Judge with Kind Smile and Evil Behavior

Judge Nino Oniani Shall Be Imprisoned from 2 to 4 Years for the Crime She Committed

Madlen Macharashvili

Judge Nino Oniani, like every judge, is entitled to pass fair decision and protect human rights. However, impartiality of the Temida is doubtful and Oniani herself is accused for fabricating the trial protocols.

Nino Oniani was suspected in the fabrication of the protocols when she was discussing the case on Merab Kubaneishvili. Concrete documents prove that incorrect data is written in the protocols.

The story is the following: Merab Kubaneishvili and his cousin Davit Chumburidze owned a holiday-house in Tskneti village close to Tbilisi for many years. Later, Chumburidze offered his cousin to purchase his share in the house for 30 000 USD and consequently, Merab Kubaneishvili could become the only owner of the house.

At that time, Merab Kubaneishvili lived in Russia and he transferred 15 000 USD on his cousin’s bank account. Before the total price was paid to him Davit Chumburidze mortgaged the holiday-house in Tskneti and then left it to his debtor in exchange of the debt. Merab Kubaneishvili said in his conversation with the investigation team that in order to get his 15 000 USD back from Davit Chumburidze he appealed to the court to sequester the house of Chumburidze in Iashvili Street 24, Tbilisi. It must be pointed out that when Chumburidze registered the house on his debtor, based on the court decision the house was sequestered. However, Chumburidze and his debtor Toidze signed purchase agreement at the Public Registration Agency without any problem. The topic of our investigation is not the sequestration of the in house in Iashvili Street or clarifying how valid the information provided by Kubaneishvili was. Our investigation team will work to find out the legal basis of sequestering the house of Chumburidze because there was no legal purchase agreement between Kubaneishvili and Chumburidze. The topic of our investigation is fabrication of protocols at the Administrative Collegium of the Tbilisi City Court. Kubaneishvili said the employee of the Public Registration Agency did not consider that the property was sequestered by the court and registered the property purchase document.

Merab Kubaneishvili appealed to the Administrative Collegium of the Tbilisi City Court on May 6, 2005 together with his mother; they requested the court to annul the decision of the Public Registration Agency. The court accepted the suit of Kubaneishvili and put Judge Nino Oniani in charge of the case. Proceeding started on Case N 3/1035.

First trial was held on June 9, 2005 though Nino Oniani did not discuss the case thoroughly. According to the protocol, the trial was postponed because of absence of the representative of the Public Registration Agency.

Suitor Merab Kubaneishvili said the judge postponed the trial several times. “We attended every trial but several times the hearing did not start because the defendant party, representative of the PRA did not appear to the court. Assistant to the judge used to tell me or my attorney: “You know, representative of the PRA has not come and the judge decided to postpone the discussion. However, according to the Procedural Code of Georgia the judge shall open the hearing and see who has come and who has not.”

“The parties shall confirm their presence at the trial by signature. Only after that the judge shall decide to postpone the hearing or not. Assistant to the judge informed us about postponing of the trial 4 times for similar reasons: “representative of the PRA has not appeared.” As a rule, nobody will allow you to meet the judge to find out the real reason. So I obeyed the decision.”

Judge Nino Oniani announced final decision on June 6, 2006 together with Gakheladze, the secretary of the trial. The judge concluded that suit of Kubaneishvili and Khachidze was unacceptable. Thus, the court stopped case discussion. Kubaneishvili decided to appeal to the Appeal Court.

Merab Kubaneishvili: “I was refused to discuss my suit at the fifth hearing of my appeal. In order to submit legally correct suit I requested full case materials from the court. I found out that the court had held more trials than I knew.”

There were many fabricated documents in the case materials. The protocols stated that my mother attended the trials though my mother was ill and she was in bed by that time.

One of the protocols said that my mother even raised some motions at the trial and requested to postpone the process. The judge and the secretary avoided writing one and the same reasons and in several protocols they wrote I did not appear to the hearing. According to the protocols my mother attended three trials.”

We requested several protocols and they really stated that Eter Khachidze attended the trials in the Tbilisi City Court. The protocol on the trial on June 9, 2005 stated: Judge Nino Oniani, Secretary Ts. Gakheladze, suitors Eter Khachidze and Merab Kubaneishvili attended the trial. The defendant party – representative of the PRA did not attend the trial.

According to the protocol of the trial on April 27, 2006 judge, secretary and suitor Eter Khachidze attended the trial; but suitor Merab Kubaneishvili and representative of the PRA did not attend the hearing.

The notifications of the medical institution cast doubt on the validity of the protocols. Our investigation team got hold of the notifications issued by the medical institutions. According to the notification of the Doctor Nemsitsveridze at the Tbilisi Clinic N 13 Eter Khachidze has been ill because of broken thigh-bone.

As a result of the broken thigh-bone Khachidze got ill with cancer. Medical document dated by February 20, 2004 states: “The sick woman needs wheel-chair for a person with disabilities to move in the room.”

The medical certificate issued by the out-patients on August 4, 2006 stated: the patient has been in bed since March of 2005.

Neighbors and caretakers of Eter Khachidze, living in Giorgi Leonidze Street N 18 confirm that the suitor was seriously ill. They said Khachidze could not move without help and her children were hiring caretakers for 24 hours a day for many years.

How could seriously ill person attend the trial? So, how the protocols on trials could contain her name?

Official explanation of the court to these questions is the following: at one of the trials a person cried out: “I am Eter Khachidze”; though the secretary did not consider it was necessary to check her ID.

Attorney of Kubaneishvili Maia Khutsishvili commented: “The court wrote to us: On June 9 2005 Kubaneishvili did not attend the trial. Thus, he could not have information whether Khachidze attended the hearing or not. However, the protocol states that both suitors were at the trial and the representative of the PRA was not there. This reply and the protocol contradict each other. The point is that Khachidze is mother of Kubaneishvili and he knew that his mother could not leave house.”

The secretary of the trial clarified: “One person rose in the court-room and said she was Khachidze. The secretary did not ask the woman to show her ID, though she had to. If we believe the protocol, Eter Khachidze had attended the trial several times. Consequently, the judge and the secretary should have recognized her in the court-room. Consequently, everything shows that the protocol was fabricated.”

Since Kubaneishvili and his attorneys got suspicious about the validity of the protocols they brought suit against judge Nino Oniani at the Council of Justice. The decision of the Council was not announced. Merab Kubaneishvili and his attorneys received the following replies from every court: “The Council of Justice is not obliged under the law to issue information about the punishment imposed on the judge.”

Merab Kubaneishvili: “If the Council of Justice finds criminal offense in the information provided to the council about the judge, the Council is obliged to send the case to the prosecutor’s office. Thus, the Council failed to find any sign of offense in the case. After that, I personally sent suit to the prosecutor’s office, and attached all necessary documents to it. The suit was left at the chancellery. Later, I received reply that the suit was sent back to the Council of Justice.”

Lawyer Maia Khutsishvili clarified that discussion of the appeal against Judge Nino Oniani for fabricating the protocols has not finished yet. At the moment, investigator of the Chief Prosecutor’s Office Temur Kuloshvili is investigating the case.

The judge is accused for professional offence which is envisaged under Article 341 of the Criminal Code of Georgia. The article imposes imprisonment from 2 to 4 years or fine for fabricating the document.

Lawyer Maia Khutsishvili clarified “if the case is discussed in accordance to the Criminal Law and the judge is charged, we will learn about it because similar judgment is public. But, if the case is launched in accordance to the disciplinary law we will not learn the results which can be a rebuke, warning, etc. So far, criminal investigation has not been ceased but in order to find a person guilty, there should be a judgment.”

 Meanwhile the court and her colleagues discuss the accusation against Nino Oniani, she will manage to pass many doubtful judgments.

Our investigation team looked for the cases that were discussed by Oniani after Kubaneishvili’s case. Having studied the cases we discovered one tendency: Oniani is the judge who discusses arguments between a person and governmental agencies. As a rule she passes verdicts in favor of the state structures. She is described as a calm, polite and kind person; however polite smile on the judge’s face does not make any difference if she obeys the orders of the government and breaches rights of the citizens?

Case of Medea Gotsadze – Judge Nino Oniani

In 2007 lecturer of the university Medea Gotsadze brought suit to the Administrative Collegium of the Tbilisi City Court; she protested the declination of her application for the competition at the University. The University Administration confirmed her declination from the competition by legal act.

Kakha Kojoridze, member of the Georgian Young Lawyers Association, attorney of Gotsadze: “Our request was to void the administrative act. Judge Nino Oniani said the act was illegal but she did not void it but annulled. According to the Article 248 of the Civil Procedural Code of Georgia judge is not entitled to exceed the requirements of the suit; s/he shall either satisfy the suit completely or partially or decline it.

The defendant party in this case was Tbilisi State University. The university decided to appeal the judgment. As a result, Appeal Court abolished the judgment of Nino Oniani and though it is ridiculous, the case was sent back to the court for repeated discussion and Nino Oniani was in charge of this case again. Another judge at the court said this case was not to be discussed by the Administrative Collegium and sent it to the City Court. Two years and half have passed since the suit was discussed but there are no results yet.  If the court had acted in accordance to the law, the case discussion should have ended at the Supreme Court. The main reason for prolonging the case discussion and obscurity of Gotsadze’s fate was violation of the law by the judge of the court.”

Case of Chakhalians – Judge Nino Oniani

Ethnic Armenian citizens of Georgia residing in Akhalkalaki Ruben, Armen and Vahagan Chakhalians are charged under the Criminal Code of Georgia. Mother of one of the accused Vahagan Chakhalian decided to hire ethnic Armenian lawyer Patrik Arapian, who lives in France and is member of the Bar Association of France. Arapian arrived in Georgia but the Ministry of Justice refused him to take up the case. Before that another lawyer applied to the ministry to protect Chakhaliani but he was also declined.

The refusal of the Ministry relied on the following arguments: Chakhalian already had one attorney and he did not need another one. If the ministry allows the accused to hire one more attorney, it will prolong the procedure.

Nino Andriashvili, lawyer for the Human Rights Center, attorney of Chakhalian: “Mother of Chakhalian brought suit to the court according to the administrative law. Judge Nino Oniani was put in charge of the case. We requested the court to void the illegal resolution of the Ministry of Justice which restricted Chakhalian’s right to defense.”

“The resolution was illegal because the Ministry of Justice abused its power and breached the right guaranteed by the Article 42 of the Constitution. According to the Constitution every citizen of Georgia has right to hire as many attorney as s/he wishes. Akhalkalaki district court was discussing the case of Chakhalians and only the judge at the district court had right to refuse the accused to hire another attorney because of ongoing procedures. The Ministry of Justice did not have similar right. Supposedly, the Ministry of Justice, to which the prosecutor’s office is subordinated, protected the right of the prosecutor and breached the right of a citizen guaranteed by the Constitution.

Judge Nino Oniani “failed to find” such an obvious shortcoming in the case. Thus, the judiciary authority breached the human rights in her name.

It is clear that the court should not have supported the Ministry of Justice but should have admitted that the ministry had breached the law when it restricted the right of the Georgian citizen to defense. In the fair state the fair court should have behaved like that.

Lia Toklikishvili, Head of the Journalistic Investigation Team
The article was prepared by the Human Rights Center and Magazine “Sitkva” within the framework of the project “Monitoring of the Judiciary System in Georgia”
with Financial Support of the Eurasian Partnership Foundation