Court Decision in the Name of Georgia

In some cases, a certain provision of the law can be so simple that it causes no ambiguity, and its purpose and intent are clear to everyone. However, in other cases, it is necessary to attach greater significance to its substance. According to Article 78 of the 1921 Constitution of Georgia: "Justice is administered in the name of the Democratic Republic of Georgia" (what a symbolic word it is—administered). Approximately the same norm has been transferred to the currently active edition of the Constitution of Georgia, Article 62: "A court decision is delivered in the name of Georgia." This article is subsequently expanded upon in various laws, for example:

Article 258 of the Criminal Procedure Code: "The court's judgment is drawn up and pronounced in the name of Georgia";
Article 5 of the Organic Law of Georgia on Common Courts: "A decision of a common court of Georgia is delivered in the name of Georgia";
Article 8 of the Civil Procedure Code of Georgia: "A court decision is delivered in the name of Georgia" (it is interesting that the same provision is not found in the Administrative Procedure Code of Georgia; however, the indication in this law: "Unless otherwise established by this Code, the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code of Georgia shall be applied in administrative proceedings," directly extends to it).
The term "in the name of Georgia" itself has several purposes:
First, behind every court decision stands the State;
Second, the State ensures the enforcement of the court decision;
Third, since the State ensures the enforcement of the decision, the court decision must be issued precisely in its name;

While in criminal law the State acts as the guarantor of the enforcement of a court decision due to its executive role, in civil law a decision made by the court primarily establishes the fact of the existence or non-existence of a certain legal relationship and/or the existence or non-existence of an obligation. The court decision itself encompasses a broad interpretation and does not mean only a "decision" (on the merits); this provision also applies to rulings (and orders). Accordingly, every judicial act adopted by the court is accompanied by the phrase "in the name of Georgia";

The binding nature of the court decision itself, which is reinforced by Article 62 of the Constitution of Georgia ("Court acts are mandatory for execution"), gives it the force of "law." Consequently, it is considered as another ground for the fulfillment of an obligation (Article 317.1 of the Civil Code: "For the emergence of an obligation, a contract between the participants is necessary, except in cases when the obligation arises from the infliction of harm (tort), unjust enrichment, or other grounds provided by law"). Therefore, if the person against whom the court decision is issued does not execute it, the State has created an additional lever in the form of the Enforcement Bureau, which executes the decision adopted in the name of the State through compulsory enforcement proceedings;

An interesting issue is the recognition and enforcement of a decision made by an arbitration tribunal established and operating under the Law of Georgia on Arbitration (in whose name is this decision issued?). However, back in the 1990s, the Constitutional Court gave an explanation regarding this, and the arbitral tribunal was nevertheless considered in compliance with paragraph 2 of Article 42 of the Constitution, because the Constitution of Georgia (Article 82: "Judicial power is exercised through constitutional control, administration of justice, and other forms established by law," and Article 107: "Until organic laws on the judicial system are adopted in accordance with the Constitution, the current legislation on the judicial system shall remain in force") allowed the possibility of using such a form. Today, any arbitral award is subject to review by the Court of Appeals, and it is presumed that the decision will ultimately be adopted/confirmed in the name of Georgia, just as during the recognition and enforcement of a decision issued by a foreign court;

The term "in the name of Georgia" does not only indicate on whose behalf the decision was made; the term has a broader meaning, and adopting it in the name of Georgia also means that the State takes on the obligation to enforce the decision made in its name. On the one hand, the meaning of the norm is relatively narrow and refers only to the obligation of the State. However, on the other hand, it also means that its execution is mandatory for any person within this State, unless the recognition and enforcement thereof is subsequently applied for in a foreign court;

Despite the fact that the court itself acts solely and exclusively on the basis of the law and is a law-applier rather than a lawmaker (which also stems from its purpose and from the fact that it delivers decisions in the name of Georgia—simply put, based on the "provisions" adopted by the legislative body of Georgia), in some cases the court steps outside its bounds and interprets the existing legislative norm based on the concept of "justice." Because "an interpretation contra legem gives priority to the law that derives from the constitutional legal order and ensures the correct, just resolution of a specific relationship." Under this provision, when acting contra legem, the legal view of the judge must be in full compliance with the Constitution but may contradict the law, providing a "constitutional-legal" basis for interpreting the law. Judge-made law is an act of applying the law, not creating the law;

I point this out because the constitutional term "in the name of Georgia" has a broader meaning and does not fall merely under the concept governed by the "power verticals." It has a more important purpose than its narrow understanding. For the State itself does not signify any sort of legal construct existing in isolation that has no connection with the main element: with every citizen of Georgia; because the State cannot exist without a group/groups of people who are connected to each other by a legal chain;

However, if we go further and trace each addressee of this chain to the end, we will definitely see that every time we use the term "State" for any purpose, there is always a human being behind it. Accordingly, while the State indeed represents a legal unity composed of the will of these people, the isolated phrase "in the name of Georgia," which is established by the constitutional norm, represents merely a legal construct, and in reality, it means that the court makes the decision "in the name of the citizens of Georgia."
I believe that "in the name of the citizens of Georgia" accurately explains the purpose created by the court itself. Because the court is an independent branch of government, it serves justice not because this function is assigned to it by the Constitution, but because it acts in the name of the citizens of this State. For the State is nothing other than the legal chain of the citizens of Georgia, and since: "We, the citizens of Georgia, whose firm will is to establish a democratic social order...";