Keti Kvartskhava, Chair of the Georgian Association of Law Firms, says that “it is unacceptable to introduce any system that restricts the independence of lawyers or creates risks of conflicts of interest.” According to her, the draft amendments to the Law on Legal Aid, initiated by the ruling Georgian Dream party and currently under review during the spring session of Parliament, raise exactly this concern.
Speaking on BMG TV’s program Analytics, Kvartskhava emphasized that “a lawyer is, by definition, independent,” and explained the role of the Legal Aid Service and why limiting the function and independence of lawyers would have negative consequences. She called on the initiators of the amendments to “responsibly assess the final outcome of the changes to the Law on Legal Aid.”
“I reviewed the explanatory note, which is practically a regulatory impact analysis. It must clarify three things: first - why this regulation is needed; second - what it will cause; and third - what it will cost. This is essentially the essence of RIA.
To the question of what triggered the need for these amendments, the explanatory document states directly that the purpose is to establish control. The authors admit that previous control over the Legal Aid Service was insufficient, and these changes will allow for stronger oversight. Previously, the Service was accountable to Parliament; now it will report to the Prime Minister. The document also briefly mentions structural changes but does not explain their real impact.
Under the amendments, the number of members on the commission overseeing the Legal Aid Service will be reduced. Previously, the Georgian Bar Association and the Public Defender each had three representatives - six in total. Now they will have only one representative each, and even those will be ex officio members - the Ombudsman and the Chair of the Bar Association themselves. This means there will no longer be experts specifically focused on the issue. This is very problematic, especially in a country like Georgia, where the number of socially vulnerable citizens is high. These people rely on lawyers appointed through the Legal Aid Service. Today, these lawyers are not controlled by the authorities — nor should they be — and any mechanism that allows the government to influence a free profession is a serious setback for democracy and human rights.
Beyond the legal framework, people must feel protected and free - free to express opinions without fear. Lawyers must be able to independently develop strategies for their cases and advise clients without feeling that the Prosecutor General is watching over their shoulder and may disapprove. This is absolutely unacceptable.
Even among the drafters themselves, questions emerged that were left unanswered. This reflects an irresponsible approach to the entire process. We are asking lawmakers to fully and responsibly understand the final consequences - what exactly the result will be. Everyone needs protection - whether socially vulnerable or not. The state’s primary obligation is to guarantee people independent legal defense,” said Keti Kvartskhava.
