Bidzina Ivanishvili’s lawyer, Teimuraz Tsikvadze, stated on social media that the legal dispute between Ivanishvili and Credit Suisse has ended in Ivanishvili’s “unconditional and complete victory.”
According to Tsikvadze, the court upheld the previous rulings in Ivanishvili’s favour and imposed even stricter assessments against Credit Suisse, finding the bank responsible for serious violations in the management of a client’s assets.
“No one doubted that Bidzina Ivanishvili would win the legal dispute in London. The robbery case brought against him—allegedly orchestrated by informal power structures often referred to as the “Deep State”—is so thoroughly documented that any other outcome would have amounted to rewriting established legal standards, something unthinkable even for these so-called informal rulers.
However, the main issue is not the London court’s decision itself, but the unfair pressure and blackmail directed at Bidzina Ivanishvili. As I explained in a letter published a few days ago, Mr. Ivanishvili does not expect the ruling to be enforced, given the ongoing blackmail, nor does he believe that these informal actors will allow him access to the assets that legally belong to him.
It is well known that the previous U.S. administration imposed sanctions on Bidzina Ivanishvili for allegedly advancing “Russian interests” in Georgia—sanctions that directly affected the same amount of money addressed in the London court’s ruling. Formally, everything appears in order, yet the assets remain under the control of these informal forces, who are likely to use this issue for future leverage.
At the same time, Mr. Ivanishvili has repeatedly stated that he will not yield to blackmail in exchange for any sum of money. Georgia’s national interests, he insists, will not be traded for any asset.
Furthermore, although the sanctions against Mr. Ivanishvili were justified by vague and unsubstantiated claims regarding “Russian interests,” no one has ever specified what interests he supposedly advanced. His family members—his wife and children—were subjected to even harsher measures, with access to their personal assets blocked. Imposing sanctions on family members under such dubious grounds would be difficult to justify even for the so-called “Deep State,” so no explanation was offered; their access was simply denied without cause.
Given this harmful, unfair, and predatory attitude, Bidzina Ivanishvili has no expectation that the court’s decision will be enforced. Moreover, those who once accused him of pursuing non-existent “Russian interests” and imposed sanctions on that basis are now sitting at the same table with Russia, discussing plans to end the war. Within a few weeks, it is highly likely that the United States itself will restore relations with the Russian Federation—including political and economic ties—after which both the sanctions imposed by the previous U.S. administration and the justification behind them (“pursuing Russian interests”) will appear even more absurd.
It is not excluded that, in order to eliminate this absurdity, U.S. sanctions against Bidzina Ivanishvili may indeed be lifted, especially since the current administration has already reviewed and reversed sanctions used as instruments of political punishment on several occasions. However, the issue goes deeper: if the informal rulers—the so-called Deep State—decide to continue their policy of blackmail and pressure, they may simply replace American sanctions with British ones. These are merely two hands of the same body, and shifting the problem from one hand to the other does nothing to change the overall situation. That is why, as long as such an unjust attitude persists toward our government and the founder of the ruling party, no legal victory can bring real results.
Finally, a clarification regarding the “joy” of the local opposition and its media over the claim that new sanctions may be imposed on Bidzina Ivanishvili: he has two types of assets abroad—(1) the sum awarded by the London Supreme Court, and (2) the assets belonging to his family members held in the Swiss bank Julius Baer. Both Mr. Ivanishvili and his family members already have fully restricted access to both assets. Everything that could be sanctioned, blocked, or delayed has already been sanctioned, blocked, and delayed. Nothing will change by adding “new sanctions.”
Moreover, Mr. Ivanishvili and his family have openly stated that despite unjustly restricted access to their assets, they continue their political and charitable activities and have no expectation of recovering the funds. Therefore, the celebration by the stateless agents is absurd, and their talk of additional sanctions is nothing more than propaganda fodder for a few hundred radical adherents,” he wrote.
