RESTITUTION-COMPENSATION LAW AND THE ISSUE OF RETURN OF OSSETIANS DISPLACED IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Keywords:
Georgia, IDPs, RestitutionAbstract
Our analysis confirms the following: 1) The Joint Control Commission’s resolutions from 1994-1997 and the agreement signed at the Shevardnadze-Chibirov meeting in Java on November 14, 1997, aimed to facilitate the return of 33,600 Ossetians who had fled Georgia for the Russian Federation. The agreement signed by Russian and Georgian officials on December 23, 2000, instructed Georgian agencies to allocate homesteads and agricultural land and restore property rights for these individuals. However, implementing this agreement would only be justified if similar measures were applied to Georgians displaced from the Tskhinvali region and if Russia were held accountable. 2) Between 1997 and 2006, funds allocated for economic restoration in the Tskhinvali region and for improving living conditions for those affected by the conflict (4.46 million dollars from Russia, 1 million dollars from Georgia, and 3.3 million euros from the European Union) were primarily used to resettle and support 546 Ossetian families in Georgia’s interior. An additional 100 Ossetian families were settled in Mitarbi village, each receiving 2,000 dollars in compensation from these funds. 3) The memorandum signed on March 2, 2007, between the Association for the Protection of Landowners’ Rights and the Ministry of Refugees and Accommodation confirms that the Restitution-Compensation Law adopted by the Georgian Parliament on December 29, 2006, was tailored to benefit Ossetian refugees who left Georgia for the Russian Federation. The needs of Georgian IDPs were largely overlooked. A parity-based approach, consistent with international and domestic human rights law, would have ensured equal treatment for both Georgians and Ossetians. This would have allowed nearly half of the available funds to be distributed to the 10,000 Georgian IDPs living in hotels. Achieving this would have required pragmatic decisions reflecting national interests, which the Georgian authorities at the time did not pursue.
