EU, US ambassadors express regret over Georgian parliament's ‘failure to reform judiciary’
By Khatia Bzhalava
Thursday, September 9
The approval of the constitutional changes by Georgian MPs on Tuesday was followed by severe criticism from the EU delegation and the US Embassy. The ruling party took out a clause of the draft which proposed electing General Prosecutor through a three-stage selection procedure, by the support of three-fifths of MPs. The US embassy criticized the parliament of Georgia for failing to approve the amendments “aimed at ensuring broad, multi-party support for an impartial Prosecutor General” and assessed this step as “another missed opportunity to increase the independence, transparency and integrity of Georgia’s judiciary.” According to the embassy, this constitutional amendment would have been an important step toward minimizing the political pressure on the Prosecutor’s Office and assuring the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
The constitutional changes, which also proposed holding the next two parliamentary elections with a two percent election threshold and in a fully proportional electoral system, were approved with the first reading by 126 votes pro and none con. Opposition parties share the criticism of the foreign partners and state that the Georgian Dream made them choose between either supporting the lowering of the election threshold and allowing the withdrawal of changes on the election rule of Georgia's prosecutor general, or letting the constitutional amendments flop. The US Embassy responded to such comments from opposition leaders by saying that all parties that signed the April 19 Agreement were equally committed to increase the public’s trust in the independence of the Prosecutor General from political interference.
According to the embassy’s statement, Georgian Dream pledged on July 28 to adopt constitutional amendments in parallel with the April 19 Agreement.
“This is yet another broken promise by the ruling party to make the much-needed judicial reforms that Georgian Dream and opposition party leaders have pledged, of their own accord, to adopt,” reads the statement.
According to the EU Ambassador to Georgia Carl Hartzell, the amendment was aimed at reducing the risk of one party alone appointing a Prosecutor General in the future and was meant to increase the independence, transparency and quality of the Judiciary in Georgia. Hartzell recalled that the appointments to the Supreme Court in the past two years were been assessed by the OSCE/ODIHR “to lack integrity, objectivity and credibility.”
EU Ambassador stressed that even though the European Union remains committed to supporting Georgia’s reforms in line with the EU-Georgia Association Agreement, the EU’s assistance to Georgia is still dependent on the progress achieved on implementing key reforms.
Head of the ruling Georgian Dream (GD) party Irakli Kobakhidze stated that the proposed change over the selection of the chief prosecutor was “legal nonsense,” and since the April 18 agreement is now annulled, he believes that there is no political, legal or moral obligation to reflect it in the constitution.
Kobakhidze responded to the criticism of the EU and US embassies, noting that the Ambassadors were given incorrect consultations and their statements were the result of invalid legal analysis.
The amendment that the ruling party withdrew envisaged the selection of the country’s chief prosecutor by the support of three-fifths of MPs. If the parliament would not manage to elect the prosecutor general twice in this way, then he would be elected by the parliamentary majority for one year instead of six.
