The Tbilisi City Court has declared inadmissible the Gakharia for Georgia party’s demand to publicize verified voter lists from the recent elections, sparking heated debate and allegations of election evidence suppression. The party claims this decision, along with actions by the prosecutor’s office, undermines transparency efforts in the October 26 elections.
Gakharia for Georgia’s Demand for Transparency
The Gakharia for Georgia party, led by former Prime Minister Giorgi Gakharia, has been vocal about its concerns regarding the handling of verified voter lists. The party had requested that the lists of verified voters be released to a neutral platform to ensure transparency. According to Gakharia for Georgia, these lists would provide evidence crucial to investigating alleged election irregularities.
Since October 29, the party has argued that the failure to release these lists could compromise the integrity of the election results. Gakharia for Georgia asserts that these lists would allow voters to confirm whether their votes were recorded accurately. “The prosecutor’s office finally took hostage the most important evidence of election falsification,” the party’s statement read, underscoring the urgency they felt regarding the public release of the lists.
Court Decision and Prosecutor’s Office Actions
The Tbilisi City Court ruled on November 8 that the lawsuit filed by Gakharia for Georgia was inadmissible, citing that the voter lists in question are currently under the prosecutor’s office’s control. According to the court, the prosecutor’s office’s involvement and custody of the lists eliminated the court’s jurisdiction over the matter, leading to the lawsuit’s dismissal.
Gakharia for Georgia claims that the prosecutor’s office has acted in coordination with the Central Election Commission (CEC) and the court to prevent public access to these lists. The party points to a series of swift, coordinated actions as evidence, stating, “As soon as we requested to make the lists public on October 29, the prosecutor’s office immediately started an investigation on October 30, following the instructions of the CEC.” The statement also mentions that the prosecutor’s office quickly moved to confiscate the voter lists after the party sought urgent intervention from the court on November 1.
Allegations of Coordinated Suppression of Evidence
The Gakharia for Georgia party contends that the synchronized actions of the CEC, the prosecutor’s office, and the court represent an effort to conceal potential election fraud. They argue that the decision to declare the case inadmissible and the subsequent confiscation of the lists were orchestrated to shield evidence from public scrutiny.
Gakharia for Georgia believes this lack of transparency undermines public trust and fuels suspicions of election manipulation. According to the party, these actions suggest a broader strategy to suppress evidence that might challenge the official election results. “The coordinated action of the CEC, the Prosecutor’s Office and the court can be clearly seen, the aim of which is to allow the Dream to fully control the evidence confirming election fraud,” the party stated, referencing the ruling Georgian Dream party.
Calls for International Investigation
In light of the court’s ruling and the prosecutor’s office’s confiscation of voter lists, Gakharia for Georgia has called for an international investigation into the matter. The party asserts that only an impartial, international inquiry could provide the transparency necessary to assess the validity of the election results and restore public trust.
Party representatives argue that any future publication of the voter lists by the prosecutor’s office would likely be viewed as tainted or manipulated due to the delay and lack of independent oversight. The party’s statement notes, “If the said lists are published now or in the future, there will already be a reasonable assumption about possible manipulations related to the lists.”
The Larger Context of Electoral Transparency in Georgia
The legal battle over the voter lists highlights the challenges Georgia faces in ensuring transparent and fair elections. Opposition parties and international observers have previously expressed concerns about transparency in the Georgian electoral process. The Gakharia for Georgia party’s demands for an impartial review reflect a growing call among Georgian citizens for electoral reform and accountability.
The incident also underscores the tensions between Georgian political institutions and the judiciary, with opposition parties questioning the independence of these bodies. Allegations of interference by the ruling party further complicate public perceptions and raise critical questions about the integrity of Georgia’s democratic institutions.
