasefires were in effect in both areas, although sporadic incidents of violence occurred in Abkhazia. These conflicts and the problems associated with roughly 270,000 internally displaced persons (IDP's) from Abkhazia, 60,000 from South Ossetia, and another 4,000-5,000 refugees from Chechnya, posed a continued threat to national stability. In 1993 Abkhaz separatists won control of Abkhazia, and most ethnic Georgians were expelled from or fled the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads/BCG Kvleva.Pdf)
    Georgia Human Development Report 2008 The Reforms and Beyond Published for UNDP Georgia Copyright © 2008 United Nations Development Programme 9 Eristavi Street, 0179 Tbilisi, Georgia All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without permission ISBN 978-9941-0-0571-8 Editing: Caitlin Ryan Cover and layout: Dimitri Modrekelize, Contour Ltd. Printing: Calamus Graphics Studio Executive summary Team for the preparation of Georgia Human Development Report 2008 Project coordinator Viktor Baramia Lead author George Welton Co-authors Tinatin Zurabishvili and Natalia Nozadze Research assistant George Kiziria Authors of background papers Givi Kutidze, Eka Avaliani, Lasha Gotsiridze, Giorgi Berulava, Tato Urjumelashvili, Shorena Abesadze, Tinatin Zurabishvili, Vakhtang Megrelishvili, Keti Kinkladze, Nino Kizikurashvili, Giorgi Meladze. Human development advisors Andrey Ivanov and Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh Indicators computation: Nodar Kapanadze and Mihail Peleah Georgia Human Development Report 2008 Forewords The UNDP National Human Development However, as we enter the second phase of the Report comes at an important time in Georgia’s reforms we need to be forward-looking. The relentless pursuit of enhanced economic devel- Report reminds us that the objective of these opment for all. The beginning of this administra- reforms has always been Human Development tion’s second term is an ideal time for reflection in the fullest sense. We do not only seek to pro- on what we have achieved and what we still need duce a wealthy society. We want our society to be to do. As a long-term supporter of Georgian re- democratic and participatory, educated, healthy forms, UNDP is ideally placed to engage with us and secure.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Owned Georgia Eng.Pdf
    By Paul Rimple This book is about the businessmen and the companies who own significant shares in broadcasting, telecommunications, advertisement, oil import and distribution, pharmaceutical, privatisation and mining sectors. Furthermore, It describes the relationship and connections between the businessmen and companies with the government. Included is the information about the connections of these businessmen and companies with the government. The book encompases the time period between 2003-2012. At the time of the writing of the book significant changes have taken place with regards to property rights in Georgia. As a result of 2012 Parliamentary elections the ruling party has lost the majority resulting in significant changes in the business ownership structure in Georgia. Those changes are included in the last chapter of this book. The project has been initiated by Transparency International Georgia. The author of the book is journalist Paul Rimple. He has been assisted by analyst Giorgi Chanturia from Transparency International Georgia. Online version of this book is available on this address: http://www.transparency.ge/ Published with the financial support of Open Society Georgia Foundation The views expressed in the report to not necessarily coincide with those of the Open Society Georgia Foundation, therefore the organisation is not responsible for the report’s content. WHO OWNED GEORGIA 2003-2012 By Paul Rimple 1 Contents INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Revolutionary Tactics: Insights from Police and Justice Reform in Georgia
    TRANSITIONS FORUM | CASE STUDY | JUNE 2014 Revolutionary Tactics: Insights from Police and Justice Reform in Georgia by Peter Pomerantsev with Geoffrey Robertson, Jovan Ratković and Anne Applebaum www.li.com www.prosperity.com ABOUT THE LEGATUM INSTITUTE Based in London, the Legatum Institute (LI) is an independent non-partisan public policy organisation whose research, publications, and programmes advance ideas and policies in support of free and prosperous societies around the world. LI’s signature annual publication is the Legatum Prosperity Index™, a unique global assessment of national prosperity based on both wealth and wellbeing. LI is the co-publisher of Democracy Lab, a journalistic joint-venture with Foreign Policy Magazine dedicated to covering political and economic transitions around the world. www.li.com www.prosperity.com http://democracylab.foreignpolicy.com TRANSITIONS FORUM CONTENTS Introduction 3 Background 4 Tactics for Revolutionary Change: Police Reform 6 Jovan Ratković: A Serbian Perspective on Georgia’s Police Reforms Justice: A Botched Reform? 10 Jovan Ratković: The Serbian Experience of Justice Reform Geoffrey Robertson: Judicial Reform The Downsides of Revolutionary Maximalism 13 1 Truth and Reconciliation Jovan Ratković: How Serbia Has Been Coming to Terms with the Past Geoffrey Robertson: Dealing with the Past 2 The Need to Foster an Opposition Jovan Ratković: The Serbian Experience of Fostering a Healthy Opposition Russia and the West: Geopolitical Direction and Domestic Reforms 18 What Georgia Means: for Ukraine and Beyond 20 References 21 About the Author and Contributors 24 About the Legatum Institute inside front cover Legatum Prosperity IndexTM Country Factsheet 2013 25 TRANSITIONS forum | 2 TRANSITIONS FORUM The reforms carried out in Georgia after the Rose Revolution of 2004 were Introduction among the most radical ever attempted in the post-Soviet world, and probably the most controversial.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Effectively Fight Corruption in Ukraine COALITIONS of the LIKE-MINDED CAN DEGRADE ENTRENCHED INTERESTS
    How to Effectively Fight Corruption in Ukraine COALITIONS OF THE LIKE-MINDED CAN DEGRADE ENTRENCHED INTERESTS PONARS Eurasia Policy Memo No. 405 December 2015 Robert Orttung1 George Washington University Nearly two years after the Euromaidan protests chased Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych from power, corruption remains among the top internal problems hindering the country’s development. Although the Euromaidan protests brought about a change of government, they did not change how the system works. Entrenched interests from the old system remain in place and continue to dictate what happens in the country. Despite this unfortunate reality, some things in Ukraine have changed, and it is possible to see a path toward a better future. This, however, requires popular action. It is the only way to overcome the elite interests that continue to support the status quo. Ukraine’s politicians have demonstrated time and time again that they will not initiate change on their own. The way to promote anti- corruption reform is through increased and persistent people power. Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Record since the Euromaidan Most Ukrainians see little progress in cleaning up their political and economic systems since the dramatic events of late 2013 and early 2014. An oligarch now serves as president and many other oligarchs remain influential. No high level officials have been arrested for participating in corrupt activities and there has been little investigation of the old regime, much less a good faith effort to restore the assets looted by the previous leaders. Additionally, there has been little practical reform of the courts. A continuing series of scandals has rocked the General Prosecutors’ office, which employs approximately 20,000 officials and is frequently portrayed as the center of corruption.
    [Show full text]
  • Ser Oliver Uordropi 150
    saqarTvelos parlamentis erovnuli biblioTeka saqarTvelos erovnuli arqivi ser oliver uordropi 150 Tbilisi 2015 1 UDC (uak) 001 (410)(092) 008.1 (479.22.410) wigni Seadgina, SeniSvnebi da komentarebi daurTo, redaqtireba gaukeTa, inglisuri teqsti qarTul Targmans Seudara istoriis doqtorma: beqa kobaxiZem teqsti inglisuridan qarTul enaze Targmna: salome beniZem qarTuli Targmanis stilisturi redaqtireba diana anfimiadisa wina ydaze gamosaxulia saqarTvelos sagareo saqmeTa ministri - evgeni gegeWkori da didi britaneTis umaRlesi komisari - ser oliver uordropi tfilisSi 1919 wlis 30 agvistos mowyobil daxvedraze. foto daculia saqarTvelos erovnul arqivSi. On the front cover there are illustrated Minister of Foreign Affairs of Georgia – Evgeni Gegechkori and British High Commissioner in Transcaucasia – Sir Oliver Wardrop at the arrival meeting of Wardrop in Tiflis on 30th of August 1919. The photograph is preserved in the National Archives of Georgia. ukana ydaze gamosaxulia ser oliver uordropi - misi udidebulesobis generaluri konsuli strasburgSi. 1925 weli. foto hilari grandis uordropebis ojaxis albomidan. On the back cover there is illustrated Sir Oliver Wardrop – His Majesty’s Consul-General in Strasbourg. 1925. Photograph from Wardrops family album of Hilary Grundy. © saqarTvelos parlamentis erovnuli biblioTeka © saqarTvelos erovnuli arqivi Sps “irida” rusTavi, firosmanis q.#7 ISBN 978-9941-0-8216-0 2 sarCevi: redaqtoris winasityvaoba ...............................................................................................4 “ser oliver uordropi:
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia Environmental Performance Reviews Third Review
    UNECE Georgia Environmental Performance Reviews Third Review UNITED NATIONS ECE/CEP/177 UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS GEORGIA Third Review UNITED NATIONS New York and Geneva, 2016 Environmental Performance Reviews Series No. 43 NOTE Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. In particular, the boundaries shown on the maps do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations. The United Nations issued the second Environmental Performance Review of Georgia (Environmental Performance Reviews Series No. 30) in 2010. This volume is issued in English only. ECE/CEP/177 UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales E.16.II.E.3 ISBN 978-92-1-117101-3 e-ISBN 978-92-1-057683-3 ISSN 1020-4563 iii Foreword It is essential to monitor progress towards environmental sustainability and to evaluate how countries reconcile environmental and economic targets and meet their international environmental commitments. Through regular monitoring and evaluation, countries may more effectively stay ahead of emerging environmental issues, improve their environmental performance and be accountable to their citizens. The ECE Environmental Performance Review Programme provides valuable assistance to member States by regularly assessing their environmental performance so that they can take steps to improve their environmental management, integrate environmental considerations into economic sectors, increase the availability of information to the public and promote information exchange with other countries on policies and experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • Country of Origin Information Report Republic of Georgia 25 November
    REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION (COI) REPORT Country of Origin Information Service 25 November 2010 GEORGIA 25 NOVEMBER 2010 Contents Preface Paragraphs Background Information 1. GEOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 1.01 Maps ...................................................................................................................... 1.05 2. ECONOMY ................................................................................................................ 2.01 3. HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 3.01 Post-communist Georgia, 1990-2003.................................................................. 3.02 Political developments, 2003-2007...................................................................... 3.03 Elections of 2008 .................................................................................................. 3.05 Presidential election, January 2008 ................................................................... 3.05 Parliamentary election, May 2008 ...................................................................... 3.06 Armed conflict with Russia, August 2008 .......................................................... 3.09 Developments following the 2008 armed conflict.............................................. 3.10 4. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]