Hotline2 405 505

News

Tuesday, 21 October, 2025
Share

Council of Europe Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA) Publishes Fourth Evaluation Round Report

On 20 October 2025, the Council of Europe Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA) published its Fourth Evaluation Round Report. This evaluation round focused on identifying and protecting groups that are particularly vulnerable to human trafficking, within the framework of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.

According to the report, the Government of Georgia has made significant progress in recent years in strengthening its legislative, institutional, and policy mechanisms to combat human trafficking. GRETA particularly commended the consistent state policy implemented by the Inter-Agency Coordination Council for Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, chaired by the Ministry of Justice.

The report also highlighted several positive developments, including the simplification of procedures for compensating victims and injured persons, the expansion of powers of law enforcement and other responsible state bodies, and enhanced training programs for professionals working in the field.

As part of the Fourth Evaluation Round, a GRETA delegation conducted a visit to Georgia from 23 to 27 September 2024.

Georgia continues to attach great importance to the effective fight against human trafficking, which remains a key component of the country’s EU integration process. These efforts also contribute to creating a safe and secure environment domestically and across the region in the fight against transnational organized crime.

The progress reflected in GRETA’s Fourth Evaluation Round Report is the result of the effective work of the Inter-Agency Coordination Council for the Implementation of Measures against Trafficking in Human Beings. The Council, chaired by the Minister of Justice of Georgia, includes representatives of all relevant state agencies, the Public Defender’s Office, and partner organizations.

The findings of GRETA’s report echo the conclusions of the U.S. Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report, which has placed Georgia in the highest “Tier 1” category for ten consecutive years, recognizing the country’s sustained and comprehensive efforts to combat human trafficking.

Other News

Share
Print

Strasbourg Court Declares Complaints on Independence and Impartiality of Supreme Court Judges of Georgia Inadmissible

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld the legal position presented by Georgia’s Ministry of Justice and, based on the submitted evidence, declared the complaints in Pirtskhalava and Y v. Georgia and Goginashvili v. Georgia inadmissible.

In these applications, the complainants alleged that one of the judges of the Supreme Court who examined their cases was biased. Additionally, the applicants in Pirtskhalava and Y claimed that Judge Sh.T. had not been appointed in accordance with the law.

The ECHR accepted the arguments of the Ministry of Justice and declared all three complaints regarding judicial impartiality inadmissible. In its decision, the Strasbourg Court reviewed the reforms undertaken by the Georgian authorities since 2012 to improve the justice system. In particular, it highlighted reforms such as: lifetime judicial appointments, improvements in the procedures for the appointment and promotion of judges, strengthening the role and functional independence of the High Council of Justice, and constitutional amendments that further refined the selection and appointment procedures for Supreme Court judges.

It is worth noting that the ongoing legal proceedings against Irakli Pirtskhalava concern the criminal case related to the murder of Buta Robakidze. Pirtskhalava additionally alleged that his criminal trial had been unfair, arguing that he had not been given the opportunity to question his former co-defendants and other witnesses or effectively challenge the evidence. The Strasbourg Court found no indication of a violation of his right to a fair trial and therefore declared his additional complaints inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded.