The 14-day working period set by the “Moscow Mechanism,” I admit, is extremely short, so for two weeks I woke up at 5:00 a.m. to conduct interviews, analyze documents sent to me, and at the same time write the report, said Patricia Grzebik, the rapporteur of the “Moscow Mechanism” and author of the report on Georgia, in an interview with Interpressnews, responding to criticism from the Georgian Dream government regarding the report.­

According to her, the writing of the report began even before she arrived in Georgia, while the two weeks spent in the country were fully dedicated to meetings with various stakeholders.

As the “Moscow Mechanism” expert noted, she took the criticism from the Georgian government regarding the time constraints as an “unconventional compliment.”

“The 14-day working period is defined by the Moscow Mechanism, and Georgia was fully informed about this. I admit that this is an extremely short time. As soon as I was informed (on February 3) that I had been appointed rapporteur, I began collecting and reading all relevant reports (of international organizations, civil society, submissions by Georgia within the Vienna Mechanism), but it was only after my mission officially began and I was informed by OSCE/ODIHR that the time allocated for appointing a second expert for Georgia had expired, that on February 11 I was able to start contacting stakeholders in Georgia. I sent my first letter to the Permanent Representation of Georgia to the OSCE and international organizations in Vienna (at 7:44 Warsaw time), and then began reaching out to other stakeholders, including representatives of civil society organizations. At the same time, I asked a former doctoral student of mine, who is now a Doctor of Law, to assist me in completing my task. During the following two weeks, I woke up at 5:00 a.m. to conduct interviews, analyze documents sent to me, and write the report together with Dr. Grzeszkowiak, properly incorporating into the report the testimonies I collected or those sent to me daily within the mission. I only pointed to issues that were fairly documented and repeatedly appeared in both oral and written testimonies.

Of course, the report was written before my arrival in Georgia, but only after the mission had officially started. During my visit to Georgia, I used all my time to meet with various representatives, and all my interlocutors saw how detailed my notes were, so that I could immediately refer to them in the report. Being aware that the mandate was very broad, I tried to highlight the most important issues while also indicating other possible avenues that the state could use for further investigation. In summary, I consider the Georgian government’s criticism - that the report was prepared in advance - to be an ‘unconventional compliment’ to my work. The report was not prepared in advance. It was written under extremely limited time conditions, as provided by the Moscow Mechanism procedure. I did everything possible to prepare the most comprehensive report within such a short time,” the expert stated.