The Constitutional Court of Georgia granted[1] the constitutional lawsuit of the Public Defender of Georgia, which disputed the constitutionality of the restriction of the opportunity to appeal a decision made by the President of Georgia on the issue of Georgian citizenship to the court.

According to the Public Defender, obtaining Georgian citizenship is extremely important for a person seeking this status, since the status of a citizen is a prerequisite for the full enjoyment of a number of civil, social and political rights. Accordingly, in the event of a negative decision made by the President on the granting of citizenship through naturalization, the interested person should have the opportunity to appeal this decision to the court.

The Public Defender indicated that when granting citizenship to a person through the ordinary procedure of naturalization, or through simplified, restoration or special procedure, the President’s discretion is limited by the criteria established by the Organic Law of Georgia on Citizenship of Georgia and the objectively determinable nature of these criteria, in contrast to the exceptional rule, when a person is assessed based on subjective criteria. Accordingly, when a person meets the objectively assessable criteria established by legislation for obtaining citizenship and the President still does not grant him/her citizenship, it is necessary to exercise judicial control over the President’s final decision in order to exclude the possibility of the President making arbitrary, biased and discriminatory decisions and to prevent a person from being unlawfully refused to obtain Georgian citizenship through naturalization.

The Constitutional Court explained that when establishing the conditions for obtaining citizenship through naturalization, each state enjoys a wide margin of discretion. At the same time, all state bodies, when exercising their functions, are bound by the requirements of the Constitution of Georgia and, when making decisions, are obliged to act in the interest of the unwavering protection of fundamental human rights. The binding nature of fundamental human rights extends, among others, to the President of Georgia when exercising his/her powers, in this case, when considering and deciding on the issue of granting citizenship through naturalization. Accordingly, he/she cannot act within the framework of absolute discretion. It is noteworthy that, despite the interest expressed by the court, the respondent did not explain the legitimate purpose of the disputed legislative norm. In turn, the Constitutional Court did not see any legitimate purpose that would justify the prohibition of the possibility of appealing the negative decision of the President of Georgia on granting citizenship to the court and recognized the disputed norm as unconstitutional.

The ruling of the Constitutional Court is available at: https://constcourt.ge/ka/judicial-acts?legal=17643

[1] Ruling No. 3/3/1601 of the Constitutional Court of Georgia, of March 7, 2025, available at: https://constcourt.ge/ka/judicial-acts?legal=17643;