References: Law on Common Courts, arts. 47, 48 There is no regulation and procedure for public oversight in the process.

Peer Review Comments: The biographies of candidates are even published online.

Peer Review Comments: Procedures are as transparent as those in any other country.

References: See Uldis Kinis: The most problematic issue in Georgia remains the application of priorities relating to the independence of the judiciary. Mr. Uldis Kinis, Chairman of the Kuldiga district court of Latvia and former rule of law expert in the EUJUST Themis mission to Georgia.

See UNDP Human Development Report, Georgia 2008

Human Rights Watch World Report 2008. Quote from Georgia: "The United States is one of Georgia's strongest allies. Prior to the November events, the US resisted publicly criticizing Georgia on its human rights record, though it did publicly call on the government to implement reforms on property rights, an independent judiciary, and the criminal procedural code."

Amnesty International 2008 Annual Report for Georgia

Peer Review Comments: The special school is created for training judges. The selection criteria includes professional qualifications.

Peer Review Comments: Uldis Kinis has not been in Georgia for the past two years and the EU Rule of Law Mission to Georgia (EUJUST THEMIS) mission also completed its work two years ago.

The situation on the ground is the same as last year.

References: Constitution of Georgia Law on the Supreme Court Law on the Constitutional Court

References: Law on Constitutional Court Procedure Civil Procedures Code Criminal Procedures Code Administrative Procedures Code

References: See OSCE report - Georgia Extraordinary Presidential Election 2008 POST-ELECTION INTERIM REPORT//6, Jan. 18, 2008

Peer Review Comments: Judges are receiving better training in opinion writing through the High School of Justice (HSOJ). HSOJ trainings are conducted independently, as well as with international partners, such as COE, American Bar Association (ABA) and GTZ.

References: Law of Common Courts; Law on Disciplinary Responsibility and Disciplinary Procedure of the Judges of Common Courts;

Tthere are formal rules, but they are not clear and do not set clear criteria. Although more than half of the members are judges, that does not mean they are independent (please see answer to the question 80b for independence of judges and judiciary). The recent case of the secretary of high council of justice being the same person as the chairman of Tbilisi appellate court might serve as an argument and valuable case. By law last year the position of the Secretary of Justice of a full time position of a main official in the system. The law was changed specifically for one man, former secretary of the council of justice, when he was appointed as a chairman of the Tbilisi Appellate court, giving him the right to stay at the same time on top position at the Council of Justice. Why was it so important? Because he was a highly loyal person to the ruling elite, former prosecutor himself and under the current state of affairs trusting one man on two key positions was the easiest option.

References: Law of Common Courts; Law on Disciplinary Responsibility and Disciplinary Procedure of the Judges of Common Courts; art.24

Peer Review Comments: The number of judges has increased and proposed reforms assume the complete withdrawal of politicians.

Peer Review Comments: The law envisions formal rules establishing that the judicial disciplinary agency be protected from political interference by the executive and legislative branches. More than half of the members of the High Council of Justice (HCOJ) are judges. Judges are represented on all disciplinary panels and the final review is done at the Supreme Court.

References: See report of the Venice Commission for Democracy through Law on The Law of Georgia on Disciplinary Procedure, March, 2007; See report of the Public Defender of Georgia from 2007 and first half of 2008: See also, UN Committee against Torture See US State Department Georgia Country Report on Human Rights Practices, released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, March 11, 2008, that speaks of "government pressure on the judiciary."

References: See US State Department Georgia Country Report on Human Rights Practices, released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, March 11, 2008, that speaks of "government pressure on the judiciary." See Amnesty International 2008 Annual Report for Georgia

Peer Review Comments: The agency has no problems enforcing its decisions. The issue is transparency of the process and the degree to which the agency follows the notion of equality under law.

References: Law on Conflict of Interests and Corruption

References: Law on Conflict of Interest and Corruption Criminal Code of Georgia, art. 340

References: No regulation exists.

References: No regulation exists.

References: No regulation exists.

References: This is not effective as there is no monitoring or regulation for audit.

Peer Review Comments: Even though there is no independent auditing, judges are controlled through the mechanism of filing their assets, and it is not a usual practice for them to accept gifts. There was one scandal three years ago when the government directly sold real estate to judges so they could build houses, but other than that, there were no reports of violations.

Peer Review Comments: Some, but not all, judges are known to accept greater amounts of gifts and hospitality from outside interest groups or private sector actors than is allowed.

References: There have been no reports as there are no legal requirements.

References: General Administrative Code of Georgia, Chapter 3, Freedom of Information

References: There have been no reports on delays or any other particular problems.

References: There have been no reports.