Judicial Independence and Legal Empowerment Project Ca # Aid-114-A-10-00008 Quarterly Report January 1, 2011

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE AND LEGAL EMPOWERMENT PROJECT

CA # AID-114-A-10-00008

QUARTERLY REPORT JANUARY 1, 2011 – MARCH 31, 2011

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE AND LEGAL EMPOWERMENT PROJECT QUARTERLY REPORT JANUARY 1, 2011 – MARCH 31, 2011

Prepared under the USAID’s Judicial Independence and Legal Empowerment Project in Georgia, Cooperative Agreement Number AID-114-A-10-0008 Period of Performance: September 24, 2010 – September 24, 2014

Submitted to: USAID/Georgia on May 2, 2011

Implementer East-West Management Institute, Inc.

Responsible Parties: Herbert D. Bowman, Chief of Party, Tbilisi, [email protected] Mark Dietrich, Project Director, Washington, D.C. [email protected]

Disclaimer This report is made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of East-West Management Institute, Inc. and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

BACKGROUND

On September 24, 2010, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) awarded Cooperative Agreement No. AID-114-A-10-00008, the Judicial Independence and Legal Empowerment Project (JILEP), to the East-West Management Institute (EWMI).

JILEP is designed to support and strengthen the judiciary as an independent yet equal branch of government, and to improve Georgia’s commercial law system. This four year program will work to improve the process by which judges are appointed, trained and disciplined to increase their independence and professionalism. JILEP will also further strengthen the state free legal aid system and the legal NGO community, and increase public understanding of the role of the judiciary. JILEP will contribute to improvement in legal education both for law students and for practicing attorneys in Georgia. Finally, JILEP will streamline procedures for handling commercial cases and enforcing commercial judgments. The program is organized around the following four main objectives: 1) strengthen judicial independence, accountability, and professionalism; 2) strengthen the institutional capacity of legal professional associations, legal rights NGOs, and the state legal aid system; 3) improve legal education; and 4) develop commercial law and improve commercial law related practice.

The following is submitted as JILEP’s Quarterly Report for the reporting period January to March 2011.

COMPONENT 1: STRENGTHEN JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE, ACCOUNTABILITY AND PROFESSIONALISM

A. Significant Results, Accomplishments, Activities

Working for Judicial Independence through the High Council of Justice (HCOJ)

Judicial Independence and Transparency, Education and Awareness Raising

During this quarter, JILEP built on the relationships it had established with the HCOJ and the Supreme Court of Georgia (SCG) in the previous quarter by supporting three events that were aimed, at least in part, at encouraging Georgia’s judicial system to adopt more transparent and objective procedures and practices in the areas of judicial selection, evaluation and discipline.

In early February, JILEP arranged for Kakha Koberidze, a HCOJ member, to travel to Yaremche, Ukraine to attend a seminar entitled, “Operation of the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine in the New Environment.” The USAID-funded seminar brought experts from Europe and the US together to share experiences and best practices in the area of judicial appointment and discipline. At the seminar, Mr. Koberidze made a presentation in which he shared his insights on the advances that Georgia has made and the challenges they still face in these areas. Mr. Koberidze was accompanied on the trip by JILEP Judicial Reform Advisor, Inga Todria.

On February 4-6, JILEP assisted the USAID-funded JAMR project and the HCOJ sponsor a working meeting of Chief Judges and members of the HCOJ to discuss the implementation of HCOJ’s recently created Assessment Guidelines on Judges’ Workload and Efficiency. The event was held at Gudauri and was attended by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, members of the Supreme Court, the Secretary and members of the HCOJ, Chairs of city and district courts, and staff members of the HCOJ and Supreme Court. During the meeting, the attendees expressed general agreement that the newly adopted Assessment Guidelines were a step in the right direction but needed to be further developed. One concern voiced by JILEP representatives at the meeting was that creating a system that gathered statistics to measure the “efficiency” of

4 court operations could be used to control the behavior and decision making of individual judges in a way that would negatively impact judicial independence.

On March 28-29, JILEP, JAMR, the Council of Europe, the European Union, and GIZ, sponsored a judicial conference in Tbilisi entitled, “Quality of Justice and its Contemporary Challenges.” JILEP’s main contribution to the event was the presentation of Colin R. Winchester, Executive Director of the Utah Judicial Conduct Commission, who spoke on judicial disciplinary regulations and practice in the US. In his presentation, Mr. Winchester described the fairness and transparency of the process of judicial discipline in his state of Utah, as well as in other states such as California. He explained how his office conducted investigations into judicial misconduct. He described the measures Utah takes to make sure the public understands the judicial disciplinary process and the outcome of cases. Through his presentation Mr. Winchester sent a message to the conference on the need to balance judicial accountability with judicial independence. Mr. Winchester followed up his appearance at the conference with a visit to the Supreme Court of Georgia where he met with Konstantin Kublashvili, Chief Justice of Georgia.

Colin Winchester, Chief Justice Konstantin Kublashivili, and David Magradze (DPK)

HCOJ Outreach Capacity Building

During the quarter, the HCOJ requested assistance from JILEP to increase HCOJ’s public outreach capacity. Considering that the functions and operations of the HCOJ are not clearly known and understood by either ordinary citizens or practicing legal professionals, and believing that a greater level of understanding can lead to a greater level of trust and confidence in the courts, JILEP worked with the HCOJ to develop a list of targeted JILEP interventions to build public outreach capacity. These interventions include: (1) an assessment of the HCOJ’s current outreach capacity including recommendations to improve it; (2) redesign of the HCOJ website to make it more informative and user friendly; (3) HCOJ staff member training in PR technologies and public outreach management; (4) development of “public information products;” and (5) creation of a judges training course in “Court Room Communication.” Activities in the areas are scheduled to begin in the next quarter.

Judicial Examination Reform

The HCOJ asked JILEP to provide assistance in improving the process by which judges are tested and selected. The HCOJ intends to redesign the judicial candidate qualification exam both as to form and content but also by adding a so-called general skills or intelligence quotient test section. They also intend to create an interview questionnaire to be used during the interview phase of the selection process. JILEP has begun discussions with the HCOJ leadership about what the nature of JILEP’s assistance in this area might look like. The JILEP Judicial Reform Advisor began participating in the HCOJ weekly planning meetings aimed at developing, among other things, an action plan to improve judge and staff selection procedures.

While these openings for cooperation seem promising, it is important to note that the HCOJ leadership continues to proceed cautiously in developing their cooperation with JILEP and that the HCOJ might not completely embrace JILEP’s message that increasing transparency should be a central goal of HCOJ’s reform efforts. For example, after accepting JILEP’s offer to organize an NGO-HCOJ Roundtable early in the quarter and agreeing on a tentative date for the event, the HCOJ backed away from idea after seeing the participant list and the meeting was postponed indefinitely.

Strengthening the High School of Justice (HSOJ)

Based on a request made by the HSOJ during the last quarter for Tax Code training for sitting judges, JILEP delivered two of three planned Tax Code trainings (the third to come in the next quarter). (See Component 4 section for more details)

While the tax training is of critical importance to Georgian judges, and the JILIP Tax Code Training has been very well received, JILEP hopes to find avenues of cooperation with HSOJ that will lead to fundamental improvement of the HSOJ as a training institution. So far, however, the HSOJ has expressed a reluctance to invite JILEP (or any other international development program for that matter) into its long-term planning process. It has declined offers to assess the quality of its new judge training program and to assist in the design of judges’ CLE curriculum. Recently, the Deputy Director of the HSOJ told JILEP that he does not invite this level of involvement by international programs because he is confident that HSOJ programming is solid and that too much outside advice and influence can lead to wasted time and effort by both judges and HSOJ staff. While the Deputy Director’s points are well taken, the commonly expressed opinion by Georgia’s judges and lawyers is that the education provided by the HSOJ for both candidate and sitting judges could use significant improvement. For this reason, JILEP will continue to explore avenues of engagement with the HSOJ with the aim of not only providing missing and critical pieces of judicial knowledge but also improving the institution itself.

Increased Capacity of Judges Association (JAG) JILEP continued its discussions with Zaza Meishvili, the President of JAG, to take a delegation of JAG members to Poland to meet with the leaders of the Polish Judges Association Iustitia and learn from their experience of building a vibrant and independent judges association from the ruins of a totalitarian legal system. At the same time, JILEP engaged in negotiations with Catholic University of Lublin, Poland Professor Delaine R. Swenson, to prepare an agenda for the study tour and facilitate the arrangements with Iustitia. Judge Meishvili was very receptive to the idea of engaging with Iustitia and a tentative plan has been made for five JAG members to travel to Poland in June 2011. Professor Swenson is preparing an agenda that will allow Iustitia representatives to explain its path toward independence, its structure, its successes and its failures. The trip will also include visits to institutions such as the National Judicial Council, the

Supreme Court of Poland, the Lublin District and Regional Courts, the Center for Training for Judges and Prosecutors of the Ministry of Justice, and the new E-Court in Lublin.

Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) Indicator Results

Anticipated Result B: The High School of Justice (HSOJ) is more sustainable and better prepared to meet evolving needs.

(3) Number of judges, judge-candidates, and court personnel trained with JILEP assistance –

Total: 79 (53 men/26 women)

HSOJ Tax Code Training- 64 judges (39 men/26 women)

Ukraine Seminar – 1 (and HCOJ member, male)

Quality of Justice Conference – 14 (12 judges, 2 HCOJ members, all men)

Key Issues and Challenges

A continuing challenge to overcome will be HCOJ’s reluctance to allow advice and input regarding changes to be made to procedures impacting the formal selection, appointment and discipline of judges. However, HCOJ did create an opening for work in these areas by requesting JILEP support in HCOJ outreach capacity building and judicial candidate testing. JILEP intends to leverage these openings to expand its work with the HCOJ.

Similarly, JILEP will continue to encourage the HSOJ leadership to take advantage of JILEP’s assistance in curriculum creation and long term faculty development. JILEP views the successful delivery of the requested tax code training as a foot in the door to wider cooperation with HSOJ.

B. Plans for next quarter The following activities are expected to take place during the next reporting period:

• Continuation of activities related to HCOJ outreach capacity building and judicial candidate qualification exam development. This includes identification and engagement

of experts in the fields of court system communications and judicial qualification examinations; • Planning for a course entitled “Communications for the Courtroom,” to be delivered to sitting and candidate judges in this quarter or the next; • Preparation and execution of a JAG study tour to Poland; • Delivery of the last in a series of tax code trainings to selected sitting judges at the HSOJ; • Continued research on the present state of procedure and practice in the area of judicial selection, advancement, and discipline of judges; and • Continuation of a comparative study of international practice related to selection, promotion and approval of judges.

COMPONENT 2: STRENGTHEN THE INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY OF LEGAL PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS, LEGAL RIGHTS NGOs, AND THE STATE LEGAL AID SYSTEM

A. Significant Results, Accomplishments, Activities

EPF Sponsored Coalition Building During the quarter, EPF published a “Call for Interested Parties to Join the Coalition for an Independent and Transparent Judiciary.” Applicant organizations were invited to the first organizational meeting on March 30, 2011 which was attended by 23 prospective Coalition members, EPF and JILEP representatives. During the meeting, EPF discussed not only the goal of the Coalition, but also distributed various project related documents, including the draft Coalition Bylaws and the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), to be signed by the Coalition members during the inaugural meeting. The meeting participants agreed to create a working group consisting of six persons to come up with the final draft of the documents of the Coalition, which is to be inaugurated at the end of April 2011.

First EPF Coalition Meeting

Organizational Development of NGO partners (EPF) EPF continued to adapt its Capacity Mapping Initiative (CMI) to the Georgian reality, ensuring that the adapted CMI is ready to be launched before EPF awards advocacy grants to coalitions of NGOs and/or media outlets. During the reporting period, EPF finalized collecting all the relevant materials for the six CMI tools and continued the process of adapting CMI - 6 Modules, 6 Report Templates, 7 Interview Guides, Implementation Guide and Interview Guides Chart for review. Among the six CMI Tools, the one dealing with Board Governance might be the most challenging module for NGOs (considering the Georgian CSO capacity surveys and research implemented by various donors). However, EPF decided to keep the standard and still introduce this component to NGOs at least for educational purposes.

CRRC Judicial Independence Study JILEP engaged the Caucasus Resource Research Center (CRRC) to conduct a study that will provide the baseline for much of JILEP’s work and help target grant-making and other activities. The study will measure public opinion about the independence and fairness of the courts and the judiciary. By conducting a set of focus group sessions with the leaders of business and legal

communities, CRRC will gauge, among other things, opinions related to the performance and effectiveness of JAG, LAS and GBA, HSOJ, and key legal education institutions.

During the reporting period, CRRC continued to work on the development of the main survey instrument – the questionnaire. The draft questionnaire is complete and CRRC is working closely with the EWMI to finalize it. The sample size for the survey will be 4,000 people and it will cover the entire country. The questionnaire will be in Georgian and Russian in order not to exclude the non-Georgian speaking population from the survey.

As part of the larger survey effort, CRRC conducted a total of nine focus group discussions with legal professionals, 12 focus group sessions with general public, and six focus group discussions with court users. The targeted areas were Tbilisi, Kutaisi, and Batumi. CRRC is currently working on the analysis of the focus group discussion transcripts. The results of the focus groups will be included in the final report.

CRRC also conducted 22 in-depth interviews with higher-ranking legal professionals during the quarter. The interviewing process is planned to end in April 1; the expected number of targeted interviews is 35. The results of these focus groups will also be included in the final report.

Support for NGO Legal Aid Providers In this quarter, JILEP continued supporting NGOs providing legal aid services.

GYLA’s Legal Aid Centers in Tbilisi and seven regional offices provided free-of-charge legal assistance to citizens, journalists, non-governmental organizations and other persons. Legal assistance was provided in GYLA’s offices, orally, through drafting legal documents, and through client representation before courts. In total, GYLA’s Tbilisi Office and its seven regional offices provided 28,043 pieces of legal advice.

GYLA Consultation Statistics by Subject Matter

Criminal Law

Criminal proceedings

Civil Law

Civil proceedings

Administrative law

Administrative proceedings

Labor and social rights

Tax and Corporate Law related matters

Domestic violence

Internally Displaced matters

Other (Diplomatic law, Rights of military servants, Patients rights, local governance, )

GYLA also provided litigation support for cases brought to the Constitutional Court of Georgia and five cases were identified and selected for submission to the European Court of Human Rights.

During the reporting period, Transparency International (TI) fully staffed its legal aid offices in Tbilisi and Batumi. TI created the criteria of case selection, and procedures for handling clients and cases. Hotline arrangements were finalized with Silknet Communication Company.

TI hosted its Batumi office presentation event in March with the participation of local media and civil society organizations. The presentation was well publicized. The Batumelebi newspaper ran an article on the opening of the office and the meeting, and TI Georgia’s Executive Director, Eka Gigauri, gave a live interview on local T.V. Channel 25. In addition, Public Broadcast – Channel One covered the event in the evening news. This publicity generated interest in TI Georgia’s work in Batumi and has already resulted in some activity at the office. TI’s lawyers are consulting clients and tracking court cases. They have been actively involved in land expropriation related problems connected to the Tbilisi Railway Bypass construction project (see Annex A: Success Stories) and property rights cases in Mestia.

Support for State Funded Free Legal Aid On December 29, 2010, pursuant to the Law on Free Legal Aid, the Minister of Corrections and Legal Aid (MCLA) created a Monitoring Board for the Legal Aid Service (LAS) composed of representatives of the Ministry, one Supreme Court judge, one representative of the governing board of the GBA, one representative of the Parliament (MP) and one representative from the NGO sector. The Deputy Minister of MCLA was elected by the members as the Chair of the board. The Board adopted its general statute at the inaugural meeting.

During the reporting period, JILEP’s team conducted a number of discussions with the Director of the LAS to identify points of potential cooperation. However, since the Board’s inaugural meeting, it has not taken any meaningful steps toward making itself a monitoring body in anything more than name. Nevertheless, JILEP conducted a series of meetings with the representatives of other donor organizations working in this area to coordinate the efforts with the aim of eventually energizing and supporting the Board. JILEP met with the EU-funded rule of law project, implemented by Human Dynamics, and with the Open Society Georgia Foundation and all agreed to encourage the leadership of the Monitoring Council, LAS and the Ministry to meet and discuss the current state of development of the Board. This meeting will hopefully take place next quarter.

Court Monitoring The general goal of the JILEP-supported court monitoring programs will be to systematically gather information indicating compliance or noncompliance of the courts with relevant domestic and international fair trial standards, as well as to identify possible shortcomings in the criminal and administrative justice system.

During the reporting period, JILEP conducted a series of meetings with its partners GYLA and TI to discuss building effective court monitoring programs. JILEP discovered in these meetings that although GYLA and TI have extensive experience in providing legal aid and doing legal advocacy, their experience in conducting classical court monitoring is minimal and their capacity limited. Recognizing that outside assistance was greatly needed, JILEP engaged the services of a trial monitoring expert to advise the NGOs on how to build focused and effective court

monitoring programs. The expert, Mr. Neil Weinstein, visited Georgia from March 23 to April 3, and helped both GYLA and TI develop solid draft monitoring plans.

According to its draft plan, GYLA will concentrate its efforts on monitoring criminal cases as well as some administrative violation cases, which include administrative detention as a sanction. TI will focus on administrative justice cases having to do with property rights. Further elaboration of the court monitoring plans will continue in the next quarter with piloting expected to begin in May.

Georgian Bar Association (GBA)

JILEP continued its discussions with the GBA, as well as other donors, on what steps need be taken to develop a continuing legal education program for lawyers. JILEP hopes to build on its successful cooperation with the GBA’s Ethics Commission to link up with the GBA on a wider education and development agenda. (See Components 3 and 4 below for more details.)

Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) Indicator Results

Anticipated Result B: NGOs provide quality legal representation to the public in civil, administrative and criminal matters in order to better protect their rights.

2. Number of persons advised and represented by organizations supported by JILEP:

TI Georgia - provided consultations to 44 individuals (38 male, 6 female)

GYLA – Unfortunately, GYLA has only gathered statistics for its work in Tbilisi. In the next Quarterly Report GYLA will track and report statistical information (including gender breakdown) for all its offices.

In Tbilisi, GYLA provided 10,700 consultations. They provided consultations to 5,011 individuals (1,762 male, 3,249 female). The number of consultations does not match the number of individuals, as in some instances the same individuals were consulted more than once. JILEP

Key Issues and Challenges

CRRC reported that the main challenge it faced during the reporting period related to data collection. Specifically, CRRC encountered difficulties in recruiting participants for its court user focus group discussions. Most people approached on the premises of the courts had ongoing cases and were afraid to speak openly as they feared it would affect the outcome of their case.

The key challenge that TI Georgia faced during the quarter was the delayed launching of its Batumi-based Advocacy and Legal Advice Center on a full scale. The problem was caused by the lengthy process of negotiating toll free number service with the communication companies. At the moment, TI is finalizing the agreement with Silknet and will be fully prepared to start publicizing the project and commencing full scale operations in the first week of May.

JILEP’s court monitoring plans face a number of challenges. One great challenge will be overcoming the lack of experience possessed by both GYLA and TI in building court monitoring systems. Another will be working with TI to figure out a method for monitoring civil cases. There are a number of international monitoring models that can inform and guide the monitoring of criminal cases but the same cannot be said of civil case monitoring. This is requiring TI and JILEP to develop a unique method for collecting and analyzing courtroom and case data. In addition, both GYLA and TI expressed their concern that judges may forbid them from filling in court monitoring questionnaires in the court rooms. The concern is based on their previous experience and the fact that recording court hearings, either electronically or by handwriting, is prohibited by law.

JILEP faces significant challenges working with the State Legal Aid Service. While according to the Law on Free Legal Aid, the Monitoring Council of the LAS is considered to be a lead actor in ensuring the successful development of the state funded free legal aid system, the mandate of the board is still not fully clear. Moreover, for the last three months, the Board has failed to assemble at all. JILEP and the other interested donors must find ways to motivate the Board to be more active if this initiative is to have any success.

Regarding cooperation with the Bar, the GBA continues to move slowly in its reform efforts. JILEP has begun coordination with the EU-funded Human Dynamics project, and it seems at this point that JILEP may be in a position to continue some of the GBA reform initiatives begun by Human Dynamics.

B. Plans for next quarter The following activities are expected to take place during the next reporting period: • CRRC will analyze the data from its focus group discussions and draft a formal report; • Starting from mid-April, CRRC will begin fieldwork for its public opinion poll and, by the end of the reporting period, will create and clean the dataset as well as analyze the results; • CRRC will develop a full report on the baseline study, which will include both quantitative and qualitative data; • EPF will hold the Coalition’s inaugural event at the end of April; • EPF will issue a request for proposals to provide grant support to local advocacy NGOs and legal aid providers and select the winners of the competition; • GYLA will continue the provision of legal assistance to the population in Tbilisi and seven regions (Imereti, Adjara, Shida Kartli, Kvemo Kartli, Guria, Kakheti, Dusheti); • TI will commence a publicity campaign for ALAC services immediately upon finalizing the agreements on the hot-line with Silknet; • With support from CRRC, TI will develop a court monitoring database to input the monitoring questionnaire and derive workable data out of it; • TI and GYLA will recruit court monitors with an open vacancy announcement. Monitors will undergo intensive training – both theoretical and hands on at actual court hearings; • JILEP, along with its partners TI and GYLA, will finalize the concept for the pilot court monitoring activity and begin the piloting of the court monitoring projects; • JILEP, together with other donors (EU HD and OSGF), will continue to push the LAS Monitoring Board to move forward in its development and take concrete actions to fulfill its oversight function.

COMPONENT 3: IMPROVE LEGAL EDUCATION

Strengthening legal education in Georgia is essential to the long-term consolidation of its gains in democratic development and the rule of law, and will assist in creating a stronger, enduring climate for investment and economic development. JILEP’s work in this area will focus on improving the process for accreditation of legal education programs, the introduction of more practical training and experience for law students, and the improvement and development of continuing legal education (CLE) for practicing lawyers.

A. Significant Results, Accomplishments, Activities During the reporting period, JILEP began its transition from introductory and follow-up meetings with principle partners and stakeholders to the implementation of work plan goals and objectives.

Law Program Accreditation

JILEP held numerous meetings with David Kereselidze, Head of the National Center for Educational Quality Enhancement (NCEQE), to assist his office in its efforts to create an accreditation system for Georgia’s law school programs. JILEP provided Mr. Kereselidze with technical assistance including a copy of Proposed Indicators of Success - 5 Standards of Higher Education in Georgia provided by one of JILEP’s US law school partners.

On March 2, JILEP sponsored a “Roundtable on Legal Regulation of Legal Education,” held in cooperation with the NCEQE. This event allowed a frank, and perhaps most importantly, public, discussion between representatives of all Georgian law schools and the NCEQE. There were significant differences of opinion among the law schools and the efforts of the NCEQE to enact accreditation standards for law programs was severely criticized by several law schools who wanted no standards whatsoever. As a result of this Roundtable, the NCEQE made modifications to its proposed standards for law programs.

Legal Education

During the reporting period, JILEP hosted the initial assessment visit of experts, resulting in the drafting of a Report and Recommendations on Legal Education in Georgia Based Upon an Assessment of Selected Georgian Law Schools. This report is currently in draft form and will be

17 finalized and provided to USAID during the next quarter. The following activities took place in preparation for the initial assessment visit:

• Initial in-house discussions on the state of Georgian legal education and general information on all Georgian law schools; • Introductory meeting with David Kereselidze, Head, National Center for Educational Quality Enhancement (NCEQE) to discuss Georgian legal education; • Initial, in-person meetings with 10 state and private Georgian law schools (this list was based partially on the information received in discussions with David Kereselidze):

o Tbilisi State University; o The University of Georgia; o Ilia State University; o Georgian American University (GAU); o Free University of Tbilisi; o Caucasus School of Law (CSL); o Kutaisi State University, Law Department (KSU); o Shota Rustaveli State University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Business and Law (Batumi State University);

o David Aghmashenebeli University of Georgia, Faculty of Law (SDASU); and o International Black Sea University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Direction of Law (IBSU); • Interview of Professor Megan Ballard, Fulbright Fellow, Tbilisi State University; • Desk research, including Legal Education Assessment, Final Report (ABA/CEELI, 2005), articles (published and unpublished) by Georgian professors and foreign professors with experience in Georgia; • In-house discussion / decision to choose the six schools to be assessed during the visit of experts:

o Shota Rustaveli State University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Business and Law (Batumi State University);

o Caucasus School of Law (CSL); o Free University of Tbilisi;

o Georgian American University (GAU); o Ilia State University; o Tbilisi State University

The choices made to create this “short list” of law schools to be further analyzed was based upon: (i) information received from David Kereselidze on the strengths of these law schools; (ii) information obtained in JILEP’s initial investigation of Georgian legal education based upon the strengths of the professors teaching at these schools, the general reputation of students graduating from these schools, and knowledge of the Deans of these law schools. Also, given the mandate to choice one private and one state school, an equal number of each were chosen.

• “Due diligence” on these six schools, including: (i) follow-up visits; (ii) interviews with the deans of each school; (iii) interviews with professors, students, and alumni of each school; and (iv) review of school websites; • Drafting of “dossiers” for each school (attached as Appendix Three to the Report and Recommendations on Legal Education in Georgia Based Upon an Assessment of Selected Georgian Law Schools), and distribution of the dossiers to each assessment team member prior to the assessment visit; and • A “focus group” with a random collection of current Georgian law students.

Commercial Law Advisory Committee

As its first Commercial Law Advisory Committee event, JILEP sponsored a Business Law Firm Roundtable on Legal Education in Georgia. This event was particularly significant as it was the first time that managing partners of leading Georgian business law firm had come together to discuss legal education in Georgia, as well as ethics and ethics training. These law firm representatives encouraged JILEP to spearhead the creation of Commercial Law Advisory Committee and all agreed to participate as active members. (Also see Component 4 below.)

First Meeting of Commercial Law Advisory Committee

Ethics Training

At the request of the GBA Ethics Commission, JILEP arranged for Professor James Moliterno, a leading expert on professionalism and legal ethics with prior experience in Georgia, to come to Georgia to lead a capacity building workshop for the Commission. On March 4-6, Professor Moliterno presided over the workshop where Ethics Commission best practices were explored. The topics discussed included disciplinary procedures and policies, confidentiality and its limits, conflicts of interest, lawyer speech, and communication between judges and lawyers. Fifteen members of the Commission Board and staff were present, as well as representatives from JILEP and USAID. In the days immediately following the workshop, Professor Moliterno met individually with the Commission Chair and Commission staff, as well as with the Heads of the sub-collegiums of the Commission to provide targeted advice and information. At the conclusion of Professor Moliterno’s visit, he provided a report reviewing his work which including detailed recommendations addressed to the Commission.

Kordzakhia Irakli, the Ethics Commission Chair, made it clear to JILEP that he and the Commission found the workshop extremely helpful and requested JILEP’s continued assistance in developing their institution. As evidence of the immediate impact Professor Moliterno had upon the Commission, Mr. Kordzakhia provided JILEP with a copy of a recently delivered Commission judgment in a very complex case involving lawyer misconduct, and reported that information provided by Professor Moliterno during the workshop helped Commission members

20 reach consensus and deliver a significant judgment in the case. (The judgment is available on the Commission website.1)

Professor Moliterno Leading Ethics Workshop

GBA Continuing Legal Education

During the quarter, JILEP met with the leadership of the GBA to discuss their strategy on continuing legal education (CLE). The GBA recently formed a Commission to develop an accreditation plan for GBA CLE and seems to be moving forward in earnest to create the plan. JILEP offered to provide technical advice in the development of the plan. It also provided the GBA with a list of commercial law-related topics that it would be willing to develop as part of a CLE program that would exist under the plan. Signs are very positive that cooperation on lawyer CLE can begin next quarter.

Competitive Fund for Law School Development

As mentioned in the last Quarterly Report, JILEP received an unsolicited request for financial support from the Tbilisi State University Willem C. Vis Moot team. Upon completion of the formal application documents and their review, JILEP provided financial support to the TSU Vis Moot team allowing them to prepare for and compete in this international competition.

1 http://gba.ge/new/admin/editor/uploads/files/ENG/etiks/decisions/07.03.2011.pdf

Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) Indicator Results

Anticipated Result B: The Georgian Bar Association (GBA) is better equipped to train, monitor, and discipline its members.

3. Number of bar members trained with JILEP assistance – 13 (7 men/6 women)

B. Key Issues and Challenges

NCEQE

While JILP has developed a good working relationship with NCEQE Head, David Kereselidze - as evidenced by JILEP’s sponsorship of the Joint Roundtable on Legal Regulation of Legal Education - the accreditation work of the NCEQE appears to have come to a standstill. This seems to be related to disagreement or conflict within the government regarding the NCEQE leadership and criticism from the law school community about NCEQE policy. JILEP witnessed very strong criticism of Mr. Kereselidze and his policies during the Roundtable. Also, for reasons unknown to JILEP, the Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Education has been named as Director of the NCEQE (removing any independence from this entity) and Mr. Kereselidze has, apparently, been demoted to First Deputy Director.

Law School Development

As a result of the assessment visit of experts from South Texas College of Law, Washburn University School of Law, PILnet, and KUL/CALS, JILEP has identified the major shortcomings and key needs of Georgian legal education. JILEP’s main challenge at this point is to establish targeted programs at the planned Centers and other Georgian law schools that address those shortcomings and fulfill those needs. Part of that challenge is to make sure that JILEP resources benefit as large a group of law schools and law students as possible.

Centers of Learning

Once the Georgia partner schools have been selected, the main challenge will be to create a shared vision and a solid working relationship between the US and Georgian schools. The form these Centers take will be critical to their long-term sustainability.

C. Plans for Next Quarter

• At this point, it is unclear what assistance JILEP will be able to provide the NCEQE to forward their agenda. In any case, JILEP will continue to keep the lines of communication open, and offer technical assistance if requested; • Make the selection and public announcement of the Georgian partner schools for the National Centers;

• Present a “Master Class” on interactive teaching methodology to professors / lecturers from all Georgian law schools;

• Sponsor a Deans’ Roundtable and reception to engage Georgian law schools in long term cooperation and policy planning;

• Research ways to assist the three “live client” legal clinics currently operating in Georgia (at the state universities in Batumi and Kutaisi, and at Georgian-American University);

• Select two Georgian professors to participate in a semester-long sabbatical at a US partner law schools during the Fall 2011 semester;

• Assist in negotiation between the US law schools and Georgian law programs of the start- up terms of the Centers of Learning; and

• Continue to work with the GBA’s Ethics Commission, to strengthen the Commission and to create an ethics training program for lawyers.

COMPONENT 4: DEVELOP COMMERCIAL LAW Strengthening commercial law practice is essential to Georgia’s continuing economic development. Commercial law development cross-cuts many of the JILEP activities described above. JILEP anticipates developing commercial law curricula for the universities, HSOJ and the GBA. One of the Centers of Learning housed at a Georgian law school and partnered with Washburn Law School will focus solely on commercial law and practice issues.

A. Significant Results, Accomplishments, Activities

Commercial Law Training for the HSOJ

In cooperation with the HSOJ, JILEP organized a series of two-day training seminars for Georgian judges on the new Tax Code. During the reporting period, trainings took place on February 12-13 and March 19-20. The trainings were organized at the HSOJ head office in Tbilisi with the participation of Georgian sitting judges from the Supreme Court of Georgia, the Tbilisi Court of Appeals and City and District Courts of East Georgia. The head of the Steering and Drafting Group of the Government of Georgia on new Tax Law, Mr. Irakli Siradze, led the training. The third training is scheduled for April 2011at the Training Centre of HSOJ in Tskaltubo (West Georgia) and will host judges from Kutaisi Court of Appeals and the City and District Courts of West Georgia. At the end of the series, virtually all Georgian judges reviewing tax disputes (approximately 65 judges) will have received the training.

JILEP filmed and edited one of the tax code trainings. JILEP intends to offer the resource as a video seminar for HSOJ to use as part of its video library and also to distribute copies among participant judges. The video resource will also be offered to the Georgian Bar Association and Georgian law firms to assist them better understand the new tax legislation.

HCOJ Tax Code Training

Commercial Law Training for GBA members

JILEP tentatively selected the following commercial law subjects to develop as learning modules for the GBA CLE program: • Tax law and overview of international financial reporting standards (IAS/IFRS); • Corporate insolvency law; • Negotiating and drafting of commercial contracts (including international commercial contracts); • Fundamentals of business administration and corporate finance for commercial lawyers; • Corporate law and corporate governance; • Legal English, legal writing and reasoning.

Commercial Law Advisory Council to JILEP (CLAC).

An initial meeting of the prospective members of CLAC (JILEP Roundtable on Legal Education) took place at JILEP’s office as on March 24, 2011. Senior representatives of leading Georgian law firms participated in the Roundtable. Information on JILEP’s activities was conveyed to the participants at the start of the meeting. Law firm representatives provided their opinion on several challenging topics related to legal education and its practical application and expressed their enthusiasm to support and advise JILEP in development of commercial law and legal education.

In the days following the roundtable, JILEP circulated a concept paper of the JILEP Commercial Law Advisory Council and invited participants to join CLAC.

Practitioners’ Commentary on Georgian Tax Legislation

JILEP developed a concept to create a practitioners’ commentary on the new tax legislation of Georgia. JILEP is in the process of identifying prospective authors and drafting a Work for Hire Agreement with them. In order to provide the greatest access to the Commentary, JILEP expects to offer it as an ‘open’ online resource.

ADR development

Cooperation in the field of ADR was the subject of a JILEP meeting with a representative of the International Finance Corporation (IFC Georgia). IFC has experience in the development of mediation in the Balkan states. JILEP representatives also attended a conference on mediation hosted by Tbilisi State University and sponsored by IFC. During the conference, JILEP had the chance to discuss prospective steps for ADR development with several Georgian arbitrators, who were also involved in mediation and expressed interest in further strengthening their mediation expertise.

The JILEP strategy in supporting mediation and other ADR is as follows:

• Train prospective mediators and mediator trainers; • Support the creation of a self-regulatory organizations of mediators; • Support drafting of a code of ethics for mediators; • Assist the Georgian MOJ in the development of a legal framework for mediation; and • Assist practical implementation of mediation in Georgia.

Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) Indicator Results

Anticipated Result A: Increased training available for judges on commercial law topics.

1. Number of judges and lawyers receiving training on commercial law topics with JILEP assistance - 64 (39 men/26 women).

B. Key Issues and Challenges

There is a need for further cooperation with the HSOJ to develop additional training courses in commercial law. More training should also be done in tax law since the participants in the HCOJ trainings were very clear in expressing their desire for more in-depth training, especially after the Georgian judiciary becomes more familiar with the new tax law and develops new approaches to tax case adjudication. JILEP intends to offer additional courses to the HCOJ on commercial law topics and is at present designing a “corporations law” course for judges.

One important issue related to creation of the Tax Law Commentary will be developing a form of agreement between the authors and EWMI that will provide clear guidance and parameters for the work.

C. Plans for Next Quarter

The following activities are expected to take place during the next reporting period:

• Advance preparations made for an assessment of ADR in Georgia; • Drafting of the Tax Law Commentary to begin; • ‘Publishing’ of the Tax Code seminar online and providing DVD’s to the judges who participated in the HCOJ training; • Planning for a course in Corporations Law to be taught at HSOJ; • Planning with GBA for commercial law-related training modules as part of their CLE; and • Convening a second meeting of the CLAC to discuss specific topics of commercial law and legal education in Georgia.

Annex A. Additional (and Previously Mentioned but Underscored) Success Stories

From Transparency International Georgia

Tbilisi Railway Bypass Route construction is one of the largest state developments in Tbilisi at the moment, and entails moving the central railway station in the central part of the city and arranging for two new rail stations to be built on the eastern and western sides of the city. For this to be achieved, large amounts of land, currently in private ownership, must be procured by the state owned Georgian Railways. Given the unwillingness of many of the owners to sell the land, expropriation procedures have started in some cases. TI Georgia received information that the expropriation procedures and the amounts of compensation offered are unfair, and the people of Didi Lilo village were upset.

TI Georgia’s lawyers met with the land owners from Didi Lilo. They studied the problems in detail and collected extensive evidence on procedural violations made by the authorities. After doing its investigation, TI contacted the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD is the main investor in this project) and informed them about the problems. EBRD’s resettlement experts met with TI lawyers and during the meeting TI provided them with the information and evidence they possessed showing procedural violations. TI also informed the international community about the ongoing property violations in Didi Lilo and representatives of TI Georgia were invited to a meeting at the French Embassy to present the evidence of property rights abuse. The meeting was attended by representatives of the Council of Europe, the Delegation of the European Union to Georgia, the US Embassy and the French Embassy.

TI Georgia (as well as JILEP) views TI’s efforts here a success since they were able to attract EBRD’s attention to the case and get them to send their external auditors to the region to study the actions of the matter. However, much work needs to be done to ensure that landowners are treated fairly and the law is respected. TI Georgia remains on the case. In upcoming weeks, after meeting with Georgian Railways representatives, TI will create a summary document explaining the ongoing problems in the area and use it as an advocacy tool. TI also plans to publish a blog post and/or a press release on the issue to further ensure wide dissemination of the information.

From GYLA

In a highly publicized case, GYLA provided legal assistance to a citizen, Eka Matiashvili, who was assaulted by an officer of the Ministry of Interior Affairs, Otar Gvenetadze, on January 3, 2011, during the crackdown by police on a veterans’ rally. With GYLA’s assistance Eka Matiashvili filed a claim in Tbilisi City Court for pecuniary damages. The lawsuit was filed against the Ministry of Interior Affairs and Otar Gvenetadze, personally. The plaintiff claimed

GEL 10 000 for pecuniary damages.

During the trial held on April 27, 2011, the Ministry of Interior Affairs, as well as Otar Gvenetadze himself, confirmed that moral damage was inflicted to Eka Matiashvili and offered an agreement to resolve the dispute. Eventually, the Ministry of Interior Affairs and Otar Gvenetadze undertook an obligation to pay GEL 4000 (four thousand) each to Eka Matiashvili

for pecuniary damages – total of GEL 8 000.

GYLA welcomed the fact that the Ministry of Interior Affairs, as well as Otar Gvenetadze admitted inflicting moral damage upon Mr. Matiashvili and expressed their willingness to compensate the damage. However, it continues to pursue admission of wrongdoing on the part

of three other law enforcement officers involved in the case.

JILEP Business Law Firm Roundtable on Legal Education in Georgia

This event was particularly significant as it was the first time that Managing Partners of the leading Georgian business law firms had come together to discuss legal education in Georgia, ethics and ethics training for law students and lawyers, continuing legal education, and the need to improve the profession.

Ethics Training for the GBA Ethics Commission

As previously reported, JILEP has been actively engaged in discussions with the GBA Ethics Commission to identify areas of support consistent with JILEP’s objectives and the Workplan. In close cooperation with the Chair of the Ethics Commission, an initial capacity building training was developed. US expert, Professor James Moliterno, a leading expert on professionalism and legal ethics, with prior experience in Georgia, arrived in March to provide comprehensive training in a workshop setting for the members of the commission, its staff and

leadership. This training had a direct impact on the operations of the Ethics Commission. The Commission provided JILEP with a copy of its recently delivered judgment in a very complex case. The Chair of the Commission told JILEP that the training and general advise given by Professor Moliterno during his time with the Commission helped them reach consensus and deliver a significant judgment in this matter (the Commission’s judgment is public and available on the Commission’s website).