Giorgi Arevadze and the list of “terrible lawyers” – How Georgia’s judiciary is losing trust

Why we keep a list

Tiflis24 will maintain a list—a list not for honor, but for remembrance. We call it the "List of Terrible Lawyers," a deliberate reference to German history, where this was the name given to the lawyers who, during the Nazi era, transformed injustice into justice with their rulings and laws. This term is also relevant in Georgia today, because there are judges whose decisions in political proceedings are undermining confidence in the judiciary.

These aren't private allegations, but documented cases that are publicly available. One of these cases is named after Giorgi Arevadze.

The Archil Museliantsi case – four years in prison for 534 lari (171 euros)

On November 30, 2024, activist Archil Museliantsi was arrested during protests in Tbilisi. Initially, the charge was an administrative offense. However, the prosecutor's office later upgraded the case to a felony: Article 187, Part 2 of the Criminal Code, causing property damage by fire, punishable by up to six years in prison. The alleged damage: a surveillance camera cable valued at 534 lari.

The final sentence was four years in prison . It was handed down by Judge Giorgi Arevadze. Legally, the verdict is final. Politically, it has sparked controversy, as many observers consider the sentence disproportionate and speak of it as a deterrent to protests.

The letter from Archil Museliantsi

Even before the verdict was announced, Archil Museliantsi wrote a letter to his supporters, which has since been publicly quoted:

"I know they will condemn me. But the real punishment doesn't fall on me, but on the country. I would even serve six years if it were for the dignity of the fatherland. I ask only one thing of you: Keep fighting! Imagine if Ilia Chavchavadze had remained silent, Merab Kostava had given up, or Giorgi Antsukhelidze hadn't fought. We are all fighting for a free and independent Georgia – and we will achieve it."

This letter makes it clear that Museliantsi considers his sentence to be politically motivated.

Criticism of the procedure

During the proceedings, questions were raised about the evidence and the conduct of the trial. Museliantsi himself stated in court that the video footage used to incriminate him had been edited and manipulated. He also expressed doubts about the completeness of the expert opinion presented. International and national observers – including representatives of NGOs – generally criticize the Georgian judiciary for not acting independently enough in politically sensitive cases.

It is legally undisputed that the verdict was passed. What is disputed is whether it meets the rule of law. This discussion affects not only the Museliantsi case, but also the entire trust in the Georgian judiciary.

Giorgi Arevadze – a judge under public scrutiny

Judge Giorgi Arevadze has been working at the Tbilisi City Court since 2008. He is now primarily associated with the verdict against Museliantsi. He is not accused of breaking a law, but of having—like many Georgian judges—handed down a ruling that casts doubt on the independence of the judiciary.

This is part of a development that has been repeatedly criticized by international institutions.

Parallel to the “terrible lawyers”

German history is familiar with the term "terrible jurists" from the Nazi era. This referred to jurists who enacted laws and rulings in favor of the regime, thus supporting the unjust system. In Georgia, too, there are jurists today whose rulings are at the center of political proceedings. The comparison is not an equation, but rather a hint: When judges hand down rulings that are considered politically motivated in society, it is reminiscent of historical experiences in which the judiciary lost its independence.

From individual case to symbol

Archil Museliantsi is not the only known case. Journalist Mzia Amaglobeli, founder of Batumelebi and Netgazeti , was also imprisoned after protests. International organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International describe such cases as politically motivated proceedings. Judges who hand down these verdicts inevitably become the focus of criticism.

Systemic problems in the justice system

The problem lies beyond individual judges. Georgia's High Judicial Council, which is supposed to guarantee judicial independence, has been repeatedly criticized by the Venice Commission and the ODIHR. Appointments are said to be politicized, transparency is lacking, and integrity checks do not exist. In such an environment, even individual judgments lose their legitimacy in the eyes of the public.

The European dimension

While the Georgian government in Brussels is talking about EU integration, cases like Museliantsi and Amaglobeli demonstrate that the judiciary in Georgia raises doubts about the rule of law. However, for the EU, judicial independence is a core criterion. The names of judges who hand down tough sentences in politically sensitive cases are therefore also recognized in Europe.

Damages of 534 lari, a four-year prison sentence, a letter full of patriotism, and a judge who handed down the sentence. Legally, the case is closed; politically, it is a symbol of the crisis in Georgia's justice system.

Giorgi Arevadze is not just any judge, but one of those whose rulings have triggered the public discussion about “terrible lawyers” in Georgia.