09 Jun, 2022
As you know, today the European Parliament adopted a resolution on Georgia. The campaign that has been underway since 2012 to protect criminals and bring these criminals back to power has reached the European Parliament – one of the European Union’s supreme institutions – which is highly unfortunate and concerning. It is extremely concerning that even such a high-ranking institution of the European Union has fallen victim to so-called fake [news] – one of the chief ailments of the modern world.
First of all, we will touch on a number of relatively minor factual inaccuracies and lies that the participants of the campaign have managed to sneak into the European Parliament’s resolution. For example, the resolution states that to this day, the authorities are refusing to transfer Mikheil Saakashvili to a private clinic, while Saakashvili is precisely at a private clinic as we speak. The resolution also states that Lekso Lashkarava succumbed to injuries sustained on 5 July, while the real cause of death is well-known to the public. Since 2012 to date, no comparable lie has ended up in any of the resolutions and official documents adopted by the Parliament of Georgia. It is extremely concerning that specific individuals manage to sneak such gross factual inaccuracies and lies into the resolution of the European Parliament.
The resolution of the European Parliament is mainly based on the description of the events that took place on 5 July. As you know, the Georgian authorities have repeatedly condemned the violence against journalists, which was a completely unprecedented event in the 30-year history of independent Georgia. The authorities used this form of violence against journalists in 2004-2012; however, instances of violence perpetrated by ordinary citizens against journalists have not been identified before or after the said events. Unfortunately, the resolution does not explain that an investigation has been launched into 12 criminal cases, resulting in 31 persons being detained or arrested. We do not believe this to be merely a technical shortcoming of the resolution. We encounter yet another false piece of information in the resolution on the topic of 5 July, suggesting that attacks on journalists in Georgia have reached unprecedented levels since 5 July. It is unfortunate that the European Parliament does not verify such facts before adopting a resolution. For example, the Parliament of Georgia and its staff work to a completely different standard. Prior to the approval of any document, the Staff of the Parliament of Georgia verifies all the factual circumstances and presents its report to the Parliament with due professional responsibility.
It is impossible for us to respond lightly to the section of the European Parliament’s resolution that calls on the Georgian authorities to transfer Mikheil Saakashvili abroad on “humanitarian grounds” and to release Nika Gvaramia. It is especially concerning that we encounter these calls in a resolution on media freedom and human rights. May God protect Georgia and every EU member state from the standard of media freedom and human rights established by Saakashvili and Gvaramia in 2004-2012. It is astonishing that the European Parliament calls on us to release those who trampled media freedom in Georgia, who seized all national broadcasters in a bandit-like manner and established the full media monopoly of the United National Movement in Georgia, who raided Imedi TV and then looted it from its rightful owner, and who robbed one of the television stations of 7 million just a couple of years ago. I would like to remind you that to this day, these people continue to trample everything valuable that is embodied by the free media – a democratic institution serving the public interest – through the daily circulation of lies and hatred as well as the use of profane language that has become the norm in the media.
It is a paradox, yet it is a fact that against the backdrop of the calls to release of Saakashvili and Gvaramia, the resolution of the European Parliament virtually declared Bidzina Ivanishvili – who has left politics – an enemy of Georgian democracy, demanding the imposition of sanctions against him.
Several minor comparisons:
As we have already noted, during Saakashvili’s and Gvaramia’s time, the media were completely monopolized by the authorities in a bandit-like manner. Founding a new television station was practically impossible. Since 2012, a pluralist media environment has been established in Georgia. There are 14 national television broadcasters, including three television stations owned by the United National Movement, which are financed with money that was looted and stolen from the people by the Saakashvili regime in 2004-2012. Dozens of other television stations – including opposition television stations – and numerous independent media outlets are operating in the country. It practically takes just a few days to set up a new television station. There are no incursions in television stations anymore and journalists have complete freedom in terms of coverage. These are the achievements that Bidzina Ivanishvili has brought to Georgia and Georgian democracy after the defeat of the Saakashvili regime;
Until 2012, there were 25,000 prisoners in Georgian prisons and an average of 150 prisoners died per year. Since 2012, the number of prisoners has decreased two and a half times and the death toll has decreased 12 times, which is the result of the crackdown on the systemic practices of torture, rape, and inhuman treatment established by the Saakashvili regime. These are the achievements that Bidzina Ivanishvili has brought to Georgia and Georgian democracy after the defeat of the Saakashvili regime;
Until 2012, the court was one of the main repressive tools of Saakashvili’s criminal regime. Since 2012, in the very first years the number of acquittals increased six times, the number of pre-trial and administrative detentions decreased three times, and the number of successful petitions for investigative actions was halved. The total amount of fines levied decreased five times, and the total amount of bails set decreased 18 times. In the very first years, the number of lawsuits sent from Georgia to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg decreased 11 times. These statistics alone are enough to prove not only that the situation in the Georgian judiciary has improved radically since 2012, but that all the systemic problems of Saakashvili’s and Adeishvili’s courts have been eliminated. These are the achievements that Bidzina Ivanishvili has brought to Georgia and Georgian democracy after the defeat of the Saakashvili regime;
Saakashvili handed over 20 percent of Georgia’s territory and a large part of its strategic economic facilities to Russia. The process of Russian expansion into Georgia was stopped only in 2012, after Saakashvili’s regime was defeated by Bidzina Ivanishvili. This too is a fundamental achievement brought to Georgia by Bidzina Ivanishvili after the defeat of the Saakashvili regime;
The process of Georgia’s integration into Western structures resumed precisely after the defeat of the Saakashvili regime by Bidzina Ivanishvili – the Association Agreement and the Free Trade Agreement with the European Union were signed, visa-free travel was introduced, the joint NATO training center was established, and numerous reforms were implemented, thanks to which today Georgia is ahead of Ukraine, Moldova, and many EU member or candidate countries in terms of democracy and the rule of law, the fight against corruption, and trade and economic cooperation with the European Union.
This is but a small list of the achievements associated with Bidzina Ivanishvili’s name. When a person who has left politics is accused of being involved in politics by a resolution of the European Parliament without any arguments or evidence, this is a separate problem. However, even if we assume, hypothetically, that Bidzina Ivanishvili is involved in politics, it is unclear what the people who call themselves well-wishers of Georgia are accusing him of. It is a fact – and in reality, they themselves are well aware of this – that thanks to Bidzina Ivanishvili, Georgia has only made progress – and fundamental progress, at that – toward democracy, human rights, and media freedom since 2012.
The only thing that Ivanishvili may be accused of by Georgia’s “well-wishers” is the fact that the authorities of Georgia refused to impose sanctions on Russia, thus refusing to punish their own country and its people. Georgia’s “well-wishers” are probably annoyed by the fact that against the backdrop of the grave economic problems around the world, economic growth exceeding 10 percent was reported in Georgia last year as well as in January-April of this year.
Georgia’s “well-wishers” may not like that the law is the law in Georgia, and that both Saakashvili – who sneaked into the country in a sour cream shipping container – and Gvaramia – who robbed a television station of 7 million – are in their rightful place today.
Georgia’s “well-wishers” may not like that Georgia did not become involved in a completely disastrous and fatal war, and that it did not allow anyone to destroy the country.
However, what is disliked by the patrons of criminals is liked by the people of Georgia – this is peace, the rule of law, and economic development. Those who do not like this cannot be called friends and well-wishers of Georgia.
The resolution that calls for the release of Saakashvili and Gvaramia – the enemies of Georgian democracy and media freedom – and declares Bidzina Ivanishvili (who is fully distanced from politics today and who returned democracy, freedom of the media, and media pluralism to the Georgian people in 2012) as virtually the main problem facing Georgian democracy, calling for sanctions to be imposed on him, has nothing in common with European values. Such a resolution, to put it bluntly, is not worth a dime.
We hope that when Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova become members of the European Union, we will have a different European Parliament by then – one that is immune to the influence of fake [news] and a defender of true European values; one that will be able to act sovereignly, in line with its own objective interests.
We are not trying to prove anything, but today’s resolution bolsters the opinion expressed by individual experts who suggested that the issue of applying for EU candidate status ahead of the declared timeframe was invented by Georgia’s ill-wishers in order to create artificial difficulties for our country and its authorities.
You all remember the artificial commotion created by the opposition regarding this topic, even though they are well aware that granting candidate status will have no practical consequences for either Georgia, Ukraine, or Moldova.
Furthermore, this commotion suspiciously coincided with the Bakuriani meeting, where Peter Ackerman – the well-known expert on revolutions – trained the United National Movement and the parties, television stations, and NGOs owned by it in overthrowing the authorities. We cannot rule out that the commotion surrounding the candidate status may have been decided at the Bakuriani meeting.
What the opposition is counting on is simple, and we have repeatedly informed the public about this in the past. They are counting on Georgia not receiving the candidate status, unlike Ukraine and Moldova, which will lead to a commotion among a part of the public, especially young people, and a coup by the United National Movement. And all this will end in Georgia becoming involved in the war – a goal so diligently pursued by the United National Movement and its patrons all these months.
The resolution of the European Parliament can be seen as hinting that Georgia – unlike Ukraine and Moldova – may not be granted EU candidate status.
If this happens, naturally, it will be a completely illogical and unjust decision and everyone in Georgia who is interested in peace, the rule of law, and economic progress will react accordingly.
We will not act prematurely, and we will wait until 23-24 June, when the final decision regarding the candidate status will be made. We will provide the public with more information about the behind-the-scenes developments pertaining to the candidate status and the relevant private conversations in accordance with the decision.