In the 10th Convocation of Parliament, the legislative body was established as a closed institution, both in terms of access to information and citizen participation. Combating civil society emerged as one of the parliament’s primary priorities, ultimately culminating in the adoption of the so-called "Russian Law."

In May 2024, the Open Government Partnership (OGP) called on [1] the Georgian government to retract the so-called "Russian Law." Subsequently, in October, Georgia’s membership in the OGP was suspended [2].

A study conducted by Transparency International Georgia evaluated the 10th Convocation of Parliament’s activities concerning openness and transparency during its tenure (2020–2024).

The report assesses parliamentary openness and transparency practices, focusing on the Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance operations. The report's conclusion presents recommendations for the incoming 11th Convocation of Parliament.

Key Findings

In a parliamentary republic, transforming the representative body into a closed institution poses significant threats to democratic development and hinders good governance.

During the 10th Convocation, the Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance functioned primarily as a formal structure, failing to address alarming trends of opacity and declining public accountability. The Council’s efforts did not contribute to improving the legislative body’s transparency.

In December 2015, to ensure parliamentary transparency and systematic and coordinated work, the Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance [3] was established by the order of the chairperson of the Parliament of Georgia. As a result of close cooperation between the Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance and the civil sector, a number of necessary steps have been taken [4] over the years. However, the 10th Parliament has actively begun implementing the policy of turning the legislative body into a closed and opaque institution.

In the 10th Convocation of Parliament, the openness, transparency, and accountability of the legislative body have deteriorated in the following areas:

➢  Parliament has become a closed institution for the media and civil society 

·        Media and civil society representatives were unjustifiably denied entry to the parliament building. A security regime was declared when critical issues were being discussed, and entry to the parliament building was prohibited. As a result, civil society and media representatives could not participate in parliamentary activities. The Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance did not respond to this issue;

·        Parliament revoked permanent permits for representatives of non-governmental organizations that monitor parliament, thereby worsening the practice of cooperation and external monitoring of the people's representative body;

·        According to the trend of recent years, parliament supported only legislative proposals submitted by state institutions, which made an essential mechanism for citizen engagement meaningless;

·        The accreditation rules for the media were tightened;

·        Parliament no longer released timely and complete public information. It was prohibited to release information that could serve as a basis for public criticism of members of parliament (MPs) (e.g., the number of speeches made by MPs);

·        Parliament no longer reviewed the reports of accountable bodies.

➢  Parliament has also worsened the standards of accountability and openness through legislation

·        Amendments to the Rules of Procedure of parliament have abolished the obligation to discuss important reports at a plenary session (e.g., reports of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Special Investigation Service, personal data protection, and public information). Reports are only discussed at a session if the leading committee, bureau, or faction requests it. The obligation to discuss committee reports at a plenary session has also been abolished;

·        A committee chairperson and parliamentary majority decide on the speakers' order and the speech's duration at the session. This is a step towards restricting the right of opposition MPs to speak.

➢   Parliament did not enact the Code of Ethics

·        Parliament has become a place of confrontation and insults, and the use of hate speech against female MPs is worth particular mentioning;

·        The Code of Ethics, which did not provide effective sanctions for unethical behavior, has not been enacted. The composition of the Ethics Council has not been established to date.

➢  The Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance has become a formal structural unit

·        The Council did not respond to any of the pressing issues related to the openness, accountability, and transparency of parliament;

·        The involvement of civil society in the Council's activities was only formal;

·        The Council's action plan was developed without the engagement of civil society organizations and did not contain significant commitments. However, parliament was unable to implement this plan either.

Recommendations for the Next Parliament  

●   In a parliamentary republic, the openness and accountability of the people's representative body are of paramount importance for the democratic development of the country. Parliament should meet the highest standards of openness, transparency, and accountability and control the implementation of open governance by the executive branch;

●   Parliament should promote public involvement in parliamentary activities; the procedure for submitting legislative proposals should be simplified, and parliament should consider legislative proposals not formally but substantively, with the involvement of the author of the proposal;

●   The existing rules for media accreditation should be changed so that the media can work in parliament without hindrance and provide information to the public;

●   The parliament's Rules of Procedure should be revised, and the norms regarding the consideration of reports of bodies accountable to parliament should be changed. Reports should be considered by parliament at plenary sessions;

●   Regarding entry into the parliament building, it is essential not to refuse citizens access unreasonably. Parliament should facilitate the involvement of civil society and the media in the activities of the legislative body and should not create artificial barriers. The Parliament of Georgia should simplify the procedure for citizens to enter the building. Citizens should be able to enter the parliament building without a pass after passing a security check;

●   The Ethics Council should be fully and promptly staffed in parliament to give the approved Code of Ethics and the sanctions provided for therein a compelling character and a means of implementation. Effective response mechanisms should be written down in the Code of Ethics;

●   The Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance and its members should respond to the deterioration of the openness and transparency of parliamentary activities, and their activities should not be formal. To exercise oversight, the Council should be interested in the current situation in the executive government sector and hold public hearings;

●   The Standing Parliamentary Council for Open Governance should focus on ambitious activities and reforms. The process of implementing the Council’s action plan should be active, including the work of working groups and individual MPs. The Council should fully fulfill those ambitious commitments that will bring tangible results in improving parliament's openness.