“According to Article 204(2) Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Georgia, the Public Defender may be nominated by a Parliamentary faction or group of at least six members. Further, Article 35 of the Constitution outlines that the Public Defender is elected by a three-fifths majority of the Parliament.
The SCA is of the view that the process currently outlined in the enabling law is not sufficiently broad and transparent. In particular, it does not:
- require the advertisement of vacancies;
- establish clear and uniform criteria upon which all parties assess the merit of eligible applicants; and
- promote broad consultation and/or participation in the application, screening, selection, and appointment process.
The PDO indicates that it has consistently advocated towards Parliament as well as at the regional and international level for legislative amendments which would establish clear criteria and a transparent selection and appointment process of the Public Defender. This advocacy led to the adoption by Parliament of temporary measures for selection of an Ombudsman which they indicated were in accordance with the Paris Principles. The temporary measures are no longer in place and were not used during the most recent election of the Public Defender.
The SCA reiterates its recommendation that the PDO continue to advocate for the formalisation of a clear, transparent and participatory selection and appointment process for the Public Defender in relevant legislation, regulations or binding administrative guidelines. A process that promotes merit-based selection and ensures pluralism is necessary to ensure the independence of, and public confidence in, the senior leadership of an NHRI.
The SCA refers to Paris Principle B.2 and to its General Observation 1.8 on ‘Selection and appointment of the decision-making body of NHRIs’.”