Constitutional Court proceedings legal formalisation of democracy’s abolition, opposition

The proceedings at Georgia’s Constitutional Court over a lawsuit seeking to ban five opposition parties amount to the legal formalisation of the abolition of democracy, Lasha Parulava, a member of the United National Movement, has claimed.

Parulava alleged that the outcome of the case had already been decided and that the court proceedings were merely a formal exercise to endorse a decision made in advance.

“The decision has already been made. They have only left us the opportunity to make our final statements. The rest of the decision has effectively been taken,” Parulava said.

He cited Constitutional Court former judge Manana Kobakhidze’s previous remarks, claiming they indicated that the judges were under pressure to deliver a predetermined ruling.

Asked why the opposition was defending its right to participate in elections after some opposition parties had themselves refused to take up parliamentary mandates, Parulava said boycotting parliament was a form of democratic action protected by the Constitution.

He argued that the opposition intended to restore the constitutional order and ensure that voters, rather than individual political figures, could decide who governs the country.

Parulava also said the opposition would pursue international legal avenues, including taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights, and continue its political struggle through peaceful, non-violent means.

The Constitutional Court began hearing the Georgian Dream lawsuit on 21 October. The ruling party is seeking to have five opposition parties declared unconstitutional and banned - the United National Movement, Coalition for Change, Strong Georgia - Lelo, Federalists and For Georgia.

The explanatory statements phase concluded on 30 October, and the court is moving on to the questioning stage. Hearings on the case are scheduled to resume on 9 November.