Repair Georgian Constitution

Our Constitution, the main law of the land, the most cherished achievement of Georgian Identity over the past 21 centuries, has been raped. I rarely use such harsh words, preferring conciliatory tone but today I must be unforgiving. I refuse to soften the blow - it was raped in broad daylight in front of our very eyes. There is nothing to be done about this now other than undo the wrong and comfort it as loving children should do.

 

I found this out several nights ago while rereading it. I read it for the first time about five years after its ratification and found it to be rather dry. As far as constitutions go it’s pretty good though. By now I've had to read half a dozen written constitutions of other western countries  and developed a certain sense for a properly constructed democratic society of our age. Among them the Constitution of United States certainly leads the pack, I am naturally most interested in the legal foundation of the land which governs some surprising details of my everyday life. In many ways I found its Georgian counterpart (1995 version) superior. This was not unexpected given the fact the Georgian constitution was written by the servants of the law not a group of disgruntled slave-owners. While I didn't agree with every single paragraph I accepted it at large. I can see how one could build a successful,  stable society with it as long as the citizens of Georgia actually bother to read it and upheld its principles.

Then I proceeded with reading the latest amendments and that turned out to be a ride. For starters there’s 31 of them of which 26 were passed since 2003. That in itself is rather bothersome – US constitution only has 27 amendments (25 active ones since #21 repeals #18) accumulated over its entire 236 years of history. Even if one were to assume the original 1995 Georgian Constitution was unacceptably inadequate the sheer idea of 83% of its changes coming from a single political force over the period of nine years is very concerning. Written constitution for a nation is like a skeleton for a quadruped – once mature it can’t be altered very often without harming the creature. Its muscles, nerves, fibers, tendons can change, grow, shrink, morph but not the skeleton. Such is the constitution of the land – it is the framework within which all participating parties – political establishments, economic entities, individual citizens, etc. – agree to operate. Altering it at will to suit the whims of time is the violation of this fundamental principal - there’s a reason the Constitution makes it difficult for the executive branch to overstep its authority, for the legal one to neglect its role and for the judiciary to interpret the laws based on political currents. Let any Government tailor the main law of the land as it sees fit and you’ll invariably end up with an autocratic rule of some sort. This is not a possibility, it is an inevitability.

As I went on seeping through these wonderful amendments my confusion slowly grew into an outrage. While most of them sound fairly harmless, subtly readjusting the balance of power here and there, some of them, particularly the ones passed in the latter years, made my hair stand up. I will only bring two of them up here, particularly disturbing ones:

June 29, 2012amendment adds the following statement to paragraph 3:

5. The status and rights and responsibilities of the city of Lasik are defined by an organic law

This is it folks, all of it. If you don’t believe me, please, follow the link and read it yourself. All legit, passed by the parliament and signed by the elected President. If you feel a little dumb-folded trying to fish out its meaning, you’re not alone. I felt the same way trying to understand what in the Pete’s name could this possibly mean? There is no “City of Lasik” in Georgia or anywhere on this fair planet. If this is some subtle reference to the experimental procedure ofremoving layers of eye-skin with a laser, it is lost on me. I naturally asked around, the answers didn't help. It appears the President in his later years has spoken of building some mysterious city of Lasik, Georgian version of El Dorado of sorts. Even if this deranged rumor has some kernel of truth to it, who in their right mind would consider putting something like this in the Constitution of a sovereign nation? More I learn about the background leading to this atrocity more I start to wonder what was exactly these parliamentarians were smoking on June 29th? But hold on to your hats the next one is even more ludicrous. 

May 22, 2012 changes add paragraph 104 stating:

All the individuals holding European Citizenship at the moment of enacting this law who were born in Georgia and have lived in the country for the past five years have a right to participate and vote in the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections of Georgia until January 01, 2014.

All right, lets decipher it – say some guy named Givi was born in USSR in 1960s, he grew up during turbulent seventies listening to The Who then lucked out with the Jewish Exodus of 1981, moved to France and got his French citizenship. When the Iron Curtain came down Givi got all sentimental and moved back to his homeland but never obtained Georgian citizenship. In the eyes of the law Givi is a foreigner no different from any other foreigner. And now Givi can legally be your elected official! Even Prime Minister! How do you like them beans?! Hypothetical you say? Not really, it very much happened (except his name is not Givi).

I can’t find the proper words to express my disdain to these ugly pieces of legislation. I will leave the judgment to you, the reader. If you find it acceptable to live in a state where the ruling party can tailor the Constitution to its needs much like a pretty girl wears different nightgowns, where foreign citizens are allowed to become Prime Ministers and the President is chasing some mysterious El Dorado, I can only shake my head in quite disbelief. If you share my outrage, please, drop a comment at the end of this article. With enough support I pledge to put together a public petition and gather enough signatures to demand for these aberrations to be removed once and for all. I hope even the most ardent proponents of UNM will find it in their hearts to look past party politics and do the right thing.