Verdict against Nika Gvaramia should not be assessed as political persecution. Such a statement made today the Chairman of the parliamentary Human Rights Committee.
“The court concluded that this was an unlawful act – an unlawful act of the category that is called an offense. So, what is this about? A decision was made by the head of the enterprise that resulted in the reduction of the organization’s income. Even the Public Defender does not deny this. Let’s talk about whether this was good or bad for the organization – for what reason could earning less income be [better] for the organization than earning more?
The Ombudsman said that he may have been insuring against long-term and short-term risks. Can you tell me what risks he was insuring against? As regards political persecution, there might be a question about whether this amounts to political persecution. I do not think there is a reason for anyone to talk about political persecution.
It is politically sensitive because Gvaramia’s activities are political in nature. Accordingly, political sensitivity may stem from this, but it does not mean that anyone can peremptorily speak about political persecution in the given situation. It is explained convincingly and quite well that a violation of law has taken place, which the court assessed as a crime”, - said Mikheil Sarjveladze.