The Venice Commission does not have a legal assessment in this case. Given the reality in Georgia, we believe that the greater the representation of the people in local elected structures, the greater the influence of the people on executive structures," said the First Vice Speaker of Parliament, Gia Volski, in response to the conclusions and recommendations published by the Venice Commission regarding the amendments to the Election Code concerning local self-government elections.

According to Volski, the amendments to the Election Code were aimed at preventing one of the revolutionary paths and were not intended to restrict the political participation and involvement of opponents.

"In cities and villages, people naturally demand as many resources as possible to have their representatives in the structures formed after local elections. This is the reality. If they [critics] face this reality and believe that the Georgian people are simply those who take to the streets, seek the country’s defeat, and aim for the irreversible development of negative processes, then they should participate in elections. On the contrary, they have an even greater chance of winning if they believe that their views on destabilization are more popular. If they do not believe that, then they have no prospects for success, and of course, in that case, they accept the Venice Commission’s political statement.

A political statement that has nothing to do with the legal aspect—especially the part where the Venice Commission recommends that decisions in the Central Election Commission (CEC) be made by a two-thirds majority. We changed this because sabotage was evident, and CEC decisions cannot be dependent on the opinions of a minority engaged in sabotage. Otherwise, the CEC’s work would come to a standstill, protocols would not be adopted, and elections could not be confirmed.

These amendments were precisely a preventive measure against one of the revolutionary paths. We have never had, and will never have, any interest in restricting political participation or the involvement of our opponents in the electoral process. The elections are free, and anyone who believes they have the resources to win should come forward, fight, and win. However, the fact that society wants greater representation in elected bodies to have more leverage over executive structures is, of course, acceptable, should be taken into account, and will only bring improvements," Volski stated.