Our concern
Confidential case material reviewed by the organisation highlights the gap between having a representative and receiving legal protection. Submissions criticise a lack of recent contact with the child; further confidential material reports an appellate refusal to admit a proposed private representative, continuing inactivity and prolonged delay in interim decisions. The refusal is described in confidential case material; we have not reviewed the written ruling. [3] [4]
What the child should receive
A child should have an accessible lawyer, confidential communication, a clear explanation of the proceedings and a way to raise new concerns. The lawyer should accurately convey the child’s views, examine current evidence and seek appropriate remedies. Representation cannot depend entirely on the next scheduled hearing.
Independence must be assessed in practice
The child’s interests and views must remain central when representation is arranged. Courts should examine actual conflicts and the child’s participation, whether a lawyer is publicly funded or privately instructed. One parent’s instructions cannot replace the child’s voice. The Code’s participation and legal-assistance provisions provide the statutory framework. [1]
Delay and disruption need an answer
The latest account describes long-unresolved requests for temporary contact and repeated changes in residence and school. These allegations require examination; the child’s current circumstances need a timely response. [4]
We call for a reasoned decision on urgent measures, a clear timetable and current information on education, safety and family relationships. The European Court’s guidance explains why time is particularly consequential in parent–child proceedings. [2]
What we want to change
We advocate regular contact between children and their lawyers, review of inactive representation, accessible ways for a child to raise concerns and a clear record of action between hearings. Refusal of a proposed lawyer should be accompanied by scrutiny of whether the representation that remains is effective. No child should disappear into the space between appointments and adjournments.
Legal sources & references
- Code on the Rights of the Child — Articles 74–81; current Georgian consolidated text
- European Court of Human Rights Registry — Guide on Article 8, paragraph 49: diligence in parent–child proceedings
- Confidential material concerning representation and procedural delay.
- Confidential material concerning appellate representation; the written ruling was not supplied.
