EFFORTS TO ENSHRINE RIGHTS IN GEORGIA'S LEGAL SYSTEM CONTINUES, HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TOLD

26 March 1997

Press Release
HR/CT/481

EFFORTS TO ENSHRINE RIGHTS IN GEORGIA'S LEGAL SYSTEM CONTINUES, HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE TOLD

19970326 Presidential Legal Adviser Introduces Georgia's Initial Report; Legal Reforms, Economic Improvement, Abkhazia Conflict Addressed

President Eduard Shevardnadze of Georgia had asserted that human rights standards represented immutable values and efforts were continuing to enshrine those principles within Georgia's legal system, his Chief Legal Adviser said this morning, as the Human Rights Committee began its consideration of Georgia's initial report on its compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

For 70 years Georgia had been part of a totalitarian empire in which human rights and freedoms were proclaimed, but were, in fact, stifled, Levan Alexidze told the Committee. However, its new Constitution was considered the most democratic in the former Soviet territory, and an improved economic situation was providing a base for the strengthening of human rights.

Actions being taken to guarantee human rights included a reform of criminal law and procedure, both theoretical and practical, and a new law on public defenders, he said. In addition, a constitutional court was open to appeal by any citizen who felt his constitutional rights had been violated.

Responding to questions that had been submitted earlier in writing by the Committee, he said 250,000 Georgians had been driven out of Abkhazia, resulting in a massive increase in refugees. The separatists' refusal to accept the refugees and internally displaced persons represented a source of constant political tension. The Abkhazian faction in Georgia's Parliament had declared a hunger strike several weeks ago, demanding that they be enabled to return home.

Today, the fact that ethnic cleansing in Abkhazia took the form of genocide had been internationally recognized, he said. A joint office of the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) had now been established to monitor and protect human rights in the territory held by the separatists. He also drew attention to humanitarian issues relating to the conflict in South Ossetia.

Human Rights Committee - 1a - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

Mr. Alexidze also discussed such issues as torture, education of law- enforcement personnel on the provisions of the Covenant, prohibitions on the use of firearms, Georgia's position on the death penalty, prison conditions and laws on preventive detention.

Following the introduction of Georgia's report, questions and comments were presented by the Committee's expert members from Australia, Finland, Italy, Canada, Israel, Chile, India, United States, Colombia and Ecuador.

The Human Rights Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today, to continue its consideration of Georgia's initial report.

Committee Work Programme

The Human Rights Committee met this morning to consider the initial report of Georgia on its compliance with the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (document CCPR/C/100/Add.1), which covers the period from January 1994 through August 1995. According to the report, the Republic had the legislative basis necessary to implement the requirements of the Covenant, legislation which incorporated the most universal provisions of international law.

According to the report, the Parliament had recognized the primacy of the fundamental rules of international law over domestic legislation. The country had already acceded to or ratified 14 international instruments on human rights, thereby binding itself to bring its domestic legislation into conformity with the requirements of international law. However, the observance of Covenant rights was affected by a number of factors.

Specifically, the report expresses concern about the country's economic crisis, which had led to a fall in the standard of living for broad segments of the population. Today, more than 80 per cent of the population were living below the poverty level. Social guarantees for vulnerable groups were affected, and there were several hundred thousand refugees in the country.

The report also cites political instability associated with conflicts that embraced entire regions of the country, and included loss of government jurisdiction of the conflict zones of Abkhazia and South Assetia. The energy crisis and paralysis of the communications system had weakened State administration. The legal system had broken down into "a motley collection of laws from the Soviet and post-Soviet periods", and there had ben an unprecedented increase in crime.

The machinery for protecting human rights was inadequate at both governmental and non-governmental levels, the report states. The country also lacked a system for informing people about human rights in general and Covenant provisions in particular. On the positive side, the economic and political situation in the country was now tending to stabilize, creating favourable conditions for legal reform. A new Constitution, which gave a central position to fundamental rights and freedoms, had also been adopted.

The report states that it had not yet been possible for Georgia to set up and operate a complete system for the protection of human rights. Nevertheless, a Committee for Human Rights and Ethnic Relations had been given the responsibility of coordinating the activities of State, public and other organizations relating to the protection of political, civil, economic, social and cultural rights.

Human Rights Committee - 3 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

According to the report, the Committee for Human Rights was authorized to make written representations to the appropriate officials and request that they examine the facts of human rights violations. The Committee might also obtain on demand any necessary information from the State and governmental agencies, organizations and other services concerned.

In addressing Covenant provisions on the right to self-determination, the report states that Georgia is building a civil society based on respect for the nations and ethnic groups living within its borders. That respect was confirmed by the existence on Georgian territory of autonomous entities and by a policy on national minorities that offered them broad cultural autonomy.

According to the report, Georgia was home to 94 different nationalities and an infrastructure had been created to help minorities achieve ethnic self- realization. The State was setting up and supporting newspapers and other publications for minorities in Russian, Armenian, Azerbaijani, Greek and other languages. There were also 500 ethnic schools in operation.

The State system of the Republic of Georgia was established on 9 April 1994, just as the Soviet Union was beginning to break up, the report states. During that period of dissolution, separatist tendencies in the autonomous regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia had gathered strength, leading to an armed conflict involving the use of heavy weapons. The Government of Georgia ceased its engagement in opened armed conflict in South Ossetia in 1992 and in Abkhazia in 1994.

In April 1994, an agreement on the return of displaced persons was reached between Georgian and Abkhaz representatives, with the participation of the Russia Federation and under the aegis of the United Nations, the report states. Russian peace-keeping troops, nominally representing the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), were stationed along the River Ingura, which separates the conflict zone from the rest of Georgia.

However, in November, the Abkhaz leadership unilaterally declared their independence of Georgia, thus challenging the international principle of territorial integrity and the inviolability of State borders, the report states. The leaders of Georgia had repeatedly declared that, as part of Georgia, Abkhazi would continue to have a State system and extensive rights. As to the conflict on the territory of the former South Ossetia, it was being settled with the broad participation of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

The report also describes the human rights situation in Abkhazia. From the moment when, in 1993, the central government temporarily lost jurisdiction over the territory, the separatists had engaged in mass murder, ethnic cleansing and deportations which had continued throughout the review period.

Human Rights Committee - 4 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

According to available information, in 1994 more than 800 people were killed in the Gali region of Abkhazia alone.

With respect to ethnic cleansing, data indicated that approximately 225,000 refugees had been forced to leave Abkhazia, the report states. The problem of refugee return was being discussed within the framework of the peaceful settlement of the conflict under the aegis of the United Nations. However, Georgia was experiencing serious difficulties in connection with upholding the rights of the forcibly displaced.

List of Issues

The Committee has prepared a list of issues to be taken up with respect to Georgia's report. Among the specific questions included in part I of the list of issues (which addresses matters considered to be of greater urgency) are the following:

What was the impact of the events in Abkhazia and South Ossetia on the exercise of Covenant rights? What safeguards and remedies were available to internally displaced persons? What measures were taken to investigate extrajudicial executions, disappearances, torture or other inhuman treatment or punishment, and arbitrary detention by members of the Georgian police, army and other security forces? What was being done to bring those suspected of such crimes before the courts and to prevent any recurrence of such actions?

What were the rules and regulations governing the use of weapons by police and security forces? Had they been violated? If so, what measures had been taken against those found guilty of such acts and to prevent their recurrence? How many death sentences had been imposed during the reporting period, and how many had actually been carried out? What efforts were under way to reduce the number of crimes carrying the death penalty?

Could confessions or testimony obtained under duress be used in court proceedings? What measures had been taken or were foreseen to address the appalling detention conditions described in the report? What steps were being taken to eradicate practices which led to unjustified extensions of the period of detention in custody?

Among the specific questions included in part II of the list of issues prepared by the Committee are the following:

What were the legal and practical consequences of the establishment of the Republic of Georgia as an independent State on the implementation of Covenant rights? What procedures exist to implement views adopted by the Human Rights Committee under the Optional Protocol? What are the powers and functions of the Public Human Rights Defender (Ombudsman)?

Human Rights Committee - 5 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

Did Georgia have a policy of affirmative action to achieve equality between men and women? What were the rules and regulations guaranteeing the independence and impartiality of the judiciary? What is the mode of appointment, tenure, dismissal and disciplining of members of the judiciary? What was the relationship between the Procurator and the Judiciary? What rules governed trials in absentia?

With respect to freedom of movement, to what extent was the old permit system still in force at the national or local level? What steps had been taken to facilitate the return of minority group members who had been forced to leave Georgia? Under what circumstances might telephone tapping be authorized? Was that subject to judicial supervision? What is the situation with regard to the freedoms of conscience, religion and expression, including freedom of the press and media?

What were the laws and practice relating to child labour? What measures had been taken to ensure that the specific needs of children living in poverty and homeless children were met, and with what results? What steps had been taken to disseminate information on the rights recognized in the Covenant? Had the public been informed of the Human Rights Committee's consideration of Georgia's report? What were the rules and regulations governing the establishment and recognition of political parties, and how were they implemented?

Introduction of Report

Introducing his country's initial report, LEVAN ALEXIDZE, Chief Legal Adviser to the President of Georgia, said some glimmers of light were now apparent in his country. The economic situation was more stable and its currency was one of the most stable in eastern Europe. That strengthened the base on which the country was building human rights. Georgia was a key link in the Europe-Asia corridor, increasing employment and leading to new economic benefits. Foreign investment had greatly increased, owing to the country's political stability.

There had also been a drastic decline in crime in the country, he said. The situation of banditry -- by which one could not walk in the capital after 5 p.m. -- had now changed dramatically for the better. Conditions had also been established for radical reform in human rights. For 70 years, Georgia was part of a totalitarian empire in which human rights and freedoms were proclaimed, but were, in fact, stifled.

Since submission of the report, Georgia's Constitution had been adopted on 24 August 1995, he said. It was considered the most democratic Constitution in the former Soviet territory. It was based on a division of power, with the President and Parliament elected by popular vote. The

Human Rights Committee - 6 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

judiciary was given important functions for the defence of human rights. The President himself now headed the entire executive system, rather than a Prime Minister.

Chapter II of the Constitution was based on the human rights Covenants and tried, in some ways, to further advance their provisions, he said. The law on public defenders (also called "ombudsmen"), adopted on 16 May, was the main guarantee of human rights. A Constitutional Court was open to an appeal by any citizen who felt his constitutional rights had been violated.

By Article VI of the Constitution, and other legislation, the primacy of international law over inter-State law was established, he said. In Article VII, those human rights were established as direct, active law. A Georgian citizen could refer, in the courts, to any universally recognized human rights standard, including Covenants to which Georgia had not yet acceded.

As Foreign Minister of the former Soviet Union, Georgia's President, Eduard Shevardnadze had asserted that human rights standards represented immutable values. As President of his country, he had worked to enshrine those principles within Georgia's legal system.

In the report, he said, statistical data on primary and secondary employment and higher education with respect to men and women were given incorrectly. They should be reversed. There were few women in Parliament, for example, but they were very active. Although some very important posts were occupied by women, thus far there were fewer women than men in public life. Georgian women were not yet demanding their rights in that area. In Georgia's educational system, girls exceeded the number of boys in all areas.

A reform of criminal law and procedure was currently under way, he said. The changes being made were both theoretical and practical, and would be discussed later.

Replies to Prepared List of Issues, Part I

Responding to the first part of the list of questions submitted by the Committee, Mr. ALEXIDZE said 250,000 Georgians had been driven out of Abkhazia. The Lisbon meeting of the OSCE had condemned ethnic cleansing and the forcible expulsion of that population, during which some 10,000 people had died and tens of thousands of women were raped and forced to flee. Today, those people were living in Georgia, complicating the situation in the country. The refugees were given accommodations and a reasonable sum, and they did not pay for public utilities. The situation was a source of constant political tension.

Human Rights Committee - 7 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

Despite all statements by the Security Council, the separatists were refusing to allow the refugees and internally displaced persons to return home. Within two years, only 311 of 250,000 people had returned. Today, the fact that ethnic cleansing in Abkhazia took the form of genocide had been internationally recognized. The conflict in South Ossetia had been based on racist structures. Today, there was a humanitarian need to return the refugees and internally displaced persons. Despite the presence of Russian peace-keeping there, many people had been killed.

In Abkhazia, there was now a joint office of the United Nations and the OSCE, which monitored and sought to protect human rights in the territory held by the separatists, he said. The Abkhazian faction in Parliament had declared a hunger strike several weeks ago, demanding that they be enabled to return home.

With respect to extrajudicial executions, disappearances, torture and arbitrary detention, he noted two incidents in which the population had taken the law into their own hands. Legal proceedings had subsequently been instituted to address that action. Torture was not permitted under Georgian law and severe sanctions were provided for such use of violence, as it was for the obtaining of testimony by force.

Over the past five months, statistics showed that no such tortures against detainees had taken place, he said. However, detained citizens still suffered under a syndrome of fear, believing that if they complained about brutal treatment, things would be even worse for them. Efforts were under way to address that problem, so that those who engaged in the practice of torture might be punished.

Active efforts were now under way to educate law-enforcement personnel on the provisions of the Covenant, he said. As President Shevardnadze had said, it was impossible to change the mentality of law-enforcement agencies all at once. However, it could be done over time. For example, firearm use was now prohibited in places where harm might be inflicted on certain individuals. Shooting next to a pregnant woman was prohibited was restricted against minors and aged people. Firearm use was forbidden when it might cripple or hurt a person when there was no justified risk.

The Georgia Constitution of 1921 had abolished the death penalty, he said. However, the Red Army had then conquered Georgia, returned it to the Soviet empire, and the death penalty reappeared in many parts of the criminal code. The population of Georgia opposed the complete and immediate abolition of the death penalty, but President Shevardnadze and the Parliament favoured its gradual elimination. Since 1994, not a single death penalty had been carried out in Georgia. President Shevardnadze had declared a virtual moratorium on its implementation.

Human Rights Committee - 8 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

Under law, women and minors under 18 years of age could not be subject to the death penalty, he said. Of some 60 individuals who carried out premeditated murder and had been waiting for the death penalty, six had been pardoned. A new criminal code was almost complete, which forbade the death penalty in almost all cases. Georgia knew it would not be accepted into the Council of Europe if its retained the death penalty as a possible punishment and was striving to eliminate it.

Under Georgian law, evidence obtained through the use of force had no legal effect, he said. Examination of the psychiatric status of a suspect or accused was done within the context of the Ministry of Health, rather than under law enforcement institutions. That was considered a very important guarantee. As of today, there were 11,905 individuals in prison, of whom 7,382 had already been convicted. Steps to address prison conditions were being taken in close cooperation with such bodies as the International Committee of the Red Cross and the OSCE.

He said Georgia's prisons and camps had not changed since the Soviet regime, owing to the cost of building new prisons. However, funds and assistance were being directed to making prison living conditions more acceptable. In 1994, 818 prisoners received medical treatment; in 1996, 1,050 received medical treatment. The number of illnesses and deaths in prison had markedly decreased during that period.

There was a great shortage of medicines in Georgia, and the Red Cross was providing valuable assistance in that respect, he said. There were plans to open a facility for free blood transfusions. There were also plans to establish a laboratory that would identify hidden forms of tuberculosis, currently the most serious illness affecting prisoners. There were no political prisoners in Georgia.

Limits were set to the periods of preventive detention and its extension, he said. The detainee or arrested person had the right to appeal to the courts with respect to the period in custody. The Procurator's decision regarding an arrest could be appealed by the detainee's representative. Strict time limits are established within which the court must act on the appeal. In addition, a lawyer must be provided to the accused immediately upon detention.

Comments and Questions from Experts

ELIZABETH EVATT, expert from Australia, said Georgia had been "in darkness for a long time" and was now coming out "into the sunshine of human rights". Georgia's periodic report and today's presentation by its delegation were frank in exposing the country's problems. However, the picture presented

Human Rights Committee - 9 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

had not been complete. The provisions in the country's Constitution were not backed up by any description of the situation in practice.

In some areas the information provided was insufficient for the Committee's requirements, she continued. For instance, the report had not referred to new measures to help overcome problems related to family planning and health care. There was no information on the risks to right to life arising from conflict situations. There was also no full information on how criminal procedure worked in practice and no understanding of how the judiciary enforced rights of individuals. One of the most serious gaps in Georgia's transition to a state of legal rights was lack of detailed information on pre-trial investigation and freedom of information, among other issues.

She said the necessary institutions to guarantee human rights were not yet in place. Georgians did not seem to be aware of their rights. The judiciary was not respected by the community. Also, the judiciary did not seem to be able to implement human rights protections. The legal profession, in general, did not seem to be fully aware of human rights issues. She stressed her concern about the Georgian Government's treatment of civilians during the conflict in South Ossetia.

MARTIN SCHEININ, expert from Finland, commenting on torture and arbitrary detention, said that it appeared that confessions were obtained under duress. Public officials were alleged to have made statements about cases already on trial. Turning to the death penalty, he said that certain cases under which accused had been sentenced to death could be unconstitutional, as the cases were tried before the new constitution had entered into force. He requested the Government not to carry out the death penalty in cases where the accused had filed petitions directly to the Committee, under the Optional Protocol. He requested reconsideration by the Government of cases in which judicial proceedings were deemed to be defective.

He also sought clarification on the Constitution's provisions on torture and confessions obtained under duress. On prison conditions, he said that serious health problems resulting in death amounted to violations of Covenant provisions of the right to life. He was concerned by the report's descriptions about prison conditions and about juveniles under detention. The Government's tight fiscal policies should not be at the expense of improved conditions in the prisons. He also observed that Georgia's report had not hidden the serious problems the Government faced in enforcing human rights protections.

FAUSTO POCAR, expert from Italy, noted the efforts of Georgia's Government to establish a rule of law in difficult circumstances. Commenting on the conflict in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, he said that he would like more

Human Rights Committee - 10 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

information about serious human rights violations against civilians in 1994. He drew attention to the Government's obligations to enforce the Covenant provisions adhered to by the previous authorities. Georgia should strictly abide by Covenant provisions, as its own Constitution indicated the country's willingness to respect them. He requested information on the remedies available to victims of rights violations subsequent to Georgia's independence. He also requested information on remedies available to victims in the conflict areas.

MAXWELL YALDEN, expert from Canada, noted that the Georgian delegation had openly recognized deficiencies in the Government's implementation of human rights protections. He commented that, without oversight in the form of an office of ombudsman, many of the human rights issues could not be dealt with. He drew attention to the report's admission that implementation of the Covenant requirements was inadequate. He asked what machinery existed to bring into practice the Government's intentions in that respect. What competent body dealt with human rights issues. He was concerned about the failure to put into practice matters stated in theory. Effective machinery was needed to implement those measures.

DAVID KRETZMER, expert from Israel, said there seemed to be a constitutional problem with regard to issues of appeal. Why had it taken so long for the Georgian authorities to prepare an edict on torture? What had happened to people convicted on the basis of confessions obtained by torture, and what was being done to reopen their cases? He also wanted information on the Georgian penitentiary system, in particular whether accused or convicted juveniles were held in separate facilities from adults.

CECILIA MEDINA QUIROGA, expert from Chile, associated herself with the issues raised by the previous speakers. She wanted to know, however, who decided on whether a person should be held in preventive detention. Who was described as a minor? What were the conditions of minors in custody? She also wanted to know whether there were plans for the review of cases where individuals had been convicted without due process.

PRAFULLACHANDRA BHAGWATI, expert from India, said there was no adequate information on what was happening in practice in terms of implementation and protection of human rights. He was happy to find that the Covenant provisions had been incorporated into Georgian domestic law. He also associated himself with concerns expressed by previous speakers. He expressed particular concern about the case of two individuals who had been sentenced to death at the time the new Constitution had not yet legally superseded the 1921 Constitution, which prohibited the death penalty. He called for a review of that case and others in which confessions had been obtained under duress. He also asked for information on cases where compensation had been paid for torture or illegal imprisonment and sought clarification on pre-trial detention.

Human Rights Committee - 11 - Press Release HR/CT/481 1564th Meeting (AM) 26 March 1997

THOMAS BUERGENTHAL, expert from the United States, said he had a difficult time understanding the current situation in Georgia. Its report covered the period up to around 1994. Today's statement said a great many things about what was going to happen. However, it was difficult to determine what had already been implemented. It would have been useful to have a supplemental report in writing.

The report appeared to state that the death penalty applied to resisting a superior, he said. What did that actually mean? he asked. Was it a fact that no one had, as yet, been compensated for any illegal detention that had taken place? What sort of compensation was envisaged? The report said Georgia's penitentiary system fell short of international standards but that the main requirements of the Covenant had been met. In what respect had those provisions been met?

Today's statement implied that torture did not take place today and mentioned the possibility of recourse to the Procurator's office with a complaint, he said. However, given the syndrome of fear that had been cited, shouldn't there be an independent body to which complaints could be brought?

PILAR GAITAN DE POMBO, expert from Colombia, said the fact that Georgia was in a period of transition to democracy must be taken into account in considering its report. Information on that transition process would be helpful to the Committee. Georgia had quickly ratified international human rights instruments, taking a political decision to ensure that international treaties would have effect within domestic law. Important educational work was also taking place in the country. She asked for additional information with respect to displaced persons, as well as on efforts to abolish the death penalty.

JULIO PRADO VALLEJO, expert from Ecuador, said there had been some important changes in Georgia and many covenants had been ratified. However, that had not necessarily improved the internal situation in terms of respect for the Covenant, which had not yet been distributed in all the Georgian languages. The report acknowledged the existence of torture and forced confessions, but said nothing about procedures established by the Government to prevent such occurrences.

Grave violations had not been investigated and abuses continued, without corrective action by the Government, he said. The report indicated that human rights bodies had been threatened. What actions had the Government taken? Violence against prisoners was acknowledged. What was being done to prevent it? What did Georgia intend to do to ensure the human rights of its citizens? The lack of remedies, acknowledged in the report, was a matter of serious concern.

* *** *