According to NGOs, the constitutional lawsuit by which the Georgian Dream demands the banning of three opposition parties serves to close down pluralistic democracy.

As Aleksandre Baramidze noted at the briefing held today, “the only evidence that accompanies the sham lawsuit is the conclusion of the so-called temporary investigative commission of the parliament.”

“The so-called parliamentary delegation of the Georgian Dream, a total of 88 deputies, recently filed a constitutional lawsuit with the Constitutional Court of Georgia, thereby demanding the banning of three opposition political parties and, accordingly, the closure of pluralistic democracy in Georgia. The only evidence that accompanies this very sham lawsuit is the conclusion of the so-called parliamentary temporary investigative commission. This commission, known in Georgia as the Tsulukiani commission, was created illegally because it was created in violation of a very important rule of the Constitution and the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament in force at that time. In particular, in order to create an investigative commission, it is necessary that opposition parties be represented in the investigative commission, at least half. Since at that time opposition parties were simply not represented in the parliament - three of them refused their mandates, and one did not refuse its mandate, but did not work in the parliament, therefore the opposition was not in the parliament at that time. What did the Georgian Dream do? It withdrew certain members from its ranks in order to artificially create so-called opposition parties. This is a direct and gross violation of the Constitution and the rules established by the Rules of Procedure, therefore, the conclusion of the investigative commission created on the basis of this procedural violation has no legal, legitimate basis.

The second problem is that the Parliament has granted this temporary investigative commission too broad powers, too broad mandate, which goes far beyond the framework established by the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament. Any impartial and independent tribunal, court would not accept the evidence created by this commission as legally obtained and reliable,” said Aleksandre Baramidze.