The Georgian political arena remains tense as the head of the ruling Georgian Dream party, Iraqi Kobakhidze, leveled criticisms at the United States ambassador to Georgia, Kelly Degnan, accusing her of applying double standards. The remarks aired on a television channel, leaving viewers with questions about the consistency of U.S. comments on Georgia’s domestic matters.
The exchange follows Degnan’s call for additional information and due process after a BBC report alleging that former Georgian Defense Minister David Kezerashvili was linked to an international fraud scheme aimed at misappropriating pension funds within the European Union.
Kobakhidze argued that the sequence of events points to a bias in some Georgian media coverage. He contended that biased reporting can lead observers to draw faulty conclusions and even support sanctions against judges, a stance he asserted must be avoided. He emphasized that under Georgia’s legal framework, filing an administrative lawsuit against a judge or issuing a formal warning is not possible without solid, irrefutable evidence, underscoring the need for careful scrutiny before any punitive steps are taken.
Reminding the audience of his earlier statements, Kobakhidze asserted that the United States had presented serious charges against elements of the Georgian judiciary without providing concrete evidence. He suggested that a political motive underpins such moves, calling into question the impartiality of the actions and the broader implications for Georgia’s judicial independence.
Degnan’s stance remained firm as she criticized Georgian authorities for protecting judges who face visa-related restrictions. She reiterated the U.S. position that there are legitimate reasons for applying those sanctions, aligning it with the broader U.S. effort to address perceived corruption and governance concerns within the judiciary.
Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department highlighted a separate set of sanctions issued on April 5, noting that four members of Georgia’s Supreme Judicial Council were targeted for significant corruption. This move, reported in Washington, signals ongoing international attention to governance and transparency issues in Georgia’s highest judicial bodies, as observers weigh the implications for reform and accountability across the country.
The debate underscores a broader international discourse about how external voices influence internal legal processes. Supporters of stronger oversight argue that international scrutiny can help root out corruption and protect public trust, while critics warn against external interference that may disrupt the balance between judicial independence and political reform. In Georgia, where political dynamics are closely watched by regional partners and international allies, the tension between domestic sovereignty and external expectations continues to shape policy discussions, media narratives, and the paths toward stronger governance mechanisms.