On January 28, 2011, in the framework of the 10th Session of the UN Human Rights Council’s Periodic Review, the Government of Georgia presented the first national report on the human rights situation between the periods of 2006-2010. The UN Human Rights Council discussed the report over three hours of interactive dialog. As a result of the review process, Georgia received 163 recommendations, 96 of which were accepted immediately, 5 were rejected, and 62 were set aside for later examination.

On June 8 of this year, during the 17th session, the Human Rights Council adopted Georgia’s report presented on January 28, 2011 and also received information regarding Georgia’s final position concerning  63 recommendations. The Georgian delegation was headed by Mr. Sergi Kapanadze, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs.  Sergi Kapanadze underscored the fact that Georgia views the UPR as an important universal forum for the protection and promotion of human rights and is committed to constructive cooperation with the Human Rights Council.

The recommendations that Georgia received during the UPR cover a wide range of human rights and freedoms.

Finally, the Georgian authorities accepted the recommendations pertaining to media reforms. However, they did not agree with the part of the recommendation that called for the government to take a lead in addressing public trust, to reduce self-censorship and unbalanced reporting, since these measures fall within the competence of media and are self-regulatory. Georgia fully shared the recommendations by the United States and Belarus to enact the draft media law reforms, such that it includes measures to increase media ownership transparency and financial transparency. “On 8 April 2011, the Parliament of Georgia passed amendments to the Law of Georgia on broadcasting to enhance media ownership and financial transparency. Measures included a prohibition for companies registered in offshore locations to own shares in a broadcasting license”. –says the Georgian report.

One of the recommendations that Georgia accepted was to review the July 2009 law on Assemblies and Manifestations, which imposes several restrictions on the right to assemble and to demonstrate (recommendation № 106.52 made by Czech Republic).

“In its recently delivered judgment, the constitutional Court of Georgia reviewed the Law of Georgia on Assemblies and Manifestation, repealed norms restricting enjoyment of these freedoms and found them incompatible with the Constitution of Georgia guaranteeing individuals the freedom to assemble and peacefully manifest.” – says the Georgian report in response to the N106.52 recommendation.

We should emphasize that the Constitutional Court’s decision invalidated certain provisions of the law of Georgia on “Assembly and Manifestation”- including the provisions where blanket rule imposes limitations on the organization of assemblies to the individuals who have no Georgian citizenship and the statements which deprived one person of the right to be the initiator of the Assembly ad Manifestation. The Article of the draft imposes a 20 meters radius principle with regard to certain buildings.

However on June 13, members of the Parliament of Georgia initiated a draft envisaging significant revision of the Law of Georgia on Assembly and Manifestation, which provides the above mentioned rights.

According to the “Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association”, the draft contradicts the Constitutional Court’s decision, which neglects the justice.

“We consider that the submitted draft contains unclear provisions as well as contains potential risks of human rights’ violations”, reported the “Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association”.

During the UPR, Georgia received a lot of recommendations regarding IDP evictions. Georgia accepted the part of the recommendations regarding the need to provide IDP’s with adequate housing. However, Georgia noted that evictions in most of the cases took place with the consent of the individuals.  (For more information about IDP issues please visit: http://humanrightshouse.org/Articles/16004.html)

Georgia fully accepted the recommendations by Lithuania, Philippines and Algeria aimed at strengthening the protection of women against discrimination and the promotion of gender of gender equality, and direct significant efforts towards gender mainstreaming. Georgia noted that no further amendment of legislation is envisaged, since current legislative acts are in full compliance with international standards in the field of discrimination against women. (For more information about Gender issues please visit http://humanrightshouse.org/Articles/16187.html).

Georgia partially accepts the recommendation to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol and noted that Georgia has signed the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and its Optional Protocol in 2009 and is at the moment conducting the required analysis of its domestic legislation and policies in considering the possible ratification of the instruments.

Georgia has also partially accepted the U.S. recommendation to implement the Venice Commission and OSCE/ODIHR’s electoral reform recommendations in consultation with opposition parties and civil society groups, well in advance of the 2012 and 2013 elections. “Georgia supports the premise of this recommendation and works closely with both the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR to ensure that their recommendations are taken into account in the final package of electoral amendments to the maximum extent possible. The reform process is a multi-party and multi-sectoral effort, with 15 political parties and civil society experts being directly engaged in the work of the Election Code Working Group. Final consensus will require an intensive consultation process, in which OSCE/ODIHR recommendations will serve as important guide posts.” says Georgia’s report.

Georgia rejected all recommendations made by the Russian Federation. These recommendations referred to women’s rights, the judicial system and national minorities.  The Georgian authority noted that they will not consider these recommendations, as they are made by a state that directly hinders Georgia’s ability to protect even the basic human rights of the population residing in its regions of Abkhazia, Georgia and the Tskhinvali region of South Ossetia.  Georgia underscored that under international law it has a positive obligation to protect and promote human rights throughout its whole territory, including Abkhazia, Georgia and the Tskhinvali region in South Ossetia, Georgia. However, because these territories remain under Russia’s occupation, Georgia is unable to do so.

Georgia also rejected recommendations by Ecuador, Bolivia and Kyrgyzstan about becoming a party to the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (ICRMW).

They also rejected the recommendation to sign and ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and recognize fully the competence of the Committee on Enforced Disappearance (France). The Georgian authority noted that this decision can be reviewed at a later date.

According to the Georgian delegation, Georgia recognizes the importance of collaboration with the Venice Commission in constitutional reform and maintained a close relationship with the Commission throughout its recent constitutional reform process. However, Georgia didn’t accept the part of the recommendation by Switzerland suggesting to reconsider all the recommendations of the Venice Commission on constitutional reform.

Georgia also didn’t accept the recommendations by the Czech Republic and Austria with regard to bringing legislation on police in line with international standards. Georgia noted that since the 2003 Rose Revolution, police reform has topped the Georgian Government’s agenda and its existing legislation on police is already in line with international standards.

It is noteworthy that Georgia undertook a voluntary pledge to submit a midterm report on the follow-up to accepted UPR recommendations.

The “Universal Periodic Review” (UPR) – this is a mechanism which was created in 2006 and which granted a mandate to the UN Human Rights Council to periodically discuss the human rights statuses within the community of UN member states. By helping this mechanism, representatives from the NGO sector can address problems and lobby for adequate recommendation.

Also on this issue – http://humanrightshouse.org/Articles/15951.html

Shorena Latatia