Sichinava: No Party Has Understood What Charge Is Against It

"Useful for Georgia" representative Berdia Sichinava told the program "Polit-Kalaki" that no political party has understood what charge is against it, because everything is thrown together in the lawsuit. In doing so he responded to the session of the Constitutional Court at which the issue of banning parties is being considered.

According to Sichinava, if the lawsuit is clear to the court, it must also be clear to the defendant, that is, the political party, what they are being sued for, so that they can build a defense strategy around it. In his assessment, the text of the lawsuit does not contain clear argumentation regarding specific political subjects. Sichinava said that everything said politically over 5 years is thrown together, and you cannot find which part says what about you. In his words, "Chorchana is also mentioned in passing."

Sichinava assessed the examples of Ukraine and Moldova as irrelevant and said they are not even cited in the lawsuit. He explained that in Ukraine parties that justified Russian aggression, demanded Ukraine's capitulation and the transfer of territories to Russia are banned. In Moldova too, according to him, parties were banned that do not recognize the territorial integrity of the country and justify Russian aggression. Sichinava said that the European Court and the German Constitutional Court also consider such an extreme measure an extreme interference when there is a factual risk that a fascist force will come to power.

According to him, such a lawsuit will not pass any test. Sichinava said that political statements, letters sent, or considering elections fair or unfair cannot become grounds for banning a party. In his view, the lawsuit is rather an attempt to overthrow the constitutional order. As he put it: "This is not only the cancellation of a party's electoral registration and the fact that these people are not allowed to take part in elections, this is the destruction of dissenting opinion and a step toward dictatorship". Sichinava added that as a result a precedent is being created in Georgia that has not existed in the Constitutional Court since 1996.

Sichinava also named violations of procedural norms and the court's rules, which, in his view, point to the bias of the process. According to him, there is also no precedent for banning a party, and such a case is being considered in an accelerated mode by judges who have a competence deficit. Sichinava explained that the court does not use the possibility of applying to the European Court of Human Rights, refuses to invite experts of the Venice Commission, and does not satisfy many motions of the parties.

He noted that under the rules, when a lawsuit is accepted for substantive consideration, the party has one month to submit its response. The court accepted the lawsuit for substantive consideration on October 13 and scheduled the session for October 21. According to Sichinava, he submitted a motion to postpone the session within 10 minutes, while the judges deliberated for one hour. Then, in his account, they stated that the response could be submitted at any time. Sichinava added that Vasil Roinishvili says the response should have been submitted earlier and that delay is now being pursued as a goal.