On December 14, 2015, the Public Defender of Georgia sent a recommendation to the Minister of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia, the Minister of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia and the Prime Minister of Georgia on provision of housing to R.U., an IDP.

R.U., as an IDP, was registered at their sister’s residential address, did not have a permanent residence and lived at the residences of different relatives. Later, based on an IDP status, the state transferred residential space held under consumption by A.B., a spouse of an applicant’s sister, into his private ownership, through the direct sale method. According to the purchase and sale agreement, purchaser was required to provide housing to R.U. R.U. was not informed about the above-mentioned.

The Public Defender of Georgia is of the opinion that the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia, when preparing the issue related to the privatization of space, and when executing the purchase and sale agreement, had to have information provided by the Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia about IDPs actually living in the sites subject to privatization, as well as about the composition of their families. Furthermore, the Ministry of Economy and Sustainable Development of Georgia had to obtain written consent of third parties in relation to the conclusion of an administrative agreement, which actually has not taken place.

Although R.U. was registered at A.B.’s residential address, the Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia was obliged to undertake comprehensive examination of the circumstances of the case, specifically, it had to describe the composition of A.B.’s family and apply to the body in charge of the disposal of state property, considering the results of such description.

Moreover, according to the Public Defender’s recommendation, following comprehensive description and clarifying the circumstances of the case, the Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Accommodation and Refugees of Georgia was to take measures to reinstate infringed rights of R.U., and it has failed to do so.