Two researches have been published today by the Open Society Georgia Foundation and the Free University. One reviews the detention standards of a person in the Georgian legislation, and another analyzes the crimes against the judiciary, such as false denunciation, false testimony, etc.

Research of a person detention standards and practices

The research revealed a number of shortcomings in the legislation and practice concerning the detention procedures; definition of rights to a detained person; implementation of investigation activities; justification of relevant decisions made by the court and the prosecutor's office; medical examination of a person; preventive measures and other problematic issues.

The authors of the research have prepared recommendations on the following issues:

• Placement of a detained person in temporary detention isolators - It is not indicated in the legislation that a detained person shall be transferred to the temporary detention isolator, where his / her security will be ensured and he / she will not be subjected to pressure or ill-treatment by law enforcement officials. Accordingly, law enforcers can detain a person in a police station for quite a long time, where he /she can be subjected to pressure and ill-treatment. Accordingly, it is recommended to immediately transfer a detained person to the temporary detention isolator.
• Issue of transferring a copy of an arrest report to the detainee - In practice, a copy of an arrest report is very rarely explained and transferred to a detainee. However, this is the basis for his / her immediate release. Consequently, if the detainee did not have a copy of an arrest report at the moment of placing him / her in the temporary detention isolator, the person shall not be detained in the isolator. This report ensures that the copy of an arrest report is honestly transferred to a person by the law enforcement officers, which, in turn, will enable the latter to get acquainted with his / her rights.
• Medical examination of a detained person - Often, detainees do not know about this right. Consequently, we consider it appropriate to add the clause to this Article, according to which the detainee's refusal to medical examination shall be certified by a separate report. This procedure will facilitate effective implementation of this right.
• Explanation of the right to protection for a detained person - The right to have a lawyer, including the attorney at the state expense, is not explained to a detained person if he / she belong to the category of socially vulnerable. In order to eliminate this problem, the legislation shall be amended and the law enforcement officers shall be obliged to draw up a separate report on the explanation of the right to a lawyer and to be protected at the expense of the state.
• Justification of the court decision - The study of cases has shown a tendency when one and the same judge was making a different decision regarding the identical factual circumstances. In addition, there are cases in which one and the same prosecutor have submitted textually identical and unreasonable petitions with the demand to detain a person, which is also reviewed and satisfied by one and the same judge.

Taking into account the above-mentioned, petition submitted on the detention of a person shall be substantiated by the prosecutor, and in the case of the arrest or detention of a person, decisions made by the judges of the first instance and appellate courts shall be foreseeable and justified.

The recommendations presented as a result of the research will assist the Parliament in rectifying the existing deficiencies in the legislation, and will help the Prosecutor's Office, the defense side and the court in establishing a uniform and effective practice.

Crimes against the Justice

Analysis of legislation and practice related to crimes against justice revealed some problematic issues. In particular, there are some gaps in the applicable legislation and inconsistent court practice. The competence and qualification of the participants of the criminal proceedings are questionable, and the decisions of the prosecution and courts are not sufficiently justified.

Consequently, the authors of the research have elaborated recommendations according to which amendments shall be introduced to the legislation, and the uniform practices shall be introduced by the law enforcement agencies, prosecutor's office, the defense and courts in regard to these crimes.

Particular attention shall be paid to the part of the report describing the possibility of imposing a responsibility of a person accused due to committing a crime against the justice. According to the recommendation of the authors of the research, it is unacceptable to take out a process against a person accused due to this action, and it is necessary to introduce relevant legislative guarantees regarding this issue.