A/HRC/31/15 8. Georgia had had continued fruitful cooperation with the special procedure mandate holders. Its commitment was underlined through its standing invitation. Several visits had occurred during the second review cycle, and more were planned for 2016. 9. Georgia enumerated its major achievements since the first review period, starting with the successful completion of a cycle of democratic and competitive elections which had created a precedent for the peaceful transfer of power in 2012. The 2012 parliamentary, 2013 presidential and 2014 local elections had all been assessed by international observers as having been free and fair. Various constitutional amendments had entered into force following the transfer of power. They had introduced new regulation of the balance of power and mechanisms for greater accountability at all levels of Government. 10. In 2014, following the transparent involvement of civil society and international actors, Georgia had adopted its first comprehensive long-term human rights strategy, for the period 2014-2020, and a subsequent action plan for the period 2014-2015. That strategy had been elaborated on the basis of the recommendations of the national human rights institution, OHCHR, national and international human rights non-governmental organizations and the report of the European Union Special Adviser on Constitutional and Legal Reform and Human Rights in Georgia. The strategy strengthened the rights-based approach that would drive State policy and programmes and identify the relevant rights holders and duty bearers. The Human Rights Inter-agency Council under the Prime Minister, which included civil society and international organizations with the right to vote, was responsible for the effective implementation and monitoring of the strategy. The Council was accountable before Parliament through the submission of an annual report. 11. The comprehensive anti-discrimination law, adopted in 2014, was an important development, as the first legislative mechanism in Georgia that explicitly prohibited all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of gender identity, in both the public and private sectors. The Public Defender was tasked with monitoring its implementation. 12. In order to strengthen systems for the protection of human rights, both the President and the Prime Minister had appointed advisers on human rights issues. Within the Foreign Ministry, an ambassador-at-large was responsible for the human rights portfolio. 13. Georgia stated that its judiciary had benefited from wide-ranging reform. For example, in 2013 the High Council of Justice – the country’s key judicial institution – had become more democratic, open and transparent. Civil society representatives and academics had replaced members of Parliament sitting in the Council, and television cameras had now been allowed into courtrooms. In 2014, life tenure for judges had been introduced, together with new transparent and objective criteria and procedures for the appointment and appraisal of judges by the Council. Further reforms were under way. 14. Turning to reforms in the law enforcement sector, Georgia stated that the Government had divided police and intelligence functions, with the police acting as a community-oriented agency to prevent and combat crime. Reforms had also been implemented in the migration services and with regard to the protection of personal data by the police. Human rights was now an essential subject in the police academy, considerable work had been done to address domestic violence, the recruitment of women had been increased and anti-discrimination guidelines for police officers had been introduced. 15. Georgia outlined reforms undertaken to depoliticize and strengthen the prosecution. The prosecutorial powers of the Minister of Justice had passed to the Chief Prosecutor, while a gender-balanced Prosecutorial Council, which included prosecutors, representatives of the legislative and judicial branches and civil society, had recently been established and would nominate candidates for the position of Chief Prosecutor for final selection by Parliament. 4