INTIMIDATION/HARASSMENT BASED ON ALLEGED POLITICAL MOTIVE
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
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.