Public administration in Georgia acts largely through administrative-legal acts: decisions, orders, resolutions, permits and refusals issued by administrative organs that directly affect the rights, obligations and legitimate interests of individuals and organisations. The General Administrative Code of Georgia establishes a dedicated mechanism for challenging such measures administratively — before the administration itself — so that a violated right can be restored without immediately resorting to litigation. This page describes that mechanism in full: what exactly can be challenged, which organ is competent to examine the complaint, the statutory appeal deadline and the rules for its restoration, the mandatory content of a written complaint, the examination timeline, the suspension of the challenged act during the examination, and the way the proceedings conclude.
What Can Be Challenged
Under the Code, an interested party has the right to challenge an administrative-legal act issued by an administrative organ. The protection is not confined to formally issued acts. If the administrative organ violates the time limit established for the issuance of an act, that violation is deemed to be a refusal to issue the act, and this deemed refusal is challengeable under the same procedure. Furthermore, an action of an administrative organ that is not connected with the issuance of an administrative-legal act is likewise challengeable under the same procedure, which extends the remedy to the organ's actual conduct beyond the sphere of formal paperwork.
There is, however, a boundary drawn around procedural measures: a decision of an administrative organ taken in connection with a matter of administrative proceedings is not subject to separate challenge, except where this is directly provided for by law or where the decision, independently of the corresponding administrative-legal act, infringes a person's right or legitimate interest. In other words, dissatisfaction with an internal procedural step becomes the proper subject of a complaint only when the law expressly allows it or when the step itself causes independent harm.
Which Organ Examines the Complaint
Unless the law or a subordinate act adopted on its basis provides otherwise, an administrative complaint is examined and decided by the administrative organ that issued the administrative-legal act — where there exists a superior official over the official who issued the act or over the relevant structural subdivision. Where the act was issued by the head of an administrative organ, the complaint concerning it is examined and decided by the superior administrative organ. This builds a two-step system of internal control: ordinarily the issuing organ itself reviews its own decision, while complaints against a head's acts ascend to the organ standing above it.
In parallel, judicial protection remains fully available: a person may apply to a court for the protection of his or her rights and freedoms under the procedure established by the Administrative Procedure Code of Georgia. The boundary between the administrative route and the judicial route in a given case is drawn by that procedural legislation — the General Administrative Code expressly defers court access to the rules of the Administrative Procedure Code rather than creating its own litigation procedure.
The Appeal Deadline of One Month
The central rule of the whole chapter is the time limit. An administrative complaint must be submitted within one month from the day of publication of the administrative-legal act or of its official notification, unless otherwise established by law. Where what is being challenged is an action of the administrative organ rather than an act, the action must be challenged within one month from the day on which the interested party became aware of the performance of the action or of the abstention from it.
Two qualifications shape this regime. First, where the organ has violated the time limit for issuing the act — the situation treated as a deemed refusal — no appeal deadline may be set at all, so a complaint against the silence of the administration is not barred by the passage of time. Second, where the appeal deadline has been missed, it must be restored if it was missed due to irresistible force or another valid reason.
Form and Content of the Complaint
Administrative proceedings under this chapter commence only upon the submission of an administrative complaint. The complaint must be drafted in writing and must satisfy the requirements of the Code. The law prescribes exactly what has to be indicated in it:
- the name of the administrative organ to which the complaint is submitted;
- the identity and address of the person submitting the complaint;
- the name of the administrative organ whose administrative-legal act or action is being challenged;
- the title of the challenged administrative-legal act;
- the demand being made;
- the circumstances on which the demand is founded;
- the list of documents attached to the complaint, if any document accompanies it.
The content may be reinforced further. The complaint may note the challenged act's non-conformity with the law on which the complaint's demand is based; it may also invoke the norms of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its additional protocols, as well as precedents of the European Court of Human Rights on a similar legal issue with which the act may be incompatible. Where the administrative-legal act was handed over to the person submitting the complaint, a copy of the act is attached to the complaint — a simple measure that removes any doubt about the subject matter of the dispute.
Examination Deadline and Suspension of the Challenged Act
The examination itself is also time-bound. Unless the law or a subordinate act adopted on its basis provides otherwise, the competent administrative organ is obliged to examine the complaint and adopt an appropriate decision within one month. Where, in cases provided for by legislation, establishing circumstances of essential significance for the case requires more than the statutory term, the organ is entitled to issue a reasoned decision extending the examination period. Such a decision must be adopted no later than 7 days from the commencement of the administrative proceedings, and the person who submitted the complaint must be notified of it immediately. The extension may not exceed one month, keeping the final resolution of the complaint within a clear time frame.
One of the most practical effects of filing is the suspension of the challenged act: unless the law or a subordinate act provides otherwise, the operation of the challenged act is suspended from the moment of registration of the administrative complaint, and the administrative organ issues an individual administrative-legal act to that effect. Suspension does not occur, however, where the act:
- would lead to an increase in state or municipal expenditure;
- is a police administrative-legal act adopted in connection with the protection of public order;
- was issued during a state of emergency or martial law on the basis of the corresponding law;
- would, if its execution were postponed, cause significant material damage or pose a significant threat to public order or security.
The decision to continue the operation of the act on these grounds is taken by the issuing organ or its superior administrative organ, and that decision may be challenged in court under the procedure established by legislation. Conversely, the interested party is entitled, under the procedure established by legislation, to demand that the court order the continued operation of the suspended act — a counterweight that keeps the suspension institute balanced between the interests of both sides.
How the Examination Proceeds and Ends
Procedurally, the examination follows the general framework of administrative proceedings: unless the chapter on appeals provides otherwise, the provisions of the Code governing administrative proceedings apply, and where a complaint is examined and decided by a collegial administrative organ, the rules on collegiality established by the Code apply as well. A crucial guarantee of impartiality is the prohibition on participation: a person who took part in the preparation or issuance of the challenged act may not take part in deciding the complaint — the official whose work is under review cannot sit in judgment over it.
The submission of a complaint does not suspend the issuing organ's right to amend the act or to declare it invalid or lost in force under the procedure established by the Code. Where it does so, the organ is obliged to notify the organ examining the complaint within 5 days. Even after the act has been amended or declared invalid, the examination must continue if the complainant demands that the act be declared invalid — it is the party's demand that determines whether the case remains substantively alive.
The complainant retains control over the complaint in one further respect: until the organ adopts its decision, the complainant has the right to withdraw it. The withdrawal must be declared in writing, and during an oral hearing the interested party may declare the withdrawal orally as well. Yet withdrawal does not stop the examination where leaving the complaint unexamined could be followed by an infringement of state or public interests or by significant damage — the public dimension of the dispute can outweigh the party's disclaim.
The endgame is shaped by two competences. The organ that issued the challenged act has the right to uphold the administrative complaint, provided this does not contradict legislation. And unless the law or a subordinate act adopted on its basis provides otherwise, the organ examining the complaint has the right to continue the administrative proceedings notwithstanding the issuing organ's recognition of the complaint — meaning that a full re-examination of the case remains possible even when the issuing organ has already conceded the complainant's position.