The Court of Appeals has deliberated on Mamuka Khazaradze’s appeal and left the verdict of the court of first instance unchanged — Mamuka Khazaradze remains in custody, stated Giorgi Sioridze, a member of the Political Council of “Lelo – Strong Georgia.”

According to him, no one had expected the Court of Appeals “to deviate in any way from Ivanishvili’s demand.”

“A short while ago, we learned that the Tbilisi Court of Appeals has kept Mamuka Khazaradze in custody. Less than an hour has passed since we received the court’s shameful verdict, dated August 8. It turns out the Court of Appeals deliberated on Mamuka Khazaradze’s appeal and left the verdict of the court of first instance unchanged. Accordingly, Mamuka Khazaradze remains in custody. I would like to remind the public that Khazaradze was convicted of violating Article 349 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, which refers to the failure to comply with the lawful demand of a temporary investigative commission of the Parliament of Georgia. Yes, Mamuka Khazaradze deliberately did not appear when summoned by Tsulukiani, but he did not commit the crime stipulated by Article 349, as the necessary elements of the offense are absent.

Apart from the fact that the so-called temporary investigative commission of the Parliament is not a legitimate commission, it was created within the framework of an illegitimate parliament, and there are also clear formal legal violations. These include violations of Article 42 of the Constitution of Georgia and legislative breaches. According to the Constitution, at least half of the members of an investigative commission must be from the opposition. Yes, ‘Georgian Dream’ labeled part of its own members as ‘opposition,’ but beyond that, the so-called quota of two seats for Gakharia’s party was never filled. Furthermore, the requirements stipulated by the commission’s own regulations were violated — including how a person must be summoned, who should sign the protocol, and so on.

The Court of Appeals, just like the court of first instance, did not dare to summon the key witnesses in this case — namely Tsulukiani and her associates in the so-called commission. All of this is unacceptable in a rule-of-law state. Regarding Article 349, under which no one in Georgia has ever been convicted before, we are dealing with a precedent. In precedent-setting cases, court proceedings — both in the Court of Appeals and in the Supreme Court — must not be conducted without an oral hearing. No one expected the Court of Appeals to deviate from Ivanishvili’s demand, but we will pursue this case to the end, including to the Supreme Court, in order to create the legal basis for appealing to the European Court of Human Rights, so that the Strasbourg Court can establish the truth in this case,” Sioridze stated.