Open Governance and Anti-Corruption

13 February 2017 image

Comments of the Institute for Development of Freedom of Information on the 2014-2015 National Action Plan Final Self-Assessment Report of the Open Government Partnership Georgia

The Open Government Partnership (OGP) Georgia’s National Action Plan (NAP) 2014-2015 was created through intense cooperation between the government of Georgia and the civil society. The NAP included 27 Commitments (29 actions) that were distributed among 16 responsible institutions. IDFI was actively involved in monitoring of the action plan commitments and provided the OGP Forum Secretariat with regular assessments about the progress of activities. 

9 February 2017 image

Public Defender Recommends Ministry of Justice to Cease Violating IDFI’s Rights

On January 31st, 2017, the Public Defender of Georgia held that the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and 11 legal entities of public law (LEPL) operating within its system violated the right of N(N)LE Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI). According to the Public Defender, the state entities failed to fulfil their legal obligation to disclose public information.

9 February 2017 image

IDP Families Waiting for Permanent Homes - Limited State Resources or Lack of Political Will

As of January 2017, 37,000 IDP households in Georgia are expecting state assistance. According to the Ministry of Refugees, GEL 1.5 billion is needed to provide these families with permanent housing.

7 February 2017 image

Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO) – Fourth Evaluation Round

Georgia is the member of GRECO from September, 1999. During its 17 years of membership Georgia underwent four evaluation rounds. The last evaluation round was launched in 2012. The GRECO Evaluation Team (GET), within the scope of fourth round of evaluation, conducted on-site visit to Georgia in June 2016. The evaluation report was adopted in December, 2016 and was published in January, 2017.

30 January 2017 image

Field Meeting of the Permanent Parliamentary Council on Open and Transparent Governance

The field meeting of the Permanent Parliamentary Council on Open and Transparent Governance (Council) and the Consultative Group under the Council was held at “Crowne Plaza Hotel”, Borjomi. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss issues related to parliamentary openness and to plan future steps.

26 January 2017 image

Parliament Chairperson Approved the New Composition of the Permanent Parliamentary Council on Open and Transparent Governance

New Members of the Council are: Irina Pruidze (as the Chairman) –  from “Georgian Dream”, Irakli Kobakhidze-“Georgian Dream”, Tamar Chugoshvili-“Georgian Dream”, Kakha Kuchava-“Georgian Dream”, Guguli Magradze-“Georgian Dream”, Giorgi Tugushi-“European Georgia-for Better Future”, Otar Kakhidze-“European Georgia-for Better Future” and Emzar Kvitsiani-“Georgian Patriots”.

10 January 2017 image

Statistics of Cutting Down Trees in Tbilisi Due to Constructions

The number of trees being cut down in Tbilisi in 2016 for being damaged has increased 5 fold compared to previous years, raising questions about the procedure for checking trees.

28 December 2016 image

OGP Awards and its Winners

The Open Government Award was established in 2014. It is aimed at identifying the best initiative in the implementation of transparency and accountability by Open Government Partnership members. Each year a different OGP challenge is chosen for the award.

21 December 2016 image

Optimization of the Website of the Parliament of Georgia with International Standards of Accessibility

The Georgian Parliament took the commitment to make its website accessible to people with disabilities within the framework of the Open Parliament Action Plan 2015-2016.

14 December 2016 image

2016 Crime Data and Access to Information in Georgia

The incompleteness and inconsistency with which the Ministry of Internal Affairs has been publishing crime data raises questions that the Ministry is purposefully trying to keep the public in the dark about the actual levels of crime in the country. In addition, the data that is published has often been contradictory, which damages public trust towards official statistics on crime.