“Democracy Index – Georgia” Assesses Activities of the Parliamentary Human Rights Committee in connection with the International Human Rights Day

It has been already 69 years since International Human Rights Day was first celebrated on 10 December to commemorate the adoption of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. From that moment on, human rights have become universal. The protection of human rights is the primary obligation of states, regardless of any differences in their internal legislative or geopolitical contexts.

The role of the parliament in fulfilling its international commitment to ensure human rights is enormous. The responsibilities of the Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee of the Parliament of Georgia in the field of human rights are as follows:

• The authority to ratify international treaties and to develop/refine the national legislative framework;
• Overseeing the activities of executive authorities in fulfilling their human rights obligations;
• Acknowledging and highlighting human rights requirements in the process of reviewing and approving the state budget;
• Making efforts to address shortcomings identified by international and local organizations and to implement recommendations provided to the State of Georgia through cooperation with these organizations.

For the above reasons, in celebration of 10 December 2019, we would like to stress the importance of the Committee on Human Rights and Civil Integration of the Parliament of Georgia in ensuring human rights and provide the public with information on the effectiveness of the Committee's work.

This year, the Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights and Civil Integration has proved to be distressingly inefficient in the light of multiple cases of human rights violations in Georgia especially in the second half of 2019.

Under the current parliamentary system, the Georgian parliament is conferred even more powers and responsibilities for securing human rights and exercising state control over the issue. Accordingly, in the country where a number of pressing issues related to human rights violations have become the subject of intense public outrage, the role and significance of the Human Rights and Civil Integration Committee should have been as high as possible. Nevertheless, the Committee's activities in the Autumn Session of the Parliament of Georgia substantially lagged behind the requirements set out in the legislation and did not respond to the challenges relating to gross human rights violations in practice. Namely:

 1. Multiple people were injured as a result of the June 20-21 events, which raised the questions regarding gross violations of human rights in two areas mostly: a. whether the response of the police and the application of rubber bullets was proportionate, and b. whether the protester victims were provided adequately with criminal procedure safeguards where those who lost their eyes were not granted or delayed the victim status.

In connection with the foregoing, according to the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Georgia, the Human Rights Committee was supposed to:

• Summon the Minister of Internal Affairs and ask him specific questions about the weapons used and the number of individuals injured;
• Invite experts with special expertise to determine the life-threatening nature of the weapons used and identify the potential use of weapons and threats related to thereof;
• Given that the Prosecutor General of Georgia considered the delay in granting the victim status to the survivors a legislative problem, the Human Rights Committee was obliged to: summon the Chief Prosecutor of Georgia to obtain more detailed information not on specific criminal cases but regarding the practice of the Prosecutor’s Office (the stages and grounds for granting the victim status) as to what the body perceived as an immediate flaw of the law preventing the victims who lost their eyes from obtaining the victim’s status; invite representatives of non-governmental organizations protecting the rights of the protesters to elaborate more on the situation regarding the protection of victims' rights;
• Develop a report, recommendations or decision after the discussion of the above matters or prepare legislative amendments to the provisions governing the rule of granting the status of the victim and the use of weapons.

 2. In November this year, the problem relating to gross violation of the right to expression was particularly obvious in the light of intense protest demonstrations, which stressed the necessity to differentiate between 'picketing' and 'blocking', as these terms determined whether or not the dispersal of protest rallies would be deemed lawful and proportionate.

In connection with the foregoing, according to the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Georgia, the Human Rights Committee was supposed to:

• Review the issue at a meeting of the Committee and submit to the plenary session for approval a draft resolution in which the Parliament would respond to the developments in the country and explicitly define in a decree the boundary between picketing and blocking. In doing so, the Committee would adhere to the principle of accountability to the public and reiterate the obligation to protect freedom of expression. Clarification of the above issue was particularly important in the light of different classification of the same acts provided by opposing political groups and controversial assessments disseminated through media.

 3. In the background of recent protest manifestations and counter-manifestations, law enforcement agencies have demonstrated ineffectiveness and non-homogeneous approaches to participants of manifestations and counter-manifestations. Protest demonstrations and counter-demonstrations have swept the capital city and the regions, where participants of counter-demonstrations acted aggressively and even resorted to violent acts against other protesters. In those processes, the police’s response was inefficient, failing to prevent violence and ensure freedom of assembly and expression.

In connection with the foregoing, according to the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Georgia, the Human Rights Committee was supposed to:

• Invite the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia and request him to provide detailed information on the challenges the agency is facing in ensuring freedom of assembly and expression, on the one hand, and protecting protesters from violence and prosecuting perpetrators on the other; the reason why the police usually failed to ensure the protection of human rights in counter-protest rallies, which created the perception that the agency’s actions were politically-biased;
• Instruct the Ministry of Internal Affairs to take preventive measures to avoid violence;
• In the event that the investigation of police actions or any order issued by senior police officials contained any signs of a crime, the Committee should have forwarded the matter for a further response (to require the commencement of an investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office or setting up an ad hoc inquiry commission).

 4. Another pressing issue is hardship, poverty and inadequately harsh labour conditions in the country. The labour rights of individuals working in difficult and most dangerous workplaces are extremely hard, where the death toll is particularly high. In these circumstances, the Human Rights Committee does not hurry to develop a legislative basis for setting up an effective labour inspection as an independent body.

Pursuant to the decision of the Human Rights Committee of 08 May 2019, a thematic inquiry group on labour safety was set up in Georgia, which had to complete its activities by 08 July 2019. Thereafter, the group was supposed to submit relevant conclusions and recommendations to Parliament for approval. The thematic inquiry group held one working meeting on 11 October 2019, yet has not so far elaborated the reports and recommendations despite the expiration of the term.

The 2019 Action Plan of the Committee (paragraph 1.1.11) envisages the initiation of a draft law “On Labour Inspection” for the Autumn Session 2019, which has not been done yet. The body supervising the compliance with labour safety rules is still the Labour Inspection Department of the Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Labor, Health and Social Affairs of Georgia.

In connection with the foregoing, according to the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Georgia, the Human Rights Committee was supposed to:

• Develop the legal basis for setting up the Labour Inspection as an independent agency that would oversee and facilitate the provision of adequate labour conditions.

We hope that by assessing the activities of the Committee on Human Rights and Civil Integration of the Parliament of Georgia we will contribute to enhancing the effectiveness of the Committee's work and supervising the activities of the executive body in the field of human rights protection.