Giorgi Margiani
With Georgia's 'State Strategy on Occupied Territories: Engagement through Cooperation,' the government has adopted new modalities for conducting activities in the occupied territories. Both Georgian civil society and international organizations have received the strategy critically, saying that the new restrictions the Georgian government has placed on their work in Abkhazia and South Ossetia will destroy the small amount of trust that has been built up between the conflicting sides.
-The new modalities will complicate both the operations of the international organizations in the conflict regions as well as complicate the implementation of the joint projects, says Giorgi Kupatadze, Editor at IWPR. -In this case, the civil sector cannot stay formally neutral – even if there is an objective and unbiased attitude from the ministry. A project approved and accepted by the Georgian government will be negatively received in Sokhumi and Tskhinvali. In addition, we have reasonable suspicion to believe that the Georgian government will try to restrict those projects in order to introduce the framework of Georgia’s state policy any activities carried out by civil society in the conflict zones. The new restrictions will destroy the small amount of trust that has been built between the conflicting sides by the civil society, Kupatadze continues.
The Norwegian Helsinki Committee suggests that, “although I understand the Georgian authorities’ need for maintaining some oversight over what happens on Georgian territory effectively controlled by the de facto authorities and the Russian Federation, this regulation is formulated in a vague manner, prescribes overly bureaucratic means of reporting and controlling of any activities carried out in the ‘occupied territories’ and could potentially represent an obstacle to the freedom of movement for journalists and NGO worker," said Aage Borchgrevink, Adviser of the Norwegian Helsinki Committee.
Another critical point is that the development of the strategy has not been a transparent process. No NGOs, in fact, no part of civil society, was consulted. The document came into force on October 15, 2010.
After the war in August 2008, Georgia took several legislative measures to address its occupied territories. The Law on Occupied Territories was intended to restrict some activities in the Tskhinvali Region of South Ossetia and in Abkhazia. The law was amended after allegations that it violated several constitutional rights as well as rights conferred by international human rights instruments. Thus, changes were made in February of 2010 on behalf of the Venice Commission Recommendations.
The Government of Georgia also adopted other legal instruments such as the State Strategy on Occupied Territories- also referred to as “Engagement through Cooperation” and Action plan of this Strategy. This strategy implies that the government of Georgia intends to build confidence between the conflicting sides. It also actively supports the idea that international actors as well as actors within local civil society will play a crucial role in building confidence and fostering peace with regard to the conflicts in Georgia.
Following the state strategy, the Georgian government has adopted modalities for conducting activities in the occupied territories of Georgia. In the preamble of these modalities it states that the Government of Georgia fully acknowledges the importance of the engagement of international and local organizations in Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region for peace building. However, the modalities say that “any activities carried out in the occupied territories shall be based on constructive dialogue between the government of Georgia and the parties involved.” These modalities lay out the criteria for the Government of Georgia to issue consent on the implementation of activities in occupied territories.
International NGOs have been among the few organizations working on both sides of the front lines, especially since the United Nations missions were terminated last year. Under the new “Modalities for the Conduct of Activities in the Occupied Territories of Georgia”, NGO’s and other projects must be agreed to by the Georgian authorities before they are launched. The only organization that does not need to check in with the State Ministry for Reintegration (SMR) is the International Committee of the Red Cross, which can operate freely.
This regulation demands that prior notification and consent from the State Ministry of Reintegration is needed for activities defined as “Emergency Humanitarian Assistance” and “Non-exempt activities”. Humanitarian activity is clearly defined by the regulatory body as: any activity securing the right to life of the population. The issue is complicated with regard to what activities constitute non-exempt status. This regulatory body makes indications on law in “Occupied Territories” and says that non-exempt activities are within the scope of the Action Plan for Engagement that falls under prohibited activities defined as law. The law itself restricts economic activities, transport activities, the use of national resources and financing activities in the occupied territories. These activities are not conducted by the NGOs, so it is unclear what the scope of non-exempt activity actually entails. The notification process for implementing the activities enumerated above must include a project description and an official copy of the registration from the Registry of Commercial and Non-commercial Legal Persons of the National Agency of Public Registry.
The project is then assessed against several criteria before the government issues the consent. The main requirement is that it must be in line with Georgian legislation as well as Georgia’s Strategy on Occupied Territories and International law. In addition, its intentions must be that of peace and confidence-building in these territories.
The State Ministry of Reintegration shall have 21 working days to issue an objection to project requests and the organizations then have a right to appeal. They are obliged to submit a progress report to the SMR every six months, from the launching of the project.
Another requirement- that they use language deemed acceptable by Georgia, is bound to cause problems with terminology. South Ossetia, for example, is officially described as “the occupied Tskhinvali region” in Georgia.
Besides the objectives and purposes stated by the “modalities”, civil society actors such as international and local NGOs- which are the main targets of regulation- have expressed several criticisms.
Almost all of the organizations trying to work on both sides of the conflict have objected to the new rules. The Institute for War and Peace Reporting (IWPR) said that the limited amount of confidence that NGOs had built up would be shattered if groups in Abkhazia and South Ossetia believed their counterparts were reporting back to the government in Tbilisi.
Local NGOs say the authorities in Tbilisi seem to want to take all activities relating to disputed areas firmly under their wing.
“I don’t know what the real purpose is behind the government’s adaptation of the ‘modalities’, but its practical implementation will not achieve the goals of peace and confidence-building in the conflicting regions of Georgia. There remains a real risk that the government will excessively use the provisions of the ‘modalities’ and they will block the activities of some human rights organizations, as the criteria to asses intended projects are ambiguous and broad,” – says Tamar Khidasheli former chairperson of one of the leading human rights organizations The Georgian Young Lawyers Association.
“Conflict resolution with engagement is a correct and relevant approach, but this regulation impedes the real possibility for such cooperation between conflicting sides,”- said Gogi Khutsishvili, the Director of the International Centre for Conflict and Negotiations.
The Deputy State Minister of Reintegration Davit Rekviashvili responded: “of course we realize the natural interests of NGOs and their protest to establish any control mechanism against free activities in the occupied territories, but the situation is special and the government is exercising its duty to control any threat that may come from activities [taking place] on occupied territories. So, the state interest in this case is much more important than the institutional interests of NGOs”.
The Georgian Young lawyers association also claims that these regulations include ambiguous provisions; it is not exactly clear what activities need approval from the Georgian Government. “The non-exempt activities, as defined by the regulation criteria are rarely or never conducted by NGOs. We see the ‘modalities’ as not prohibiting activities such as the meetings of the conflicting sides, representing inhabitants of occupied regions in local or international courts, and other related activities. So we don’t feel obligated to ask the government to issue consent on the abovementioned activities,”-said Tamar Khidasheli from GYLA.
A different approach is provided by the Deputy Minister of Reintegration: “Modalities establish the obligation of international and local civil society actors to notify the government of all the various activities they are going to implement on occupied territories. The government has a compelling interest to be aware of what the institutions’ purposes are on occupied territories. eg: Are they contrary to peace and the territorial integrity of Georgia or not? It is for this reason that we establish these mechanisms which are intended to prevent all activities in the occupied territories that are not considered to be in line with the state interests of Georgia“.
News
December 13, 2023
Ethnic minorities outside the peace dialogue
November 6, 2023
‘Peace’ agenda of political parties
Popular
Articles
February 13, 2024
Why are Ossetians affected by the conflict unable to regain Georgian citizenship and their property?
