Date: 2020-07-30
Period: 2020 Parliamentary elections - Pre-election period
District: Khelvachauri , Khelvachauri
Incident Category: Intimidation , Other cases of intimidation
2020-07-30 On July 30, Khelvachauri Municipality Sakrebulo terminated a mandate of a majoritarian member Vazha Tavdgiridze (United National Movement) for being absent from the Sakrebulo’s meetings for six months. According to the Sakrebulo, the medical certificate Form 100 confirming that Vazha Tavdgiridze had stage 3 of cancer, was undergoing a treatment course and was not able to move freely was not an excusable reason. According to Khelvachauri Municipality Sakrebulo’s Chairperson Nadim Varshanidze, Form 100 is just a paper and it is insufficient. He said that the MP should have also presented a medical bulletin and other medical documents. In an interview with ISFED observer, Sakrebulo lawyer could not specify what other documents Tavdgiridze was required to submit. Chairperson of Khelvachauri Sakrebulo faction “United National Movement - Christian Democrats” Mikheil Bolkvadze believes that this fact amounts to political harassment and says that the majority wanted to break up the faction (the faction consisted of 3 members and following Tavdgiridze’s dismissal it dissolved). The UNM is planning to appeal the decision in court. According to the Code of Local Self-Government, if a member of Sakrebulo is not participating in work of Sakrebulo for six straight months for inexcusable reason, s/he may be dismissed (art.43.1.e). Reason of the absence is examined by relevant commission of the Sakrebulo, according to the rules provided in the Sakrebulo’s statute (art.43.5). According to the statute of Khelvachauri Municipality Sakrebulo, legal and procedural affairs commission of the Sakrebulo examines the reason of the absence. Upon confirming that the absence is inexcusable, the commission prepares findings and submits it to the Sakrebulo (art.8.5). This means that the law does not provide a list of concrete documents that should be used for examining the reason of the absence. Instead, the reason should be examined on a case-by-case basis, in view of particular circumstances of the case. In this particular case, Form 100 and the statement of the individual concerned should have been considered as valid excuse.