By Eto Midelashvili
As Georgia heads toward its 2024 parliamentary elections, recent legislative reforms have raised concerns about the future of the country’s democracy. With European Union (EU) membership ambitions in the balance, the electoral process is facing significant scrutiny from both domestic and international observers. The ruling Georgian Dream party has introduced changes that many believe could undermine the integrity of the elections, threatening the country’s democratic standing.
Electoral Reforms and the EU’s Expectations
In 2023, the European Union set out nine essential steps for Georgia to fulfill before initiating formal membership negotiations. One of the most critical requirements is the need for free, fair, and competitive elections. However, despite this clear directive, recent reforms to Georgia’s election laws have been met with skepticism.
International observers, including the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), have long advocated for reforms to ensure the independence of the Central Election Commission (CEC). The goal was to create a more transparent and balanced electoral process. However, recent legislative changes have shifted power over the CEC into the hands of the ruling party, allowing the Speaker of Parliament to nominate key officials. This move has reduced the opposition’s influence within the commission, raising concerns about impartiality in overseeing the upcoming elections.
Changes to the Central Election Commission (CEC)
One of the most debated reforms concerns the CEC, which now operates under revised rules. The changes allow for the unilateral appointment of key commission members with a simple majority vote, bypassing the need for broader political consensus. This adjustment has sparked criticism, as it diminishes the role of opposition parties in the election administration.
Additionally, the elimination of the CEC’s deputy chairperson role—previously held by an opposition representative—has further reduced checks and balances within the commission. Critics argue that these reforms concentrate power within the ruling party, raising questions about the fairness and transparency of the election process.
Reintroduction of Majoritarian Elements
Another significant reform involves the introduction of “delegates” in the parliamentary election process. This provision allows political parties to designate candidates as delegates, in addition to running for parliament. The 30 districts designated for delegates largely coincide with the former majoritarian districts, which were phased out in favor of a proportional system.
Critics argue that this change reintroduces elements of the majoritarian system, which historically favored the ruling party in key districts. The proportional system was intended to ensure fairer representation across the political spectrum, but the new delegate system has raised concerns about the potential for one-party dominance in these areas.
Abolition of Gender Quotas
In a move that has drawn widespread criticism, the ruling party abolished gender quotas that required political parties to include at least one woman for every four candidates on their party lists. This quota had been a key measure to promote gender equality in Georgian politics, a goal strongly supported by the European Union.
The removal of this quota is seen as a step backward in efforts to enhance women’s political participation. With fewer structural guarantees for female representation, observers fear that women’s voices could be marginalized in the upcoming elections. The decision to abolish the quota was vetoed by the president, but this veto was overridden by the ruling party, reflecting a broader consolidation of power.
Potential Violations in the 2024 Election
Recently, during visits to various regions and conversations with people, we’ve often heard concerns that some individuals expect the government to rig the elections, which, in turn, fosters cynicism and hopelessness. This section aims to provide more information about the electoral process and potential violations to increase public awareness. It will also help people understand preventive measures that can be taken.
In response to iFact’s question about possible violations and what citizens can do, representatives from organizations that have been monitoring elections for years shared their insights. We asked four experienced organizations: the “Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association,” “Open Space Caucasus,” ISFED, and the “Reforms and Research Group.”
Due to the implementation of the “Russian Law”, they fear that their ability to fully observe the elections may be restricted. Additionally, they mentioned the following challenges to expect during the pre-election period: misuse of administrative resources, vote-buying, intimidation/blackmail, illegal campaigning, use of violent tactics, inequality in political party donations, a polarized environment, etc.
On election day itself, the following procedural violations may be observed at polling stations:
- Misuse of Administrative Resources: There are fears that public resources may be used to support the ruling party’s campaign, giving it an unfair advantage.
- Vote-Buying and Intimidation: Past elections have seen instances of voters being coerced or bribed, and there is concern that such tactics may reappear.
- Electronic Voting and Transparency Issues: Although electronic voting machines are expected to enhance efficiency, there are concerns about the risk of procedural violations, such as ballot manipulation or improper voter marking. Additionally, the secrecy of the vote could be compromised if voters do not follow the proper procedures when submitting their ballots.
- Reduced Oversight: Changes in CEC rules, particularly the early drawing of lots to allocate functions among polling station staff, may limit the transparency of election-day procedures. Election monitoring organizations warn that this could result in fewer opportunities for independent observers to monitor key activities, especially at Georgia’s more than 3,000 polling stations.
- “Carousel Voting” and Proxy Voting: There remains concern about potential voting fraud, where votes could be cast on behalf of individuals who do not show up to the polls.
Election observers stress the importance of citizen participation in monitoring the elections and reporting any irregularities. They encourage voters to be vigilant and actively engage in the process to prevent violations and ensure that the election is as transparent and fair as possible.
Conclusion: Georgia’s Democratic Path at a Crossroads
As Georgia prepares for its parliamentary elections, the country finds itself at a critical juncture. The recent electoral reforms, particularly those affecting the CEC, the reintroduction of majoritarian elements, and the abolition of gender quotas, have raised concerns about the fairness of the upcoming vote. With EU membership on the horizon, Georgia’s ability to conduct free and fair elections will be under scrutiny.
The outcome of this process will not only determine the country’s immediate political future but also its long-term path toward European integration. As election day approaches, the world will be watching to see how Georgia navigates these challenges and whether its democratic institutions can withstand the pressure.
