Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08TBILISI2071
2008-11-06 13:47:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Tbilisi
Cable title:  

GEORGIA: LAW ON OCCUPIED TERRITORIES SEEKS TO

Tags:  PGOV PREL KBTS RU GG 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO4615
PP RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHSI #2071/01 3111347
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 061347Z NOV 08
FM AMEMBASSY TBILISI
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0360
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING PRIORITY 0142
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 4719
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE PRIORITY 2207
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 TBILISI 002071 

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/06/2018
TAGS: PGOV PREL KBTS RU GG
SUBJECT: GEORGIA: LAW ON OCCUPIED TERRITORIES SEEKS TO
SAFEGUARD TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY

Classified By: Charge d'Affaires a.i. Kent Logsdon for Reasons 1.4 (b)
and (d).

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 TBILISI 002071

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/06/2018
TAGS: PGOV PREL KBTS RU GG
SUBJECT: GEORGIA: LAW ON OCCUPIED TERRITORIES SEEKS TO
SAFEGUARD TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY

Classified By: Charge d'Affaires a.i. Kent Logsdon for Reasons 1.4 (b)
and (d).


1. (C) Summary and comment. The "Law of Georgia on the
Occupied Territories" was formally published with President
Saakashvili's signature October 30. Georgian
parliamentarians and staff described the law as a response to
Russian aggression and an effort to prevent degradation of
Georgian territorial integrity. Key elements include
restrictions on economic activityin the regions and
limitations on movements by foreigners. The law also renews
the state of emergency in the territories. Although the law
sets basic parameters for the legality of activities in the
regions, the government must establish detailed procedures to
implement the law within a month. The diplomatic corps has
concerns about limitations on its own movements, which could
contravene the Vienna Convention and be construed as an
implicit acknowledgment of some loss of Georgia's
sovereignty, and limitations on the movements of
international organizations, which could render important
assistance difficult. Although the intentions of the law are
understandable, the Parliament may not have given the
government sufficient time to implement this legislation in a
thoughtful way. End summary and comment.

THE LAW ITSELF


2. (SBU) In an October 21 briefing for the diplomatic corps,
Deputy Chairman of the Georgian Parliament's Legal Issues
Committee Akaki Minashvili and Committee member Tsiora
Taktakishvili, who helped draft the "Law of Georgia on the
Occupied Territories," offered an overview of the law itself
and answered questions. Article 1, entitled "The Purpose of
the Law," contains one sentence: "The purpose of the present
Law is to define the status of those territories that are
occupied as a result of the military aggression of the
Russian Federation, and to establish a special legal regime
on these territories." The following articles then define
the occupied territories and maritime zones (Article 2);
restrict the movements of foreigners to one entry and exit
point for each territory -- Zugdidi for Abkhazia and Gori for
South Ossetia (Art. 4); nullify property transactions in the
territories (Art. 5); prohibit economic activity in the

territories that is regulated in some way by the de facto
authorities (Art. 6); assign the Russian Federation
responsibility for the protection of human rights and
cultural heritage in the territories while they are outside
Georgia's effective control (Art. 7); declare de facto
governments and legislatures and their acts illegal (Art. 8);
and oblige the government to take steps to protect Georgia's
interests in the territories, in particular by signing
bilateral treaties that establish sanctions for those that
violate the law (Art. 9). A copy of the draft has been
emailed to EUR/CARC.


3. (SBU) Minashvili and Taktakishvili explained that the law
provides a basic framework for a legal regime in the
territories, but the government would have to prepare a
decree within one month of the law's October 30 publication
that sets out detailed procedures for implementing the
legislation. In Articles 4 and 6, for example, the law gives
the government the authority to make special provisions for
movements and economic activity in the territories, provided
they serve Georgia's national interest, and the government
Qthey serve Georgia's national interest, and the government
will have to lay out the criteria for such provisions and the
process by which such decisions are made. Minashvili
suggested that authorizing the government to establish those
criteria and processes, rather than including them in the law
itself, would provide for more flexibility. It would be
easier for the government to issue a new decree than for the
Parliament to pass a new law.


4. (SBU) Based on earlier discussions with various parties,
including diplomats, Minashvili and Taktakishvili explained
that the text had been amended to take certain concerns into
account. The special provision for allowing more flexible
movement, for example, now has a passage that makes explicit
the importance of enabling the work of international
organizations on "peaceful conflict resolution, deoccupation
or humanitarian purposes." Restrictions on economic
activities in the territories can likewise be lifted "if they
serve the national interests of Georgia and the purpose of
peaceful conflict resolution, deoccupation, or humanitarian
purposes."


5. (SBU) Article 3 declares that a state of emergency will
remain in effect in the occupied territories. Minashvili
explained that this includes any areas that Russian forces

TBILISI 00002071 002 OF 003


still occupy, including those in undisputed Georgian
territory, such as the Russian checkpoint in Perevi.

DIPLOMATIC COMMUNITY CONCERNS ABOUT FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT . . .


6. (SBU) The focus of the October 21 discussion was Articles
4, 5 and 6, especially the issue of foreigners' freedom of
movement. French Ambassador Eric Fournier noted that the
Vienna Convention prohibits restrictions on diplomats'
movements and expressed concern about the ability of
international organizations to conduct their work. He
furthermore suggested that this provision of the law might
even be counterproductive, because prohibiting diplomats from
going wherever they want to go within Georgia -- a right
guaranteed them by the Vienna Convention -- could reinforce
the reality of the administrative boundaries and thereby
degrade Georgia's territorial integrity.


7. (SBU) Council of Europe Special Representative Igor Gaon
focused on the practical difficulties that restrictions on
movements would pose. He raised the case of a recent Council
of Europe mission that the Georgian government had invited to
survey damage to cultural sites (primarily churches) in South
Ossetia. The Georgian government insisted that the mission
seek entry to South Ossetia from Gori (as the law now
formally requires),but the mission could not gain entry.
Gaon suggested that the Georgian government knew al along
that the mission would not be allowed in, but asked that they
come anyway. He said that not only was this approach unfair
to the international organizations, but it was impractical,
because it would prevent the Georgian government from
addressing real concerns (such as the current state of
cultural sites). If the government had authorized the
mission to enter from the north, through North Ossetia, then
they could have done what the government had asked them to do.


8. (SBU) Regarding diplomatic movements, Minashvili said that
Article 26 of the Vienna Convention does allow countries to
restrict movement into zones "for reasons of national
security," and Georgia therefore has the right to establish
certain restrictions. The government fully supports
diplomats' travel into the territories, but only in
accordance with procedures established by Tbilisi, including
via the two established entry points.


9. (SBU) Regarding the movement of international
organizations, Minashvili emphasized that the government
would have the authority to make special provisions, such as
for assistance providers. He suggested that the government
would probably authorize entry from the north, for example,
if necessary. In response to a question from a British
representative, Minashvili explained that the government did
not want to obstruct the activities of international
organizations that conduct confidence-building activities,
but that the government also wanted to be sure that any
special arrangements assisted only "impartial" organizations.
He noted, for example, that the government would want to
avoid assisting organizations supported by Russia that would
not be constructive. Minashveili emphasized that the
government had to have the authority to prevent
"illegitimate" organizations from operating in the
territories. Fournier suggested that some non-governmental
organizations might be sensitive about restrictions being
placed on their movements. Minashvili repeated that Georgia
Qplaced on their movements. Minashvili repeated that Georgia
did not object to legitimate organizations moving throughout
the country, but had the right to regulate movements for the
sake of both territorial integrity and the interests of its
citizens.


10. (SBU) In response to a question about enforcement,
Minashvili explained that violations of the law would indeed
be punishable under Georgian law. Although the government
might not have agents at northern border crossings to observe
movements, it would have other means -- such as inspection of
stamps entered into passports -- to determine points of
entry. In any case, however, a legitimate organization would
have the opportunity to seek permission from the Georgian
government to enter from the north and thereby avoid a
violation.

. . . ABOUT ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES . . .


11. (SBU) In response to a question from Estonian Ambassador
Toomas Lukk about property rights in the territories,
Minashvili explained that the law forbids property
transactions in order to protect legitimate property holders,
in particular among Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). He
explained that the Ministry of Justice is currently compiling

TBILISI 00002071 003 OF 003


a registry of information about real estate in the
territories, to which anyone with documentation about
holdings in the territories can contribute. Once the
political status of the territories is resolved, the registry
will be used to resolve questions of ownership and
restitution; in the meantime, the law is designed to outlaw
unauthorized transactions.


12. (SBU) Regarding small business activities, in particular
between entities on both sides of the administrative
boundaries, Minashvili explained that small transactions that
do not require any government regulation would not be
affected by the legislation. Any transaction that does
require regulation would be subject to the law, however. He
suggested that this would be one of the first areas that the
government would likely address in its implementing decree.

. . . AND ABOUT GEOGRAPHIC DEFINITIONS.


13. (SBU) Lithuanian Counselor Viktoras Dagilis asked about
the codification of geographic boundaries within the law
(Article 2). He raised current diplomatic efforts to
persuade Russian forces to depart the Akhalgori region,
which, if successful, would return Akhalgori to Georgian
control. According to the law, Akhalgori -- as part of the
former Autonomous Oblast of South Ossetia -- would still be
subject to the legislation's provisions and restrictions.
Would the Parliament want to repeal the provisions in regard
to Akhalgori if it reverted to Georgian control, and would
including those geographic definitions in the law itself
provide sufficient flexibility to do so? Minashvili did not
offer a substantive answer. After the meeting, Dagilis noted
to PolOff that, in Soviet practice, the boundaries of
autonomous oblasts were not as systematically defined as
those of autonomous republics, so that it might be difficult
to establish an authoritative demarcation of the border. It
might therefore be advisable not to encode such an imprecise
definition in the law. He added that this same imprecision
was at the root of the dispute over the remaining Russian
checkpoint at Perevi.


14. (SBU) After the meeting, PolOff raised a question about
the draft's definition of Abkhazia's maritime area as
extending all the way south to the Enguri River. Some
territory north of the Enguri River lies outside the Abkhaz
administrative boundary (such as the village of Ganmukhuri),
and making the maritime area there subject to this law could
lend support to Abkhaz interest in claiming all the territory
south to the Enguri. Minashvili expressed his appreciation
for the comment, but the final version of the law retained
the language.

COMMENT: HASTE MAKES WASTE


15. (C) PolOff also asked whether one month would be
sufficient to draft the necessary decree to implement the
law; Minashvili thought it would. When asked which agencies
would take the lead in formulating the details of the policy,
however, Minashvili did not offer a direct answer, but said
the prime minister would coordinate a government-wide
approach, with contributions from various agencies.
Parliament seems to be placing significant responsibility on
the government to formulate a complex set of criteria and
procedures in a very short time. Deputy Minister of
Reintegration Dimitri Manjavidze told PolOff on November 5
that the government did not yet have a basic plan for
implementation, and in fact had not even identified which
Qimplementation, and in fact had not even identified which
agency would take the lead in either drafting the decree or
putting it into practice. He added that Minister of the
Interior Merabishvili would likely end up playing a key role
in implementation. Although codifying in law an approach to
activities in the territories makes sense, the government may
not have been given enough time to implement the law in a
thoughtful way.
LOGSDON