Why should I care about this topic?

Decisions made by politicians directly impact our lives on a local-level. Thus, the fundamental aspect of democracy is for citizens to be able to influence this process. We must demand that governmental bodies consider our needs in policy planning and we must also monitor their activities accordingly. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the extent to which the involvement of all societal groups in decision-making processes is ensured, to identify obstacles we face, and to recognize the state's efforts to overcome these barriers.

Our comment

The involvement of ethnic minorities in decision-making at the local level is impeded by several factors, including 1) cultural, social, and economic barriers, and 2) procedural deficiencies. However, merely analyzing these problems cannot provide a satisfactory solution. The primary challenge lies in political choices. The government is well aware that public involvement enhances public oversight of local bodies, which binds it further and increases its accountability to society. Thus, encouraging and promoting participation is not politically advantageous for the elite.

What is the political significance of public involvement in the decision-making process?

Public participation in the decision-making process not only amplifies the voice of the people and addresses their needs at the political level, facilitating people-oriented policy formation, but also enhances the quality of democracy. Public participation compels government bodies to operate transparently. Engaging the public in this process builds trust in decision-makers and holds them accountable, thus bolstering the legitimacy of state activities. In such a model, decisions are made not solely by those in power, but directly by the people for their own benefit.

Legal guarantees of participation in Georgia:

With the legislative changes of 2015, mechanisms for citizen involvement in decision-making processes at the local level were expanded in Georgia. Initially perceived positively, this action by the state created an opportunity to intensify relations between self-governments and the population. However, recent studies have highlighted shortcomings in these mechanisms. Here, we examine some of them:

General assembly of a settlement: This form is generally viewed favorably. It entails informing citizens about the general assembly, their participation, mandatory consideration of decisions made at the assembly by local self-government, and informing the population about the final decision. Additionally, mayors of municipalities are mandated to convene a general assembly twice a year at their own initiative. This provision encourages the establishment and growth of such practices.

Civil Advisory Council: consisting of members of the community, this mechanism serves as the deliberative body of a mayor of a municipality. The mayor is obligated to submit the municipal budget project, spatial planning documents, proposals on the names of geographical objects, social projects, and etc. to the advisory council. However, some provisions of the law regarding this mechanism are ambiguous and flawed. Specifically:

• It is unclear whether the formation of the council is the responsibility of the mayor or merely at his discretion;
• The composition of the advisory council is subject to the mayor's preferences, which may not ensure the inclusion of all interested parties;
• The procedure for publishing the council's decisions and soliciting citizens' opinions about them is not defined, hindering transparency in the council's activities.

Participation in City Council and Commission meetings: citizens can freely attend municipality meetings without prior notice or permission, however:

• In practice, citizens often require a "pass" for access, though the city council is not obligated to issue one, posing a significant obstacle to society;
• The ability of citizens to pose questions to the speaker depends on the goodwill of the session's chairman. This regulation stifles engagement and makes the participation formalistic.

Report hearings: The law does not specify the format of the report or the mandatory information that must be included in it. Studies indicate that reports are often presented in a formal manner. Frequently, officials either fail to submit reports or read them to a closed audience. Public notice regarding the date and procedure for submitting reports is rarely published.

In addition to discussing these shortcomings, some authors criticize the legislation for not recognizing many progressive, internationally recognized forms of participation that strengthen the connection between citizens and self-government. These include: Citizens' Charter; Civil Laboratory; Free Space Technology; Citizens' Assembly; Electronic Communications, among others. However, the law grants municipalities the opportunity to define additional mechanisms and expand participation opportunities. The only obstacle here is attitude – the willingness of ruling authorities to involve people in policymaking.

What hinders the participation of ethnic minorities in decision-making?

In recent months, our platform has held meetings with representatives of ethnic minorities residing in Ninotsminda, Gardabani, Marneuli, and Akhalkalaki. These meetings revealed the scale and systemic nature of problems related to participation. Apart from procedural gaps in forms of participation, which can hinder all citizens of the country, language barriers and associated informational limitations create additional difficulties for ethnic minorities. Local self-government bodies do not adequately disseminate information about the possibility of participation in the decision-making process.

These obstacles are compounded by issues such as poor road infrastructure connecting villages with municipal centers, lack of public transport, high cost of taxi travel, and others. As revealed in the meetings, similar to other parts of the country, labor migration has increased in these municipalities due to economic challenges. Mostly men migrate for work abroad, leading to increased responsibilities for women in managing family and domestic affairs. In such circumstances, women lack the time and opportunity to engage in matters beyond the family, hindering their active participation in community discussions.