Eurasia Daily Monitor has an in-depth article detailing pressure by Georgian President Saakashivili’s Rose Revolution government on the judiciary in the country.

Widespread allegations about restrictions on judicial independence since the Rose Revolution have received new credibility following sensational confessions by four members of the Georgian Supreme Court. Tamaz Iliashvili, Merab Turava, David Sulakvelidze, and Nino Gvenetadze have publicly accused Kote Kublashvili, chairman of the Supreme Court, and Valery Tsertsvadze, secretary of the Supreme Council of Justice, of exerting political pressure on judges and forcing them to make decisions favoring the government on specific cases.

Currently, the Judicial Discipline Commission under the Supreme Council of Justice is considering “disciplinary action” against these four judges and 18 others who are suspected of misconduct. After the November 2003 Rose Revolution the Supreme Council of Justice, a deliberative body under President Mikheil Saakashvili, was authorized to prosecute and fire judges in case of “disciplinary” abuse. Some analysts allege that the government is using this provision to get rid of troublesome judges.

Five Supreme Court justices resigned on December 6 and most observers believe their departure was forced, rekindling a wave of criticism of the authorities over alleged pressure on judges. “These judges were threatened that, had they refuseed to resign, they would be deprived of any kind of social security, including pensions,” former justice Turava said.

Turava is among those four judges who accuse Kublashvili and Tsertsvadze of bullying judges. Turava said that Kublashvili had tried to induce him to resign in exchange for material comforts after retirement, but when he refused, Turava was slapped with a disciplinary hearing. Both men have denied these allegations.

The same tactic has been applied to the other “dissident” judges. According to an amendment to the law on the Supreme Court of Georgia passed in June 2005, Supreme Court judges who resign before December 31, 2005, will receive a pension equal to their current salary. NGOs and some judges argue that this amendment is designed to clean out judges who refuse to yield to the authorities’ demands to resign. Several judges were reported to have resigned “voluntarily” because they could not endure any further pressure. This method appears to be an efficient mechanism, because very few people can afford to decline a high pension given the current level of unemployment and economic hardship in Georgia. The threat of dismissal forces judges to accept the current situation and carry out political orders, analysts argue.
Ä…Å
Analysts and opposition groups claim that Kublashvili, Tsertstvadze, Prosecutor General Zurab Adeishvili (all Saakashvili’s close confidants), and some members of parliament, including Saakashvili’s closest allies, Giga Bokeria and Nika Gvaramia, are orchestrating a forcible reorganization of the Georgian judicial corps. Bokeria has unequivocally stated that the ruling party intends to purge disgraced judges from the court system.

In the two years since the Rose Revolution, an apparently widespread government practice of taming judges through “disciplinary cases” has evidently tipped the already fragile balance among the judicial, legislative, and executive branches in favor of the executive. Ten years ago Saakashvili, then chair of the parliamentary committee for legal affairs, was unanimously hailed as the “godfather of revolutionary court reform in Georgia.” Now the Georgian court system gravely ill and needs immediate treatment.

I’m certainly a big fan of the Rose Revolution, making it my initial gut reaction to defend the Saakashvili government. But that defense would be based on the ideals of that revolution being inexorably attached to the government’s actions, something that to date has had a chasm between them. Words have so far not translated into concrete action.

While not as bad as his predecessor at his most corrupt, we have seen under Saakashvili the unprecedented centralization of power to the executive. This intense pressure on the judiciary is only one example. It has appeared elsewhere, such as stuffing the Central Election Commission — the body that verifies national election results — with government allies and not allowing the Tblisi mayoral elections to be decided by popular vote. Instead, the mayor is picked by the government.

It’s hard to write something like this as nobody wants to see something idealistic fade away. The same went with earlier pieces on the Orange Revolution. But with more and more hard evidence coming in month after month, now is a good time to bring it up. The West, while correct in cooperating with and aiding the new legitimate government of Georgia, needs to stop being delusional as to the worrying concentration of power in the executive. Charismatic as he is, Saakashvili cannot liberalize the country through the force of his personality alone, and should be concentrating on building independent institutions that will serve to solidify democracy no matter who the leader is.