Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T09:11:04.283Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Trial by Jury in Georgia

A Catalyst for Evolving Independent Courts

from Part III - Challenges to Lay Participation in Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2021

By
Nikolai Kovalev  and
Giorgi Meladze
Edited by
Sanja Kutnjak Ivković ,
Shari Seidman Diamond ,
Valerie P. Hans  and
Nancy S. Marder
Sanja Kutnjak Ivković
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Shari Seidman Diamond
Affiliation:
Northwestern University, Illinois
Valerie P. Hans
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Nancy S. Marder
Affiliation:
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Get access

Summary

As trial by jury is expanding across Georgia and covering more types of crimes, one question is gaining increasing importance – whether Georgians fully understand the reform, which to this point has expanded to seven cities and covers nearly 30 crimes in the Criminal Code. Without a well-informed public, progress of the reform will likely face serious challenges, such as citizens’ reluctance to participate, lengthy and costly selection procedures, and increased public support for the political opposition to the reform. Jury reform also remains a politically challenging process. Government support remains weak, exacerbated by skepticism from the courts. As a result, the reform is poorly funded and few, if any, efforts are made to educate the public. Furthermore, the jury receives little attention in the curriculum of Georgian law schools. The media is still not prepared for informed coverage of actual trials and is easily manipulated by opponents of the reform. This chapter addresses these and other problems faced by the Georgian jury and discusses risks that can hamper the development of the institution and discredit its value in the eyes of the public.

Keywords

jury trialjudicial reformjudicial independencemedia coveragerevolutioncriminal justice reformadversarial trial
Type
Chapter
Information
Juries, Lay Judges, and Mixed Courts
A Global Perspective
 , pp. 261 - 282
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Bar Association/Central European and Eurasian Law Initiative. (2005). Judicial reform index for Georgia. Washington, DC: ABA.Google Scholar
Beachain, O. D., & Polese, A. (Eds). (2010). The colour revolutions in the former Soviet republics: Successes and failures. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black’s Law Dictionary (2009). 9th ed. St. Paul, MN: West.Google Scholar
Cape, E., Namoradze, Z., Smith, R., & Spronken, T. (2010). Effective criminal defence in Europe. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Davitashvili, G. (2003). Sasamartlo mt’kicebulebani kartul chveulebit samartalshi სასამართლო მტკიცებულებანი ქართულ ჩვეულებით სამართალში [The judicial evidences in Georgian customary law]. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University.Google Scholar
Diamond, S. S., Rose, M. R., & Murphy, B. (2014). Embedded experts on real juries: A delicate balance. William & Mary Law Review, 55, 885–933.Google Scholar
Dolidze, A. (2015). Napits msajulta sasamartlo sakartveloshi da misi shesabamisoba adamianis uplebata evrop’ul k’onventsiastan ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლო საქართველოში და მისი შესაბამისობა ადამიანის უფლებათა ევროპულ კონვენციასთან [Jury trials in Georgia and their compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights]. In Korkelia, K (Ed.), Adamianis uplebebi da samartlis uzenaesoba ადამიანის უფლებები და სამართლის უზენაესობა [European standards of human rights and their influence on Georgian legislation and practice] (pp. 43–59). Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University Press.Google Scholar
Freedom House. (2019). Freedom in the world, Georgia. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2019/georgiaGoogle Scholar
Gharibashvili, I. (2015). P’remieri Gharibashvili: Napits msajulta inst’it’ut’ma sruli k’rakhi ganitsada პრემიერი ღარიბაშვილი: ნაფიც მსაჯულთა ინსტიტუტმა სრული კრახი განიცადა [A public statement by Prime Minister Gharibashvili: The jury institute has suffered a complete setback]. Tabula. www.tabula.ge/ge/story/96953-premieri-nafic-msajulta-institutma-sruli-kraxi-ganicadaGoogle Scholar
Gleadow, C. (2000). History of trial by jury in the Spanish legal system. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Gruzenberg, M. O. (1917). Sud prisiazhknykh v zakavkazie [Jury trials in Transcaucasia]. Tiflis: Tipografia Kantseliarii Osobogo Zakavkazskogo Komiteta.Google Scholar
Gupta, P., Kleinfeld, R., & Salinas, G. (2002). Legal and judicial reform in Europe and Central Asia. Washington, DC: World Bank, Operations Evaluation Department.Google Scholar
Herrmann, J. (2002). Comments on the Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Institute of Social Researches. (2009). Sabaziso codnisa da aghkmis k’vleva sasamartlo sist’emis shesakheb საბაზისო ცოდნისა და აღქმის კვლევა სასამართლო სისტემის შესახებ [Basic knowledge and perceptions concerning courts in Georgia]. www.msajuli.ge/uploads/2009.pdfGoogle Scholar
Jackson, J. D., and Kovalev, N. (2016). Lay adjudication in Europe: The rise and fall of the traditional jury. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 6, 368–395.Google Scholar
Javakhishvili, I. (1982). Sakartvelos ist’oria, t’omi 6 საქართველოს ისტორია, ტომი 6 [History of Georgia, Vol. 6]. Tbilisi: Mecniereba.Google Scholar
Jones, S. F. (1988). The establishment of Soviet power in Transcaucasia: The case of Georgia 1921–1928. Soviet Studies, 11(4), 616–639.Google Scholar
Jones, S. F.(2005). Socialism in Georgian colors: The European road to social democracy, 1883–1917. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kakabadze, S. (1997). Kartveli khalkhis ist’oria 1783–1921 ts’lebshi ქართველი ხალხის ისტორია 1783–1921 წლებში [History of the Georgian people 1783–1921]. Tbilisi: Nekeri.Google Scholar
Kavkazskaia Arkheograficheskaia Komissiia [Caucasus Archeological Commission]. (1866). Akty sobrannye Kavkazskoi Arkheograficheskoi Komissieiu [Documents collected by Caucasus Archeological Commission], Vol. 1. Edited by Berzhe, A. P.. Tiflis: Tipografia Glavnogo Upravleniia Namestnika Kavkazkogo.Google Scholar
Kikvadze, A. (1959). Sakartvelos ist’oria XIX–XX ss, ts’igni 2: 1861–1921 საქართველოს ისტორია : XIX–XX სს. : წიგნი 2 : 1861–1921 წწ [History of Georgia, XIX–XX centuries, Book 2]. Tbilisi: Tbilisi State University Press.Google Scholar
King, George V (1913). Dzeglis dadeba giorgi brts’q’invalis mier ძეგლის დადება გიორგი ბრწყინვალის მიერ [Book of Law “Dzeglisdeba”]. Edited by Kakabadze, S. Tbilisi: S. M. Losaberidze.Google Scholar
K’onstitutsiuri k’vlevebis tsentri კონსტიტუციური კვლევების ცენტრი [Center for Constitutional Research]. (2018). Mediis monitoringis angarishi მედიის მონიტორინგის ანგარიში [Media monitoring report]. https://conlaw.iliauni.edu.ge/naphits-msajultha-sasamarthlo-mediashi-1998–2018Google Scholar
K’onstitutsiuri k’vlevebis tsent’ri, martlmsajulebis ganvitarebisa da samartlebrivi sts’avlebis cent’ri da adamianis uplebebis erovnuli inst’it’ut’i კონსტიტუციური კვლევების ცენტრი, მართლმსაჯულების განვითარებისა და სამართლებრივი სწავლების ცენტრი და ადამიანის უფლებების ეროვნული ინსტიტუტი [Center for Constitutional Research, the Judicial Empowerment and Legal Education Center & the National Human Rights Institute at Free University]. (2015). Gantskhadeba napits msajulta sasamartlostan dak’avshirebit dagegmili tsvlilebebis shesakheb განცხადება ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლოსთან დაკავშირებით დაგეგმილი ცვლილებების შესახებ [Joint statement about the intended changes in the jury trial provisions]. http://nihr.freeuni.edu.ge/uploads/files/gantskhadeba_jury.pdfGoogle Scholar
Korff, D. (2005). Comments on amendments to the Georgian Criminal Procedure Code and the draft New Georgian Criminal Procedure Code (as formulated in December 2005). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N. (2010). Criminal justice reform in Russia, Ukraine, and the Former Republics of the Soviet Union: Trial by jury and mixed courts. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N. (2015). Analysis of the draft law of Georgia amending the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia with regards to jury trials. Report prepared for the Open Society Georgia Foundation, Tbilisi.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N., & Meladze, G. (2015, October 13). Authors’ meeting with judges at the Supreme Court of Georgia.Google Scholar
Kovalev, N., & Smirnov, A. (2014). The nature of the Russian trial by jury: Jurata Patriae or Raison d’Etat. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 22(2), 115–133.Google Scholar
Leigh, L. (2002). Comments on the Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Lekveishvili, M. (2013). Napits msajulta inst’it’ut’is sakmianoba tbilisis sakalako sasamartloshi ნაფიც მსაჯულთა ინსტიტუტის საქმიანობა თბილისის საქალაქო სასამართლოში [The operation of the jury trials in Tbilisi City Court]. In Napits msajulta inst’it’ut’i sakartveloshi ნაფიც მსაჯულთა ინსტიტუტი საქართველოში [The trial by jury in Georgia] (pp. 146–161; English translation, pp. 457–467). Tbilisi: Iverioni.Google Scholar
Light, M. (2014). Police reforms in the Republic of Georgia: The convergence of domestic and foreign policy in an anti-corruption drive. Policing and Society, 24(3), 318–345.Google Scholar
Lomsadze, G. (2010, October 1). Georgia: Jury trials aim to bolster public confidence in courts. Eurasianet. https://eurasianet.org/georgia-jury-trials-aim-to-bolster-public-confidence-in-courtsGoogle Scholar
Mchedlishvili, Z. (2015, June 8). Sud prisiazhnykh razocharoval prem’er-ministra Gruzii [The jury trial disappointed prime minister of Georgia]. Ekho Kavkaza. www.ekhokavkaza.com/a/27060806.htmlGoogle Scholar
Meladze, G. (2007). Law and revolution: Formation of the new legal tradition in Georgia. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 6(3). www.esiweb.org/pdf/esi_turkey_tpq_id_115.pdfGoogle Scholar
Meladze v. Imedi TV, Case No. 244 (January 27, 2019). www.qartia.ge/ka/gadatsyvetilebebis-dzebna/article/67901-gadatsyvetileba-saqmeze-giorgi-meladze-irakli-chikhladzis-da-thamar-gogesashvilis-tsinaaghmdegGoogle Scholar
Minister of Education and Science of Georgia. (2016). 2018–2024 ts’lebis erovnuli sasts’avlo gegma damt’k’itsebulia sakartvelos ganatlebisa da metsnierebis minist’ris 2016 ts’lis №40 brdzanebit 2018–2024 სასწავლო წლების ეროვნული სასწავლო გეგმა დამკიცებულია საქართველოს განათლებისა და მეცნიერების მინისტრის 2016 წლის №40/ნ ბრძანებით [National education goals document for 2018–24 (National educational goals, adopted by Minister of Education and Science Decree #40, 2016)]. http://ncp.ge/ge/curriculum/satesto-seqtsia/akhali-sastsavlo-gegmebi-2016-2021Google Scholar
Mytton, E., & Meladze, G. (2006). Legal education in transition: A study from Georgia. http://webjcli.ncl.ac.uk/2006/issue3/mytton-meladze3.htmlGoogle Scholar
Nasonov, S. A. (2015). Evropeiiskie modeli proizvodstva v sude prisiazhnykh v Gruzii (sravnitel’no-pravovoe issledovanie) [European models of the proceedings in the trial by jury in Georgia (comparative legal studies)]. Aktual’nye problem rossiskogo prava, 6(55), 163–169.Google Scholar
Netgazeti (2017). Okrop’iridze sakartvelos ts’inaaghdeg ოქროპირიძე საქართველოს წინააღმდეგ [Okropiridze v. Georgia]. https://netgazeti.ge/news/202542/Google Scholar
Nikolo, M. (2007). Napits msajulta mimart sazogadoebis inpormirebuloba da chartuloba ნაფიც მსაჯულთა მიმართ საზოგადოების ინფორმირებულობა და ჩართულობა [Awareness of and participation in jury trial]. www.msajuli.ge/uploads/2007.pdfGoogle Scholar
Papuashvili, G. (2012). The 1921 Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Georgia: Looking back after ninety years. European Public Law, 18, 323–350.Google Scholar
Piacentini, L., & Slade, G. (2015). Architecture and attachment: Carceral collectivism and the problem of prison reform in Russia and Georgia. Theoretical Criminology, 19(2), 179–197.Google Scholar
Pondi ghia sazogadoeba sakartvelo ფონდი ღია საზოგადოება საქართველო) [Open Society Georgia Foundation]. (2015). Roundtable on jury trials. October 16, Tbilisi. Unpublished notes, on file with authors.Google Scholar
Popjanevski, J. (2015). Retribution and the rule of law: The politics of justice in Georgia. Silk Road Paper. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program. https://silkroadstudies.org/resources/pdf/SilkRoadPapers/2015-popjanevski-retribution-and-the-rule-of-law-the-politics-of-justice-in-georgia.pdfGoogle Scholar
Roudik, P. (2011). Georgia: Courts with jurors established nationwide. Global Legal Monitor. www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/georgia-courts-with-jurors-established-nationwide/Google Scholar
Sakartvelos akhalgazrda iurist’ta asotsiatsia საქართველოს ახალგაზრდა იურისტთა ასოციაცია) [Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association]. (2016, June 22). The GYLA responds to legislative changes related to the jury system. https://gyla.ge/en/post/saia-nafic-msajulta-sasamartlotan-dakavshirebul-cvlilebebs-ekhmianeba#sthash.vChEOqA6.dpbsGoogle Scholar
Sakartvelos k’onst’it’utsia საქართველოს კონსტიტუცია [Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Georgia] (1921), adopted on February 21, 1921.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos k’onst’it’utsia საქართველოს კონსტიტუცია [Constitution of Georgia] (1995), adopted on August 24, 1995, with amendments as of March 23, 2018.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos p’rezidentis gank’arguleba No. 914 საქართველოს პრეზიდენტის განკარგულება No. 914 [Presidential Decree of Georgia No. 914] (2004).Google Scholar
Sakartvelos siskhlis samartlis k’odeksi საქართველოს სისხლის სამართლის კოდექსი [Criminal Code of Georgia] (1999), adopted on July 22, 1999, No. 2287. Arts. 108, 109, 117(2), (4), (6), and (8), 126(2), 135-1, 143(2-4), 143-1, 143-2, 143-3(2-4), 144-2, 146(2), 147, 149, 197(4), 198(3), 229.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos siskhlis samartlis sap’rotseso k’odeksi საქართველოს სისხლის სამართლის საპროცესო კოდექსი [Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia] (1998), adopted on February 20, 1998.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos siskhlis samartlis sap’rotseso k’odeksi საქართველოს სისხლის სამართლის საპროცესო კოდექსი [Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia] (2009), adopted on October 9, 2009, No. 1772.Google Scholar
Sakartvelos uzenaesi sasamartlo საქართველოს უზენაესი სასამართლო [Supreme Court of Georgia]. (2012). Napits msajulta sasamartlo ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლო [Jury trials]. www.supremecourt.ge/files/upload-file/pdf/12msajuli.pdfGoogle Scholar
Sakartvelos uzenaesi sasamartlo(2014). Sasamartlo sist’emis reporma sakartveloshi სასამართლო სისტემის რეფორმა საქართველოში [Judiciary reform in Georgia]. www.supremecourt.ge/files/upload-file/pdf/broshura-2014.pdfGoogle Scholar
Sakartvelos uzenaesi sasamartlo (2020). Napits msajulta sasamartlo damouk’idebel sakartveloshi ნაფიც მსაჯულთა სასამართლო დამოუკიდებელ საქართველოში (1917–1921 წწ) [Jury court in independent Georgia (1917–1921)]. www.msajuli.ge/index.php?m=796Google Scholar
Sakhalkho Sakme (1920, February 20). [Georgian newspaper].Google Scholar
Slade, G. (2013). Reorganizing crime: Mafia and anti-Mafia in post-Soviet Georgia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sofronenko, K. A. (1967). Istoriia gosudarstva i prava SSSR, Chast 1 [History of state and law of USSR, Vol. 1]. Moscow: Iuridicheskaia literatura.Google Scholar
Solomon, P. H., & Foglesong, T. S. (2000). Courts and transition in Russia: The challenge of judicial reform. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
Tanovich, D. M., Paciocco, D. M., & Skurka, S. (1997). Jury selection in criminal trials. Toronto: Irwin Law.Google Scholar
Belgium, Taxquet v., Application No. 926/05 (January 13, 2009).Google Scholar
Belgium, Taxquet v., Application No. 926/05 (November 16, 2010).Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C. (2002a). Japan’s new system of mixed courts: Some suggestions regarding their future form and procedures. Saint Louis-Warsaw Transatlantic Law Journal, 2001–2002, 89–117.Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C. (2002b). Latin America’s first modern system of lay participation: The reform of inquisitorial justice in Venezuela. In Donatsch, A, Forster, M, & Schwarzenegger, C (Eds.), Strafrecht, Strafprozessrecht und Menschenrechte: Festschrift für Stefan Trechsel [Criminal law, criminal procedure law and human rights: Commemorative for Stefan Trechsel] (pp. 765–780). Zürich: Schulthess Juristische Medien AG.Google Scholar
Thaman, S. C.(2011). Should criminal juries give reasons for their verdicts? Chicago-Kent Law Review, 86 , 613–668.Google Scholar
Transparency International. (2007). Global corruption report: Corruption in judicial systems. www.transparency.org/whatwedo/publication/global_corruption_report_2007_corruption_and_judicial_systemsGoogle Scholar
Transparency International Georgia. (2010). Refreshing Georgia’s courts. Trial by jury: More democracy or a face-lift for the judiciary? www.transparency.ge/sites/default/files/Trial by Jury.pdfGoogle Scholar
Vidmar, N. (2000). The jury elsewhere in the world. In Vidmar, N (Ed.), World jury systems (pp. 421–447). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vidmar, N.(2003). Juries and lay assessors in the Commonwealth: A contemporary survey. Criminal Law Forum, 13, 385–407.Google Scholar
Vogler, R. (2006, July 6–9). Lay participation and the criminal justice revolutions in Eastern Europe: The cases of Georgia and Ukraine [Paper presentation]. Law and Society Association Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD. On file with authors.Google Scholar
Vogler, R.(2009). Report on the 2009 Draft of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia prepared on behalf of the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Wheatley, J. (2017) Georgia from national awakening to Rose Revolution: Delayed transition in the Former Soviet Union. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
World Bank. (1998, April 10). Georgia judicial assessment (Report No. 17356-GE). http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/293711468773997603/pdf/multi-page.pdfGoogle Scholar
World Bank.(2007). Doing business: How to reform (Annual report). www.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusiness/media/Annual-Reports/English/DB07-FullReport.pdfGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×