ECHR dismisses complaints against Georgian Supreme Court judges over independence, impartiality concerns

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has upheld the legal position of the Georgian Ministry of Justice, supported by appropriate evidence, and declared the complaints in the cases of “Pirtskhalava and Y vs Georgia” and “Goginashvili vs Georgia” inadmissible.

According to Georgia’s Ministry of Justice’s statement, within the framework of these complaints, the applicants alleged that one of the judges hearing their cases at the Supreme Court was biased.

“Furthermore, in Pirtskhalava and Y’s assessment, the judge, identified as Sh.T., was not appointed in accordance with the law. The European Court of Human Rights upheld the Ministry of Justice’s arguments and declared all three complaints concerning the judge’s impartiality inadmissible. In its judgment, the Strasbourg Court reviewed the reforms carried out by the Georgian Government since 2012 aimed at improving the justice system.

Specifically, among other matters, attention was drawn to issues such as: life tenure for judges; the refinement of procedures for judicial appointment and promotion; the strengthening of the role and functional independence of the High Council of Justice; and a constitutional amendment that further refined the procedures for selecting and appointing Supreme Court judges. It should be noted that the criminal proceedings against Irakli Pirtskhalava were related to the murder of Buta Robakidze. Additionally, Irakli Pirtskhalava claimed that his criminal trial was conducted unfairly, as he was not allowed to question former co-defendants and other witnesses, nor to effectively challenge the evidence presented against him.

The Strasbourg Court concluded that there was no evidence of a violation of the applicant’s right to a fair trial. Accordingly, Irakli Pirtskhalava’s additional complaints were declared inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded, states the official information from Georgia’s Ministry of Justice.