Former Georgian Prime Minister and Interior Minister Giorgi Gakharia has called on the parliamentary investigative commission to question Bidzina Ivanishvili, the individual responsible for bringing Sergei Gavrilov to Georgia, as well as the Prosecutor General and the head of the State Security Service.

“To understand the full context, this commission must question Ivanishvili, the person who brought Gavrilov and assumed responsibility for the risks. He made assurances that everything would be manageable — then vanished. The Prosecutor General, who has been investigating this case for years, should also be questioned. Strasbourg has already noted the prolonged nature of the investigation. The head of the State Security Service, whose duty was to anticipate and mitigate such risks, should also be questioned. If the commission fails to do this, it will be a commission of half-truths — and therefore, a false truth,” Gakharia stated during the commission’s session.

He also emphasized that during the protests on June 20, 2019, he was protecting the state — not a political party or individuals.

“I say with full responsibility: on June 20, I defended the state, not the party, not the government, not individuals. I once thought placing Gavrilov in the Speaker’s chair was a foolish mistake — today, I see it differently. What happened later, on the night of my resignation on February 18, 2021, mirrored those events.

You, Madam Chair, were among those who initially believed arresting Melia that night would be a mistake — I recall your exact words. But within an hour, everyone changed their stance as if influenced by an invisible hand. I now suspect something similar may have happened on June 20, 2019. I’ve testified twice to the Prosecutor’s Office and stand by those statements. I hope you’ve reviewed them.”

Gakharia added that he initially had no intention of attending the session but changed his mind due to what he views as the commission’s misuse.

“Frankly, I wasn’t planning to come. I don’t understand this commission’s mandate. You aren’t investigating who ordered the storming of Parliament. You don’t call key figures from the opposition and have no intention to ban or hold the Natsis (UNM representatives) accountable. Instead, you’re using the commission as a tool of hybrid warfare, applying psychological and informational pressure on the public — just like what happened when the heroism of Giorgi Antsukhelidze was devalued. That’s why I felt obligated to appear. But make no mistake — my presence doesn’t mean I recognize this commission. If I did, we would have had representation here. Still, I see that your influence is working, and I feel responsible for voicing my dissent wherever I can.”