Appeals Court Begins Hearing Aleko Elisashvili Case

The Court of Appeal has begun hearing the case of Aleko Elisashvili, leader of the party "Citizens". The case concerns an attempt to start a fire in the administrative building of the court. The first instance court found Elisashvili guilty and sentenced him to 13 years in prison.

The case is being heard by a panel of judges: Lavrenti Maghlakelidze, Paata Silagadze and Thea Leonidze.

Elisashvili's lawyers requested the recusal of Judge Lavrenti Maghlakelidze. According to their argument, Maghlakelidze was deputy head of the State Security Service, under its head Ani Okhanashvili, from April to September 2025. The panel rejected the recusal motion. Maghlakelidze stated that during his time at the State Security Service he had neither direct nor indirect contact with Elisashvili.

The judges granted the motion of Public Defender Levan Ioseliani to attend the trial. The Public Defender addressed the Court of Appeal in the Elisashvili case with an opinion of a friend of the court (Amicus Curiae).

The opinion states that a terrorist act is a crime with a special purpose, for which a "terrorist aim" is a necessary constituent element. According to the Ombudsman, the study of the verdict established that the Tbilisi City Court did not pay due attention to identifying the special intent, namely the terrorist aim, and automatically equated it with the political protest motive of Elisashvili.

Elisashvili's lawyers assess that he is a victim of political persecution. At today's hearing, the parties will deliver opening statements.

The verdict was announced on July 10 by Judge Giorgi Gelashvili of the Tbilisi City Court. The prosecution charged Elisashvili with attempting to commit a terrorist act. Elisashvili admitted to attempting to start a fire in the auxiliary building of the Tbilisi City Court, but stated that his aim was protest and not the commission of a terrorist act.

The investigation initially began under Article 187, Part 2 of the Criminal Code of Georgia, which provides for damage or destruction of another person's property. It was later reclassified under the article on attempted terrorist act.

The analysis of the case was prepared by the organization "Transparency International – Georgia". According to the organization's assessment, the court failed to prove the mandatory element of terrorism, which creates grounds for considering the politician a political prisoner.