The European Court of Human Rights has stated that there is no reason to doubt the fairness of the criminal proceedings against former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. This is stated in the statement of the ECHR, reports UNN.
Details
Reportedly, the case of Saakashvili v. Georgia (Nos. 6232/20 and 22394/20) concerned two separate groups of criminal proceedings initiated against Mikheil Saakashvili.
The first set of proceedings concerned the 2005 attack on a member of parliament, and the second concerned his 2008 pardon of four former high-ranking Interior Ministry officials convicted of murder.
The ECHR said in a statement that both proceedings took place after the newly formed government officially announced in 2012 that investigating past crimes would be a key priority.
In today's decision in this case, the European Court of Human Rights:
- ruled unanimously that there had been no violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) (right to a fair trial/right to be present and examine witnesses) of the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to the way the domestic courts had dealt with the evidence against Saakashvili or the alleged lack of independence or impartiality of the judge who heard the second criminal case against him;
- By 5 votes to 2, the Court decided that there had been no violation of Article 7 (no punishment without law) of the European Convention.
Saakashvili could have reasonably foreseen, given the specific circumstances of the case, that the use of his pardon powers to pervert the course of justice in the murder case would lead to his criminal liability under Georgian law
The Court also rejected as inadmissible Saakashvili's complaints under Article 18 (restrictions on the use of restrictions on rights) of the Convention. The ECtHR found that Saakashvili had not substantiated his claim that there was an ulterior motive behind his persecution - to prevent him from participating in Georgian politics.
In this regard, the court took into account that the charges against Saakashvili were serious and substantiated, that the case file contained a significant amount of both direct and circumstantial evidence against him, that the domestic courts had conducted a fully adversarial process in which his lawyer had been able to examine all the main witnesses and otherwise challenge the evidence against him, and that, above all, the court decisions had been duly reasoned
Georgian President comments on possible pardon of Saakashvili29.02.24, 11:46 • [views_38271]