Public discussion organized by GYLA’s Foundation for Promotion of Legal Education was held on February 28, 2012. The event featured discussion of religious associations in Georgia as well as problems that they are facing. Facts of prosecuting and oppressing religious minorities in Georgia, their underlying causes and the role of the state and the Georgian Orthodox Church in tackling the problem were discussed. Among the invited experts at the public discussion were Head of the inter-religious council within the office of the Public Defender of Georgia Beka Mindiashvili, Rector of Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani Teaching University, doctor of theology Vazha Vardidze and representative of GYLA’s strategic litigation center Giorgi Gotsiridze. Representatives of civil sector and law students from higher education institutions in Tbilisi actively participated in the discussions.
2012-03-01 12:44 See moreOn February 28, 2012, during his annual speech in Parliament, President of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili referred to a student, Mikheil Aleksidze, who has been expelled from the public school N53 as a hooligan. Mikheil Aleksidze was expelled from the public school N53 on October 13, 2011, citing gross violation of the school regulations as grounds for his expulsion. However, the decision failed to note the nature of alleged violation or corroborating evidence. Furthermore, on October 13, 2011, the investigation was launched into the alleged hooliganism perpetrated against the principal of the public school N53 (i.e. the investigation was not instituted against Aleksidze). The investigation is ongoing. Public Defender of Georgia took interest in the case of Aleksidze. He revealed a number of violations in the case and addressed the Minister of Education and Science with a recommendation to restitute the right of education violated against Aleksidze. However, no further actions were taken on the basis of the recommendation of the Public Defender.
2012-02-29 12:51 See moreOn February 28, 2012 the Constitutional Court upheld the claim filed by Georgian Young Lawyers Association and citizen Tamar Khidasheli against Parliament of Georgia. The claim was filed by GYLA in October 2008, requesting para. 2 of Article 8 of the Law of Georgia on Operational Investigative Activities to be recognized as unconstitutional. The norm allowed extension of an operational investigative measure to up to 6 months based on a motivated resolution of chief of an operational investigative agency and with prosecutor’s consent, if operative information about a criminal action of an individual required collection of additional information. It allowed investigation authorities to secretly intercept conversations of individuals concerned for the period of 6 months, violating oara. 1 of Article 20 of the Constitution of Georgia – right to a privacy. The respondent – Parliament of Georgia – did not agree with the noted interpretation of the impugned norm, maintaining that the law did not allow for secret interception and surveillance without court’s control. Eventually, the Constitutional Court concluded that the impugned norm allowed extension of term, including of operational investigative measures that entail secret surveillance and interception, which resulted in violation of the right to privacy guaranteed by para. 1 of Article 20 of the Constitution of Georgia. In its judgment the Constitutional Court highlighted the particular importance of the right to privacy. Therefore, it upheld the claim of GYLA and deemed the impugned norm as unconstitutional.
2012-02-29 12:09 See moreSigning of the petition concerning the legislative amendments adopted in December 2011 was held yesterday, at the hotel Courtyard Marriot, within the framework of the campaign It Affects You. The event was spearheaded by the editor-in-chief of Liberal magazine, Shorena Shaverdashvili who introduced the text of the petition to the audience and called for signatures. The meeting also featured the discussion of the planned activities of the campaign, including one of their highlights – submission of the legislative proposal to parliament today, at 2:00 pm.
2012-02-17 06:30 See moreRealizing the importance of free and fair elections, we, the representatives of NGOs and media organizations, categorically disapprove of the amendments adopted in December 2011, which • limit civil activity, property right, freedom of expression and political work, hinders democratic development of Georgia; • impose grave and unjustified liability on voters; • delegate the key agency controlling party funding – the Chamber of Control of Georgia – with an unlimited unconstitutional authority; • produce serious threats to each and every citizen as well as public society, including media; • deteriorate election environment in Georgia Therefore, we demand amendments to the election legislation.
2012-02-16 10:13 See moreStop Persecuting NGO Sector! Stop Killing Civil Activism! We Are Not Political Parties! Distinguish Parties from NGOs! – these are the slogans from the rally held yesterday, by NGOs on February 8 outside the building of the Chamber of Control to protest against the unlawful decision of the Chamber of Control declaring the New Generation New Initiative (nGnI) as an entity related to a party. NGOs state that the unsubstantiated decision constitutes an action undertaken against the civil activism, jeopardizing the work of NGOs in the country. NGOs state that restrictions that apply to political parties are utilized by the Chamber of Control not only against political activities but also against the realization of civil activism.
2012-02-10 08:13 See moreGeorgian Young Lawyers` Association (GYLA), Transparency International – Georgia (TI) and International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) declare that the December 2011 amendments to the organic Law of Georgia on the Political Union of Citizens and the Criminal Code of Georgia, jeopardize freedom of expression and freedom of property and will have a restrictive effect on civil-political activities. Furthermore, most of the legal prohibitions imposed are unreasonable, the sanctions disproportionate and it creates an uneven election environment.
2012-01-27 14:09 See moreRegarding the Issues of Granting Compensation to Victims of RepressionGYLA and the European Human Rights Advocacy Center (EHRAC) will present their submission about enforcement of the judgment delivered by the ECHR in Klaus and Yuri Kiladze v Georgia. For the purpose of enforcement of the February 2, 2010 judgment delivered by the ECHR in Klaus and Yuri Kiladze v Georgia, legislative amendments were made in May 2011, delegating Tbilisi City Court with the authority to consider the issue of granting compensation to victims of repression and their first generation heirs and to determine the amount of compensation. GYLA and EHRAC have already applied once the CoE Committee of Ministers by submitting their communication on May 30, 2011. The organizations were requesting the Committee of Ministers to continue monitoring of enforcement of the ECHR’s judgment in the Kiladze case, which would have established practice of application of the legislative amendments by national courts and afterwards, the Committee of Ministers would have been able to evaluate whether the laws were implemented in due course.
2012-01-17 09:03 See moreRegarding the Issues of Granting Compensation to Victims of RepressionGYLA and the European Human Rights Advocacy Center (EHRAC) will present their submission about enforcement of the judgment delivered by the ECHR in Klaus and Yuri Kiladze v Georgia. For the purpose of enforcement of the February 2, 2010 judgment delivered by the ECHR in Klaus and Yuri Kiladze v Georgia, legislative amendments were made in May 2011, delegating Tbilisi City Court with the authority to consider the issue of granting compensation to victims of repression and their first generation heirs and to determine the amount of compensation. GYLA and EHRAC have already applied once the CoE Committee of Ministers by submitting their communication on May 30, 2011. The organizations were requesting the Committee of Ministers to continue monitoring of enforcement of the ECHR’s judgment in the Kiladze case, which would have established practice of application of the legislative amendments by national courts and afterwards, the Committee of Ministers would have been able to evaluate whether the laws were implemented in due course.
2012-01-16 12:41 See more