Gorduladze: We Would Have Acted Out of Narrow Party Interest, Would Not Have Filed Suit Against "Collective National Movement"

Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Legal Affairs Archil Gorduladze says that if the ruling team were acting out of narrow party interests, it would not have found a "better opponent than the decrypted agent" and would not have filed a lawsuit against "Collective National Movement", this single party. According to him, they act in a statesmanlike manner, and it is their duty, before the voters and the absolute majority of society, and also based on constitutional provisions, to ensure that anti-constitutional parties have no place in the political space.

Gordulaze explained the procedures for the hearing to be held today at the Constitutional Court. According to him, at the session the court will announce its ruling on the motions, then the rapporteur judge will provide the plenum with brief information about the lawsuit, and finally the plaintiff's explanation will be presented. According to Gorduladze, at this stage they are discussing in detail which unconstitutional act applies to which party.

According to him, it will once again be confirmed that these parties have different names and numbers, but in reality they are "one offshoot" and act with one intention. Gorduladze says that the non-democratic and non-statehood actions carried out since 2021, for example after the formation of Gakharia's party, will be highlighted. According to his explanation, the parties will be held responsible for actions they did not distance themselves from and agreed to by entering into coalition.

According to Gorduladze, when a party is non-legal and fights the legal state, members of parliament and the relevant subjects have not only the right but also the obligation to apply to the Constitutional Court requesting its ban.

According to him, no one will cancel the choice of the voter, because the guarantee of this is the Constitution of Georgia. Regarding the practice of other countries, he recalled the argument that in Italy and Germany, when Nazi and fascist parties were banned, they also had voters and members, and he himself concluded that people's right to choose was not restricted by this.

Gorduladze also spoke about the supporters of the parties. According to him, on the first day of the hearing at the Constitutional Court they tried to organize a rally and gathered about 30 people, while the number of journalists and camera operators exceeded the number of participants. A few days later, on Sunday evening, all five parties together brought several hundred people out to a march, as they had in other weeks. According to Gorduladze's assessment, society has already grown tired of the activities of parties representing the "externally controlled agentura".