Statement of the Coalition of Non-Governmental Organizations

Statement of the Coalition of Non-Governmental Organizations
on the Amendments and Additions to the Georgian Constitution

Notes and Opinions on the Project of Amendments and Additions to the Georgian Constitution

The model of the governance in the Article 511 should be further analyzed. On the basis of the amendments, the mechanism of the additional balance among governmental branches is offered.

In February 2004, the mechanisms of the balance and equality among governmental branches were blatantly breached. In fact, the result was the indefinite, uncontrolled and irresponsible power of the president. Currently proposed amendments are the imitation of exposing the rights of the Parliament and putting the president's power in the frame relating the parliament. However, we think the proposed model will be ineffective, because the new model is not created on the basis of one classic model, and it is the eclectic mixture of some models. One of the appropriated models should be selected-what should be presidential, parliamentary or a mixed one. Discussing the issue, recommendations of the Venice Commission within the Council of Europe should be undertaken. These recommendations were made in 2004 on the amendments to the Constitution. 

Article 1041:"3. Elections for the Georgian President and Parliament, who were elected in 2004, should be held from September 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008. The date of the elections should be fixed by the president."

Presidential and parliamentary elections should not coincide with each other [especially artificially].  It should be pointed out, that one essential principle of the constitutionalism is maintaining the inheritance principle during alerting the balance and equality among the governmental branches. The stark example for the aforementioned principles is the different terms of the parliamentary [chambers are among them] and presidential governance. Subsequently, if we do not deal with election of the fundamental document [like new constitution], when new institutions are being established, on the basis of the aforementioned principles, elections of the president and the parliament should not coincide with each other 'artificially'.

Postponing the dates of authority is not acceptable and has no basis, as it is the breaching of the main principle of the changes in the government and democracy. Saving the budget through making these changes has no proves, because 150 MP are going to be in the next parliament and during 7-8 months the expenses for additional 75 MP will be much more loss for the budget than the separate elections for the president and the parliament.

The following question was raised on public meeting of the commission, held regarding the amendments to the Constitution. The question was that if only one party will get over the barrier in the elections, to avoid the one-party parliament, the party, which will take the second place in the polls, will receive the mandates of the parliament, even if they have not got over that barrier.

The proposed initiative cannot be considered acceptable, because of a danger for getting one-party parliament. In this case, legislators should discuss the question of reducing the barrier. If they think that the party, having received the votes below seven percent does not have right to be in the parliament, then, exception should not be made. The topic is discussed only for one reason: the state should be ashamed in front of the western countries having one-party parliament. However, if 97% of the whole Georgian population wants to have one president they can also have only one party in the parliament, thus, the parliament should show the exact output of the elections?!

Comments regarding the liability under the Administrative Code on holding the demonstrations and meetings twenty meters away from the court.
 
• The exact definition of the court building in this article should be given. We propose that the building should only be the court building and not the yard or a fence as well. Thus, the twenty meters should be measured from the court building itself.

• As for the prohibitions in the area within the twenty meters, using of the technical equipments [like amplifiers] can be banned only. In fact, only such equipments can interrupt court hearings. In the case of breaching these regulations, a person can either fined or seized of equipments.