COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the document Fourth progress report on Georgia's implementation of the action plan on visa liberalisation
Date: 2015-12-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: Georgia, application of the law, biometrics, border control, fight against crime, fundamental rights, judicial cooperation, migration control, right of asylum

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 18.12.2015  
SWD(2015) 299 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Accompanying the document 

Fourth progress report on Georgia's implementation of the action plan on visa 
liberalisation 

{COM(2015) 684 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
1. INTRODUCTION 

This  Commission  staff  working  document  (hereinafter  CSWD)  accompanies  the  fourth 
progress report on Georgia's implementation of the visa liberalisation action plan (VLAP).1  

The  CSWD,  together  with  the  report,  provides  a  detailed  analysis  of  the  most  recent 
developments  relating  to  the  second-phase  VLAP  benchmarks  concerning  effective  and 
sustainable  implementation  of  relevant  measures.  The  annex  to  the  CSWD  includes  an 
updated assessment of potential migratory and security impacts on the European Union (EU) 
resulting from visa liberalisation for Georgia.  

The  factual  information  and  assessment  included  in  the  CSWD  are  based  on  information 
gathered  during  the  EU  evaluation  missions  that  took  place  in  Georgia  in  September  and 
October  2015,  which  involved  experts  from  EU  Member  States,  the  Commission  and  the 
European  External  Action  Service  (EEAS),  as  well  as  the  EU  Delegation  to  Georgia. 
Additional information was obtained through the progress report submitted by Georgia on 17 
August  2015,  its  updated  versions  received  by  the  Commission  on  22  October  2015,  and 
related communications between August and October 2015.  

The  CSWD  follows  the  VLAP  structure.  In  the  sections  corresponding  to  individual  VLAP 
blocks, the CSWD lists all the benchmarks from the second phase and it describes the state of 
implementation  of  those  that  were  not  deemed  to  have  been  achieved  at  the  time  of 
publication of the third progress report, on 8 May 2015.  

2.  ASSESSMENT  OF  THE  IMPLEMENTATION  OF  THE  VLAP  UNDER  THE 
REMAINING BENCHMARKS 

2.1. Block 1: Document security, including biometrics 

The  document  security  benchmark,  which  was  deemed  to  have  been  achieved  in  the  third 
progress report2, has remained achieved. 

2.2. Block 2: Integrated Border Management, Migration Management, and Asylum 

2.2.1.  Integrated border management 

The integrated border management benchmark, which was deemed to have been achieved in 
the third progress report, has remained achieved. 

2.2.2.  Migration management 

(cid:190)  Continued  effective  implementation  of  the  EU-Georgia  readmission  agreement,  as 
well  as  relevant  Georgia's  readmission  agreements  with  third  countries,  and  of 
measures providing for the sustainable reintegration of Georgian citizens (returning 
voluntarily or not) 

1 COM(2015) 684 final. 
2 COM(2015) 199 final. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
The  joint  committee  of  the  EU-Georgia  readmission  agreement,  which  met  on  13  October 
2015,  confirmed  the  continuous  effective  implementation  of  its  provisions.  Since  the  entry 
into  force  of  the  agreement,  on  1  March  2011,  until  August  2015,  4587  decisions  to  accept 
people  have  been  adopted  and  320  have  been  refused.  The  rejection  ratio  of  readmission 
applications has been falling, from 9.9% in 2011 to 3.1% in the first eight months of 2015.  

The introduction of an electronic readmission management system in 2014 has significantly 
facilitated communication on readmission cases. Thirteen EU Member States are now using 
this  web-based  portal  for  uploading  and  processing  readmission  requests,  compared  to  only 
three in 2014.  

In  the  area  of  reintegration  of  Georgian  citizens,  activities  have  been  centralised  under  the 
management  of  the  Ministry  of  Internally  Displaced  Persons  from  the  Occupied  Territories, 
Accommodation  and  Refugees  (MRA).  The  Department  for  Migration,  Repatriation  and 
Refugee Issues within this ministry is responsible for the implementation of state policies in 
this area and for coordinating the process at national level. In order to ensure the maximum 
efficiency  and  sustainability  of  the  programmes  implemented  by  different  ministries,  each 
state agency has to inform the others about services offered to the Georgian returnees.  

The  overall  policy  on  reintegration  of  Georgian  nationals  has  been  redesigned  in  the 
framework of the 2016-2020 Migration Strategy, which is to be approved by the end of the 
year.  The  strategy  defines  as  a  general  objective  the  refinement  of  Georgia's  reintegration 
policy and the expansion of related programmes. This general objective is broken down into 
nine  specific  objectives,  which  include  ensuring  the  necessary  funding,  increasing  the 
Mobility  Centres'  capacities,  creating  a  registration  system  for  returning  Georgian  nationals 
and improving data processing and risk analysis.  

To  strengthen  the  reintegration  support  provided  to  returned  Georgian  migrants,  Georgia 
established  a  state  programme  on  reintegration,  financed  from  State  budget,  amounting  to 
GEL 400.000 for 2015. State grants have been issued to six NGOs to implement projects in 
various  fields,  such  as  promotion  of  paid  internships  for  returnees,  provision  of  temporary 
accommodation,  or  provision  of  medical  care.  These  services  are  similar  to  the  support 
provided through the four Mobility Centres that were established in Georgia within the EU-
funded  project  'Reinforcing  the  capacities  of  the  Government  of  Georgia  in  border  and 
migration  management'.  To  ensure  complementarity  of  the  services  offered  under  the  state 
programme and by the Mobility Centres, the MRA is now the point of entry for any returned 
migrant  applying  for  reintegration  assistance.  Once  the  EU-funded  project  for  reintegration 
assistance is phased out, the Mobility Centres will become subordinate to the Government of 
Georgia.   

Since  August  2015,  a  new  analytical  department  within  the  MRA  is  responsible  for 
establishing  the  analytical  reporting  system  in  respect  of  returned  Georgian  migrants.  The 
objective  is  to  consolidate  data  collected  by  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs  on  readmitted 
persons,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  data  of  the  Ministry  of  Foreign  Affairs  on  deported  and 
voluntary returned migrants, on the other hand, to estimate the overall number of returnees. 
The  system  will  also  contain  data  on  their  educational  level,  qualifications  and  professional 
skills and their needs for reintegration. The risk analysis system of the MRA, which will be 
part of the comprehensive risk analysis system that is being created on the institutional level, 
will process the statistical data on returnees and identify the related risks.   

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(cid:190)  Effective  implementation  of  legal  framework  for  migration  management,  including 
provision of administrative structures with adequate human and financial resources 
with clear competences for all aspects of migration management, as well as effective 
cooperation between relevant agencies 

Georgia continued the implementation of its 2013-2015 Migration Strategy and Action Plan. 
Almost all of the 100 activities envisaged have been implemented and the next Strategy and 
action plan for the period 2016-2020 will be approved by the end of 2015.    

Raising  awareness  among  the  Georgian  population  as  regards  the  opportunities  for  legal 
migration  and  the  possible  dangers  of  irregular  migration  was  among  the  objectives  of  the 
2013-2015  Migration  Strategy  and  Action  Plan.  An  info-campaign  'Legal  Migration  –  Best 
Choice' was launched in 2013. In this framework, the State Commission on Migration Issues 
(SCMI)  finalised  the  'Legal  Migration  Guidebook',  which  is  a  comprehensive  information 
document covering both sides of legal migration, publicly available on various state agencies' 
and NGOs' websites. The guidebook on legal emigration was published in March 2015, while 
the immigration part was published in July 2015, after the last legislative changes in this field. 

The  'Legal  Migration  –  Best  Choice'  campaign  was  complemented  by  an  information  and 
communication action plan on the EU-Georgia VLAP for the period of July-December 2015. 
The action plan lists concrete activities to be carried out: meetings with people in the capital 
as well as in the regions; thematic seminars for representatives of central and regional media, 
as  well  as  of  central  and  local  governments;  and  an  information  campaign  (video  clips,  TV 
and radio programmes, information leaflets). According to the Office of the State Minister on 
European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, which coordinates this information campaign, around 
200 events have taken place so far in Tbilisi and  in the regions,  reaching  more than 25.000 
Georgian citizens. Communication on the rights and obligations of Georgian citizens under a 
future  visa-free  regime  with  the  EU  is  also  ensured  through  video  clips,  social  media  and 
information leaflets.  

The  Office  of  the  State  Minister  of  Georgia  for  Diaspora  Issues  is  also  involved  in  the 
information  dissemination  process  by  organising  and  participating  in  diaspora  meetings  and 
by  updating  the  Georgian  diaspora  website  with  relevant  information.  In  2015,  it  organised 
seven  such  meetings  in  EU  Member  States,  in  which  over  2000  diaspora  members 
participated, and where relevant information on migration and reintegration possibilities was 
disseminated.  

EU-funded projects such as ENIGMMA or 'Capacity Building of the Government of Georgia 
in  Border  and  Migration  Management'  supported  several  awareness-raising  activities  and  a 
new  information  campaign  on  the  prevention  of  irregular  migration  is  being  financed  by 
'2014-2017  EU  Integration  and 
Belgium.  Further  activities  are  planned  under  the 
Communication Strategy' and the '2016-2020 Migration Strategy'. 

As  regards  the  main  legislative  developments,  the  'Law  on  the  legal  status  of  aliens  and 
stateless persons' was amended on 8 May 2015, extending the visa-free stay from 90 days to 
one full year. On 7 August 2015, the Government adopted a Resolution on the conditions of 
employment  by  a  local  employer  of  a  labour  immigrant  and  performance  of  paid  labour 
activities by such immigrant. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
(cid:190)  Establishment  and  regular  updating  of  Georgia's  Migration  Profile,  and  effective 

analysis of data on migration stocks and flows 

Georgia's Migration Profile for 2015 was prepared under the coordination of SCMI and will 
be approved by the end of 2015. It is structured around four parts: migratory trends, impact of 
migration,  migration  management  and  key  findings  and  recommendations.  The  Migration 
Profile will be available on the websites of SCMI and of other agencies at the beginning of 
2016 and will be published in both English and Georgian. It will be updated every two years.  

(cid:190)  Consistent  implementation  of  an  effective  methodology  on  inland  detection  of 
irregular  migrants,  risk  analysis  (including  the  reporting  of  relevant  agencies  and 
analysis  on  all  administrative  levels),  and  investigation  of  cases  of  organised 
facilitated  irregular  migration,  including  effective  cooperation  between  relevant 
agencies 

Irregular migrants in the country are detected either through routine checks carried out by the 
police, or on the basis of information provided by state authorities. The Minister of Internal 
Affairs  approved  on  15  October  2015  a  standard  operational  procedure  for  the  detection  of 
irregular migrants. If it is established that an alien is illegally staying in Georgia and there is 
no  ground  for  detention,  the  person  has  to  appear  at  the  Migration  Department  within  a 
maximum period of five days. If he/she fails to appear at the Migration Department without 
justifiable  reason,  he/she  will  be  subject  to  detention.  From  1  July  to  30  September  2015, 
there were 24 cases of illegal aliens detected by the police. 

The Concept of Migration Risk Analysis System, together with its Action Plan for 2015-2017, 
was approved by SCMI on 25 September 2015. It aims at extending the risk analysis concept, 
currently limited to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, to all migration fields.  

To this end, seven state agencies will be involved in gathering and processing information for 
risk  analysis  purposes:  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs,  State  Security  Service,  Ministry  of 
Internally  Displaced  Persons  from  the  Occupied  Territories,  Accommodation  and  Refugees, 
Ministry  of  Foreign  Affairs,  Ministry  of  Labour,  Health  and  Social  Affairs,  the  Ministry  of 
Justice’s  Public  Service  Development  Agency,  State  Security  and  Crisis  Management 
Council's Office. The resultant analytical reports will cover all migration-related risks, in the 
areas  of  regular  or  irregular  migration,  border  crossing  and  organised  crime  related  issues, 
asylum,  return  and  reintegration  of  Georgian  citizens,  integration  of  foreigners  and  internal 
migration. The reports will serve as practical tools in identifying risks, forecasting threats and 
establishing adequate measures in this regard. 

The overall migration risk analysis will be supported by a set of electronic tools: the Unified 
Migration Analytical System (UMAS). UMAS will ensure the collection of data from various 
state agencies on immigration, emigration and internal migration. The EU has contributed to 
the establishment of UMAS through its project 'Reinforcing the Capacities of the Government 
of  Georgia  in  Border  and  Migration  Management'.  The  tender  for  purchasing  required 
hardware and software was announced in September 2015 and it is expected that the system 
will be tested by mid-2016. 

(cid:190)  Provision of adequate infrastructure (including detention centres) and strengthening 
of responsible bodies to ensure, according to EU and international standards and in 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
full respect of migrants' human rights, effective expulsion of illegally staying and/or 
transiting third-country nationals from the territory of Georgia 

Between September 2014 and September 2015, 34 return decisions were issued in Georgia, 21 
of which were issued after 1 July 2015, when the 'Law on legal status of aliens and stateless 
persons'  fully  entered  into  force.  During  the  same  period,  18  aliens  were  detained  in  the 
Temporary Accommodation Centre. 

2.2.3.  Asylum policy 

(cid:190)  Effective  implementation  of  asylum  legislation,  including  provision  of  adequate 
infrastructure  and  strengthening  of  the  responsible  bodies  (staff,  funding, 
training programmes), in particular in the area of asylum procedures, reception 
of asylum seekers, refugees and other persons in need of international protection, 
protection of their rights and dignity 

To facilitate access to asylum procedures, the Joint Order N1033-N2975 was amended on 23 
December 2014. Previously, asylum seekers were not explicitly mentioned in the legislative 
framework  as  a  category  that  may  be  granted  a  visa  on  humanitarian  grounds.  This 
shortcoming  has  been  remedied  with  the  new  amendment,  which  specifically  provides  for 
issuing  of  humanitarian  visas  to  asylum  seekers  by  the  border  authorities.  Such  a  visa  was 
granted on 8 October 2015 to a Pakistani citizen who landed at Tbilisi international airport. 
Other positive changes in the legislation include the guarantee, in the Criminal Code, of non-
penalisation  for  illegal  entry  of  asylum  seekers,  as  well  as  the  abolishment  of  a  pre- 
registration procedure for asylum applications. 

The  procedure  for  determination  of  refugee  status  is  being  implemented  by  the  MRA. 
However,  the  last  progress  report  picked  out  the  high  number  of  rejections  based  on 
undisclosed  security  concerns  by  the  State  Security  Agency.  It  was  recommended  that  the 
MRA make reasoned decisions on the cases independently and strictly on individual merits. 
Consequently, Article 25 of the Law on Refugee and Humanitarian status has been amended 
and now specifies the  grounds  under which an application can be rejected for state security 
purposes,  namely  when  there  is  a  reasonable  ground  to  believe  that  the  asylum  seeker  has 
connections  with  armed  forces  hostile  to  Georgia,  foreign  intelligence  services,  terrorist  or 
other criminal organisations. This article also obliges the State Security Agency to provide the 
MRA with minimum information about asylum seekers’ potential threat to state security but 
the applicants themselves have no access to the classified information.  

A  backlog  management  strategy  has  been  developed  to  reduce  the  high  number  of  pending 
cases. First, clear guidelines were drafted for the Donbass region in Ukraine, for Yezidi who 
have  fled  Daesh-controlled  territory  in  Iraq  and  for  Sunnis  out  of  Iraq.  These  guidelines, 
which introduce simplified procedures, together with increased specialisation of caseworkers, 
led  to  a  significant  decrease  of  the  backlog,  from  1174  pending  cases  in  March  2015  to  a 
normal  workload  of  approximately  200  cases  in  October  2015.  Second,  a  new  provision  of 
Decree  No  100  'On  the  Procedures  for  Granting  Refugee  or  Humanitarian  Status'  envisages 
the  setting  up  of  a  commission  that  can,  among  other  things,  decide  on  relevant 
methodological guidelines and identify the need for additional human and financial resources. 
Finally,  a  new  Article  5  of  the  'Law  on  Refugees  and  Humanitarian  Status'  was  introduced, 
enabling the use of the prima facie principle in case of massive influx of asylum seekers. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In the last months, MRA also took measures to monitor the quality of the handling of cases. 
Besides establishing a separate Quality Control and Training Unit, which will identify needs 
in  the  field  of  research  and  plan  training  for  its  staff  as  of  1  January  2016,  MRA  adopted 
procedural  quality  indicators  for  the  filing  system,  the  application  procedure,  interview 
documents and assessment. The recent introduction of the recording of personal interviews is 
welcomed in this regard to evaluate the quality of interviews.  

Training  may  contribute  to  better  implementation  of  the  procedure  for  determination  of 
refugee  status.  The  MRA  staff  has  participated  in  various  training  activities  organised  by 
organisations  such  as  UNHCR  and  ICMPD.  The  MRA  has  already  offered  to  give  its 
caseworkers  internal  trainings,  based  on  national  needs  and  given  by  national  staff.  Its  new 
Quality  Control  and  Training  Unit  will  be  in  charge  of  developing  the  national  training 
programme.  In  the  meantime,  and  to  support  the  work  of  the  Quality  Control  and  Training 
Unit, a migration training manual was adopted on 29 September 2015. 

Caseworkers  were  briefed  on  basic  principles  of  country  of  origin  information  (COI)  in  a 
workshop, and regular meetings were organised on recent developments in the main countries 
of origin. Moreover, a new database that can be consulted independently by all caseworkers 
contains country of origin information and enables the COI unit to post questions on specific 
countries, which will be answered by specialists. The MRA has working arrangements with 
several EU Member States, including for example direct access to the German COI database. 
It should be noted that the legislative framework was amended to guarantee the independence 
of the COI unit and clearly distinguish between COI and policy products.     

In case of a negative decision, an asylum seeker now has 15 days to lodge an appeal before 
the court. The previous 10-day deadline was considered as too short given the vulnerability of 
the  applicant,  and  has  therefore  been  prolonged  through  an  amendment  to  the  Code  on 
administrative procedures. The draft law on asylum that will enter into force as from next year 
provides  for  an  appeal  period  of  30  days.  In  addition,  the  maximum  processing  time  in  the 
appeal phase has been shortened to two months. The 'Law on free legal aid' was modified on 
29  July  2015  to  give  asylum  seekers  access  to  qualified  and  free  legal  assistance  and 
representation in court.  The new provisions will enter into force on 1 January 2016. The help 
provided by the Legal Aid Service will be the same as for Georgian citizens.  

As regards infrastructure, a new wing of the Temporary Accommodation Centre for asylum 
seekers in Martkopi will open in January 2016, increasing the total capacity to 132 persons. 

(cid:190)  Integration  of  refugees  and  beneficiaries  of  international  protection,  ensuring 
their  capacity  to  self-sustain,  to  access  public  services  and  social  rights  and  to 
integrate in Georgia, including access to travel documents under the legislation 

Georgia has taken further steps to address integration issues, for example by giving refugees 
vouchers  to  receive  vocational  training  or  facilitating  access  of  minors  to  the  general 
education  system.  The  integration  of  asylum  seekers  is  part  of  the  2016-2020  Migration 
Strategy. The accompanying Action Plan will identify the financial needs for carrying out the 
planned activities.   

Naturalisation  is  considered  as  the  most  durable  solution  to  integrate  refugees  and  stateless 
persons.  The  legislative  framework  in  place  since  2009  provides  procedures  for  granting 
Georgian citizenship to refugees. A refugee can address to the relevant Georgian authorities a 
7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
request for granting of citizenship by naturalisation either under the ordinary procedure or by 
way  of  exception.  The  new  law  on  citizenship  introduced  Georgian  language  knowledge, 
knowledge of history and basic principle of law as mandatory requirements for naturalisation. 
A  special  educational  programme  was  developed  in  2015  to  provide  Georgian  language 
courses for asylum seekers, refugees and humanitarian status holders. 

2.3. Block 3: Public Order and Security  

2.3.1.  Preventing and fighting organised crime, terrorism and corruption 

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  the  legislation,  national  strategy  and  action  plan  on 
preventing and fighting organised crime including effective coordination between 
the relevant authorities, as well as conducting effective investigation, prosecution 
and confiscation of proceeds of crime 

The  organised  crime  benchmark,  which  was  deemed  to  have  been  achieved  in  the  third 
progress report, has remained achieved. 

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  legislation,  national  strategy  and  action  plan  on  addressing 
trafficking  in  human  beings,  including  effective  coordination  between  state 
agencies,  effective  protection  of  victims  of  trafficking,  in  particular  children,  as 
well as effective measures to prosecute human traffickers and users of services of 
trafficking  victims;  provision  of  adequate  infrastructures  and  funds  ensuring 
decent  reception  and  protection  of  the  rights  and  dignity  of  trafficking  victims, 
and supporting their social and professional reintegration 

The protection of victims of trafficking in human beings (THB) is mainly ensured through a 
dedicated State Fund. The State Fund for Protection of and Assistance to (Statutory) Victims 
of  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings,  established  in  2006,  is  responsible  for  the  two  victim 
shelters  and  the  financing  of  support  measures.  All  victims,  whether  they  are  considered  as 
'statutory victims' by the law or not, have access to the services provided by the State Fund, 
including a three-month stay in one of the shelters and  payment of a compensation of GEL 
1.000.  

The shelters are equipped to receive children and are supported in this by the Social Services 
of the Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs. Social workers are required to draw up 
an individual rehabilitation plan for each child and to monitor its implementation. Two posts 
of  'babysitters'  have  recently  been  filled  to  take  care  of  minor  THB  victims  and  children 
accompanying  their  parents,  as  well  as  to  support  them  in  their  education.  Unaccompanied 
THB  victims  are  under  the  legal  guardianship  of  the  Social  Service  Agency  and  may  be 
placed in family-type care or accommodated in a shelter.    

The State Fund resources have been increased and a psychologist was recruited for the Tbilisi 
shelter.  Every  beneficiary  of  the  shelter  is  subject  to  mandatory  medical  screening  upon 
arrival and can then decide whether she/he wants to receive medical assistance. On 7 August 
2015, the new Director of the State Fund approved a new offer form, which lists all available 
services in three languages (Georgian, Russian and English) and provides for the reason to be 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
given  if  a  service  is  refused.  In  general,  the  State  Fund  resources  are  deemed  to  be  flexible 
and responsive to the varying needs of victims.  

A  governmental  decree  of  2  March  2015  established  a  Labour  Conditions  Inspection 
Department within the Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs. Twenty-five inspectors 
have  recently  been  recruited  from  a  variety  of  different  professional  backgrounds.  They 
received  intensive  training  including  THB  and  forced  labour,  with  the  support  of  the 
International Labour Organisation. By the end of November 2015, the inspectors had visited 
75  (state  and  private)  companies  and  the  first  recommendations  on  occupational  and  health 
issues  had  reached  the  relevant  employers.  The  current  system  is  being  reviewed  by  the 
Ministry  of  Labour,  Health  and  Social  Affairs,  together  with  NGOs  and  international 
organisations  to  introduce  sanctions,  in  compliance  with  the  standards  of  the  International 
Labour  Organisation.  Furthermore,  a  Memorandum  of  Understanding  was  signed  on  13 
August 2015 between the Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Affairs and the Ministry of 
Internal Affairs with clear arrangements for information sharing and reporting of cases. 

The  Central  Criminal  Police  Department  (CCPD)  of  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs  is  the 
law-enforcement agency responsible for investigating THB. Four mobile groups complement 
the  work  of  the  central  and  regional  agencies.  Between  January  and  July  2015,  the  mobile 
groups  inspected  52  high-risk  organisations,  including  venues  used  for  prostitution  such  as 
bars, baths, saunas and hotels with clubs. The officers also liaise with childcare institutions, 
tourism  and  employment  agencies  and  respond  to  hotline  enquiries.  Another  source  of 
information  is  the  interviewing  of  deported  people  coming  through  Tbilisi  international 
airport and the Sarpi border crossing point. Between January and October 2015, 1.265 persons 
were interviewed at the airport and 487 at the border crossing point. Out of 17 investigations 
led  between  January  and  September  2015,  11  resulted  from  proactive  activity.  Seven  cases 
concerned labour exploitation, nine related to sexual exploitation, and one to the selling of a 
minor.  

Furthermore, with a view to securing the testimony of buyers of the services of THB victims, 
Georgia  amended  Article  143  of  its  Criminal  Code  on  24  July  2015.  Pursuant  to  the  new 
provision,  such  persons  may  be  relieved  of  criminal  liability  if  they  make  a  voluntary 
confession  and  cooperate  with  the  investigation.  While  the  main  objective  is  to  tackle 
traffickers, the law must be implemented rigorously to avoid a situation where buyers of the 
services of THB victims face no consequences for their actions. 

Both the CCPD and the State Fund have separate hotlines specifically dedicated to THB. In 
September 2015, the hotlines received respectively 133 and 146 calls. The number of calls is 
tangible  evidence  that  public  awareness  measures  are  increasing  concern  about  the  issue  of 
THB  across  the  country.  The  need  for  two  separate  hotlines  was  confirmed  by  NGOs.  The 
State  Fund  provides  inter  alia  useful  information  on  preventive  measures  and  legal 
consultation on labour contracts. The risk with a single hotline operated by the State Fund and 
law enforcement is that those who are not willing to cooperate with the police may not use the 
hotline at all.  

Data  are  now  collected  and  shared  in  a  single  database,  which  has  been  developed  by  the 
Inter-Agency  Coordination  Council  on  Combating  Trafficking  in  Human  Beings.  The  new 
database contains extensive information including details on victims, witnesses and suspected 
traffickers, nominated officers and contacts, stages of cases and outcomes. It is available to all 
key agencies in a secured way.   

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  allocation  of  police  attachés  has  been  reviewed  to  ensure  that  countries  highlighted  as 
threats  in  terms  of  trafficking  are  covered,  i.e.  Azerbaijan,  Kyrgyzstan,  Uzbekistan  and 
Armenia.  Moreover,  in  the  first  nine  months  of  2015,  five  mutual  legal  assistance  requests 
came from Turkey and one from Azerbaijan. 

(cid:190)  Effective implementation of the legal framework and national strategy and action 

plan on preventing and fighting corruption  

The  Anti-Corruption  Council  (ACC),  which  was  established  in  2008,  continues  to  facilitate 
the  development  of  state  anti-corruption  policy  and  the  fight  against  corruption.  The 
Government approved the new Anti-Corruption Strategy and the 2015-2016 Anti-Corruption 
Action Plan adopted by the ACC on 20 April 2015. The Action Plan includes all the relevant 
components: strategic priority, results and respective indicators, activities (indicating specific 
targets  to  be  fulfilled),  specific  deadlines  (indicating  both  month  and  year),  responsible 
agencies/partners,  risks  and  budget  (indicating  amounts  allocated  for  each  specific  measure 
and amount of donor support as well as financial gap).  

(cid:190)  Ensuring  the  independence  and  efficient  functioning  (including  analytical 
capacity) of anti-corruption bodies, including the Anti-Corruption Inter-Agency 
Coordination Council; ensuring effective measures for addressing corruption in 
areas/sectors identified as being most vulnerable (risk assessments); ensuring and 
maintaining a convincing track record of corruption cases (from prosecutions to 
final court decisions), including corruption at high-levels, as well as of detection 
and sanctioning of conflicts of interest and unjustified wealth 

In order to ensure the implementation of the 2015-2016 Action Plan, on 4 February 2015 the 
ACC  adopted  a  new  stand-alone  monitoring  and  evaluation  methodology  in  respect  of  anti-
corruption  policy  documents.  The  methodology  is  based  on  the  recommendations  of 
international and local organisations, as well as monitoring mechanisms used by GRECO and 
OECD-ACN.  In  June  2015,  the  ACC  Secretariat  prepared  the  first  progress  report  on 
achievement of six months' targets of the Anti-Corruption Action Plan (2015-2016).  

The Anti-Corruption Agency was established within the Ministry of Internal Affairs at the end 
of  2012.  As  a  result  of  the  security  sector  reform  in  August  2015,  which  resulted  in  the 
establishment of the State Security Service of Georgia, the Anti-Corruption Agency has been 
subordinated  to  the  Service.  The  Agency  investigates  cases  of  conflict  of  interests  in  public 
service and the fight against corruption and malfeasance by officials within their competence. 
The  Agency  is  also  required  to  take  preventive  and  suppressive  measures  necessary  for  the 
fight against corruption. 

The two specialised units responsible for handling serious corruption crimes cases within the 
Office  of  the  Chief  Prosecutor  set  up  in  early  2015  are  the  Anti-Corruption  Unit  and  the 
Department for the Crimes Committed in Process of Legal Proceedings. The Anti-Corruption 
Unit  is  responsible  for  investigation  and  prosecution  of  the  most  serious  corruption  crimes 
cases. It is also in charge of trend analysis and policy making. Based on the analytical work, 
the unit aims to develop practical guidelines for the investigation and prosecution authorities 
working  on  corruption  crime  cases.  The  unit  currently  employs  seven  investigators,  three 
prosecutors and various administrative staff. The staffing may further increase in light of the 
emerging needs. The Department for the Crimes Committed in Process of Legal Proceedings 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
is  competent  to  investigate  and  prosecute  the  abuses  of  legal  process  that  lead  to  serious 
human rights violations inter alia freedom from torture, inhumane or degrading treatment or 
punishment and arbitrary deprivation of possessions. 

Corruption  crimes  asset  recovery  figures  for  2015  demonstrate  that  Georgian  authorities 
performed reasonably well the fight against corruption crimes. In nine months of 2015, EUR 
515.000  in  assets  were  confiscated  and  EUR  5.350.000  in  assets  were  frozen  by  Georgian 
authorities.    

The  Georgian  authorities  further  addressed  concerns  regarding  the  autonomy  of  Public 
Prosecution. Legislative amendments have been prepared to the 'Law on Prosecution Service'. 
The  amendments  envisage  the  establishment  of  new  institutions:  the  Prosecutorial  Council, 
the Conference of Prosecutors and the Special (ad hoc) Prosecutor.  

According  to  the  amendments,  the  Chief  Prosecutor's  Office  will  be  headed  by  the  Chief 
Prosecutor  whose  term  of  office  will  be  six  years.  No  person  may  be  elected  as  a  Chief 
Prosecutor for a second consecutive term.  

institutional  model  for 

the  reformed  Prosecutor’s  Service  envisages 

The  new 
the 
establishment of a Prosecutorial Council consisting of fifteen members, including the Minister 
of Justice as a chairperson of the Council, eight prosecutors to be elected by the conference of 
all  prosecutors,  two  members  of  Parliament  (one  from  the  parliamentary  majority  to  be 
elected by the parliamentary majority, and another from the members that do not belong to the 
parliamentary  majority  to  be  elected  by  such  members),  two  judges  of  general  courts  to  be 
elected  by  the  High  Council  of  Justice,  and  two  members  of  the  Prosecutorial  Council  who 
will  be  elected  by  Parliament  from  among  the  candidates  nominated  by  higher  education 
institutions and civil society organisations. Neither the Minister of Justice nor the Council will 
have prosecutorial powers under this model.    

If there are sufficient grounds to believe that the Chief Prosecutor has committed a crime, the 
Prosecutorial Council, at the initiative of one or more Council members will discuss the issue 
of  appointing  a  special  (ad  hoc)  prosecutor.  The  Chief  Prosecutor  will  be  suspended  from 
discharging  his/her  responsibilities  immediately  upon  the  appointment  of  the  special 
prosecutor and suspension will be effective until the Prosecutorial Council and/or Parliament 
makes  a  decision.  If  the  special  prosecutor  finds  it  probable  that  the  Chief  Prosecutor  has 
committed a crime, the Prosecutorial Council will, by two thirds of its members, approve the 
report  of  the  special  prosecutor,  following  which  it  must  apply  to  the  Parliament  to  remove 
the  Chief  Prosecutor  from  office.  Furthermore,  the  Chief  Prosecutor  may  also  be  dismissed 
from office if the Prosecutorial Council, after examination, by secret ballot by two thirds of its 
total membership, decides that he/she has committed a disciplinary offence. In addition, the 
draft  amendments  also  envisage  other  grounds  for  removal  of  the  Chief  Prosecutor  from 
office, such as his/her resignation or incapability of discharging duties for health reasons, or 
taking over any other public office, or any other case of conflict of interest, etc. 

A  number  of  important  safeguards  have  been  introduced  into  the  operation  of  the  plea-
bargaining  system.  Either  the  prosecutor  or  the  defendant  can  propose  a  plea  bargain.  The 
district prosecutor must approve agreements entered into by lower-ranking prosecutors in his 
district. The judge must be satisfied that there is a proper legal basis for the conviction of the 
defendant and that the defendant understands the consequences of his/her action in entering 
into the plea bargain. The prosecutor is under an obligation to consult with the victim of the 
11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
crime although not necessarily to agree with or accept the victim's point of view. The victim 
is  also  entitled  to  be  heard  by  a  judge.  The  plea  bargain  has  to  be  recorded  in  writing  and 
signed by the parties concerned. Policy guidelines are in place for prosecutors, which suggest 
appropriate sentences for different offences and the weight which should be given to different 
mitigating  and  aggravating  circumstances.  The  decline  in  the  number  of  cases  being  dealt 
with by way of a plea bargain, from approximately 90% to approximately 70% between 2013 
and 2014, would suggest that these reforms have had an effect. From January to July 2015, 
64% of cases were completed with plea bargain agreement, while in 2014 there were 69.9% 
cases registered with this procedure. 

The  issue  of  enhancing  the  independence  of  individual  judges  has  been  further  addressed  in 
relation to the three-year statutory probation period for those judges who have served a 10-year 
term. The Government decided to introduce relevant provisions to the draft law currently being 
considered  by  the  Parliament  as  a  part  of  the  third-wave  judicial  reform  package,  which  is 
expected to be adopted by the end of 2015. 

The  working  process  on  the  Civil  Service  Reform  concept,  which  was  adopted  in  November 
2014,  revealed  the  need  for  a  unified  approach  and  some  shortcomings  of  the  legislation 
governing the civil service, such as the existence of contradictory provisions within main laws, 
or the absence of secondary legislation regulating specific legal relationships. On 28 October 
2015,  the  Parliament  adopted  the  'Law  on  Civil  Service'  with  the  relevant  package  of  46 
secondary laws. The respective legal acts will enter into force from 1 January 2017. The new 
'Law  on  Civil  Service'  specifies  the  status  of  a  civil  servant,  terms  of  recruitment  and 
employment,  civil  service  management  issues  and  the  employment  relationship  of  civil 
servants. Pursuant to the new draft regulations, all professional civil servants must be appointed 
on merit on the basis of fair and open competition. Special guarantees for the independence of 
the head of the Civil Service Bureau (CSB) are laid down. These include conditions for early 
termination  of  his/her  term  of  office.  In  addition,  significant  progress  was  made  towards 
enhancement of the CSB’s capabilities and resources. More  specifically,  the  role of the CSB 
has been increased in the civil service human resources selection process. In addition, a further 
GEL 150.000 was added to the 2014 yearly budget of the CSB and it was entitled to hire 18 
additional staff members. 

The Georgian authorities took further steps to strengthen the protection of whistle-blowers, by 
introducing  amendments  to  the  'Law  on  the  Conflict  of  Interest  and  Corruption  in  the  Public 
Service'.  The  amendments  passed  the  third  reading  in  the  Parliament  on  28  October  2015. 
Pursuant  to  the  amendments,  upon  notification  regarding  misconduct  of  civil  servants  the 
whistle-blower protection rights prescribed by the law will be extended to 'any person' outside 
the public sector and will not be limited to only current or former civil servants. Furthermore, 
according to the draft amendments, whistle-blowers will be able to inform civil society or mass 
media directly after the decision is made by an application reviewing body, police, prosecutor 
or  public  defender  as  opposed  to  the  existing  regulation  whereby  whistle-blowers,  before 
informing civil society or mass media, have to wait for two months after the decision is made 
by an application reviewing body, police, prosecutor or public defender. Moreover, pursuant to 
the amendments, the electronic appeal mechanism allowing for confidential appeal in case of 
doubt  over misconduct by  civil servants will  be  introduced. The appeal will be processed by 
the CSB in a confidential manner and then automatically forwarded to the appropriate public 
entity. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Further  work  has  been  carried  out  in  order  to  strengthen  the  monitoring  and  verification 
system  of  asset  declarations  by  public  officials.  The  special  working  group  created  by  the 
Anti-Corruption Council held a number of meetings throughout February-June 2015 and draft 
amendments  were  finalised  by  the  CSB.  The  amendments  were  discussed  at  the  Anti-
Corruption Council Session on 29 June 2015 with the active participation of public agencies, 
representatives of civil society and international organizations. According to the amendments, 
monitoring  of  declarations  will  take  place  in  three  cases:  first,  constant  verification  of  the 
declarations  of  top-level  officials  exposed  to  high  risks  of  corruption;  second,  by  random 
selection  of  declarations  in  a  transparent  manner  through  the  electronic  system  based  on 
specific risk criteria by the Independent Commission (the list of selected declarations will be 
published  at  the  beginning  of  each  year  by  the  CSB);  third,  on  the  basis  of  well-founded 
written complaints/information submitted to the CSB. 

The monitoring process will be completed upon cross-checking of the information in different 
electronic  databases  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of  confidentiality.  The  CSB:  the  first 
may make either a positive assessment of the declaration in question or a negative assessment 
thereof,  the  latter  in  the  event  of  a  violation  related  to  non-submission  of  required 
information/documents,  submission  of  an  incomplete  or  incorrect  declaration  as  well  as 
violation  of  the  'Law  on  Civil  Service  and  Law  on  Conflict  of  Interest  and  Corruption  in 
Public  Sector',  which  will  be  identified  throughout  the  monitoring  process.  For  minor 
violations, the Head of the CSB will impose a fine upon a public official amounting to GEL 
1.000. In cases where it is found that a public officer has presented deliberately incomplete or 
incorrect data, or specific elements of crime are identified, the declaration in question together 
with  appropriate  documentation  will  be  sent 
their 
consideration.  

law-enforcement  bodies  for 

to 

In  addition,  in  order  to  effectively  implement  the  monitoring  of  asset  declarations,  the  draft 
amendments define direct and indirect participation in enterprise activities, specified time of 
submitting asset declarations and expand the scope of information to be disclosed by public 
officials. Furthermore, in order to allow for comprehensive and extensive monitoring to detect 
conflict  of  interest  and  corruption-related  offences,  according  to  the  new  draft  regulations 
officials will be obliged to fill in asset declarations a year after leaving office, if not appointed 
to a new position.  

The amendments to the 'Law of Georgia on the Conflict of Interests and Corruption in Public 
Service' were adopted by the Parliament of Georgia on 28 October 2015 in third reading.  

The  Georgian  authorities  continued  to  improve  the  procurement  system.  The  State 
Procurement  Agency  of  Georgia  (SPA)  drew  up  amendments  to  the  'Law  on  State 
Procurement'.  The  changes  introduced  include  the  provision  that  a  decision  on  conducting 
simplified procurement must be agreed with the SPA. A submitted application on the conduct 
of  simplified  procurement  by  the  procuring  entity  is  public  and  all  the  interested  parties  are 
entitled  to  express  their  own  considerations.  The  SPA  will  take  into  account  both  the 
submitted  application  of  the  procuring  entity  and  considerations  expressed  by  the  interested 
parties,  including civil society  and business  sector actors. The rules,  procedures, criteria and 
terms  for  agreeing  a  decision  on conducting  simplified  procurement  with  the  SPA  were  laid 
down by the corresponding by-law. Thus, the procedures explicitly require public notice and 
the right of objectors to be heard is ensured, and also the decision to dispense with tendering 
requires  independent  approval  by  the  SPA.  Based  on  the  aforementioned  legal  amendments, 
the  SPA  drew  up  the  Decree  of  the  Chairman  on  'Defining  Criteria  and  Adopting  Rules  for 
13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Conducting  Simplified  Procurement'.  The  Decree  clearly  defines  the  basis  and  criteria  for 
awarding a contract through simplified procurement, the rule on agreeing the decision with the 
Agency as well as other issues concerning simplified procurement. In particular, according to 
the Decree, the simplified procurement can be conducted if the value of procurement is below 
the  statutory  thresholds.  The  Decree  also  defines  other  circumstances  in  which  simplified 
procurement can be conducted, such as when supply of goods, rendering a service or carrying 
out construction is (a) an exclusive right of one person; (b) an urgent necessity; (c) in order to 
prevent  the  deterioration  of  the  quality  of  an  object,  etc.  For  all  these  above-mentioned 
circumstances/cases  the  Decree  sets  out  the  criteria,  which  should  be  met  in  order  to  allow 
simplified procurement. The procuring entity is entitled to award a contract through simplified 
procurement pursuant to directly prescribed cases and established procedures of the Law and 
the  Decree.  The  Decree  was  signed  on  17  November  2015  and  entered  into  force  on  1 
November 2015. 

(cid:190)  Development  of  effective  ethical  codes  accompanied  by  sanctions  applicable  to 
public officials (elected and appointed)  and notably regarding elected officials at 
central  and  local  level,  law  enforcement  and  judiciary;  ensuring  appropriate 
capacity,  specialisation  and  training  of  law  enforcement  and  judiciary  to  deal 
with corruption cases in an efficient manner  

As regards the development of effective ethical codes accompanied by sanctions applicable to 
public  officials,  the  working  group  responsible  for  the  development  of  norms  on  ethical 
conduct of civil servants was established. The Code of Ethics will include detailed regulation 
of  conduct  in  the  civil  service  and  will  apply  to  all  civil  servants  (with  exceptions).  The 
working group has already developed the initial draft code and submitted it for consideration 
to  the  Civil  Service  Bureau.  Preparation  of  the  draft  code  on  ethics  as  a  separate  law  is 
scheduled for the end of 2015. 

Additionally,  a  handbook  on  'Ethics  and  General  Rules  of  Conduct  for  Civil  Servants'  was 
developed, presented officially and published online as well as sent out to all central and local 
governmental institutions.  

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  legislation  for  the  prevention  of  money-laundering  and 
financing  of  terrorism,  including  reporting  obligations;  implementation  of 
relevant  legislation  on  search,  freezing,  seizure  and  confiscation  of  assets  of 
criminals (including the provisions addressing cross-border aspects) 

In  July  2015,  the  Georgian  Parliament  adopted  several  amendments  to  strengthen  its 
legislative  framework  for  cross-border  cash  movements  and  improve  its  implementation. 
First, the 2003 'Law on facilitating the prevention of illicit income legalisation' was amended 
to extend the anti-money-laundering requirements for cross-border transportation of cash and 
securities  to  the  export  and  import  of  physical  currency  and  bearer  negotiable  instruments 
through mail and cargo containers, where the amount exceeds GEL 30.000. Consequently, the 
scope of the declaration system was broadened to include cash sent and received by post and 
freight  in  addition  to  cash  physically  carried  by  natural  and  legal  persons.  Thus,  any  cross-
border movement is now subject to declaration if the amount exceeds GEL 30.000. Second, 
Article  289  of  the  Tax  Code  was  reviewed  to  increase  penalties  in  the  event  of  failure  to 
comply  with 
to  declare  cross-border  cash  movements.  Previously, 
administrative  fines  were  limited  to  a  maximum  amount  of  GEL  3.000  or  deprivation  of 
possession. Under the new Tax Code, bypassing the customs control may lead to a penalty of 
14 

the  obligation 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
GEL 3.000 if the amount of cash movement was more than GEL 30.000, GEL 5.000 if it was 
above GEL 50.000, and a seizure of cash or a fine equal to 10 % of the amount transported if 
it had a total value of GEL 100.000 or above. Third, the declaration form has been changed to 
include  information  about  the  provenance  and  intended  use  of  the  cash.  Lastly,  if  there  are 
indications  of  illicit  activity  concerning  amounts  of  cash  carried  which  are  below  the 
declaration  threshold,  the  Revenue  Service  will  liaise  with  relevant  agencies,  such  as  law-
enforcement agencies which are present at the border to take appropriate action. 

In order to make better use of the existing legal framework for confiscating criminal assets, 
the Chief Prosecutor's Office developed a four-step action plan that was implemented during 
summer 2015. The first action taken involved the drafting of a Recommendation instructing 
prosecutors and investigators 'on certain measures to be implemented in the course of criminal 
proceedings'.  To  prevent  criminals  from  finding  ways  to  avoid  confiscation  of  illicit  assets 
through  plea-bargaining,  the  Recommendation  provides  that  'measures  shall  be  taken  to 
ensure [the] confiscation, irrespective of the fact, whether the plea bargain agreement should 
be  concluded  with  the  said  person'.  On  this  last  point,  it  should  be  noted  that  the 
recommendation to freeze assets and request confiscation is addressed to prosecutors whereas 
confiscation  is  ordered  by  courts,  normally  on  a  discretionary  basis.  The  content  of  the 
Recommendation was discussed with its main recipients in the first half of July 2015. In total, 
275  prosecutors  and  investigators  participated  in  the  meetings.  On  4  August,  the  Chief 
Prosecutor adopted the Recommendation, which was then circulated internally. The General 
Inspection  Unit  of  the  Chief  Prosecutor's  Office  was  designated  as  the  monitoring  body  for 
implementation of the Recommendation. According to a preliminary analysis by the General 
Inspection  Unit,  since  the  adoption  and  circulation  of  the  Recommendation,  the  law-
enforcement  bodies  and  prosecutors  have  started  more  proactively  pursuing  confiscation  of 
assets.  Statistics  show  that  in  nine  months  of  2015,  the  amount  of  confiscated  property  in 
money-laundering cases almost doubled in comparison to 2014.  

As far as the institutional framework is concerned, the Financial Monitoring Service (FMS) 
has  operated  since  2004  as  the  national  centre  for  receiving,  analysing  and  disseminating 
suspicious transaction reports. Whereas the FMS was previously a legal entity of public law at 
the National Bank of Georgia (NGB) and used to receive financing from the NGB, it is now 
an  independent  legal  entity  of  public  law  that  is  accountable  to  the  Government  of  Georgia 
and receives funding from the state budget. It is expected that the FMS will become more of a 
priority.  Moreover,  the  FMS  hired  two  new  staff  members  in  October  2015  and  plans  to 
shortly announce additional openings for the remaining vacancies. 

The most important supervising authority is the National Bank of Georgia, which supervises 
all  financial  institutions,  except  for  insurance  companies  and  private  pension  schemes.  A 
separate  methodology  and  offsite  inspection  unit  has  been  established  within  the  National 
Bank,  which  exclusively  performs  risk-based  offsite  anti-money-laundering  (AML)  and 
counter-terrorist financing (CFT) supervision of financial institutions. The recruitment of six 
people  to  the  unit  has  been  completed  and  the  first  AML/CFT  reports  were  filed  by 
commercial  banks  in  summer  2015.  The  Insurance  Supervision  Authority,  which  acts  as 
supervising  authority  for  insurance  companies  and  private  pension  schemes,  created  a  new 
separate offsite monitoring division within the supervision department. Three staff members 
are being recruited and work has started to define the forms of reporting and the frequency of 
their submission. 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
To  address  the  low  level  of  reporting  in  a  number  of  professional  sectors,  such  as  lawyers, 
accountants  or  auditors,  the  FMS  organised  awareness-raising  activities.  Between  April  and 
August  2015,  it  conducted  three  training  seminars  for  members  of  the  Association  of  Law 
Firms  of  Georgia  on  customer  due  diligence  requirements  and  the  application  of  risk-based 
approach.  The  FMS  also  assisted  the  Association  in  drafting  a  lawyer's  guide  to  the 
prevention  of  money-laundering  and  plans  to  develop  training  courses  for  lawyers  in 
Georgia’s anti-money laundering legislation as part of their continuous education programme. 
The  FMS  is  currently  working  with  the  Georgian  Federation  of  Professional  Auditors  and 
Accountants to organise training-seminars for auditing firms.     

On  25  September  2015,  the  Council  of  Europe  launched  its  project  'Combating  money 
laundering  and  terrorist  financing  in  Georgia',  with  EU  funding.  The  project  aims  at 
enhancing the capacities of the anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorist financing system 
in Georgia in terms of legislation, institutional frameworks, skills and operational capabilities.  

(cid:190)  Implementation  of  the  national  anti-drug  strategy  and  action  plan,  ensuring 
adequate working of the Inter-Agency Coordination Council on Combating Drug 
Abuse,  making the information on drug seizures and persons involved accessible 
at  border  crossing  points,  and  further  developing  cooperation  and  information 
exchange  with  relevant  international  bodies  in  the  drug  field;  establishing 
cooperation with the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction 
(EMCDDA) 

Georgia  continued  to  implement  the  national  drug  strategy  and  action  plan  for  2014-2015. 
The latest developments confirmed the progress made by the authorities in shaping a balanced 
drug policy, pursuing both demand-reduction policies and supply-reduction measures.  

As  regards  demand  reduction,  recent  preventive  activities  that  include  training  on  risks  and 
early identification of drug abuse were provided to 370 family doctors throughout the country 
between the end of 2014 and August 2015. In the area of treatment and rehabilitation, more 
than  3000  opiate  addicted  persons  benefited  from  substitution  therapies  in  the  first  half  of 
2015  thanks  to  an  increase  in  the  overall  capacity  of  the  drug-addiction  state  programme. 
Furthermore, in order to increase the number of beneficiaries of the services provided by the 
harm reduction centres (e.g. safe injecting instruments and HIV testing), a mobile ambulatory 
practice has started operating in October 2015.  

As regards supply reduction, Georgia has further strengthened the drug-related provisions of 
its legislative framework. On 15 March 2014, new legislative amendments entered into force 
that  criminalised  the  illicit  trade  in  some  psychoactive  substances  being  used  as  main 
substance for producing home-made drugs. As a result, the use of so called 'crocodile' (home-
made drug) has decreased by around 99 % in recent months.  

New  amendments  to  the  Criminal  Code,  which  entered  into  force  on  31  July  2015,  aim  at 
distinguishing between criminal liability for possession and distribution of drugs. Thus, illegal 
manufacturing,  production,  purchase,  storage,  transportation,  transfer  or  sale  of  narcotic 
drugs,  their  analogues,  precursors  or  new  psychotropic  substances  will  not  be  punished  as 
strictly as before, whereas distribution will still be heavily punishable. The previous version 
of  Article  260  of  the  Criminal  Code  provided  for  a  criminal  liability  of  up  to  eleven  years 
imprisonment for both drug possession (and other actions, such as production, storage, etc.) 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and distribution. According to the new law, drug possession is punishable with up to six years 
imprisonment.  

However, six years' imprisonment is seen as an exceptional sanction and statistics show that, 
even  before  the  new  amendments  entered  into  force,  between  one  and  three  years' 
imprisonment  was  imposed  in  the  vast  majority  of  cases  (70  %  of  cases  in  2011,  73  %  of 
cases in 2012, 91 % of cases in 2013 and 90 % of cases in 2014). Since the entry into force of 
the amendment, out of 108 persons convicted under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Code, 37 
were imprisoned. One of them was sentenced to over five years' imprisonment.  

As  to  the  liability  for  drug  consumption  or  possession  of  a  small  amount  for  personal 
consumption,  the  Georgian  legislation  provides  that  the  first  occasion  is  subject  to  an 
administrative fine. The second case within the same year is punishable by a fine, community 
service  or  imprisonment  of  up  to  one  year  under  Article  273  of  the  Criminal  Code.  As  a 
matter of judicial practice, imprisonment is imposed only for third-time use of drugs within 
the  same  year.  It  should  also  be  noted  that  possession  of  small  amounts  of  cannabis  (2-3 
grams) does not reach the threshold of criminal offence in Georgia and is not punished at all 
under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Code. 

the  Council  of  Europe/EU  Eastern  Partnership  Programmatic  Co-operation 
Within 
Framework regional initiative, the 'Alternatives to coercive sanctions to drug law offences and 
drug-related  crime'  project  is  being  implemented  in  Georgia.  Comparative  research  is  being 
conducted  to  identify  what  models  of  alternatives  to  imprisonment  for  drug-dependent 
offenders are applicable and feasible for Georgia. On the basis of the findings, alternatives to 
imprisonment will be further integrated into the policy and practice of Georgia. 

In  order  to  protect  citizens  from  arbitrary  drug  testing,  the  Georgian  legislation  provides 
different options for appeal in respect of unplanned drug tests performed by the police. First, 
the  'law  on  police  of  Georgia'  requires  that  the  decision  on  conducting  a  test  be  based  on  a 
reasonable ground to believe that a person has consumed drugs. Pursuant to Order 725 of the 
Minister  of  Internal  Affairs,  approved  on  30  September  2015,  the  reasonable  ground  to 
believe must be accompanied by other circumstances. Thus, an employee of the Ministry of 
Internal Affairs is authorised to transfer a person for drug testing to the forensic service of the 
Ministry  only  if  (a)  the  employee  personally  witnessed  that  person  committing  an  offence 
envisaged  under  the  Code  of  administrative  offences  of  Georgia,  (b)  the  person  attempts  to 
flee or refuses to comply with the legal request of the police and there are sufficient grounds 
to believe that this person has consumed drugs or is under drug influence, or (c) information 
that  a  person  has  illegally  consumed  drugs  has  been  obtained  through  operative-search  or 
covert  investigative  activities  conducted  in  compliance  with  Georgian  legislation,  has  been 
reported to the Ministry, or submitted directly to a policeman by an identified source.  

Furthermore, a person subject to an unplanned drug test has different options to challenge the 
police  decision,  from  referral  to  the  General  Inspection  of  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs, 
which  is  responsible  for  sanctioning  illegal  acts  of  policemen,  to  appeals  before  the 
Administrative Court and the Prosecutor's Office. Between 2014 and mid-2015, a total of 40 
cases  were  reported  via  the  hotline  number  of  the  General  Inspection  of  the  Ministry  of 
Internal  Affairs.  Two  cases  were  forwarded  to  the  Chief  Prosecutor's  Office  for  further 
consideration. Besides mechanisms for challenging a decision of the administrative body, the 
results of the drug tests as such are subject to judicial review within 14 days.   

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
The institutional framework in the area of drugs has been further strengthened. In addition to 
the  Inter-Agency  Coordination  Council  on  Combating  Drug  Abuse,  a  National  Drug 
Monitoring Centre will start operating by the end of 2015, which will produce annual country 
reports and serve as an EMCDDA focal point. Furthermore, cooperation with EMCDDA has 
been stepped up with the signing on 4 November 2015 of a Memorandum of Understanding 
between the EU body and the Ministry of Justice of Georgia. 

(cid:190)  Sound  implementation  of  relevant  UN  and  Council  of  Europe  Conventions,  as 

well as GRECO recommendations in the above-mentioned areas 

The implementation of this benchmark has been evaluated in other sections of this report. 

(cid:190)  Provision  of  sufficient  financial  and  human  resources,  including  adequate 
training  programmes,  to  ensure  effective  implementation  of  all  the  measures 
mentioned above 

The implementation of this benchmark has been evaluated in other sections of this report. 

2.3.2.  Judicial co-operation in criminal matters 

The judicial cooperation in criminal matters, which was deemed to have been achieved in the 
third progress report, has remained achieved. 

2.3.3.  Law enforcement co-operation 

(cid:190)  Ensuring  a  high  level  of  operational  and  special  investigative  capacity  of  law 
enforcement  services  and  its  consistent  and  efficient  use  to  tackle  cross-border 
crime 

The  Procedural  Code  and  the  Law  on  Criminal  Intelligence  Activity  provide  the  legal 
framework  for  the  operational  and  special  investigative  operations  of  law-enforcement 
services.  They  lay  down  a  broad  set  of  special  investigative  measures,  ranging  from 
interrogation and wiretapping to undercover  operations. Georgian law-enforcement agencies 
have demonstrated their capability to use special investigative measures. 

Besides the legal tools, Georgian authorities have sophisticated equipment at their disposal to 
support investigations and prosecutions. Forensic capabilities have been further strengthened, 
notably with the technical upgrade of a chemistry laboratory in the Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti 
region.  The  regional  laboratory  can  now  provide  advanced  instrumental  analysis  on  drugs, 
pharmaceutical  and  unknown  substances  for  local  law-enforcement  agencies,  independently 
of the Tbilisi laboratory.    

(cid:190)  Ensuring  a  high  level  of  effectiveness  of  law  enforcement  co-operation  among 
relevant national agencies - especially border guards, police, customs officers -, as 
well as cooperation with the judicial authorities 

The institutional framework and coordination tools supporting law-enforcement co-operation 
within Georgia are well known and used by the relevant public actors. Not only have the law-
enforcement agencies shown that their co-operation is highly effective, fostered by the 2013 
Memorandum  of  Understanding  on  Inter-Agency  Co-operation  on  Law  Enforcement  issues, 
18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
but  there  is  also  good  interaction  between  investigators  and  prosecutors.  Joint  investigator-
prosecutor  teams  deal  with  high-profile  cases  and  joint  training  courses  are  held  within  the 
framework of the Memorandum of Understanding. The latest were organised in July 2015 and 
involved representatives from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry of Finance and the 
Prosecutor's  Office.  Furthermore,  e-flow  electronic  exchange  software  enables  real-time 
communications among all law-enforcement and prosecution bodies in a secured way. 

With a view to producing a regular assessment report on all-encompassing threats, based on 
intelligence-led policing and continuous evaluation, an intra-agency working group within the 
Ministry of Internal Affairs was created on 22 June 2015. So far, each structural unit of the 
Ministry is carrying out its own analytical process. The Central Criminal Police Department 
and  the  Patrol  Police  Department  are  collecting  and  analysing  data  on  the  criminal  cases 
falling  within  their  respective  areas  of  competence.  This  information  is  consolidated  by  the 
Information-Analytical  Department,  which  analyses  the  data  and  makes  recommendations. 
The  department  already  documents  all  criminal  records  registered  in  Georgia  and  reflects 
them in statistical reports but the Ministry lacks a common system of risk analysis.  

The working group has developed the concept of a unified risk analysis mechanism, based on 
intelligence-led policing. The working group held several meetings to flesh out the functions 
of  the  structural  units  involved  in  the  implementation  of  intelligence-led  policing. 
Representatives  of  the  Belgian  Federal  Police  visited  Georgia  on  5-9  October  2015,  in  the 
framework of the EU-funded ENIGMMA project, to share their experience in this regard. On 
the basis of the concept, approved on 22 October 2015, and the exchanges with partner states, 
the working group started preparing a detailed action plan of the measures to be adopted for 
the implementation of the future risk assessment system. 

(cid:190)  Strengthened bilateral and multilateral operational law enforcement cooperation 
agreements  or  working  arrangements,  namely  with  INTERPOL,  including  by 
sharing  on  time  relevant  information  and  conducting  joint  investigations  and 
operations  with  competent  law  enforcement  authorities  of  EU  Member  States 
and  third  countries,  in  line  with  data  protection  requirements  and  through  the 
appropriate channels 

International cooperation is implemented on the basis of international agreements and the 'law 
on  international  law  enforcement  cooperation',  which  provides  for  the  categories  of 
information that can be exchanged and regulates international police cooperation even in the 
absence of bilateral and multilateral agreements. In the latter case, cooperation will take place 
on the basis of an ad hoc decision or under the principle of reciprocity. The rules for drafting 
and  sending  requests  are  laid  down  in  the  Order  of  the  Minister  of  Internal  Affairs  No  787 
dated 15 October 2014. When there is a need for international cooperation, the regional police 
unit  sends  a  request  via  e-flow  to  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs  and  the  National  Central 
Bureau  of  Interpol,  and  asks  them  for  assistance.  The  information  can  be  issued  by  the 
divisions of Ministry with the consent of the Information-Analytical Department.  

Bilateral police cooperation is based on 25 agreements on security and the fight against crime, 
14  of  which  have  been  concluded  with  EU  Member  States,  and  16  agreements  on  the 
exchange  of  classified  information,  13  of  which  have  been  concluded  with  EU  Member 
States. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
To further improve partners' trust in the Georgian authorities, the Minister of Internal Affairs 
adopted  on  30  May  2015  by  Order  No  387  the  'instruction  on  processing  and  protecting 
personal data' within its Ministry, including for international exchange of personal data in the 
law-enforcement  field.  The  aim  is  to  promote  the  application  of  Georgia's  Personal  Data 
Protection Law and of Recommendation No R 87(15) of the Council of Europe for processing 
of all personal data by all departments under the authority of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 
including the law-enforcement authorities.    

The  Georgian  authorities  conducted  an  awareness-raising  programme  over  the  last  months, 
including  in  the  regions,  to  inform  the  police  and  the  Chief  Prosecutor's  Office  about  the 
scope for international cooperation at operational level. Thus, on 7 May 2015, the Director of 
the  Central  Criminal  Police  Department  issued  instructions  on  existing  resources  and 
activities to be carried out in case of need for international cooperation, which were presented 
to  its  staff  in  Tbilisi  and  in  the  regional  main  divisions.  Furthermore,  the  National  Central 
Bureau  of  Interpol  produced  an  informational  brochure  on  the  existing  cooperation 
mechanisms  through  Interpol.  The  document  was  distributed  to  the  relevant  staff  of  the 
Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs  and  to  the  Chief  Prosecutors'  Office.  Joint  training  courses  for 
investigators  from  the  Ministry  of  Internal  Affairs,  the  Ministry  of  Finance  and  the  Chief 
Prosecutors' Office were also held from 7 to 18 July 2015 to discuss possibilities offered by 
the international law-enforcement cooperation framework.     

(cid:190)  Conclusion  of  an  operational  cooperation  agreement  with  EUROPOL  ensuring 

an adequate level of data protection 

Significant  progress  has  been  made  since  July  2014,  when  Europol  initiated  the  process  of 
preparing  negotiations  for  the  conclusion  of  an  operational  cooperation  agreement  with 
Georgia.  During  summer  2015,  Europol  finalised  its  assessment  on  the  existence  of  an 
adequate  level  of  data  protection  in  Georgia,  which  is  a  prerequisite  for  entering  into 
negotiations.  The  scrutiny  of  Georgia's  data  protection  framework  was  done  in  close 
cooperation  with  their  competent  authorities,  which  provided  Europol  with  detailed 
information  in  questionnaires  as  well  as  during  video  conferences  and  the  data  protection 
study  visit  which  took  place  from  2  to  5  June  2015.  Experts  conducted  meetings  with  the 
relevant departments of the Ministry of Internal Affairs as well as with representatives of the 
Personal Data Protection Inspector’s office, the General Prosecutor’s Office and the Financial 
Police  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance.  The  data  protection  report  was  submitted  to  the 
Management Board of Europol on 6 October 2015, which approved it for sending to the Joint 
Supervisory  Board.  The  Joint  Supervisory  Board  has  issued  its  opinion  before  the 
Management  Board,  which  gave,  on  1  December  2015,  the  authorisation  to  commence 
negotiations  on  an  operational  agreement.  Final  steps  for  formalising  the  operational 
agreement will follow in the coming months. 

2.3.4.  Data protection 

The protection of personal data benchmark, which was deemed to have been achieved in the 
third progress report, has remained achieved. 

2.4. Block 4: External Relations and Fundamental Rights  

2.4.1.  Freedom of movement within Georgia 
20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The freedom of movement benchmark, which was deemed to have been achieved in the third 
progress report, has remained achieved. 

2.4.2.  Conditions and procedures for the issuance of travel and identity documents 

The  benchmark  on  the  conditions  and  procedures  for  the  issuance  of  travel  and  identity 
documents,  which  was  deemed  to  have  been  achieved  in  the  third  progress  report,  has 
remained achieved. 

2.4.3.  Citizens’ rights including protection of minorities 

(cid:190)  Effective  implementation  of  legislation  and  policies  on  anti-discrimination, 
including  by  ensuring  effective  legal  aid  and  the  independence  of  the  judiciary; 
implementation of relevant UN and Council of Europe instruments 

The  anti-discrimination  law  assigns  the  function  of  supervising  the  elimination  of 
discrimination and ensuring equality to the Public Defender's Office (PDO).  

Following  a  thorough  assessment  of  the  shortcomings  of  the  law,  the  PDO  addressed  the 
Parliament on 11 February 2015 with a proposal to amend three legal acts: the Organic Law 
of Georgia on the Labour Code, the Civil Procedure Code and the Law on Public Service. An 
amendment to  the  Law on Elimination  of  all  forms of Discrimination would require private 
persons  to  provide  the  Public  Defender  with  necessary  materials,  documents  or  information 
for the examination of a case.  

Due consideration was given to the legislative proposals by both the Human Rights and Civil 
Integration Committee and the Legal Committee. A working group set up within the Human 
Rights' Committee has finalised its work and drafted the relevant amendments. It is expected, 
that by the end of 2015, the Parliament of Georgia will reflect the changes into the Law on 
Elimination of all forms of Discrimination.  

(cid:190)  Effective  implementation  of  the  National  Human  Rights  Strategy  and  Action 
Plan  measures  to  fight  against  discrimination  (including  allocation  of  adequate 
human  and  financial  resources);  general  awareness-raising  campaigns  against 
racism,  xenophobia,  and  other  forms  of  discrimination;  strengthening  the 
capacities  of  responsible  bodies  for  anti-discrimination  policy  and  combating 
racism, xenophobia and other forms of discrimination 

On 2 May 2014, the Parliament of Georgia adopted the Law on Elimination of all forms of 
Discrimination.  The  PDO  plays  a  key  role  in  monitoring  and  overseeing  the  efforts  to 
eliminate  discrimination.  Since  November  2014,  it  is  assisted  by  the  Equality  Department 
which has been granted sufficient human resources and budget to support the PDO activities 
including in the field of awareness-raising. To explain the grounds on which discrimination is 
prohibited and the application procedure for getting PDO's support, a promotional video has 
been broadcast on TV and social media. A set of frequently asked questions and responses on 
the  equality  mechanism  in  Georgia  has  been  uploaded  on  the  website  of  the  PDO  and  is 
therefore  accessible  to  all.  Training  courses  were  organised  jointly  with  the  Ministry  of 
Internal  Affairs  to  raise  awareness  on  equality  and  diversity.  In  particular,  training  courses 
were  delivered  to  the  Ministry's  staff  on  'Elimination  of  all  forms  of  Discrimination'  (this 
21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
topic was also included in the curriculum of the  Academy  for  police officers) and 'personal 
data protection'. Journalists and students also benefited from training sessions.  

In  addition,  brochures  on  elimination  of  discrimination  and  activities  of  the  Equality 
Department  are  being  prepared  (EU-funded  project  expected  to  be  launched  in  November 
2015)  and  should  be  disseminated  through  PDO  regional  offices  and  Public  Service  Halls. 
Those  information  brochures  will  be  available  in  Georgian,  Russian,  Armenian  and 
Azerbaijani languages.  

Finally,  the  Human  Rights  Secretariat  has  been  conducting  awareness-raising  campaigns 
across  Georgia  to  inform  local  municipalities  and  NGOs  on  the  National  Human  Rights 
Strategy  and  the  Governmental  Action  Plan.  This  campaign  helps  to  educate  citizens  and 
representatives  of  the  State  in  all  regions  of  Georgia  about  notions  of  freedom,  tolerance, 
equality and diversity.  

Raising communities' awareness about their citizens' rights and the state services and benefits 
available 

The population of Georgia includes a significant proportion of ethnic minorities constituting 
around 16 % of the total population of the country (based on 2002 census).  

As  coordinator  of  the  state  policy  on  ethnic  minorities,  the  State  Minister's  Office  for 
Reconciliation and Civic Equality played a key role in drafting the new Strategy on Equality 
and  Civic  Integration.  Emphasis  has  been  put  on  improving  ethnic  minorities'  access  to 
decision-making,  political  life  and  public  services,  including  by  overcoming  language 
barriers.  The  strategy  and  action  plan  were  considered  and  discussed  with  the  Council  of 
National Minorities and representatives of ethnic minorities.  

Together with relevant state agencies the office of the State Minister for Reconciliation and 
Civic  Equality  organised  and  participated  in  lectures  and  seminars  in  higher  education 
institutions on ethnic minorities' rights and on the state policy on civic integration in general.   

Since 2014, several information measures targeting ethnic minority representatives have been 
conducted by:  

- the Ministry of Justice on illegal migration and protective measures;  

-  the  Central  Election  Commission  of  Georgia  on  election  procedures.  To  ensure  equal 
electoral rights for those living in the regions populated by national minorities, trainings were 
conducted  targeting  specifically  young  voters,  women  and  people  with  disabilities  from 
minorities who could be involved in the election process. Electoral documents are translated 
into Azerbaijani and Armenian.  

-  the  State  Attorney-Governor's  Administration  on  new  norms  of  legislation,  anti-
discrimination regulations, protection of the rights of ethnic minorities;  

- the Office of the State Minister for Europe and European Integration on the Georgian Euro-
Integration  process  and  the  EU-Georgia  Association  Agreement  in  particular  (information 
materials prepared in ethnic minorities' languages); 

22 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
- the Ministry of Health, Labour and Social Affairs on the state healthcare programmes and 
social benefits. Brochures and booklets on emergency medical care, social protection, health 
of  mothers  and  children,  and  Hepatitis  C  programmes  are  available  in  ethnic  minorities' 
languages; 

- the Georgian Ministry of Agriculture on specific programmes and innovations in the field of 
agriculture  (ethnic  minorities  addressed  here  in  the  framework  of  a  larger  information 
campaign).  

Education undoubtedly plays a key role in ensuring ethnic minorities' sustainable integration 
in  wider  Georgian  society.  The  'higher  education  mitigation  system'  (or  quotas  for  national 
minority students) introduced in 2010 has proved successful as the number of non-Georgian 
students  has  significantly  increased.  The  National  Assessment  and  Examination  Centre 
conducted information programmes on the higher education entrance examinations for ethnic 
minorities'  representatives.  The  preparatory  materials  were  translated  and  published  in 
Armenian, Azerbaijani and Russian languages.  

Further effort has been put into assisting the Roma population with regard to citizenship. The 
Ministry  of  Justice  ensures  legal  support  for  undertaking  the  necessary  steps  to  provide 
appropriate status.   

Finally,  the  Ministry  of  Culture  and  Monument  Protection  implements  a  dedicated 
programme  to  promote  and  popularise  identities  and  cultures  of  ethnic  minority  groups. 
'Supporting  National  Minorities'  culture'  funds  a  variety  of  activities  (exhibition,  concerts, 
festivals) and also museums, theatres and publications.  

New strategy to promote tolerance and civic integration 

In 2014, the Office of the State Minister for Reconciliation and Civic Integration has triggered 
a review of the National Concept for Tolerance and Civic Integration (NCAP) and its Action 
Plan for 2009-2014. The objective was to assess the implementation of the Action Plan and 
the  impact  of  civic  integration  programmes  conducted  so  far.  The  performance  assessment 
released in June 2014 concluded on the need to adapt the strategy, also to take into account 
the EU-Georgia Association Agreement.  

The  new  strategy  was  prepared  in  a  cooperative  and  consultative  manner  with  the  relevant 
stakeholders:  the Council of National Minorities, representatives of local and civil society as 
well as international organisations, the Human Rights and Civic Integration Committee of the 
Georgian Parliament, political parties and experts. The representatives of ethnic minorities as 
well as the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities were also consulted.  

The Georgian Government adopted the Civic Equality and Integration Strategy together with 
an Action Plan for 2015-2020 on 17 August 2015. The strategy will be translated into English 
and Russian.   

The  State  Inter-Agency  Commission  is  in  charge  of  monitoring  the  implementation  of  the 
strategy and action plan, including the results to be achieved by 2020. The composition of the 
Commission  is  being  reviewed  in  order  to  cover  all  relevant  institutions,  including  the 
Council  of  National  Minorities  operating  under  the  PDO.  The  action  plan  includes 
benchmarks  and  specific  indicators  for  each  area.  Each  state  agency  involved  in  the 
23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
implementation  will  draw  up  a  detailed  annual  action  plan  within  its  area  of  competence. 
Overall  assessment  of  the  implementation  of  this  revised  strategy  is  envisaged  at  an 
intermediate stage (2017) and by its due completion in 2020.    

Financial  support  for  the  activities  planned  in  the  action  plan  is  to  be  provided  by  the  state 
agencies within their profile and competence. 

Training of legal professionals 

To  conduct  capacity-building  programmes,  the  Public  Defender's  Office  and  relevant 
ministries  have  been  working  closely  with  the  European  Union,  the  Council  of  Europe,  the 
United  Nations  Development  Programme  but  also  with  the  Open  Society  Foundation  and 
some  local  NGOs.  Representatives  of  the  PDO  have  attended  workshops  and  seminars 
organised in the framework of the European Network of Equality Bodies (EQUINET).  

Legal professionals have benefited directly from these growing exchanges with civil society 
and  international  organisations.  The  Prosecutor's  Office  organised  a  couple  of  training 
sessions for the prosecutors on the obligations of the State with regards to the prohibition of 
discrimination  and  the  definition  of  hate  crimes.  The  High  School  of  Justice  has  started 
preparing  a  curriculum  on  discrimination-related  issues  with  an  emphasis  on  the  new  anti-
discrimination  law  of  Georgia  and  relevant  international  legal  instruments.  It  has  already 
conducted two training sessions on gender equality for judges. 

Within the framework of an EU-funded project, the Ministry of Internal Affairs has since May 
2015 organised 11 training sessions across the country for investigators on adequate Human 
Rights Protection in Temporary Detention Isolators. In total more than 220 representatives of 
the  MIA  and  the  Prosecutor's  Office  have  been  trained  on  the  subject  of  elimination  of 
discrimination. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 

ASSESSMENT OF MIGRATORY AND SECURITY IMPACTS 

1. INTRODUCTION 

1.1. Background 

In line with the Visa Liberalisation Action Plan (VLAP) methodology, before moving to the 
second phase, the Commission undertook to provide an assessment of the potential migratory 
and  security  impacts  of  future  visa  liberalisation  for  Georgian  citizens  travelling  to  the 
Schengen area.3 An extensive assessment was accordingly presented in the Commission staff 
working  document  (CSWD)4  accompanying  the  second  progress  report  on  Georgia's 
implementation of the VLAP.5 

After  Georgia  had  started  the  second  phase  of  its  Visa  Liberalisation  Action  Plan,  the 
Commission, 
third  progress  report  on  Georgia's 
implementation  of  the  VLAP,6  provided  an  update  on  the  potential  impact  of  Georgian 
nationals travelling to the Schengen area without a visa.  

the  CSWD  accompanying 

the 

in 

1.2. Methodology 

This document updates the latest assessment of impacts that was published in May 2015. This 
assessment has been based on the updates provided in October 2015 by EU Agencies and the 
EU  Monitoring  Mission  (EUMM)  in  Georgia.  The  present  document  also  draws  on  a 
combination of official Georgian and international organisation sources, and Eurostat data.   

Based on the contributions received, the present update aims to identify new phenomena and 
emerging trends in the areas of migration, mobility and security in relation to Georgia and the 
possible impact of a visa-free regime for the EU and the Schengen area. This update  to  the 
assessment reflects the state of play as of October 2015 and therefore represents a snapshot of 
the situation.  

This assessment does not constitute a benchmark of the VLAP. Nevertheless, this document 
also  lists  some  measures  and  targeted  actions  developed  by  Georgian  authorities,  notably 
throughout the process of implementing the VLAP, addressing issues that are likely to arise in 
the  migration  and  security  areas  as  identified  by  the  assessment  of  impacts.  In  conclusion, 
some possible mitigation measures that may be undertaken by EU Member States are set out.  

3 The visa waiver would apply to the Schengen area including: EU Schengen States, EU Member States who not 
yet fully apply the Schengen acquis, Non-EU Schengen States. 
4 COM(2014) 681 final. 
5 SWD(2014) 334 final. 
6 SWD(2015) 103 final. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
2. ASSESSMENT OF MIGRATORY IMPACTS 

2.1. Regular and irregular migration: trends and potential impacts of visa-free travel 

2.1.1. General overview 

The  migration  of  Georgians  abroad  is  mostly  a  spontaneous  circular  movement  to 
neighbouring  countries.  Georgian  migrants  worldwide  are  estimated  at  approximately  770 
000,7  including  630  000  in  Russia  and  a  total  of  66  042  Georgians  citizens  holding  valid 
permits in the EU in 2013.8 According to Eurostat data, 35 % of Georgian migrants holding a 
valid  residence  permit  in  the  EU  in  2014  are  male,  65  %  are  female.  Men  work  mainly  in 
manual  labour  industries  (construction,  agriculture)  and  women  tend  to  be  domestic  or 
seasonal agricultural workers. 

High  currency  devaluation,  inflation,  high  unemployment  rate  and  lack  of  economic 
opportunities  are  major  determinants  of  labour  migration  from  Georgia.  However  there  is  a 
positive investment climate, average monthly nominal salary of employees has been steadily 
rising for the last 20 years and unemployment in the country has fallen from 15% in 2012 and 
14.6%  in  2013  to  12.4  %  in  2014.  9  With  18%  of  its  population  aged  under  15  in  2013,10 
Georgia will still have to provide inclusive economic opportunities in the near future to avoid 
large  emigration  flows.  Economic  and  social  development  on  both  national  and  local  levels 
remains  one  of  the  major  priorities  of  the  Georgian  Government  (i.e.  business  incentives, 
employment promotion, poverty reduction, health and social protection, education, protection 
of rights, integration programmes).  

Better working conditions is the main reason why Georgian nationals go to the EU, even if the 
labour  migration.  Economic 
Russian  Federation  remains  a  popular  destination  for 
opportunities  and  links  with  the  EU  result  in  migratory  movements  between  Georgia  and 
Member States. The statistics show that Greece, Italy and Germany are attractive destinations 
for  Georgian  citizen  migration,  but  they  also  consider  several  other  Member  States  such  as 
Spain,  France,  Belgium,  Austria,  Poland,  Sweden  and  the  UK  as  attractive  destinations  for 
labour  migration.  Therefore  Georgians  are  widespread  across  European  countries  but  form 
compact communities only in a few countries of the EU. Other common destinations outside 
the EU include the United States and Turkey.  

The presence of an established diaspora can also be a major pull factor even if compared to 
other  regions  of  the  world.  The  Georgian  diaspora  in  Europe  is  small  and  concentrated  in 
Greece, Germany, Italy and Spain.  

As these relatively low overall figures reveal, Georgia is not among the main origin countries 
of migrants in the EU and migration to the EU is not quantitatively impressive.   

2.1.2 Regular migration facts 

7 European University Institute / Migration policy centre – Migration profile Georgia 2013. 
8 Eurostat data. 
9  National  Statistics  Office  of  Georgia 
(http://geostat.ge/index.php?action=page&p_id=146&lang=eng) 
10 International Organisation for Migration - Mission to Georgia: http://iom.ge.  

employment 

(Geostat), 

and  unemployment 

figures, 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
The first table below from Eurostat, based on the stock of valid residence permits in 2013 and 
available figures for 2014, shows that the largest communities of Georgian citizens in the EU 
and Schengen area are hosted in Greece (16 392 Georgians holding a valid residence permit in 
2013), Italy (14 130 in 2014), Germany (11 223 in 2014), Spain (9 318 in 2014) and France (5 
564 in 2014). Compared to the stock of valid residence permits registered for other countries 
of  origin  (e.g.  around  850  000  valid  residence  permits  for  Ukrainians  in  2013),  the  total 
number  of  66  042  valid  permits  held  by  Georgians  in  the  EU  in  2013  can  be  considered 
relatively small.    

However, the data also show an increase in the number of permits each year from 2011 for the 
total  EU  countries,  with  roughly  5  000  more  permits  between  2012  and  2013,  which 
corresponds to a growing preference for the EU.  

Table  1:  All  valid  residence  permits  by  reason,  length  of  validity  and  citizenship 
(Georgians), 2011-2014 

EU Member States and Schengen area 
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 

Germany  
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 

2012 
60 188
1 944
79
724
135

10 567
252
364
15 532
8 275
4 468
NA
11 042
NA
251
308
15
226
48
680
1 352
924
951
49
14
65
95
605
1 109
6

2013 
66 042 
1 813 
75 
773 
141 

10 741 
275 
312 
16 392 
8 907 
5,027 
7 
13 051 
954 
289 
325 
15 
170 
71 
483 
1 560 
1 320 
902 
79 
13 
64 
42 
1 221 
1 020 
6 

2014 

NA
1 720
133
839
137

11 223
338
327
NA
9 318
5 564
5
14 130
773
282
430
22
NA
66
NA
NA
1 441
847
86
14
64
59
578
1 014
NA

2011 
57 565
2 021
67
836
136

10 143
244
367
16 523
7 516
3 945
NA
9 467
1 248
243
243
11
247
47
733
1 073
585
1 042
36
11
73
81
542
NA
6

27 

 
 
 
 
 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 09.10.15, extracted on 09.10.2015 

NA
84
397

NA
72
NA

2 
91 
410 

2
86
414

When  compared  with  the  neighbouring  countries  in  the  South-Caucasus,  better  working 
conditions  (higher  wages)  and  diaspora  presence  are  probably  two  of  the  main  reasons  for 
preferring EU Member States.  

When  it  comes  to  regular  migration  to  the  EU  and  Schengen  area,  as  the  data  in  Table  2 
suggest, the number of Georgian citizens getting valid permits varies from 11 596 (maximum 
registered in 2010) to 9 850 residence permits issued in 2013, and 9 457 in 2014 (waiting for 
final  data  from  Austria).  Therefore  the  data  available  for  2014  generally  confirm  the  same 
trend  of  the  past  years,  with  a  significant  increase  in  France  and  considerable  variations 
between Member States in 2013 and 2014.    

The residence permits were mostly issued in France (869 in 2013, 1 653 in 2014), Italy (2 573 
in 2013, 1 402 in 2014), Germany (1 284 in 2013, 1 312 in 2014), Poland (1 211 in 2013, 1 
342 in 2014) and Greece (809 in 2013, 1 096 in 2014), followed by Spain (901 in 2013, 802 
in 2014) and UK (565 in 2013, 521 in 2014). 

Sudden  increases  in  (2009/2010  and  2013)  are  presumably  due  to  political  developments 
(2008/2012 military conflict and 2012 political power shift). 

Table 2: First residence permits by reason, length of validity and citizenship (Georgia), 
2009-2014 

EU Member States and Schengen area 
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany  
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 

2010 
11 599
339
22
176
26
799
83
45
757
875
575
NA
5 898
187
72
34
1
59
8
112

2009 
9 514
395
23
167
27
806
65
79
697
922
602
NA
3 590
243
59
72
6
68
22
156

28 

2011 
7 617
217
22
95
24
806
66
56
569
1 240
600
NA
1 483
184
94
45
2
56
12
85

2012 
8 508 
148 
26 
130 
9 
1 243 
58 
49 
676 
992 
718 
NA 
1 952 
133 
81 
122 
3 
50 
19 
93 

2013 
9 850 
98 
13 
161 
17 
1 284 
64 
57 
809 
901 
869 
1 
2 573 
137 
100 
95 
4 
109 
21 
142 

2014 
9 457
113
38
147
13
1 312
103
68
1 096
802
1 653
2
1 402
99
67
159
6
100
17
112

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Source: Eurostat data.  Last updated 08.10.15, extracted on 09.10.2015 

352
147
111
28
4
21
14
150
688
0
NA
12
NA

384
241
107
13
7
20
8
156
595
0
NA
22
NA

552
537
86
9
9
24
11
163
570
0
NA
29
NA

500 
640 
67 
13 
6 
16 
19 
172 
573 
0 
NA 
42 
76 

341 
1 211 
58 
45 
3 
12 
17 
143 
565 
1 
1 
34 
84 

NA
1 342
74
46
5
8
22
130
521
NA
1
36
46

It is also interesting to note the trend in the issuing and refusal rates for the different types of 
visas.  

According to the DG HOME data based on Member State contributions, in terms of absolute 
numbers, 82 159 short-stay visas were applied for by Georgian nationals during 2013 and 93 
126  in  2014.  That  represents  a  13%  increase  which  in  turn  signals  a  greater  interest  among 
Georgians  on  travelling  to  the  EU.  The  demand  for  multiple  entry  visas  is  also  high,  with 
around 26 000 issued each year.  

In 2014, Germany was the main issuer of EU/Schengen visas to Georgian nationals, followed 
by  the  Netherlands  and  Italy.  These  data  roughly  correlate  with  the  known  Georgian 
communities in the EU.  

The average refusal rate for short-stay visa applications lodged by Georgian citizens increased 
slightly from 11.5 % in 2013 to 12.7 % in 2014, and continues to be relatively high compared 
to the world average (5.1 %). The multiple entry visa (MEV) issuing rate was 28.2 % in 2014, 
having dropped slightly from 2013 (31.6 %). However, this is due to a correction of the Italy' 
MEV issuing policy, under which MEVs are no longer issued for short periods. 

The  refusal  rates  between  different  issuing  countries  vary  greatly,  from  4.5  %  in  Poland  in 
2014  to  20.7  %  in  the  Netherlands,  indicating  differing  perceptions  of  the  level  of  risk 
associated with irregular migration. These high visa refusal rates can be explained by the fact 
that  Georgian  nationals  frequently  falsely  declare  business,  training  events  or  visiting 
acquaintances  as  the  purpose  of  their  intended  travel,  as  well  as  by  the  high  number  of 
falsified supporting documents, such as false bank statements or proof of employment that are 
often provided to the applicants by assisting agencies. Apparently the main risk is that these 
visas would be used for travelling to other Member States and/or for reasons other than those 
stated in the application (e.g. unauthorised work). Differing perceptions of irregular migration 
risk  are  likely  to  remain  even  after  visa  liberalisation  and  will  be  driven  by  similar 
considerations (risk of overstay or abuse of visa-free travel to engage in illegal work).  

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3: Applications for short-stay and multiple entry Schengen visas in Georgia, 2013-
2014 (countries with consular presence in Georgia) 

Schengen 
State 

Czech 
Republic 
Estonia 
France 
Germany 
Greece 
Italy 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Netherlands 
Poland 
Switzerland 
Total 

C visas 
applied 
for 
2013 

C visas 
issued 
2013 

MEVs 
issued 
2013 

MEVs 
issuing 
rate 
2013 

C visas 
not issued 
2013 

C visa 
refusal 
rate 
2013 

C visas 
applied 
for 
2014 

C visas 
issued 
2014 

MEVs 
issued 
2014 

MEVs 
issuing 
rate 
2014 

C visas 
not 
issued 
2014 

C visa 
refusal 
rate 
2014 

7,791
8,760 
2,039
2,461 
7,963 
7,070
17,625  15,592
6,144 
5,294
13,464  12,185
2,589
2,832 
4,172
5,305 
9,032
10,293 
3,153 
2,922
4,016
4,159 
82,159  72,702

587 
705 
1,611 
2,918 
511 
11,673 
943 
1,748 
3,450 
979 
877 
26,002 

7.5% 

34.6% 
22.8% 
18.7% 
9.7% 
95.8% 
36.4% 
41.9% 
38.2% 
33.5% 
21.8% 

31.6% 

968 
           421 

           891 

2,024
           850 

1,271 
243 
        1,192 

1,254 
231 
140 
9,485 

11.1%

7,832
17.1%
1,651
11.2%
7,661
11.5% 16,739
13.8% 10,048
9.4% 14,906
8.6%
4,127
22.5%
4,741
12.2% 17,888
7.3%
3,890
3.4%
3,643
11.5% 93,126

6,709 
605 
1,535 
588 
6,710 
1,836 
15,795
3,143
8,672 
600 
12,886 
9,338 
3,871 
962 
3,726 
1,471 
13,924 
5,615 
3,715 
1,393 
704 
3,424 
80,967  26,255 

9.0% 

38.3% 
27.4% 
19.9% 
6.9% 
72.5% 
24.9% 
39.5% 
40.3% 
37.5% 
20.6% 

1,123 
104 
942 
943 
1,376 
2,018 
255 
941 
3,708 
175 
217 
28.2%  11,802 

14.3% 

6.3% 
12.3% 
5.6% 
13.7% 
13.5% 
6.2% 
19.8% 
20.7% 
4.5% 
6.0% 

12.7% 

C visas 
applied 
for - 
change 
13-14 

C visas 
issued 
- 
change 
13-14 

-10.6% 
-32.9% 
-3.8% 
-5.0%
63.5% 
10.7% 
45.7% 
-10.6% 
73.8% 
23.4% 
-12.4% 
13.3% 

-13.9% 
-24.7% 
-5.1% 
1.3%
63.8% 
5.8% 
49.5% 
-10.7% 
54.2% 
27.1% 
-14.7% 
11.4% 

Source:  European  Commission,  Directorate-General  for  Migration  and  Home  Affairs. 
October 2015 

It  is  not  possible  to  measure  the  extent  to  which  the  visa  requirements  have  deterred 
Georgians  from  travelling  to  the  EU.  However,  it  is  reasonable  to  assume  that  when  visa 
requirements  for  Georgians  are  abolished,  they  will  be  more  likely  to  leave  their  home 
country to travel to the EU. However, the availability of financial means will also be a key 
factor shaping their decision to travel. 

Increased  circularity  of  the  migratory  flows  from  Georgia  to  the  EU  and  Schengen  area  is 
expected  to  occur  as  a  result  of  abolition  of  the  visa  requirement,  which  in  turn  would 
strengthen people-to-people contacts.  

2.1.3. Irregular migration trends 

Entry point 

Georgians  tend  to  use  relatively  few  major  land  entry  points  to  the  EU,  mainly  Poland  and 
Latvia, and to a much lesser extent Greece and Lithuania, while there is much more variation 
regarding  their  preferred  destination  countries.  Georgian  would-be  migrants  use  primarily 
land routes probably because they are not able to board aircraft without a visa on the way to 
the EU. 

A  total  of  8  210  Georgian  citizens  were  refused  entry  in  2013  as  shown  in  the  table  below 
(Eurostat data). The corresponding figure of 3 205 in 2014 resulted mainly from a significant 
drop in refusals of entry issued to Georgians by Poland.    

Table 4: Georgian citizens refused entry at the EU's external borders 2012-2014 

EU Member States and Schengen area 
European Union (28 countries) 

2012 

2013 

2014 

8 980

8 210

3 205 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany  
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Source: Eurostat data.  Last updated 20.08.15, extracted on 12.10.2015. 

10
70
10
0
20
10
10
95
10
20
NA
35
10
215
115
0
10
0
60
0
8 245
0
10
5
0
5
0
20
NA
5
0
5

10
50
10
15
20
0
10
160
5
30
20
60
0
320
110
0
10
0
60
0
7 250
0
25
0
5
0
0
25
NA
0
0
0

15 
20 
5 
0 
25 
5 
5 
210 
25 
5 
45 
70 
5 
960 
145 
0 
10 
0 
45 
10 
1 345 
0 
230 
5 
0 
0 
5 
20 
NA 
0 
0 
0 

Belarus  has  no  visa  requirement  for  Georgian  citizens  and  regular  and  direct  flights  exist 
between the two countries, making Belarus the main transit country for irregular migration to 
the  EU.  Therefore  Poland  is  the  main  entry  point  to  the  EU  and  it  issues  the  majority  of 
refusals  to  Georgian  nationals  (7  250  refusals  in  2013,  with  a  steep  fall  in  2014  to  1  345 
cases), followed by Latvia (960 cases in 2014, a big increase from 2013).   

After being refused entry at the EU's eastern borders with Belarus because they do not have a 
visa,  some  migrants  apply  for  asylum  while  others  try  to  cross  the  border  illegally.  The 
number of irregular border-crossings detected is still relatively low (328 cases in 2013, 267 in 
2014  –  Frontex  -  European  Agency  for  the  Management  of  Operational  Cooperation  at  the 
External Borders of the European Union - data) in comparison with the refusals. When such 
attempts  or  secondary  movements  inside  the  area  of  free  movement  are  detected,  Georgian 

31 

 
 
 
 
nationals tend to apply for asylum with the intention of absconding from the asylum centre in 
order to continue to their preferred destination countries.  

Frontex  also  notes  that  in  Greece,  which  used  to  be  the  other  main  entry  point  and  final 
destination country, the number of detections has dropped sharply in recent years. Reasons for 
this shift may include the difficult situation in the Greek labour market, making Greece a less 
attractive destination country.   

Detection of irregular migrants 

Eurostat's  database  table  below  shows  a  sizeable  increase  in  irregular  migrants  found  to  be 
illegally present in the EU Member States from 2013 to 2014, with respectively 4 930 and 6 
290 Georgians citizens having been detected. Germany accounted for the highest number (1 
580  cases),  followed  by  France  (905),  Greece  (820),  Sweden  (795),  Italy  (420)  and  Austria 
(390), showing the irregular migrants' preferred route and final destination.  

The  most  noticeable  increase  compared  with  2013  was  recorded  in  France,  Sweden  and 
Germany,  which  is  probably  an  indicator  of  new  preferred  destination  countries  for  future 
years.   

Detection of illegal stay can pertain both to persons who have entered the country irregularly 
and have been detected staying illegally and to persons who entered legally but overstayed the 
duration of their regular visa or residence permit (i.e. persons who entered the territory legally 
but remained after their visa expired or, in the case of Georgian citizens who cannot have their 
first or subsequent residence permit renewed  because they have lose their job and might be 
requested to leave the EU country they are residing in). Since, to a large extent, the number of 
illegal  stayers  reflects  the  number  of  overstayers,  it  is  logical  that  the  countries  hosting  the 
largest number of Georgian citizens with visas/temporary residence permits are also the ones 
showing the highest level of detections of illegal stayers.  

However, according to Frontex,11 an increase in the number of illegal stayers detected while 
the  numbers  of  entry  refusals  and  detection  of  illegal  border-crossings  are  decreasing  may 
point to some abuse of legal entry channels as well.    

Table  5:  Third-country  nationals  found  to  be  illegally  present  (annual  data  for 
Georgians), 2008-2014  

EU Member States and Schengen 
area 
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany  
Estonia 
Ireland 

2008 
5 005
140
25
95
5
460
10
145

11 Eastern Borders Annual Risk Analysis 2015. 

2009 
7 180
110
25
165
0
605
0
250

32 

2010 
5 325
125
25
30
0
710
10
120

2011 
4 285
90
25
70
0
585
20
45

2012 
5 335 
125 
15 
65 
0 
1 085 
45 
25 

2013 
4 930
115
30
45
0
1 380
20
25

2014 
6 290
180
20
30
0
1 580
15
10

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Source: Eurostat data.  Last updated 20.08.15, extracted on 09.10.2015. 

1 915
635
0
NA
265
280
15
30
NA
15
0
95
490
20
NA
0
5
230
10
NA
125
0
0
5
NA

1 340
440
400
NA
370
280
5
55
0
30
0
280
450
75
40
20
0
85
55
270
105
NA
0
NA
0

2 395
595
410
NA
245
275
5
80
0
30
0
140
895
255
40
20
0
130
20
345
135
0
0
0
0

850
355
285
NA
335
325
15
130
5
35
0
160
345
95
45
30
0
40
65
240
90
NA
0
10
205

795 
290 
390 
NA 
445 
295 
70 
265 
5 
45 
10 
NA 
410 
210 
50 
10 
0 
65 
15 
505 
110 
NA 
0 
15 
200 

590
245
400
0
395
160
75
220
5
65
10
NA
340
215
35
10
0
55
10
405
80
NA
0
35
245

820
390
905
0
420
90
65
175
10
45
10
NA
390
210
25
15
0
15
20
795
70
NA
0
40
220

These  data  also  show  that  political  factors  and  effects  of  internal  displacement  cannot  be 
totally excluded, as for example the peaks in detection of irregular flows in 2009 and 2012. 

2.1.4. Visa-free regime potential impacts 

Increased circularity of migratory flows from Georgia to the EU and vice versa is expected to 
occur  as  a  result  of  simplified  travel  arrangements  but  visa  liberalisation  would  not  lead  to 
massive  migration.  It  is  more  likely  to  foster  regular  temporary  and  circular  migration  and 
strengthen  people-to-people  contacts.  If  a  visa-free  regime  with  the  EU/Schengen  area  is 
implemented,  the  flows  of  Georgian  migrants  are  likely  to  become  more  self-regulated  and 
more  regularised.  Regarding  labour  migration  when  there  is  no  demand  for  specific  jobs, 
Georgian  nationals  will  either  refrain  from  entering  the  EU  countries  or  leave  the  EU  area 
with no fear of not being able to return in the event that better economic opportunities arise. 

Furthermore, the relatively small population of Georgians (less than 5 million) would tend to 
keep the flows relatively small. Additionally, there is no direct land-border with Georgia and 
direct flights between Georgia and the EU are not numerous.  

Regarding  irregular  migration  trends,  Georgians  combine  the  abuse  of  legal  entry  and  to  a 
lesser  extent  irregular  border-crossing  as  methods  of  entry  to  the  EU.  The  detection  of 
Georgians  who  overstay  the  legal  limits  of  their  travel  visa  is  increasing.  Presumably,  after 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
visa liberalisation, the most likely modus operandi will continue to be linked to the abuse of 
legal entry; however, the visa-free regime arrangements could also mitigate this trend.  

It  is  also  important  to  note  that  under  the  VLAP  Georgia  has  since  2013  modernised  its 
migration  management  policy  and  introduced  a  number  of  systematic  reforms  to  control 
immigration  and  emigration.  Georgian  authorities  have  also  developed  targeted  awareness-
raising campaigns on visa liberalisation, with a focus on repercussions of violating the terms 
of legal stay, including resulting entry ban, as well as pointing out economic opportunities in 
Georgia  with  the  aim  of  minimising  the  number  of  Georgians  overstaying  in  EU  Member 
States. The draft of Georgia's 2016-2020 Migration Strategy also pays special attention to the 
issue of raising public awareness on migration-related issues. It is also worth mentioning that 
the  four  mobility  centers  operating  under  the  Ministry  of  Refugees  and  Accommodation  of 
Georgia (in cooperation with IOM) are providing advice to potential emigrants.  

The  visa-free  regimes  with  Turkey  and  Israel  for  Georgian  nationals  show  that  organised 
movement  of  Georgian  migrants  within  the  legal  framework  of  stay  is  in  general  properly 
observed under the provisions laid down.  

2.2. Asylum: trends and potential impacts of a visa-free travel 

During the past five years, Georgia has consistently been among the top 15 main countries of 
origin  of  asylum  applicants  in  the  EU  and  Schengen  area  and  applications  from  Georgian 
citizens  are  spread  widely  throughout  Europe.  However,  there  has  been  a  decrease  in 
applications since 2013 and in 2014 Georgia was ranked 21st in terms of country of origin of 
applicants registered in the EU and Schengen area. 

Table  6  below  shows  that  Georgian  asylum  applicants  for  EU  28  countries  totalled  9  090 
applicants in 2013 (9 815 with Schengen area) and 8 560 in 2014 (9 070 with Schengen area).  

Georgian applicants have been primarily concentrated in a small number of countries, which 
tend  to  be  the  most  popular  destination  countries  of  Georgian  labour  migrants  (except  for 
Italy). 

Since  2008,  Poland,  France,  Germany  and  Greece  can  be  considered  the  main  receiving 
countries for Georgian applicants; however, destinations vary significantly from year to year. 
Greece ranked first in 2008 and has since then received fewer applicants from Georgia, while 
Poland ranked first in 2009 and 2012. In terms of main receiving countries, the importance of 
France and Germany has grown since 2008 and they became the main EU countries receiving 
Georgian  applications  in  2013.  The  ranking  changed  in  2014,  with  Germany  taking  over  as 
the  top  destination  country  for  Georgian  applicants  (3  180)  followed  by  France  (1  610), 
Sweden (constant increase from 2008 with 805 applicants in 2014) and Poland (in spite of a 
steep drop from 2012, with 720 applicants in 2014).  

Although a number of factors can influence the choice of destination country, the presence of 
an  established  Georgian  diaspora  and  previous  work  or  study  experience  in  the  destination 
country  are  significant  pull  factors.  Therefore  the  existence  of  Georgian  residents  seems  to 
explain the geographical distribution of Georgian applicants for asylum, except in the case of 
Italy, which has not registered high numbers of applications for asylum. 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Certain characteristics of the asylum system within a given EU or Schengen associated State 
may also  act  as  pull factors for persons who are  not in need  of  international  protection, but 
who  want  instead  to  take  advantage  of  access  to  the  EU/Schengen  area  and  other  benefits 
linked to the asylum procedure.  

It  should  be  noted  that  the  highest  numbers  of  asylum  applications  recorded  coincide  with 
times  of  conflict  in  the  country.  This  also  leads  to  forced  movement  of  people  within 
Georgia12  and  produced  an  increased  flow  of  citizens  fleeing  the  conflict  and  moving  or 
wishing to move to EU countries. The highest peaks in asylum applicants from Georgia have 
been registered during times of crisis, e.g. in 2003, in 2008-2009 with 11 185 applicants and 
in 2012 with 10 830 applicants. The figures show a decreasing trend since 2013 owning to the 
current stable political situation in Georgia.  

Table 6: Asylum applicants by citizenship (Georgia), 2008-2014   

EU  Member  States  and  Schengen 
area  
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany  
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 

2008 
5 015
275
5
40
25
285
0
180
2 240
60
460
NA
65
120
15
10
0
160
5
75
510
70
5
55
0
120

2009 
10 500
385
15
35
15
640
5
90
2 170
35
540
NA
85
75
0
75
0
115
0
425
975
4 180
0
40
0
100

2010 
6 865
365
15
10
15
750
0
55
1 160
50
1 435
NA
80
40
0
250
5
70
0
610
370
1 085
5
10
5
65

2011 
7 060
400
5
15
15
525
5
15
1 120
10
1 740
NA
30
15
175
230
15
20
0
235
260
1 735
5
25
0
65

2012 
10 830 
505 
5 
10 
75 
1 430 
35 
20 
895 
10 
2 680 
NA 
65 
10 
105 
310 
5 
10 
0 
250 
300 
3 235 
5 
0 
0 
55 

2013 
9 090
370
5
15
65
2 485
10
15
535
10
2 695
0
105
0
145
120
20
40
0
215
255
1 240
0
25
0
35

2014 
8 560
430
0
20
105
3 180
5
20
350
20
1 610
0
90
10
175
115
10
40
0
335
415
720
0
5
0
15

12  According  to  Ministry  of  Internally  Displaced  Persons    in  Georgia,  about  266  835  Internally  Displaced 
- 
Persons 
http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49e48d2e6.html 

also  UNHCR 

in  Georgia, 

breakaway 

registered 

regions 

from 

data 

see 

are 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Total 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 09.09.15, extracted on 12.10.2015. 

20
370
100
0
0
45
640
11 185

10
225
NA
5
0
20
480
5 520

70
280
45
5
0
50
400
7 515

55
290
85
0
0
85
640
7 595

30 
750 
30 
10 
0 
110 
725 
11 675 

15
620
50
5
0
65
655
9 815

40
805
55
5
0
35
465
9 070

Data show an overall recognition rate of 5.5 % as indicated by Eurostat in 2014. Such a low 
recognition rate indicates that a majority of the Georgian applicants do not have clear grounds 
for protection but there is also a variation in the recognition rate between EU countries due to 
differing  perceptions  of  the  Georgian  applicants'  need  for  protection.  335  first  instance 
positive decisions in the EU were made in respect of the 6 135 applications in 2014 (October 
2015 data). The bulk of positive decisions were issued in France, involving 195 cases, which 
represent 56 % of the positive decisions in the EU/Schengen area as a whole.  

Table  7:  First  instance  decisions  on  applications  by  citizenship  (Georgia),  2012-2014 
with positive decision in 2014, per country 

EU Member States and Schengen area 
European Union (28 countries) 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Czech Republic 
Denmark 
Germany 
Estonia 
Ireland 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Croatia 
Italy 
Cyprus 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Hungary 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 

2012 

2013 

2014 

6 850
540
0
10
25
585
25
15
1 120
10
2 585
0
35
5
45
230
0
5
0
245
285
490
0
5

36 

6 350
230
0
20
40
1 380
0
15
855
10
2 335
0
110
5
30
70
5
15
0
150
215
435
0
15

6 135 
285 
0 
20 
30 
1 035 
5 
10 
1 090 
20 
2 610 
0 
60 
5 
40 
35 
0 
20 
0 
285 
NA 
170 
0 
5 

Positive 
decision 
in 2014 
335
25
0
0
0
10
0
5
10
0
195
0
25
0
0
0
0
5
0
5
NA
40
0
0

 
 
 
 
 
Slovenia 
Slovakia 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Switzerland 
Total 
Source: Eurostat data. Last updated 18.09.2015, extracted on 12.10.2015. 

0
0
5
385
20
5
0
60
475
6 890

0
10
15
530
25
0
0
80
450
7 380

0 
5 
10 
360 
40 
5 
0 
30 
275 
6 445 

0
0
0
15
0
0
0
0
10
345

2.2.1. Visa-free regime potential impacts 

There  is  a  probability  that  the  number  of  asylum  applications  from  Georgian  citizens  will 
continue to decrease as a result of visa liberalisation, since the use of the asylum procedure 
might be considered less necessary for staying in EU Member States or Schengen Associated 
States. 

Conversely, in the context of current flows one of the effects of a visa-free regime could be an 
increase in the number of asylum applicants as a result of the opening of legal travel channels 
giving easier access to the asylum procedure. 

In  that  context,  there  could  also  be  a  rise  in  the  number  of  Georgian  asylum  applicants  if 
Georgian overstayers apply for international protection as a means to legalise their stay.    

As already mentioned, Frontex also notes that in the case of detection of Georgian nationals 
engaged  in  irregular  border  crossing,  they  tend  to  apply  for  asylum  with  the  intention  of 
absconding  from  the  asylum  centre  in  order  to  continue  to  their  principal  destination 
countries.   

As  regards  possible  abuse  of  the  Schengen  Member  States'  asylum  systems  of  by  Georgian 
citizens,  in  spite  of  an  already  low  recognition  rate,  putting  Georgia  on  the  Member  States' 
lists of safe country of origin might be a further means of preventing abuse. Georgia is also 
effectively implementing the readmission agreement in place with the EU.  

However,  other  concerns  over  asylum  applications  relate  to  the  presence  of  long-term 
internally  displaced  persons  (IDPs)  in  Georgia:  for  them,  emigration  to  the  EU  may  be  an 
option  in  the  future  if  not  enough  state  targeted  social  assistance  is  provided  (in  terms  of 
social  protection  of  families  and  children,  legal  assistance,  education  and  employment 
proposals, pension funds warranty, etc.). In order to guarantee protection of the rights of the 
IDPs,  as  well  as  their  reintegration  and  to  provide  a  durable  solution,  the  Government  of 
Georgia  adopted  in  2007  the  Strategy  on  IDPs  managed  by  the  Ministry  of  Internally 
Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia. 
Durable  housing  and  social  and  employment  assistance  for  IDPs  are  part  of  the  long-term 
strategy.  

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Data  show  that  a  new  political  crisis  or  armed  conflict  could  cause  an  immediate  rise  in 
asylum  applications  throughout  the  EU  and  Schengen  area.  However,  according  to  the 
EUMM  in  Georgia,  the  likelihood  of  another  violent  armed  conflict  between  Georgia  and 
Russia is low and therefore there is no reason to expect a rapid increase of refugees/asylum 
seekers from Georgia in the foreseeable future.    

3. ASSESSMENT OF SECURITY IMPACTS 

3.1. Organised crime: trends and potential impacts of a visa-free travel 

According to the Transcrime study edited by DG HOME,13 Georgian organised crime groups 
(OCGs) are already present and active in several EU Member States. Georgian OCGs appear 
to  be  widespread  in  Europe  in  terms  of  investments  in  the  legitimate  economy  with  an 
established presence. 

Georgian  OCGs including "thieves-in-law"  invest mainly in construction, transportation and 
logistics, real estate, wholesale and retail trade, hotels, bars and restaurants. Their activities in 
the  legal  economy  are  often  related  to  schemes  to  launder  the  proceeds  of  their  criminal 
activities. 

Georgian  OCGs  active  in  the  EU  engage  in  organised  property  crime,  waste  management, 
payment  card  fraud,  money  laundering,  forgery  of  documents,  facilitation  of  irregular 
migration,  extortion/racketeering  and  drug  trafficking,  but  they  are  also  active  in  the 
following  criminal  activities:  theft,  assault,  pick-pocketing,  trafficking  in  human  beings, 
cigarette smuggling, euro counterfeiting, murder, and corruption in general.  

Georgian OCGs also control a large proportion of the criminal markets in the countries of the 
former Soviet Union. Use of the Russian language and a common background make it easier 
for them to cooperate with other groups from the region.  

With visa liberalisation, the market for OCGs facilitating the irregular migration of Georgian 
nationals  to  the  EU  will  probably  decrease,  compelling  OCGs  to  seek  new  opportunities. 
Nevertheless, as a result of enhanced mobility, OCGs will most likely seek to exploit freedom 
of  movement  for  facilitating  irregular  migration  for  ethnic  minorities  or  other  neighbouring 
nationalities not eligible to benefit from a visa-free regime with the EU,14 for example with 
counterfeit  Georgian  biometric  passports  (in  spite  of  Georgia's  cooperation  with  Interpol15). 
There  is  however  a  minimal  risk  that  third-country  nationals  will  use  Georgia  as  a  transit 
country  to  reach  the  Schengen  area  and  apply  for  asylum  due  to  the  fact  that  Georgia  has 
established  effective  mechanisms  not  only  for  detection  and  management  of  irregular 
migrants  but  also  for  reception  and  protection  of  asylum  seekers  on  its  territory.  In  2015 
asylum seekers came mainly from Iraq and Ukraine (roughly 900 applicants in total).16 

13 Transcrime study: "From illegal markets to legitimate businesses: The portfolio of organised crime in Europe" 
(published in March 2015). 
14 Residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia who apply for and received Georgian travel documents according to 
the legislation in force in Georgia will benefit from a future visa-free regime. 
15 The National Central Bureau of Interpol in Georgia actively cooperates with the Interpol General Secretariat 
and  EU Member States' national bureaux of Interpol.  
16  Statistics  provided  by  Ministry  of  Internally  Displaced  Persons  from 
Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia in September 2015. 

the  Occupied  Territories, 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Furthermore, Georgian OCGs might be able to abuse the asylum systems of the EU Member 
States and Schengen area and the legitimacy of long-term stay for Georgian citizens (i.e. use 
of false entry/exit stamps).  

Visa  liberalisation  might  also  open  up  new  opportunities  for  OCGs  as  they  will  be  able  to 
carry out their activities and investments with flexibility and adaptability. A visa-free regime 
might therefore facilitate the smuggling of various commodities or illicit goods (i.e. precious 
metals and stones) on the Southern Caucasus route.  

Georgian  authorities  are  facing  up  to  the  risks  posed  by  OCGs  and  "thieves-in-law"  of 
Georgian  origin  by  establishing  the  necessary  legislative  framework  and  institutional 
mechanisms  notably  introduced  under  the  VLAP;  for  example  by  sharing  operative 
information and intelligence through international police cooperation17 or by developing anti 
money  laundering  (AML)  mechanisms  compliant  with  international  standards.  Georgia  has 
also  criminalised  the  status  of  "thief-in-law",  meaning  inter  alia  that  known  Georgian 
"thieves-in-law" are not eligible to receive Georgian biometric passports.  

3.2. Trafficking in human beings: trends and potential impacts of visa-free travel 

Georgia is a source, transit and destination country for the trafficking in human beings. The 
threat to the EU remains low as Georgia is listed neither among the major non-EU countries 
of origin for victims nor for suspected traffickers identified in the UE. 

3.3. Arms and Drug trafficking: trends and potential impacts of a visa-free travel 

There is no evidence to suggest that Georgian OCGs are involved in arms trafficking within 
the EU. To be noted that certain sources indicate that OCGs in the ex-USSR region could be 
involved in arms trafficking. 

Regarding drug trafficking, the South Caucasus route is used for the trafficking of heroin from 
Iran and Afghanistan, as an alternative transit hub to the EU. After crossing the Black Sea, the 
heroin is further trafficked to Western European countries. Ferry connections may therefore 
offer smuggling opportunities for traffickers and may require increased attention, especially if 
in the future Ukraine's citizens also become eligible for travelling visa-free to the Schengen 
area.    

A  visa-free  regime  could  provide  Georgian  OCGs  with  new  channels  and  modalities  of 
trafficking, exploiting the Black Sea route. The growing number of passengers travelling from 
Georgia to the EU could also be used as couriers.  

It  is  however  important  to  note  that  in  connection  with  the  drug  benchmark  of  the  VLAP, 
Georgian authorities have developed in particular infrastructure and control capacities, human 
resources  training  and  a  risk  management  system  for  establishing  risk  profiles  to  identify 
possible  perpetrators,  their  transport  means  and  suspicious  transactions  in  advance. 

17 So far Georgia has concluded bilateral agreement with 25 countries on cooperation in the field of combating 
crime  and  police  cooperation,  and  16  international  agreements  on  the  exchange  and  mutual  protection  of 
classified information. Georgia's Ministry of Internal Affairs actively cooperates with police attachés of the EU 
Member States represented in Georgia or covering Georgia from other countries.  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Information  about  cargo  is  added  to  the  system  at  the  border  crossing  points.  The  risk 
management  system  automatically  processes  information  and  if  risk  is  detected,  a  customs 
officer  receives  an  electronic  message  about  the  need  for  more  detailed  inspection  of  the 
cargo and the officer carries out checks as defined by the risk profile. 

4. MAIN CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY IN CASE OF VISA-FREE REGIME  

The  updated  data  and  information  available  point  to  the  most  likely  developments  in  the 
migration  and  security  areas,  with  the  EU  remaining  an  attractive  destination  for  migrants 
from Georgia and potential migratory and security challenges therefore need to be monitored.  

4.1. Key potential impacts on migration trends 

(b) 

(c)  

(a)   About  66  000  Georgian  nationals  were  legally  residing  in  various  Member  States  in 
2013. Latest trends show a growing interest in migrating to the EU. Visa liberalisation 
for  Georgia  will  reduce  the  barriers  associated  with  travelling  to  the  Schengen  area, 
fostering existing regular temporary and circular migration and strengthening people-
to-people  contacts.  However,  the  relatively  small  population  of  Georgia  would  be 
likely to keep the flows at a low level. Georgia is not among the main origin countries 
of migrants in the EU. 
Given the economic and social prospects in Georgia, the EU is an attractive option for 
labour  migrants  from  Georgia.  Additionally,  the  demand  for  residence  permits  will 
most likely increase. Georgia will have to provide inclusive economic opportunities in 
the near future to avoid emigration flows. Economic development on both national and 
local levels must remain one of the major priorities of the Georgian Government. 
There  is  a  continuing  shift  in  modus  operandi  of  Georgian  irregular  migrants  as 
methods of entering the Schengen area move from illegal border-crossing and asylum 
applications  to  abuse  of  legal  entry,  as  shown  by  an  increase  in  detection  of 
overstaying  irregular  migrants.  Presumably,  in  the  event  of  visa  liberalisation,  the 
most likely modus operandi will continue to be linked to the abuse of legal entry; the 
visa-free regime arrangements could however also mitigate this trend. 
There  is  a  probability  that  the  number  of  asylum  applications  from  Georgia  will 
decrease  as  a  result  of  visa  liberalisation,  since  the  asylum  channel  will  not  be 
considered  as  one  of  the  best  ways  to  enter  in  the  EU  Member  States.  On  the  other 
hand,  in  spite  of  an  average  low  recognition  rate  and  current  trend  of  decreasing 
asylum  applications,  one  of  the  effects  of  a  visa-free  regime  could  be  an  increase  in 
the  number  of  asylum  applicants  as  a  result  of  the  opening  of  legal  travel  channels 
giving  easier  access  to  the  asylum  procedure.  There  is  also  a  chance  that  asylum 
procedure could be used as a method to legalise overstay in an attempt to avoid return 
procedures. 
In the wake of armed conflicts or major political developments, as seen in the past, the 
Schengen area will remain an attractive option for asylum seekers and a rapid increase 
in asylum applications and emigration cannot be ruled out in the event of new armed 
conflict and subsequent potential increase of internally displaced persons fleeing such 
conflict.  

(d)  

(e)  

Possible mitigation measures to be undertaken by the EU Member States 

The  EU  Member  States  could  take  the  following  measures  to  foster  development  of  legal 
migration channels between Georgia and the EU: 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
•  Work  more  actively  on  establishing  circular/temporary/seasonal  migration  schemes 
with  the  Georgian  Government  to  facilitate  legal  migration  of  eligible  Georgian 
nationals to the EU; 

•  Work on establishing legal channels through which migrants from Georgia who are in 
an  irregular  situation  can  regularise  their  status,  provided  they  qualify  and  meet  the 
needs of EU Member States' labour markets; 

•  Provide  opportunities  for  university  graduates  from  Georgia  who  have  graduated  in 

EU Member States to extend their stay for work purposes; 

•  Cooperate with the Georgian Government on better protecting the rights of Georgian 
labour migrants in the EU Member States in general, and establishing a social benefit 
transfer system in particular; 

•  Revise the approach and procedures for processing asylum applications, especially in 
those  EU  Member  States  where  asylum  claims  are particularly  high,  to  mitigate  the 
abuse  of  asylum  benefits.  Continue  to  implement  effectively  the  readmission 
agreement in place with the EU at the level of each Member State.   

4.2. Key potential impacts on security trends 

(a) 

(b)  

Visa  liberalisation  with  Georgia  would  not  lead  to  any  notable  increase  of  security 
risks for the EU Member States compared to the existing situation, and measures are 
in place to mitigate potential impacts as well as to address them subsequently.  
It is unlikely that visa liberalisation with Georgia will bring about a major change in 
the activities of Georgian organised crime groups (OCGs). These groups have already 
found  ways  to  overcome  travel  restrictions  and  are  already  active  in  several  EU 
Member States. 

(c)   Nevertheless, visa liberalisation might facilitate to some degree the criminal activities 
carried  out  by  Georgian  OCGs  regarding  the  trafficking  of  goods  and  drugs  from 
Georgia to EU Member States, through possibly taking advantage of people travelling 
from Georgia to the EU. 
The market for OCGs facilitating the irregular migration of Georgian nationals to the 
EU will probably shrink, compelling OCGs to seek new opportunities, for example by 
attempting to provide ethnic minorities or other nationalities with stolen or counterfeit 
Georgian passports, or to consider services linked to the legalisation of long-term stay 
in the EU for Georgian citizens.  

(d) 

Possible mitigation measures to be undertaken by the EU Member States 

The  EU  Member  States  could  take  the  following  measures  to  address  potential  security 
impacts of a visa-free regime with Georgia: 

•  Conclude bilateral agreements on cooperation in the fight against organised crime and 

• 

• 

establish relevant contact points, when applicable, by deploying police attachés; 
Invite Georgian counterparts to participate in Joint Investigation Groups (Georgia-EU 
Member  States),  with  the  aim  of  exchanging  expertise  and  insights  into  the  modus 
operandi of Georgian criminals; 
In order to support the development of Georgia’s tools for crime analysis and facilitate 
exchange  of  corresponding  information,  accelerate  the  process  for  concluding  an 
agreement with EUROPOL.  

41