DOCSLIB.ORG

The Report of the Public Defender of Georgia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

versia i s r e v e l k o m 2016 THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA ON THE SITUATION OF PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN GEORGIA mdgomareobis Sesaxeb mdgomareobis da TavisuflebaTa dacvis dacvis TavisuflebaTa da saqarTveloSi adamianis uflebaTa uflebaTa adamianis saqarTveloSi damcvelis angariSi damcvelis saqarTvelos saxalxo saxalxo saqarTvelos 2016 S H O R T V E R S I O N THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA ON THE SITUATION OF PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN GEORGIA 2016 SHORT VERSION www.ombudsman.ge ON THE SITUATION OF PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN GEORGIA 1 This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. 2 THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA, 2016 (SHORT VERSION) CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 5 1. HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS (NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM) .......................................................................... 14 2. HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION IN THE DEFENCE FIELD ............................. 30 3. THE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE LEGAL REQUESTS OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER ..................................................................................................... 38 4. PROHIBITION OF TORTURE, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING TREATMENT AND PUNISHMENT ....................................................................................... 39 5. THE RIGHT TO LIBERTY AND SECURITY ....................................................... 43 6. THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL ......................................................................... 47 7. RIGHT TO PRIVACY ........................................................................................ 52 8. FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, CONSCIENCE AND RELIGION ............................ 54 9. PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF ETHNIC MINORITIES AND CIVIL INTEGRATION ................................................................................................ 58 10. FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION .......................................................................... 60 11. FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND MANIFESTATION ........................................ 62 12. RIGHT TO EQUALITY ..................................................................................... 64 13. RIGHT TO VOTE ............................................................................................. 69 14. RIGHT TO PROTECT CULTURAL HERITAGE .................................................. 71 15. RIGHT TO WORK ........................................................................................... 72 16. RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT ........................................................ 73 17. RIGHT TO HEALTH CARE ............................................................................... 76 18. SITUATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD ................................................. 78 19. GENDER EQUALITY ....................................................................................... 85 20. HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ................. 96 21. LEGAL SITUATION OF RIGHTS OF OLDER PERSONS ................................... 104 22. RIGHT TO ADEQUATE HOUSING .................................................................. 106 23. RIGHT TO SOCIAL SECURITY ........................................................................ 108 24. RIGHTS OF INTERNALLY DISPLACED PERSONS – IDPS ............................... 110 ON THE SITUATION OF PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN GEORGIA 3 25. HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF CONFLICT-AFFECTED PERSONS ............... 114 26. SITUATION OF THE RIGHTS OF ECO-MIGRANTS .......................................... 120 27. REPATRIATION OF PERSONS FORCEFULLY SENT INTO EXILE FROM THE SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA BY THE FORMER USSR IN THE 1940s ........................................................................................................ 122 28. SITUATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MIGRANTS ................................................... 124 29. RIGHTS OF ASYLUM SEEKERS, REFUGEES AND HUMANITARIAN STATUS HOLDERS .......................................................................................................... 125 30. RIGHT TO PROPERTY ...................................................................................... 130 4 THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER OF GEORGIA, 2016 (SHORT VERSION) INTRODUCTION This document is the report by the Public Defender of Georgia on the protection of hu- man rights and freedoms in Georgia in 2016. The document has been developed under Article 22.1 of the Organic Law of Georgia on the Public Defender and submitted to the Parliament of Georgia. The Report reviews a wide spectrum of human rights, emphasising the positive and nega- tive trends identified in the reporting period. Furthermore, it brings together the key rec- ommendations made by the Public Defender for the various branches of the government. The Public Defender of Georgia welcomes the statutory approval of the procedure for the parliamentary control of hearing and fulfilment of the Public Defender’s recommenda- tions. This was accomplished by the eighth Parliament of Georgia in the reporting period through an amendment made to the Rules of the Parliament. However, the Parliament of Georgia should not be making selective choices among the recommendations made by the Public Defender and modify them in the parliamentary resolution. It could so happen that some of the most critical recommendations directed to the Government of Georgia and aimed at securing a higher standard of human rights protection were not displayed in the parliamentary resolution. This will in turn weaken the parliamentary control of the ex- ecutive. It is desirable that the Parliament of Georgia reproduced the recommendations, in the way they were presented in the Report, in the resolution taken after the hearing of the Public Defender’s Report. In the reporting period, the number of applications lodged with the Public Defender’s -Of fice continued to be high. In 2016, 8827 applications/appeals were received, which shows both awareness about the Public Defender among the population and their heightened expectations from this institution. In the reporting period, there were incidents where several state agencies, including the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia and Tbilisi City Court, failed to submit the informa- tion and materials requested by the Public Defender. The absence of the data processed in the form as requested by the Public Defender was the reason cited for the failure. This is evaluated as a wrong practice. Such approach, apart from amounting to breach of law, significantly hampers the activities of the Public Defender. In the course of 2016, the Georgian authorities, stemming from the obligations, undertak- en at international and national levels, continued reforms in the justice system and law enforcement bodies. However, there are still numerous challenges such as the absence of effective mechanism for civic monitoring of the security system. Within the third wave of the justice reforms, the Parliament adopted, with a significant delay, the law providing for one of the key recommendations of the Public Defender on introducing electronic case-management in the court system. However, this provision will be enforced only from 2018. ON THE SITUATION OF PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN GEORGIA 5 In the reporting period, considerable criticism was expressed concerning the legislative amendments adopted that could undermine the Constitutional Court’s prompt and effec- tive functioning.1 The Plenum of the Constitutional Court declared a number of legislative amendments as unconstitutional2, which is positively assessed. In 2016, the Public Defender proposed to the Parliament of Georgia and the State Con- stitutional Commission to extend the authority of the Constitutional Court. According to the initiative of the Public Defender, as an exception, within a year after the enforcement of the law at stake, it would be possible to appeal legally binding judgments of the courts of general jurisdiction before the Constitutional Court of Georgia. This would, in a way, reflect the public demand for restoration of justice. However, the Parliament of Georgia limited its deliberations to a parliamentary committee and the Public Defender’s proposal was not followed up further. At this stage, neither the draft law of the Constitutional Com- mission contains a positive feedback on the issue. The imposition of the undertaking not to divulge information on the defence by the Office of the Chief Prosecutor of Georgia in so-called Cyanide Case, whereas the prosecution it- self made public various details of the case, should be assessed as a breach of the equality of arms. The Public Defender welcomes the amendments made to the Imprisonment Code, under which, as of 1 September 2016, the Public Defender/Special Preventive Group may take photos in penitentiary establishments. The Public Defender positively assesses the decrease in the total number of accused/con- victed persons3 in the reporting period. However, this number is still high in comparison to the average European indicators. It is important that the penal policy of the country should be aimed, to the maximum degree, at using non-custodial measures, rehabilita-
Recommended publications
  • State of Conservation Report by The

    State of Conservation Report by The

    au_(_~ b.-,rl.-,~ooaa~(Y)b J'tJ~6'tJ~'tJ~o aaaJao~~a(Y)<'>Ob ~..,e aob a~(Y)a6'tJ ~o b.-,.-,0a66(Y) Georgian National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation(,i-1/J. " ..:.'d)___ 0 u (ri _ ..;._ ---------- 201s v· To: Mr. Kishore Rao, Director World Heritage Centre 7, Place de Fontenoy 75352, Paris 07 SP Dear Mr. Rao, In conformity with the decisions of the 38th session of t he World Heritage Committee, held in Do ha, Qatar in 2014, I would like to present for your consideration the State of Conservation report of the Bagrati Cathedral an d Gelati Monastery World Heritage Site as well as the State of Conservation and Progress Re ports of the Historical Monuments of Mtskheta World Heritage Site. On behalf of the National Agency for Cultural Heritage Preservation of Georgia, I would like to reiterate the deep commitment to the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Please, accept the assurance of my highest consideration. Nikoloz Antidze Director General (;" ~__.:, Annex 1: SoC report Historical Mo uments of Mtskheta Annex 2: Progress Report Historic I Monuments of Mtksheta Annex 3: SoC report Bagrati cathedral and Gelati Monastery 0105. J.m?loS!!_'o ho. m.'>6'Z}t!•'> 030S!!,'O h d· No5, (~lJR'· ( +995 32) 93 24 11, 93 23 94 5 Tabukashvili str. Tbilisi 0105. Tel.(+995 32) 93 24 II, 93 23 94 Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery, C 710 The present folder contains: 1. State of Conservation Report of the Bagrati Cathedral and Gelati Monastery, C710, Georgia, 2015 Annexes orovided on CD: Annex 1: Metodology report about conservation of building stones of the Early 12th-Century Church of the Virgin at Gelati Monastery in Kutaisi - Stefano Volta Annex 2: Engineering Technical Report Annex 3: Technical Report of the Restoration Works 2.
  • Georgia's October 2013 Presidential Election: Outcome and Implications

    Georgia's October 2013 Presidential Election: Outcome and Implications

    Georgia’s October 2013 Presidential Election: Outcome and Implications Jim Nichol Specialist in Russian and Eurasian Affairs November 4, 2013 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R43299 Georgia’s October 2013 Presidential Election: Outcome and Implications Summary This report discusses Georgia’s October 27, 2013, presidential election and its implications for U.S. interests. The election took place one year after a legislative election that witnessed the mostly peaceful shift of legislative and ministerial power from the ruling party, the United National Movement (UNM), to the Georgia Dream (GD) coalition bloc. The newly elected president, Giorgi Margvelashvili of the GD, will have fewer powers under recently approved constitutional changes. Most observers have viewed the 2013 presidential election as marking Georgia’s further progress in democratization, including a peaceful shift of presidential power from UNM head Mikheil Saakashvili to GD official Margvelashvili. Some analysts, however, have raised concerns over ongoing tensions between the UNM and GD, as well as Prime Minister and GD head Bidzini Ivanishvili’s announcement on November 2, 2013, that he will step down as the premier. In his victory speech on October 28, Margvelashvili reaffirmed Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic foreign policy orientation, including the pursuit of Georgia’s future membership in NATO and the EU. At the same time, he reiterated that GD would continue to pursue the normalization of ties with Russia. On October 28, 2013, the U.S. State Department praised the Georgian presidential election as generally democratic and expressing the will of the people, and as demonstrating Georgia’s continuing commitment to Euro-Atlantic integration.
  • PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION in GEORGIA 27Th October 2013

    PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION in GEORGIA 27Th October 2013

    PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN GEORGIA 27th October 2013 European Elections monitor The candidate in office, Giorgi Margvelashvili, favourite in the Presidential Election in Georgia Corinne Deloy Translated by Helen Levy On 27th October next, 3,537,249 Georgians will be electing their president of the republic. The election is important even though the constitutional reform of 2010 deprived the Head of State of some of his powers to be benefit of the Prime Minister and Parliament (Sakartvelos Parlamenti). The President of the Republic will no longer be able to dismiss the government and convene a new Analysis cabinet without parliament’s approval. The latter will also be responsible for appointing the regional governors, which previously lay within the powers of the President of the Republic. The constitutional reform which modified the powers enjoyed by the head of State was approved by the Georgian parliament on 21st March last 135 votes in support, i.e. all of the MPs present. The outgoing President, Mikheil Saakashvili (United National Movement, ENM), in office since the election on 4th January 2004 cannot run for office again since the Constitution does not allow more than two consecutive mandates. Georgian Dream-Democratic Georgia in coalition with Mikheil Saakashvili. 10 have been appointed by politi- Our Georgia-Free Democrats led by former representa- cal parties, 13 by initiative groups. 54 people registe- tive of Georgia at the UN, Irakli Alasania, the Republi- red to stand in all. can Party led by Davit Usupashvili, the National Forum The candidates are as follows: led by Kakha Shartava, the Conservative Party led by Zviad Dzidziguri and Industry will save Georgia led by – Giorgi Margvelashvili (Georgian Dream-Democratic Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili has been in office Georgia), former Minister of Education and Science and since the general elections on 1st October 2012.
  • One Week Tour in Georgia – Imereti and Racha

    One Week Tour in Georgia – Imereti and Racha

    One week tour in Georgia – Imereti and Racha – Offered by: Foundations from Poland: “Partnerstwo” and “Together for Rural Development” with ”International Center for Caucasus Tourism” (ICCT) from Georgia Autumn offer WHERE: Imereti – Racha (Georgia) WHEN: September-October HOW: Direct flights to Kutaisi from many European cities PRICE: € 500,0 + flight cost ON-SITE: insurance, accommodation, meals, guided tours and guaranteed unforgettable impressions GROUP: maximum 15 person I NVITE : P OLISH FUNDS "TOGETHER FOR RURAL DEVELOPMENT ”&" P ARTNERSTVO "&"I NTERNATIONAL C ENTER FOR C AUCASUS T OURISM “ I C C T How to reach Kutaisi? • DIRECT flights to KUTAISI “Kopitnari” FROM: Barcelona, Berlin, Birmingham, Budapest, Dortmund, Katowice, Larnaca, Memmingen, Milan, Moscow, Paris, Prague, Riga, Thessaloniki, Vilnius, Warsaw, Wroclaw. Flights schedule with present time http://kutaisi.aero/Flights • Georgian Currency GEL (Lari) (USD: 2.57; EUR: 2.92). Withdrawing of GEL from ATM from your card or exchange USD /EUR into GEL at the relevant points. • Language – Georgian, possibility to communicate in English, Polish and Kutaisi Russian (mostly with aged people) ქუთაისი • Convenient dress - sports ware Kopitnari • Perceptible temperature – about +18 კოპიტნარი • Telephone code +995 NOTE: - Air ticket price changes daily. The above mentioned cost reflects the situation on 18th August 2018 - One can buy a group ticket (more than 9 people) Map of KUTAISI Google Map image highlights the most important tourist destinations in the city. The system "Street
  • Misuse of Administrative Resources During Georgia's 2020

    Misuse of Administrative Resources During Georgia's 2020

    Misuse of Administrative Resources during Georgia’s 2020 Parliamentary Elections Final Report December 2020 Authors Gigi Chikhladze Tamta Kakhidze Co-author and research supervisor Levan Natroshvili This report was made possible by the support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The opinions expressed in the report belong to Transparency International Georgia and may not reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. Contents Key Findings ____________________________________________________________________ 4 Introduction ____________________________________________________________________ 7 Chapter I. What is the misuse of administrative resources during electoral processes? ____________________________________________________________________ 8 Chapter II. Misuse of Enforcement Administrative Resources during Electoral Processes ____________________________________________________________________ 9 1. Violence, threatening, intimidation, and law enforcement response _________ 10 1.1. Incidents that occurred during the pre-election period _____________________ 10 1.2. Incidents that occurred during the Election Day ____________________________ 14 1.3. Incidents that occurred after the Election Day ____________________________ 15 2. Destruction of political party property and campaigning materials and law enforcement response to them _________________________________________________ 15 3. Use of water cannons against demonstrators gathered at the CEC ___________ 16 4.
  • Tentative Lists Submitted by States Parties As of 15 April 2014, in Conformity with the Operational Guidelines

    Tentative Lists Submitted by States Parties As of 15 April 2014, in Conformity with the Operational Guidelines

    World Heritage 38 COM WHC-14/38.COM/8A Paris, 6 June 2014 Original: English / French UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE WORLD HERITAGE COMMITTEE Thirty-eighth session Doha, Qatar 15 – 25 June 2014 Item 8 of the Provisional Agenda: Establishment of the World Heritage List and of the List of World Heritage in Danger 8A. Tentative Lists submitted by States Parties as of 15 April 2014, in conformity with the Operational Guidelines SUMMARY This document presents the Tentative Lists of all States Parties submitted in conformity with the Operational Guidelines as of 15 April 2014. The World Heritage Committee is requested to note that all nominations of properties to be examined by the 38th session of the Committee are included on the Tentative Lists of the respective States Parties. • Annex 1 presents a full list of States Parties indicating the date of the most recent Tentative List submission; • Annex 2 presents new Tentative Lists (or additions to Tentative Lists) submitted by States Parties since the last session of the World Heritage Committee; • Annex 3 presents a list of all properties submitted on Tentative Lists received from the States Parties, in alphabetical order. Draft Decision: 38 COM 8A, see Point II I. EXAMINATION OF TENTATIVE LISTS 1. The World Heritage Committee requests each State Party to submit an inventory of the cultural and natural properties situated within its territory, which it considers suitable for inscription on the World Heritage List, and which it intends to nominate during the following five to ten years.
  • Acceptance and Rejection of Foreign Influence in the Church Architecture of Eastern Georgia

    Acceptance and Rejection of Foreign Influence in the Church Architecture of Eastern Georgia

    The Churches of Mtskheta: Acceptance and Rejection of Foreign Influence in the Church Architecture of Eastern Georgia Samantha Johnson Senior Art History Thesis December 14, 2017 The small town of Mtskheta, located near Tbilisi, the capital of the Republic of Georgia, is the seat of the Georgian Orthodox Church and is the heart of Christianity in the country. This town, one of the oldest in the nation, was once the capital and has been a key player throughout Georgia’s tumultuous history, witnessing not only the nation’s conversion to Christianity, but also the devastation of foreign invasions. It also contains three churches that are national symbols and represent the two major waves of church building in the seventh and eleventh centuries. Georgia is, above all, a Christian nation and religion is central to its national identity. This paper examines the interaction between incoming foreign cultures and deeply-rooted local traditions that have shaped art and architecture in Transcaucasia.1 Nestled among the Caucasus Mountains, between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, present-day Georgia contains fewer than four million people and has its own unique alphabet and language as well as a long, complex history. In fact, historians cannot agree on how Georgia got its English exonym, because in the native tongue, kartulad, the country is called Sakartvelo, or “land of the karvelians.”2 They know that the name “Sakartvelo” first appeared in texts around 800 AD as another name for the eastern kingdom of Kartli in Transcaucasia. It then evolved to signify the unified eastern and western kingdoms in 1008.3 Most scholars agree that the name “Georgia” did not stem from the nation’s patron saint, George, as is commonly thought, but actually comes 1 This research addresses the multitude of influences that have contributed to the development of Georgia’s ecclesiastical architecture.
  • Country of Origin Information Report Republic of Georgia 25 November

    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 ..........................................................................................
  • Management Plan for the World Heritage Site Gelati Monastery

    Management Plan for the World Heritage Site Gelati Monastery

    MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE WORLD HERITAGE SITE GELATI MONASTERY 2017 Table of Contents LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS........................................................................................................................5 1. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................6 1.1. Aim of the Management Plan.................................................................................................6 1.2. Relation with other studies.....................................................................................................6 1.3. Scope and approach ...............................................................................................................7 General.............................................................................................................................................7 Management principles ...................................................................................................................8 Approach..........................................................................................................................................9 1.4. Objectives of the management plan ................................................................................... 10 Preparation of a spatial plan for the project area......................................................................... 10 Protection and conservation management .................................................................................
  • Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Department of Sociological and Political Sciences

    Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Department of Sociological and Political Sciences

    Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Department Of Sociological And Political Sciences Laura Kutubidze Main Social-Political Aspects of Georgian Press in 2000-2005 (Short version) Dissertation report for receiving academic degree - PH D. In Journalism Report is developed in Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Scientific instructor, PH D. In Journalism, Professor Marina Vekua Tbilisi 2009 Content: Introduction; I chapter – Several General Specifications for Characterization of essence of Mass Media and Georgian Mass Media; About the Mass Communication and Mass Media; The General Specifications of Georgian Mass Media in Millennium; II chapter – Country from the Prism of Georgian Media; Image of the Country; West or Russia? (problematic aspects of State orientation); Several Aspects of the Topic of External Policy ; “Informational Guarantee” of Destabilization ; III chapter – Elections and the Political Spectrum; Elections of President, 2000 Year and Local Elections, 2002 Year; Permanent Election Regime, 2003 Year; Elections of Parliament and President, 2004 Year ; Elections in Post-revolution Adjara; IV chapter - “Rose Revolution” and Post-revolutionary Period; V chapter - Georgian Mass Media on the Visit of US President George Bush to Georgia; Conclusion; STATE. 2 Introduction The dissertation report mainly is based on printed media of 2000-2005, (newspapers – “Alia”, “Resonansi”, “24 Saati”, “Dilis Gazeti”, “Akhali Taoba”, “Kviris Palitra”, “Akhali Versia”, “Kviris Qronika”, “Georgian Times”, “Mtavari Gazeti”,
  • Reserved Domains

    Reserved Domains

    Countries: (.ge; .edu.ge; .org.ge; .net.ge; .pvt.ge; .school.ge) afghanistan cameroon ghana lebanon nigeria spain zambia albania canada greece lesotho norway srilanka zimbabwe algeria centralafricanrepublic grenada liberia oman sudan andorra chad guatemala libya pakistan suriname angola chile guinea liechtenstein palau swaziland antiguaandbarbuda china guinea-bissau lithuania palestina sweden argentina colombia guyana luxembourg panama switzerland armenia comoros haiti macau papuanewguinea syria aruba congo honduras macedonia paraguay taiwan australia costarica hongkong madagascar peru tajikistan austria croatia hungary malawi philippines tanzania azerbaijan cuba iceland malaysia poland thailand bahama curacao india maldives portugal timor-leste bahrain cyprus indonesia mali qatar togo bangladesh czechia iran malta romania tonga barbados denmark iraq marshallislands russia trinidadandtobago belarus djibouti ireland mauritania rwanda tunisia belgium dominica israel mauritius saintlucia turkey belize dominicanrepublic italy mexico samoa turkmenistan benin ecuador jamaica micronesia sanmarino tuvalu bhutan egypt japan moldova saudiarabia uganda birma elsalvador jordan monaco senegal ukraine bolivia equatorialguinea kazakhstan mongolia serbia unitedarabemirates bosniaandherzegovina eritrea kenya montenegro seychelles uk botswana estonia kiribati morocco sierraleone england brazil ethiopia northkorea mozambique singapore unitedkingdom brunei fiji korea namibia sintmaarten uruguay bulgaria finland southkorea nauru slovakia uzbekistan burkinafaso
  • Tion Media Monitoring

    Tion Media Monitoring

    Election Media Monitoring July 17-30, 2012 Key findings identified during the media monitoring for the period of July 17-30: According to the time allocated by Rustavi 2 and Imedi, the sequence of the first top five subjects and time distribution coincide to one another. These are: the President, the Government, the Coalition Georgian Dream, Christian-Democratic Movement and New Rights. Likewise, the time distribution is similar on Maestro and the Ninth Channel. Here the following sequence is present: Coalition Georgian Dream, the government, United National Movement, the President and local NGOs. According to the time allocated by the First Channel, Kavkasia and Real TV, the Coalition Georgian Dream ranks first. However, there are big differences from the standpoint of time distribution. Distribution of the time allocated to the subjects on the first channel is the most equal of all, and the least equal on Real TV. On the First Channel, all the subjects, except the government, have a more than 50% share of direct speech. Distribution of direct and indirect speech on Rustavi 2 and Imedi is similar, like it is the case of distribution of allocated time. In both cases the Coalition Georgian Dream has the lowest share of direct speech out of those subjects to which more than 5 minutes were allocated. The Coalition Georgian Dream has very similar distribution of direct and indirect speech on Maestro, Kavkasia and the Ninth Channel – almost half of the allocated time. The government has a very little share of direct speech on the Ninth Channel. Such indicator has not been observed on any other channel among those subjects to which more than 4 minutes were allocated.