Lia Mukhashavria: “Release of Prisoners under Amnesty Law Does Not Carry any Threat for Society”

Koba Bendeliani, Interpresnews

Interpresnews interviewed Lia Mukhashavria, executive director of the nongovernmental organization Human Rights Priority, regarding legal and political aspects of the amnesty and the goals and causes of recently-launched discussions about constitutional amendments. 

-Ms. Mukhashavria, it is clear that the president will not sign the Amnesty Law, and it will go into effect after it is signed by the Parliament Chairman on January 12. First of all, 190 political prisoners and 25 political refugees will leave custody. How would you evaluate the Law on Amnesty in legal and political terms?

-Generally, amnesty is a humane, positive and generous act by the state. So, we should evaluate the Amnesty Law as a positive step for the parliament, particularly because its provisions regarding prisoners are progressive and set an appreciable precedent for the Georgian legal field. However, it should be noted that not all political prisoners were included on the list of amnestied people, and the law has a gap in light of this; however, the parliament intends to continue working on this matter.

It is noteworthy that the Amnesty Law constitutes an important step in the general process of justice reform, which was an attractive promise made to society during the election period and which is still greatly expected by citizens. Amnesty marks a compromise of the new government. With this act, the government is trying to expiate the history of inhumane treatment and practice that was common in our country before the elections. There was no justice in the country; zero tolerance was declared in Georgia. The adoption of the Amnesty Law is a positive step, though public expectations cannot be fully met if the new government ceases to be willing to compromise.

-The reaction of the previous government to this law is known, but how will the West react? I mean to say, if the Georgian legislative body admits that the National Movement arrested and persecuted people on political grounds during its nine-year governance…

-The president tried to block the parliament’s resolution. He vetoed the law, a precedent in the recent history of our country; however, the parliament luckily was able to defeat this veto, which is an appreciable fact. The parliament stood by its decision. As for the West, there were diverse attitudes towards this law. Some circles were under the influence of lobbyist companies and claimed that democracy was flourishing in Georgia, even saying that we were a beacon of democracy. However, there was another, professional circle of human rights organizations who clearly demonstrated the poor human rights situation in the country in their reports. Our own opinion will be most important for us, not the opinions and evaluations of our Western partners about the current situation in our country. It is progressive that we did not resemble an ostrich hiding its head in the sand and admitted that we had political prisoners, and that steps were taken to release them from imprisonment.

It was known for a long time that we had political prisoners. All of Europe and the world knew that we had a large number of them. So I do not think our reputation will be degraded in the West after the amnesty is put into effect. Just the opposite—it is a healthy process and this fact demonstrates the soundness of our society.

-How dangerous is it that politicization of the justice system might undermine the judiciary and the internal stability of the country? And what do you think about the parliament’s resolution to make the law stricter for amnestied people?

-We were unhappy about the judiciary system, but despite my criticism towards the current political elite, it should be noted that I absolutely approve of the policy which was worked out and implemented with regard to the judiciary system and judges. We all know how many sins were committed by those judges, but if the court in this country had been completely changed, it would have been destabilizing; so it could not have happened. It is good that the current government acknowledges this fact and is not changing the court.  While the previous government expelled the old judges after the Rose Revolution, the new government is giving many judges a chance to prove that they are good lawyers and honorable enough to wear a judge’s robe. On the other hand, a replacement process will take place, but every step will be carefully considered. It is good when the government tries not to directly interfere with and influence judges’ activities.

As for making the law stricter with regard to amnestied people, if they commit a new crime, the new punishment will be added to the one they were amnestied for by a principle of aggregation. I do not think that the criminal situation will become worse in the country after prisoners leave their penitentiary establishments. We should note in favor of Garibashvili’s ministry [the Ministry of Internal Affairs] that they work effectively and successfully. Besides, I do not think the people who are now leaving prisons were imprisoned for actual crimes, so their freedom does not carry any threat for society.

-Currently pending topics were brought up at the first session of general-public discussion of the constitutional commission. What do you think, why is the majority trying to restrict the president’s authority and not changing the constitution completely? Or, why has the establishment of the new constitutional commission been delayed?

-I might adopt the position of many people who state that the parliamentary majority was not ready to take the responsibility and burden that it faced after winning the elections with a majority, and it now has to resolve all the problems that have accumulated in the country during the last nine years.

We are fully aware that the government is coping with difficult tasks, but it would have been braver of them to face all these problems; they should have declared that they would deal with those problems on a fundamental level instead of simply subduing the danger that might be escalated.

Constitutionalists know that the president enjoys plenty of constitutional rights, and his verbally declared wishes of so-called nonpartisanship and some of his offers do not mean anything in fact. One fine day, and it will not be a fine day at all, he might work out his full constitutional rights. The parliament is trying not to wake up the dragon— Saakashvili—in order to neutralize this threat. So the parliament is trying to restrict his power with small measures, trying not to degrade his dignity too much and not to irritate him. This situation is not pleasant, because the current government enjoys huge societal support, and they should enjoy this mandate to finally fix the basis of the law.

Full interview in Georgian: www.interpressnews.ge/ge/interviu/226040-lia-mukhashavria-gamoikvetha-rom-konsultaciebi-sakonsitucio-cvlilebebze-garigebebshia-gadazrdili.html