Supreme Court of Georgia

Respond on the article published by the “Prime-Time”

Published: 11/12/2013

On November 11, 2013 the "Prime-Time" published an article titled “The judges double standards”. The author of the article reviews the criminal case, which is examined by Kutaisi City Court, and declares that the judge with the agreement of the prosecutor deliberately hinder the proceedings in order not to give the lawyer the opportunity to defend her client. For the “illustration” the lawyer Inga Sharashenidze claims that the judge postponed the hearing on the ground of several motions and mostly the motions about the delaying the hearings were from the prosecution.

What was really happening in this case and what the "secret agreement" is between the court and the prosecutors office?

The hearings of this case began on June 26, 2013 at Kutaisi City Court.

The factual backgrounds of the case are the following: On March 14, 2013, accused David D., in a drunken state, was arguing with D.G., when he on offending ground with the revenge motive, shot D.G. three times in chest inflicted life-threatening injuries by the firearm which was registered on the name of David D. with the right of possession, after D.G. died in hospital. At the same time, another person, who witnessed the committing the crime, was wounded as a result of shooting and was inflicted gunshot wounds in the form of light injuries that caused short-term health disorders. As a measure of restraint David D. was sentenced to imprisonment. The Lawyer Inga Sharashenidze represents the interests of the accused before the court.

Considering the numbers of the cases that are hearing at the court, the court sessions of this case were appointed by the relevant schedules. At present, 8 court sessions were held and 13 witnesses were interrogated, the delay was caused because of the existing legal and objective circumstances that a judge could not avoid. Accordingly, there was no motive deliberately hinder the case proceedings. In this case f the prosecution was a party, and the judge is obligated to listen to and to take into account both the lawyer and the prosecutors motions, which are derived from the requirements of the law.

Therefore, the lawyers statement on the restriction of the defense right lacks the argument because, despite the absurd accusation that the case was deliberately delayed, the lawyer may freely defend his/her client’s rights even after 9-months term of imprisonment. Hopefully the lawyer knows that in case of the defendants pre-trial detention, if the 9-month period of the trial will not be enough, the court should release the prisoner and the hearings of the case will last within a reasonable time limit period determined by the court.

However, in this particular case the judge still have enough time for the examination. Next session will be held on November 12, 2013, and as for the 9-month term of imprisonment, it expires on December 15, 2013.

And finally, at present 9 judges examine 592 cases at Kutaisi City Court. Prosecutors and lawyers put dozens of court petitions daily and the court, only on the basis of law, either uphold or dismiss the applications. This is the ordinary way of court trials, and if any of the parties see “the partiality" in these everyday activities, it is the problem of professionalism only of this party, and also we do not want to think that the lawyer attempted to “swank” before the client.