Motion on recusal of Judge Gabinashvili assigned to Judge Gabinashvili - another violation of the law in the cassation case of Nika Gvaramia

Another violation of the law on Nika Gvaramia's cassation case - the motion to remove judge Merab Gabinashvili was assigned to the same judge. On March 27, the lawyers of the founder of "Mtavari Channel" applied to the court with a motion to recuse Gabinashvili. The appeal should have been considered within 3 days, but the law and deadlines were violated here as well. Almost a week has passed, and the response to the motion is still unknown. The Supreme Court is in no hurry to finish the review of Nika Gvaramia's case.

More than half of the 6-month review period has already passed. Judge Gabinashvili himself cannot answer the questions of "Mtavari Channel" and advises the journalist to "get to know the legislation better":

"Do you realize that you are interfering with the work of the judge with these questions? Don't you have the feeling of it?...Are you asking me for a report on the criminal case that I have to consider?" You should look into the legislation better" said judge Gabinashvili during a telephone comment to "Mtavari".

Nika Gvaramia's lawyer once again explains the time limits of the cassation lawsuit and the basis of the motion for the recusal of Gabinashvili:

"10 days ago, we applied to the Supreme Court with a motion to recuse judge Merab Gabinashvili, despite the fact that the court is obliged by law to consider our motion within three days, to this day this motion has not been considered.The fact that this motion , as it has become known to us, from the Supreme Court itself, has been assigned to Merab Gabinashvili should be especially highlighted.However, according to the law, when the Chamber considers the case, the decision on the recusal must be made by other judges, and not by the judge whose recusal is requested by the party. Accordingly, we ask the Supreme Court not to violate the terms and procedures established by law for consideration of our motion. The motion on the recusal of Merab Gabinashvili is based on two main arguments. First argument is that more than the half of 6-month term of consideration stipulated by law has expired so the case not only has not been reviewed but the Chamber is not staffed either and we have written several times to the Court asking for the information who and in what composition the Chamber has reviewed the cassation complaint of Nika Gvaramia but in reply they told us that the composition of the Chamber is still unknown," - says Nika Gvaramia`s lawyer Dimitri Sadzaglishvili.

The second argument is that Merab Gabinashvili is a loyal member of the clan, he was appointed to the Supreme Court with gross violation of legal requirements and this is not just our position, this is the position of Venice Commission, - says Nika Gvaramia's lawyer Dimitri Sadzaglishvili.