Georgian judge Levan Murusidze claims UK sanctions due to court's independence

Levan Murusidze, a judge at the Tbilisi Court of Appeals, on Thursday said his recent sanctioning was a direct consequence of the Georgian judiciary's refusal to bow to external pressures and its commitment to making decisions based on what judges believe was right.

Murusidze’s remarks came in response to the United Kingdom Government’s decision to impose sanctions on Levan Murusidze, a member of Georgia’s High Council of Justice and a judge at the Tbilisi Court of Appeals, and Mikheil Chinchaladze, the Chair of the Tbilisi Court of Appeals. The official statement cites “reasonable grounds to suspect” their involvement in serious corruption.

Speaking about his sanctioning, Murusidze said he was expecting this development.

“It is illogical, and frankly, I was expecting this based on the trends that were occurring in relation to the court”, he said.

Murusidze further elaborated, recalling his time as the Secretary of the High Council of Justice. He claimed that various representatives had approached them regarding “vetting”, a process he described as an attempt to force out “undesirable” judges and ensure that only those loyal to a particular political agenda remained in the judicial system.

“Since the [Georgian] judiciary does not obey decisions made from the outside and judges make decisions that they consider correct, this is why the sanctions were imposed. It is illogical and to be honest, I expected this [desidion] based on the trends that have been happening in relation to the judiciary”, he continued.

“They need this because the judiciary is a crucial instrument for implementing political agendas. For example, in Romania, a candidate won the first round of elections, but the decision was overturned. We did not allow the implementation of such a ‘vetting’ process to cleanse the judiciary in Georgia. Now, they have resorted to sanctions instead”, Murusidze noted.

He firmly denied any connection between the sanctions and corruption allegations, asserting that the move was purely political.

“I view this with strong resolve and calmness. The more external pressure is exerted, the more determined we will be in upholding judicial independence”, he concluded.