Hotline2 405 505

News

Wednesday, 06 October, 2021
Share

According to Global Governance Efficiency Index, Georgia Is Among Top 20 Member Countries of the World Bank

The Deputy Minister of Justice evaluates the results of the 2021 Global Governance Efficiency Index, according to which Georgia is in the list of the top twenty of European and World Bank member states, ranking 21st in the world. Compared to last year, Georgia has improved its rating position by 8 places and took 62% with a 100% rating scale, which is the best result historically.

"This success is the result of the effective work of the Georgian government ... We are talking about two indicators in particular - the provision of public services and anti-corruption reforms," ​​said Tornike Cheishvili.

According to the Deputy Minister, "Improving services and increasing their availability is a daily process, and in terms of anti-corruption reforms, increasing accountability and transparency, and improving the criminal legislation."

"We, of course, will be committed to this course and will continue to work to achieve even greater success," said the Deputy Minister of Justice.

According to the Global Governance Performance Index, Georgia is a leader in the Black Sea and the Caucasus, and worldwide, is ahead of the United Kingdom, France, Canada, the Netherlands, Australia, Italy, Portugal, Norway, Sweden, Israel, Singapore, South Korea, etc.

The 2021 Global Governance Efficiency Index was published by the transnational research center SolAbility. The study evaluates the governments of 180 countries around the world according to 26 indicators, which are finally grouped into 15 criteria of 5 clusters. The determinants of the rating are: government cohesion (criteria: public services, education budget, military spending), infrastructure (criteria: investments, roads and rail, transmission), business environment (criteria: ease of doing business, business registration, sector developments) (Corruption (criteria: Corruption Index, Bribery prevalence, Red tape), Financial Stability (Criteria: Austerity, Exposure to Financial Shocks, Financial Regulation).

The Government Performance Index is based on surveys by the World Bank, UN profile institutions, and the world’s leading research centers.

Other News

Share
Print

According to the Strasbourg Court, Publicly Made Insulting, Obscene, and Degrading Statements Fall Outside the Scope of Freedom of Expression

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg upheld the position of the Ministry of Justice in the case of Miladze v. Georgia, confirming that publicly made insulting, obscene, and degrading statements directed at public officials are not protected under the right to freedom of expression.

The case concerned a video published on the social media platform TikTok in 2022, in which the applicant, civil activist Irakli Miladze, used obscene and insulting language toward the Mayor of Tbilisi, City Hall employees, and police officers. As a result, the national courts imposed a fine of 500 GEL, the minimum penalty provided for by law.

The Strasbourg Court unanimously held that the applicant’s statements did not amount to political criticism or the expression of views on a matter of public interest. According to the Court’s assessment, the language used was intended primarily to humiliate and insult public officials.

The Court also agreed with the reasoning of the national courts, noting that they had properly distinguished between harsh political criticism, which is protected in a democratic society, and personal insults, which are not. The judgment further emphasized that the sanction imposed on the applicant was minimal and proportionate, as he received only the lowest fine available under the law.

Today’s ruling by the Strasbourg Court reaffirmed an important principle: freedom of expression is one of the fundamental values of a democratic society and protects even strong and offensive criticism; however, it does not extend to humiliating or personally insulting statements directed at others, including public officials and civil servants.

The judgment further underscores that the state is entitled to protect political officials and public servants from unjustified verbal abuse and insults, ensuring that they are able to perform their duties in an environment free from attacks that undermine their dignity.

The Court’s assessment once again highlights the fundamental importance of freedom of expression, while clearly establishing that the exercise of this right — particularly on the internet and social media platforms — must not infringe upon the dignity and rights of others.