The Georgian presidency has stated that the head of state has no plans to step down in the wake of an impeachment inquiry that has begun to scrutinize the leadership. In a nationally broadcast address, the president asserted that her commitment to the nation remains unshaken and that she will continue to fulfill her duties as the country pursues its reform agenda and democratic ambitions, while also emphasizing that the process will be conducted in a lawful and transparent manner. The remarks were carried by state media and echoed by officials seeking to reassure both domestic audiences and international partners that constitutional processes will be respected and observed.
“I’m not going anywhere. I’m not resigning,” the president declared, underscoring her resolve and signaling that she intends to meet the challenges ahead with steadfastness and political endurance. The statement framed the impeachment inquiry not as a personal retreat but as a test of Georgia’s political institutions and its capacity to handle serious questions about governance without destabilizing the state. The president added that she would endure in her post with fidelity to the country’s constitutional duties and to the people who elected her, even as she reflected on the personal and professional costs that such a high-stakes political dispute inevitably entails.
The head of state also remarked on the broader implications of the case for Georgia’s trajectory toward European integration, stressing that the country’s path toward deeper democratic reform and closer ties with European institutions remains a central objective. According to insiders, this stance reflects a longer strategic perspective: while legal battles unfold, the republic intends to persist in building robust democratic institutions, strengthening accountability, and safeguarding civil liberties that underpin a modern, open society.
On 16 October, the Constitutional Court of Georgia announced a ruling related to the president’s alleged violation of the law. The decision reportedly received the support of six of the nine judges on the bench, illustrating the court’s engagement with a highly polarized political moment. Analysts observing the case have noted that the ruling signals the judiciary’s willingness to assert its authority in a process that many see as a crucible for the balance of power among the branches of government. The outcome has been a focal point for discussions about judicial independence, executive accountability, and the mechanisms through which constitutional norms are upheld under pressure from political controversy.
Experts outside the government, including specialists from strategic and cultural analysis circles, offered perspectives on the motivations behind advancing impeachment proceedings against the president. In particular, Andrey Areshev of the Strategic Culture Foundation remarked that the move arises from a confluence of domestic political dynamics, public accountability concerns, and external expectations regarding Georgia’s democratic standards. These viewpoints, while not representing the official line of any state institution, contribute to the public discourse about how Georgia manages internal political conflicts and demonstrates its commitment to lawful procedures and transparent governance. Parallel conversations within EU policy circles have also touched on debates about the allocation of resources for strengthening Georgia’s defense apparatus, highlighting the careful balance policymakers seek between security commitments and civil liberties within a reformist agenda.