News
The Constitutional Court of Georgia Rules Not to Uphold the Constitutional Claims № 1585 and №1590 ("Davit Goniashvili v. the Parliament of Georgia and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Geo
On November 14, 2025, the Second Board of the Constitutional Court of Georgia ruled not to uphold the Constitutional Claims №1585 and №1590 ("Davit Goniashvili v. the Parliament of Georgia and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia").
In the case under consideration, part of the disputed regulations concerns several provisions of the Law of Georgia "On the Police" pursuant to which the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia is vested with the authority to establish the Rules for Service in the Police, the Code of Police Ethics, and the Disciplinary Statute of the Employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia. As regard the disputed subordinate normative acts, they establish the obligations of the employees of the Ministry, according to which "refusal to undergo narcotic drug testing (including marijuana)" constitutes a disciplinary misconduct, imposing a dismissal from service as a sanction.
According to the argumentation of the Claimant, the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia lacked the authority to define "refusal to undergo narcotic drug testing (including marijuana)" as a disciplinary misconduct and to impose a corresponding sanction, since no legislative act delegated to the executive branch the authority to regulate this matter or defined the scope and limits of such delegation. Thus, according to the position of the Claimant, the disputed regulation established by the subordinate normative acts was in formal contradiction with Paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the Constitution of Georgia.
The Respondent party explained that the authority of the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia to define "refusal to undergo narcotic drug testing (including marijuana)" as a disciplinary misconduct derives from the Laws of Georgia "On the Police" and "On Public Service". According to the Respondents, at the legislative level, it is impossible to define the content of concepts such as 'conduct inappropriate for an employee that undermines the authority of the Ministry’s system' exhaustively. In this regard, the Respondent party maintained that the disputed regulations are in compliance with the established constitutional standards for delegation of authority.
In accordance with its established practice, the Constitutional Court of Georgia defined the scope of the assessment and took into account the applicable legislation when adjudicating the case. In this regard, when determining the content of the disputed norms, the Court considered the prevailing regulatory framework resulting from the legislative amendments to the Law of Georgia "On The Police" and assessed the constitutionality of the disputed norms strictly within this scope.
In compliance with the constitutional standards for delegation of authority, the Constitutional Court reviewed the constitutionality of the disputed norms of the Law of Georgia "On the Police" and explained that, in the current normative reality, a number of provisions of this Law specify the scope and content of the disputed authority as well as determine the types of disciplinary misconducts and corresponding sanctions. According to the Constitutional Court, the aforementioned Law also establishes binding guiding criteria for the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia in regulating the procedure for Rules of Service in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia, the Code of Police Ethics and Disciplinary Statute of the Employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia. Accordingly, the Constitutional Court held that the issues considered by the Claimant as potentially unconstitutional had already been resolved within the prevailing framework of the applicable legislation.
At the same time, the Constitutional Court of Georgia did not consider it relevant to review the formal constitutionality of those disputed rules established by the subordinate normative act which define refusal to undergo narcotic drug testing (including marijuana) as a disciplinary misconduct, since at the time of adjudication of the constitutional dispute, in the current normative reality, the Law of Georgia "On the Police" literally repeats the disputed rule established by the subordinate normative act.
In view of the foregoing, the Constitutional Court of Georgia ruled that the disputed norms are in compliance with the requirement of formal constitutionality, as provided for in sentence 2 of Paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the Constitution of Georgia.
The dissenting opinion of Judge Teimuraz Tughushi is attached to the judgment.
Subject of the Dispute: a) on the Constitutional Claim № 1585: constitutionality of subparagraphs "a", "d" and "i" of Paragraph 2 of Article 60 of the Law of Georgia "On the Police" and Paragraph 3 of Order No. MIA 4 18 00001/73 of February 15, 2018, of the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia "On Prohibition of Certain Actions by Employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia" (wording as in force until May 30, 2024) with respect to Paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the Constitution of Georgia;
b) on the Constitutional Claim №1590: constitutionality of Paragraph 1 of Article 36 of the Law of Georgia "On the Police", subparagraph "f"' of Paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the Statute approved by Appendix №1 to Order №989 of the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia of December 31, 2013, "On Approval of Disciplinary Statute of the Employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia" (in the version as in force until May 30, 2024), the wording "by individual legal acts, instructions and other legal acts of the Minister or an authorized person" of subparagraph "a" of Paragraph 1 of Article 9 of Order №995 of the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia of December 31, 2013, "On Approval of the Rules for Service in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia" and Chapter 8 of the Code approved by Appendix №1 to Order №. 999 of the Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia of December 31, 2013, "On Approval of the Code of Ethics of the Police of Georgia and the Instructions on Conduct for Certain Employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia" with respect to the paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the Constitution of Georgia.
