WILL GEORGIA ADOPT A NEW CONSTITUTION?
ZAAL ANJAPARIDZE,
Political analyst, Tbilisi
While the Russian and foreign experts and policy-makers are figuring out if President Vladimir Putin intends to remain in power after his second presidential term expires, his Georgian counterpart Mikheil Saakashvili has puzzled the analysts in the same way when in the first days of the New Year he proposed to draft a new Constitution for Georgia.
As was expected, at the end of December 2006 the Georgian puppet Parliament dominated by Saakashvili-led ruling party “United National Movement” unanimously adopted the one-time constitutional amendment proposed by Saakashvili as early as in October 2006. Under this favorable to Saakashvili and his party amendment, the presidential and parliamentary elections in Georgia as well as the elections to the Supreme Council of Autonomous Republic of Adjaria will take place simultaneously within the period October 1 to December 31 2008, i.e. after the elections in Russia. As pro-Saakashvili forces assumed the elections in Russia could have an adverse effect on political stability in Georgia.
While signing the constitutional amendments on January 10, Saakashvili made no secret of the fact that they were introduced to “please friends and disappoint enemies”, and immediately he suggested working on the new Constitution because the current Constitution adopted in 1995 as he said is imperfect and requires “fundamental improvement”.
Saakashvili, known by the frequent mistreatment and tough attitude to his political opposition, unexpectedly invited the opposition political parties to the Constitutional Commission and to the enlarged Security Council. But the next day, after visiting the Upper Abkhazeti (former Kodor gorge), Saakashvili stated that adoption of a new Constitution is possible only after the territorial integrity of Georgia is restored, and that Georgia “doesn’t have any other choice”.
Nevertheless, the work on the new Constitution is most likely to get started. Moreover, several moderate opposition groups wished to cooperate on this issue with the government directly or indirectly. This step resulted in growing discontent in the opposition camp that is disunited enough as it is. Other opposition parties and some analysts believe that Saakashvili needs the new Constitution in order to prolong his term in office. This can occur if the new Constitution makes Georgia a parliamentary republic; and after his two presidential terms Saakashvili could become a prime minister. As a matter of fact, a similar scenario is being discussed with regard to Vladimir Putin.
The question is whether the adoption of a new Constitution is a top priority for Georgia at the current stage and whether Georgia can afford spending intellectual, human and financial resources on creating the new Constitution in the backdrop of numerous pressing problems including the unresolved issue of the country’s territorial integrity.
Of course, the current Constitution, which was elaborated shortly after Georgia had emerged from the turmoil of civil war and ethnic conflicts, has serious flaws. In many respects it was adjusted to the personal and political interests of the then Georgian leader Eduard Shevardnadze.
Unfortunately, after the 2003 Rose Revolution the faulty tradition to tailor the Constitution to the interests of persons and the short-lived political conjuncture has been kept unchanged. Judging by the current political situation in the country, there is no guarantee that the new Constitution will be free from this shortcoming.
Those suspicions are strengthened by the fact that there is still no consolidating national concept and strategy of the state development.
January 17, 2007
|