Information documents

SG/Inf(2009)9                                                                                                       30 June 2009

Report on the human rights situation in the areas affected by the conflict in Georgia

Second report (April – June 2009)

Document presented by the Secretary General
I.       Introduction

1.         At its 119th session in Madrid on 12 May 2009, the Committee of Ministers “took note of the first report of the Secretary General on the human rights situation in the areas affected by the conflict, looked forward to the subsequent quarterly reports and called on all those concerned to facilitate access to information on the situation in all areas affected by the conflict, in order for all views to be taken into account”[1].

2.         This is the second report prepared by the Secretariat. It covers main trends and developments between 1 April and the end of June 2009.

3.         To collect information for the preparation of the second quarterly report, the Secretariat visited Tbilisi, Sukhumi, Gali and villages in Lower Gali[2], as well as Gori, and the villages of Knolevi and Ergneti which are located close to the administrative boundary line (ABL) with South Ossetia (Georgia). The Secretariat also visited the new settlement in Shavshebi. No fact-finding mission to South Ossetia (Georgia) could be organised as a result of continuing restrictions on access to the region.

4.         The sources of information used for the preparation of this report include information collected during the fact-finding missions[3], reports and documents produced by Council of Europe bodies, submissions by the authorities and information provided by international organisations (UN, OSCE and EU) as well as international and local non-governmental organisations.

5.         This report does not contain an exhaustive list of all the human rights issues and alleged violations during the reporting period.

II.     General situation in the areas affected by the conflict

6.         On 14 April, Human Rights Watch published a report on the use of cluster bombs during the August conflict (“A Dying Practice: Use of Cluster Munitions by Russia and Georgia in August 2008”)[4]. Its field investigations in August, September and October 2008 documented dozens of civilian deaths and injuries from the use of cluster munitions, including casualties after the fighting ended. Unexploded munitions continue to threaten civilians. In its conclusion to the report, Human Rights Watch found that both Russia and Georgia had used cluster munition attacks, which caused the death or injury of 70 civilians. Human Rights Watch called on both the Russian Federation and Georgia to sign and ratify the Convention on Cluster Munitions as soon as possible[5].

7.         In a statement on 14 April, the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities, Knut Vollebaek, called on the de facto Abkhaz authorities to end the pressure on the Georgian population in the Gali district through the limitation of their education rights, compulsory “passportisation”, forced conscription into the Abkhaz military forces and restrictions on their freedom of movement”[6].

8.         On 23 April, the first meeting under the Geneva-agreed Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism (IPRM) took place in Ergneti, between the checkpoints on the administrative boundary line. The meeting was attended by representatives of the Georgian, Russian and de facto South Ossetia authorities and was facilitated by the European Union Monitoring Mission (EUMM) and OSCE. Procedural issues related to the organisation of subsequent meetings – such as the identification of the location for meetings, working languages, agenda-setting, chairmanship, calendar of future meetings, functioning of a hotline for the rapid exchange of information and the conduct of joint visits – were discussed.

9.         On 30 April, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and the de facto Presidents of the two breakaway regions – Mr Kokoity and Mr Bagapsh – signed an agreement on co-operation on border protection. The deployment of the Russian border guards in the two territories began at the beginning of May and was to a large extent completed at the time of drafting this report.

10.       The fifth round of Geneva talks on security and stability took place on 18 and 19 May. The first day was marked by the absence of representatives of the Abkhaz de facto authorities, who refused to attend the talks following a delay in issuing the UN Secretary General’s report on the situation and future UN presence in the region. This was followed by the walk-out of the representatives of the South Ossetia de facto authorities and the Russian delegation. Nevertheless, talks resumed on the following day in the presence of all invited participants. According to the press release issued by the Greek OSCE Chairmanship[7], the parties began to discuss specific security arrangements and addressed humanitarian questions for the first time. In particular, the participants agreed to a joint needs assessment team, led by an international expert under the auspices of the OSCE, to look at the repairs which are necessary to guarantee water supplies. Furthermore, all participants reiterated their commitment to the implementation of the IPRM. The next meeting is scheduled to take place in Geneva on 1 July.

11.       On 18 May, the United Nations Secretary General issued a report pursuant to Security Council Resolutions 1808 (2008), 1839 (2008) and 1866 (2009)[8], in which he called for “a revised security regime” in the region.

12.       The second meeting under the IPRM took place in Dvani (between two checkpoints on the ABL) on 29 May. According to the EUMM Head of Mission, Ambassador Hansjörg Haber, the meeting was "very positive" and a “step forward”[9]. Issues of substance, such as access to cemeteries and places of worship, access to fields and pastures, and the gas supply to Akhalgori, were discussed. However, no agreement was reached on several procedural issues such as the question of chairmanship or the location of further meetings.

13.       On 31 May, “elections” of the de facto Parliament were held in South Ossetia (Georgia). According to the “official election results” made public on 1 June, the Party of Unity of de facto President Kokoity won with 46.3% of the votes, followed by two other parties which are not considered as being critical of the de facto President and his policy (the People’s Party with 22.6% of the votes and the Communist Party with 22.2% of the votes). The only party considered to be critical of the de facto President (“Fidibasta” – Fatherland Party) failed to reach the 7% threshold to enter the de facto Parliament. Leaders of the South Ossetia opposition claimed widespread violations and intimidation of voters, and questioned the official figures of voter turnout of over 80%.

14.       The third meeting under IPRM, with the participation of representatives from the Georgian, Russian and de facto South Ossetia authorities, was scheduled to take place on 11 June, but it was postponed because the South Ossetia side refused to take part until it receives information about the fate of three young South Ossetians who went missing in October 2008.

15.       On 15 June, the UN Security Council did not agree to prolong the presence of the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia (UNOMIG), after Russia exercised its right to veto a draft Resolution proposing a two-week technical roll-over of UNOMIG which had operated in the region for nearly 16 years.

16.       Despite all the efforts by the Greek OSCE Chairmanship-in-Office, no agreement has been reached with regard to OSCE presence in Georgia, including the prolongation of the mandate of the OSCE military monitors, beyond 30 June. The OSCE mission in the country has been in a state of technical closure since the beginning of 2009. On 14 May, the Chairperson of the OSCE Permanent Council announced that the OSCE Chairmanship had suspended negotiations on a continued OSCE presence in Georgia until further notice[10]. At the time of drafting this report, informal consultations are still taking place.

17.       An international fact-finding mission, commissioned by the EU to look into the origins and the causes of the August 2008 conflict, headed by the Swiss diplomat Heidi Tagliavini, visited Georgia twice during the reporting period in order to collect information for the report due to be issued by the end of July.

18.       The International Crisis Group issued a policy briefing on “Georgia-Russia: Still Insecure and Dangerous”[11] on 22 June.

Council of Europe action

19.       On 16 April, the European Court of Human Rights held a Chamber hearing in the case of Georgia v. Russia (No. 1). The case concerned the alleged harassment of the Georgian immigrant population in the Russian Federation following the arrest in Tbilisi, on 27 September 2006, of four Russian military personnel by the Georgian authorities on suspicion of espionage against Georgia.

20.       On 29 April, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe reviewed the follow-up given by Georgia and Russia to Resolution 1647 (2009)[12]. The information report, submitted by the Co-Rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee, concluded that Georgia had not yet fully complied with all of Assembly’s demands, and that Russia had failed to comply with most of the demands and might be seen as moving further away from the minimum conditions for a meaningful dialogue. On the same day, the Assembly discussed the humanitarian consequences of the war between Georgia and Russia[13].

21.       A delegation of the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) carried out an eight-day visit to Abkhazia (Georgia), starting on 27 April[14]. The de facto authorities in Abkhazia fully co-operated with the delegation, which was granted access to all places of deprivation of liberty which it wished to visit and was able to interview, in private, persons deprived of their liberty. There was no possibility for the CPT to visit South Ossetia.

22.       On 15 May, the Commissioner for Human Rights issued his fourth report[15] on human rights issues following the August 2008 armed conflict (containing facts and conclusions after his visit to Tbilisi, Sukhumi and Gali from 8 to 12 February). The Commissioner took stock of the implementation of the six principles for urgent human rights and humanitarian protection and addressed certain human rights problems specific to Abkhazia (Georgia).

23.       Following the “parliamentary elections” in South Ossetia on 31 May, the Chairmanship-in-Office of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe issued a statement to reiterate its full support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia within its internationally recognised borders[16].

24.       On 18 June, the Parliamentary Assembly Rapporteurs on the consequences of the war between Georgia and Russia and the humanitarian consequences of this war (Luc van der Brande, Mátyás Eörsi and Corien Jonker) expressed their concern that “Abkhazia was in danger of slipping into a human rights black hole”[17] following the discontinuation of UNOMIG operations,. The Chairman-in-Office of the Committee of Ministersaligned himself with this statement in his address to the Parliamentary Assembly session on 22 June[18].

III.    The human rights situation in the areas affected by the conflict

25.       The two main preoccupations of the population residing in the areas affected by the conflict remain security and freedom of movement. Other issues of concern are access to health care and education, including education in the mother tongue, and the issue of Abkhaz identity documents (internal passports) in the Gali district. Detailed information on the situation of displaced persons and the challenges which they are currently facing is also provided in this report.

-                      Security situation and the right to life

26.       In some areas affected by the August conflict, the security situation remains volatile, but it varies from one location to another. According to information provided by the Georgian authorities, one armed attack on civilians and one armed attack on police as well as two explosions and two illegal detentions in April were registered by the Ministry of the Interior. There were repeated incidents during the period covered by the report. The most recent incident took place on 21 June, when the driver of an ambulance accompanying an EUMM patrol close to the ABL with Abkhazia died in a mine explosion.

27.       In the Gali district, local residents are in a particularly vulnerable situation. The post-conflict environment has been conducive to an increase in criminal activities (such as smuggling, robbery and other assaults affecting the everyday life of people), in particular in the areas adjacent to the ABL. The number and regularity of incidents involving abductions of people for ransom is alarming. Alleged harassment and intimidation are increasing[19], and the de facto law enforcement authorities are either unable and/or unwilling to take effective measures to ensure the security of local residents. Moreover, the local law enforcement personnel is believed to be occasionally involved in misbehaviour and/or has repeatedly been turning a blind eye to certain criminal activities in the area.

28.       The security situation in the areas close to the ABL with South Ossetia (Georgia) varies from one location to another, as demonstrated by the case of two villages - Knolevi and Ergneti – which were visited by the Secretariat. According to local residents, the situation in the village of Ergneti, according to local residents is calm, and no shooting has been heard there for some time. Most of the houses were either partially or totally destroyed during the active hostilities. Since then, people have been returning to the village, and some of them have started to rebuild their houses (at the time of the Secretariat’s visit there were around 40 returnees[20]).

29.       In contrast, the situation in the village of Knolevi continues to raise concern.

Situation in the village of Knolevi (no man’s land)[21] The village of Knolevi is surrounded on three sides by territories which are under the control of the de facto authorities of South Ossetia. Part of the village is situated between the Georgian police checkpoint and the South Ossetia checkpoint[22]. There are 32 families residing along a road of approximately one kilometre which separates the two checkpoints. Overall, 70 people (including three babies, ten young children and a pregnant woman) were living in this part of the village at the time of the Secretariat’s visit. According to local residents, incidents such as shooting in the air occur almost on a daily basis. People are afraid of moving around in the dark, and there are allegations of people being harrassed by armed South Ossetia guards. The local population confirmed the information in the report by the Tbilisi-based Human Rights Centre that their return to their homes was organised without duly taking into account their legitimate concerns about the security situation in the part of the village where they live.[23] Several interlocutors said that they would definitely prefer to stay somewhere else for the time being if they had this option. The local residents feel abandoned by everyone, and they claim that no-one representing the public authorities, including the village administration, has ever crossed the line separating this part of the village from the rest of Knolevi in order to meet them and discuss the issues affecting their daily life. Some of the villagers reportedly went to see the representatives of the local public administration on their own initiative, but this failed to bring the expected results in their view. These people clearly deserve special attention, and both the government and the relevant international organisations should spare no efforts in addressing their problems.

30.       At the beginning of June, the situation in Perevi and the neighbouring villages became increasingly tense [24]. Information contained in the box below could not be verified on the spot owing to restrictions on access to the region.

Situation in Perevi/Kazmani There have been conflicting reports about the very tense situation in the villages of Perevi and Kazmani. Based on information provided by the Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on 7 June, 50 South Ossetia militia entered the village of Perevi (situated on Tbilisi-controlled territory, but where Russian military presence continues in breach of the agreement of 12 August). Other sources, including those quoting the de facto authorities of South Ossetia, confirmed an increased presence of South Ossetia militia in the nearby villages of Kazmani and Tbeti (under control of the de facto South Ossetia authorities but populated by ethnic Georgians). There were reports of robbery and cattle theft. At the time of drafting the report, the South Ossetia militia had reportedly left Perevi.

-                      Freedom of movement

31.       Interlocutors in both Sukhumi and Gali expressed concern about freedom of movement. For interlocutors in Sukhumi, freedom of movement is mostly associated with the possibility to travel outside the region. They deplore cases where Abkhaz residents[25] are denied an entry visa to other countries, even when it is needed for urgent medical treatment. Residents in the Gali district associate freedom of movement with the possibility to cross the Enguri river.

32.       At the time of the Secretariat’s visit, the ABL (which is increasingly becoming a de facto border) between Abkhazia and the rest of Georgia was officially closed. However population movements could be observed at the main bridge across the Enguri river – the only official crossing point. Movement at other crossing points which are commonly used by the locals - but are not recognised as such and are usually described as “illegal crossing points” - is limited. At least some of these “illegal crossing points” in lower Gali are now being guarded by the de facto Abkhaz border guards.

33.       Since the ABL is closed, the general rule is that no crossing is allowed. However, various exceptions seem to be tolerated, for example in the case of medical emergencies, but are left to the discretion of the de facto border guards and/or the de facto police[26]. This ambiguity has reportedly encouraged bribery at the crossing points.

34.       There is even more ambiguity on how the ABL will operate after its re-opening[27]. As regards the number of crossing points, the numbers mentioned by different interlocutors vary from four to seven. There is no clarity on the future regime of the ABL crossing, such as what kind of documents would be needed to cross it, and whether people would have to pay to obtain a crossing pass or would be provided with this pass at no charge. What is clear at this stage is that the more restrictive the future regime for crossing the ABL will be, the more severe the impact it will have on the humanitarian and human rights situation in the adjacent areas.

35.       As a result of restrictions on access to South Ossetia (Georgia), we could not obtain any detailed information about the procedure and conditions for crossing the de facto South Ossetia border. Examples presented in the box below were selected as an illustration of issues which attracted media interest during the period covered by the present report.

Cases in the administrative boundary line with South Ossetia: On 21 April, South Ossetia militia detained two OSCE monitors for about two-and-a-half hours (the de facto South Ossetia authorities claim that the monitors entered territory which is under their control). Similar incidents with OSCE monitors have occurred in the past[28]. The current administrative boundary line was never clearly defined. On 26 April, Russian media reported on the case of a Russian citizen and her two young children, who were detained by the Georgian police near the village of Akhmadji. Valentina B., an ethnic Ossetian who permanently resides in Vladikavkaz (North Ossetia-Alania/Russian Federation)[29] entered the territory under the control of the de facto authorities of South Ossetia, from the north in order to visit her relatives living in the Akhalgori district. She then crossed the administrative boundary line to visit other relatives. She was detained[30] on charges of illegally crossing the State border between Georgia and the Russian Federation and later released on bail.

36.       Preventive measures such as raising public awareness about the rules for crossing the State border and the ABL, the legislation in force concerning the status of the breakaway regions and related issues should be further intensified, in particular among the population residing in the areas adjacent to the ABL. This could contribute to reducing the number of incidents involving the civilian population.

-                      Situation of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)

37.       Internally displaced persons in Georgia fall into three main groups:

-     People who were displaced by earlier conflicts in the 1990s, usually described as “old” IDPs, amounting to some 220 000 people;

-     People who were displaced during hostilities in August 2008, but later returned to their places of residence, so-called “returnees”, amounting to over 100 000 people;

-  People who were displaced following the conflict in Georgia in August 2008, described as “new” IDPs, amounting to 25 000 people.

38.       Below is a non-exhaustive list of issues still faced by internally displaced persons:

-                      Housing problems/living conditions.

With the support of the international community, the Georgian Government has provided a quick and adequate response to the immediate housing needs of the newly displaced persons in the aftermath of the August 2008 military conflict. 36 new settlements have been built for this purpose and accommodate some 18 500 “new” IDPs[31]. However, as highlighted in the previous report, under the time pressure of the approaching winter, preference was given to speed over quality. Further efforts are urgently needed in order to secure decent living conditions for IDPs currently living below the minimal standards in these newly-built settlements. As noted in the recent report by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, dampness/drainage problems, the absence of waste disposal and washing/showering facilities, have been cited as being among the most serious deficiencies in some of these settlements. If no urgent measures are taken to address these problems in the near future, the living conditions in such places could further deteriorate, and it would be very difficult for the residents to stay there for another winter season.

Over 12 000 newly displaced persons still remain in collective centres or temporary private accommodation in Tbilisi and in other parts of the country. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, who visited two collective centres for IDPs in Tbilisi on his visits to the region following the August 2008 conflict, found that “the overall conditions in each of these facilities remained sub-standard, unsanitary, as well as potentially hazardous, especially for children”[32].

The biggest challenge, however, is to resolve the housing issue and to improve the integration process for so-called “old” IDPs, the majority of whom have been living in dilapidated and poorly maintained collective centres for nearly two decades. The revised Action Plan on IDPs (see below) is expected to address this issue.

-                      Sustainable livelihoods.

The majority of “new” IDPs come from rural areas. For many of them, cultivating the land remains the only viable way to provide for themselves and their families. For various reasons (such as the absence of available land plots close to the place of settlement or the absence of irrigation water), many of these IDPs have not been able to obtain or cultivate a plot of land and are becoming increasingly dependent on assistance provided by international donors and state institutions. A lack of specific employment opportunities was also reported with regard to those persons who did not previously work in agriculture, but who are in possession of other important skills.

As for the returnees and persons who did not leave their villages during the active hostilities, many are clearly in need of assistance so as to restore their livelihoods and repair damage to their property, in particular to rebuild their houses which were destroyed or damaged during the August conflict. Those persons who no longer have access to their plots of land because they are situated on the territories under the control of the de facto South Ossetia authorities, have lost the only source of income for themselves and their families. Others cannot cultivate their land because de-mining has not yet been completed. This also affects the work of international organisations. Others need assistance to provide them with the necessary means (equipment, chemicals, water) to be able to restore their livelihoods.

-                      Health care.

Since spring 2008, “new” IDPs are entitled to receive from the Georgian authorities a one-year special vulnerability pension which allows them to obtain medical insurance coverage at a discounted rate. IDPs in possession of this insurance should receive a number of basic services free of charge. There is conflicting information on whether this special state-run assistance programme is automatically applicable to the returnees. There are numerous reports of patients - even in possession of insurance - being asked to pay unjustified fees which they cannot afford[33]. Another problem is the limited presence of medical staff in rural areas and the absence of modern medical equipment. Often patients cannot pay for transportation to receive treatment, especially if it is needed on a regular basis.

-                      Documents/certificates/legal status.

Some IDPs experience problems because their documents, such as passports, birth certificates and property certificates, were lost or destroyed during the August armed conflict. To replace these documents, the IDPs must go through the relevant court procedure, but they do not always have the means to cover the related expenses.

Registration of the newly displaced persons was initially undertaken by the Civil Registry Agency. It has provided registration which was essential for obtaining humanitarian assistance, but not a formal IDP status. On 12 May, the Ministry of Refugees and Accommodation officially inaugurated the process of the formal registration of people displaced during the August  conflict, with a view to granting IDP status^[34]. The whole process is expected to take several weeks and to be largely completed by the end of June. According to initial estimates, around 24 000 persons will receive IDP status.

-                      Education for children.

There are cases of IDPs without adequate means to pay for the education of their children (including school-related expenses such as textbooks).

-                      Bank loans.

Many IDP families obtained bank loans (either a consumer loan or an agricultural loan) in the period before the conflict and are now unable to repay the loans. The provisions for force majeure are either non-existent in their contracts or the banks are not willing to apply them and demand repayment instead. It appears that the only viable solution to such problems could be sought at the state level.

-                      Psychological rehabilitation.

Many IDPs, especially children, have suffered psychological trauma during and following the events of August and are in urgent need of special care and rehabilitation programmes.

-                      Integration of IDPs in the local communities.

Further efforts are needed to ensure the integration of both “new” and “old” IDPs in their new communities. This issue is  particularly important for displaced persons who have been resettled in the communities mainly populated by ethnic minorities (such as those in the Kvemo-Kartli region).

-           Lack of information on issues of importance to IDPs.

Displaced persons often lack information about their rights and about assistance and benefits available to them. Both the Representative of the UN Secretary General on the human rights of internally displaced persons (Walter Kälin) in his report of 13 February [35], and the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights have highlighted the importance for IDPs and returnees to be consulted on all the issues affecting their daily life and the future of their families.

39.       In July 2008, the Georgian Government adopted the Action Plan to implement Decree No. 47 of the Government of Georgia on “Approving of the State Strategy for Internally Displaced Persons”, which envisaged measures for the integration of IDPs. However, following the August conflict and the new wave of displacements in the country, the Government adopted Decree No. 854 (4 December 2008), entrusting the Ministry of Refugees and Accommodation with the revision of the initial Action Plan. The revised Plan was approved on 28 May 2009 following extensive consultations with all stakeholders. It foresees the provision of permanent housing solutions for the “old” IDPs, including options such as the rehabilitation and privatisation of collective centres, resettlement and lump-sum financial assistance. It is expected that the revised Plan will pay due attention to the need to ensure the integration of displaced persons in their new communities[36]. The Council of Europe Development Bank could provide assistance with the implementation of the revised Plan.

-                      Access to education

40.       The state of the education system in Abkhazia (Georgia) raises concern both in Sukhumi and Gali. Several interlocutors have pointed out that it was a common phenomenon that, after graduating from school, students did not have the level of knowledge and other skills required to pass exams and enter higher education institutions. Schools are not well equipped, they are underfinanced and rely on the support and financial assistance of the parents to a large extent.

41.       Some children do not attend school as a result of the difficult economic situation. One case involved a child who did not attend school because the parents had no money to buy a pair of glasses for the child who could not properly follow her studies without them[37]. Instead of attending school, some children engage in activities which allow them to earn money to support their family[38].

42.       In the Gali district, residents are concerned about access to education in the Georgian language for their children. Some schools only provide the full curricula in the Russian language. In others, Russian is the main language of instruction, and Georgian is taught as a separate subject. In addition there are some schools where Georgian is still the main language of instruction, and they use textbooks approved by the Georgian Ministry of Education. However, it was also reported that in the aftermath of the August conflict, increased pressure was put on teaching history and geography according to textbooks approved by Sukhumi[39]. Some teachers reportedly continue to teach the two subjects as they did before, at their own risk.

43.       Interlocutors in Sukhumi expressed their concern about the limited use of the Abkhaz language in everyday life, the lack of resources and methodology for teaching the Abkhaz language at school, and the future of the Abkhaz culture and identity. It should be noted that an estimated 500 000 ethnic Abkhaz residing abroad (mostly in Turkey) may be potentially interested in returning to their native land.

44.       Recently adopted local legislation aims at promoting the use of the Abkhaz language. Interlocutors in both Sukhumi and Gali were critical of the way in which languages are taught at school. School teachers are apparently not aware of modern methods of teaching languages, such as interactive learning tools which can make it easier for both native and non-native speakers to learn the language quickly. The present system does not encourage teachers to use innovative methods in their work. Children attending schools in the Gali district, who are expected to learn three or four different languages (Abkhaz, Georgian, English and Russian), often end their education without being proficient in any of them.

-                      Access to health care

45.       The health care system and its medical facilities in Abkhazia (Georgia), are in a deplorable condition. The medical centres and dispensaries are often located in dilapidated buildings. Hospitals are poorly equipped, and the local doctors cannot ensure the provision of basic medical assistance to the population, with serious consequences in cases of medical emergency. There was a case of a nine-year-old child who died on the way to the hospital in Zugdidi after doctors in the hospitals in Gali and Sukhumi were unable to diagnose his condition as a result of a lack of modern diagnostic equipment.

46.       A group of Russian doctors with modern medical equipment was sent to the Gali district this spring for a one-month period. This was an opportunity for the local population to have medical check-ups, diagnoses and consultations. There is no question about the positive effects of such actions. However, their short-term nature means that they cannot be considered as a substitute or an alternative to medical services provided locally. When these missions finish, the patients often  return to the local doctors who cannot ensure a proper follow-up to the treatment owing to the absence of equipment and/or inadequate supplies of medicine.

47.       The residents of the Gali district used to go to the hospital in Zugdidi (on the other side of the Enguri river) for any treatment they could not receive locally. It takes less than an hour to get to Zugdidi from Gali. However, this is no longer an easy task as a result of the ABL having been closed. The Secretariat was also informed that even the ambulances are no longer allowed to cross the boundary line on some occasions.[40]

48.       As for the Abkhaz population residing elsewhere in the region, it is reported that they use the medical facilities in the Sochi district (Russian Federation) whenever treatment cannot be obtained from the local doctors[41].

49.       Assistance provided by the Georgian Government to teachers and medical professionals in the Gali district is crucially important. It needs to be further encouraged and extended.

-           Local identity documents and property rights

50.       The process of issuing local identity documents (internal passports) started in Abkhazia in 2005. It was originally limited to areas other than the Gali district. Local IDs started to be issued in Gali recently and can be linked, inter alia, to the approaching “presidential elections” which are due to take place in December 2009. Residents of the Gali district wishing to obtain an Abkhaz ID are required to renounce their Georgian citizenship on their application form[42]. However, they can still keep their Georgian passports (at least for the time being).

51.       As has been noted in the recent report by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights[43], an alternative option for people who do not wish to apply for an Abkhaz ID is to obtain a residence permit. However, there is much ambiguity as to the rights and entitlements of the holders of residence permits and internal passports. Holders of residence permits are clearly not entitled to vote, but the difference is not clear in matters such as property ownership, social benefits and access to education. An Abkhaz ID is required for activities such as opening a bank account and obtaining a driving licence or a school certificate.

52.       According to the local legislation, only “Abkhaz citizens” are currently allowed to buy and sell real estate property in Abkhazia[44]. Draft legislation which would allow citizens of other countries to buy property is currently under consideration, but local inhabitants have a rather critical attitude towards this initiative.

53.       As regards the situation in South Ossetia (Georgia), South Ossetia internal passports began to be issued to inhabitants of the Akhalgori region as of 15 April. As in the case of Abkhazia, it is believed this action was linked to “parliamentary elections” which took place on 31 May in South Ossetia.

-           Rights of women and gender issues

54.       There are reasons to believe that the tradition of kidnapping young girls and women for marriage is still widespread in some rural areas including those affected by the conflict. The post-conflict environment brings a new dimension to this problem, most notably in cases where the perpetrator and the victim belong to different ethnic groups or reside on different sides of the ABL.

55.       In Sukhumi, the local non-governmental organisations working on gender issues spoke in positive terms about the recently-adopted local legislation aimed at promoting gender equality.

-                      Freedom of conscience

56.       The case below is an illustration of the impact of the August conflict and post-conflict developments on the Church and religious life in the affected areas.

Three Georgian monks and four nuns were expelled from the St. George Monastery in Azhara (Kodori Gorge) by the Abkhaz de facto authorities on 2 and 3 April. They were accused of having refused to pledge allegiance to the Abkhaz Orthodox Church and of spreading Georgian propaganda among the remaining residents of Kodori. Georgian Patriarch Ilia II expressed deep regret over this decision and declared his intention to visit Abkhazia and discuss this issue in May. However, senior ecclesiastic officials in Abkhazia commented that this would not be possible in the near future.

-           Ombudsman office

57.       Draft legislation about the Ombudsman’s status and office, together with relevant changes and amendments to the Constitution, are currently under preparation in Sukhumi. The establishment of offices for the Ombudsman’s regional representatives is also under consideration.

IV.    Concluding comments

58.       The freedom of movement and the security situation in the areas close to the ABLs should be closely monitored in future. Any further deterioration could lead to a new displacement of people from areas such as the Gali district, Akhalgori, Knolevi and Perevi.

59.       The closure of the OSCE and the UNOMIG Missions may have serious implications for the humanitarian and human rights situation in the areas affected by the conflict. The departure of the UN mission will further limit access to the region.

60.       Future Council of Europe activities in Georgia (including the two breakaway regions) should be carefully considered against this background. It is becoming increasingly important to ensure an on-the-ground presence of international organisations dealing with human rights issues, including the Council of Europe.