“Ivanishvili must be forced to call elections not by his rules or even by our rules, but by international standards. For this, we must follow exactly the line we are following: protests inside the country and sanctions abroad,” reads the statement by Nika Gvaramia — imprisoned leader of the Coalition for Change.

According to Gvaramia, many more traps involving false dilemmas lie ahead, “such is the dialectic and inner logic of dictatorship.”

Abolishing voting rights for emigrants:Snap elections or restoration of diplomatic relations with Russia?

“I will start with the answer to that question: of course, the second.

What troubles the ‘Georgian Dream’ today? The answer is clear: illegitimacy, which is also expressed in lack of international recognition. So why could they call snap elections? Why has the expectation of snap elections emerged? How can new elections solve the problem of non-recognition and the sanctions stemming from it? They could help only in one case — if these elections meet democratic standards, ‘Georgian Dream’ wins, and receives a mandate. Under conditions where the field of political parties and leaders is artificially engineered (imprisoned or annulled), and where the electorate itself is also engineered (with nearly a million deprived of the right to vote), achieving legitimacy is an impossible mission — the slightest chance of legitimizing such elections does not exist. Then why do they need snap elections? For abolishing Article 78 of the constitution? And how does this article hinder ‘Georgian Dream’? What can’t they do under it? The answer is obvious: it doesn’t hinder them at all — they do everything.

Moreover, our goal of EU integration did not begin with Article 78 and was not created because of it — even before the emergence of this article, European integration was the country’s political, constitutional, historical, and everyday choice. Therefore, the slogan ‘defend Article 78’ is illogical and looks like an artificially constructed target. Also, why would the ‘dream’ abolish something they themselves use as a propaganda shield in the eyes of their own voters — their only argument to justify their ‘georgian-dreamness’ to society?

Back to the emigrants’ issue: why did they raise this topic under a stormy sky, where any wrong move could bring decisive damage? For bargaining.

Obviously, depriving emigrants of the right to vote is clearly unconstitutional and violates the fundamental principles of elections — universality and equality. Obviously, this will be appealed in the Constitutional Court, where, it seems, the ‘dream’ has transferred the main battlefield for burying democracy (recall the lawsuits regarding the dissolution of political parties).

What might the Constitutional Court say? Yes, it violates universality; yes, it violates equality — but both are also violated by denying the right to vote to Russian citizens, and therefore the Court may instruct the authorities to take necessary measures. Here the legal test is the following: it is unconstitutional to say “they do not participate” (as written in the law). As for the wording “they cannot participate,” two questions apply: do they have the right (theoretically), and do they have the opportunity (practically) — meaning, did the state do everything it possibly could; did it exhaust every available resource?

In 2024 the state did not do this in European countries and the United States. It did not do — not could not do. (By the way, even this was enough to declare those elections unconstitutional, as one-third of the voters were left outside by the government’s intentional and deliberate inactivity.) In Russia, this cannot be ensured, because there are no diplomatic relations, and the election process abroad is a diplomatic procedure regulated by bilateral agreements and the Vienna Convention.

Therefore, what is needed so that all emigrants vote and universality and equality principles are protected? Exactly — abolishing this law + restoring diplomatic relations with Russia. And they will push the false dilemma: voting rights for emigrants (but only for all of them equally) or restoring relations with Russia.

This can also be managed without the Constitutional Court if ‘Georgian Dream’ wants: they simply “consider the will of the population” and do not adopt this law, but add that “in order to ensure equal voting rights in Russia, all necessary efforts will be taken” — which means nothing else (and cannot mean anything else) but restoring diplomatic relations. And what that means needs no explanation. Nor does it need explanation what result Georgian elections (and therefore a referendum or plebiscite) held in Russia would produce — 300, 400, 500 thousand additional falsified votes speak for themselves.

We must also understand clearly that the current regulation does not hinder ‘Georgian Dream’ from holding elections even tomorrow. They will simply open the same 50 polling stations abroad as in 2024 and stop there. So why create this constitutional and international madness? For nothing — just like the abolition of Article 78, which does not hinder them at all. What they need is legitimacy, and for that they will mobilize all mechanisms to drag the opposition into pseudo-elections held under their rules.

Ivanishvili must be forced to call elections not by his rules, or even our rules, but by international standards.For this, we must follow exactly the line we are following: protests inside the country and sanctions abroad.

Against this background, it is strange to discuss the idea that we are forced to enter elections appointed by Ivanishvili and held by his rules — elections that, in my opinion, are not even expected to be held.

More such traps of false dilemmas lie ahead — this is the dialectic and inner logic of dictatorship.The starting principle of a successful protest is that erosion of resistance, perseverance, and consistency is unacceptable; it is a precondition for defeat, and we cannot afford defeat.” - writes Nika Gvaramia.