Sulkhan Molashvili Issues Complaint Against the Parliament of Georgia

Sulkhan Molashvili Issues Complaint Against the Parliament of Georgia
Judge Assisted Investigation Agencies in Procrastination of Molashvili’s Case

Former chief of the control chamber Sulkhan Molashvili, who has been spending his pre-detention in a prison hospital, has made a complaint to the constitutional court of Georgia.
A court hearing at the constitutional court of Georgia is scheduled for 12:00 on March 18.  Molashvili is being represented by attorneys from “Article 42 of the Constitution,” Lia Mukhashavria, Mana Kobakhidze and Maka Gioshvili.

Sulkhan Molashvili wants to prove that the 11th part of article 243 of the Criminal Proceeding Code of Georgia is un-constitutional.   According to this article, the lawfulness and the validity of a judge’s order on prolonging the term of imprisonment cannot be appealed.
 The term of his pre-detention period has been prolonged three times, based on petitions presented by investigation agencies. Sulkhan Molashvili and his lawyers claim that the investigator’s petition regarding prolonging the imprisonment term was not well-grounded or validated. The investigation was intentionally stalled, and the judge’s illegal orders assisted this. The judge did not discuss whether leaving Molashvili in prison was necessary, but agreed automatically with the circumstances pointed out in the investigator’s petition.
Sulkhan Molashvili believes that he was illegally confined by the order of Judge and because of this illegal order he is still in prison. Despite that, the 11th part of article 243 of the Criminal Proceeding Code of Georgia does not give him right to appeal this decision in any court.
In his constitutional appeal, Sulxan Molashvili writes- This article is unequivocally prohibits appealing the lawfulness and the validity of court decisions regarding the term of imprisonment. I believe that the lawfulness and validity of my case are disputable. Article 42 of the Constitution of Georgia does not contain anything regarding the restriction of the right to apply to a court, but does define a person’s right to apply to the court to defend his/her rights. I did not have the possibility to appeal the decision regarding the lingering term of imprisonment at court, or to defend my liberty and personal immunity that is guaranteed by the 18th article of the Constitution of Georgia. Human rights, stipulated in the first part of article 42 of the Constitution, have been violated by the above-mentioned decision (The liberty of an individual is inviolable). If I had a chance to appeal this illegal decision, I would have proved the unlawfulness of the investigator’s petition and court’s decision, which would have led to the annulment of my detention and my release.
By prolonging the term of detention, Sulkhan Molashvili’s condition worsens, and at the same time he is deprived by law of the possibility of defending his personal freedom and personal immunity by means of the court. This directly violates not only the 42nd article of the Constitution but also the 6th article of the Human Rights European Convention.
According to the 1st paragraph of the 6th article of the Georgian Constitution, the constitution has a superior judicial authority over other lawful acts. On this ground, all other normative acts, which run counter to the Georgian Constitution and which deprive the right of going to court, should be acknowledged as being unconstitutional.

Hence, Sulkhan Molashvili asks the court to adopt and examine his constitutional claim and to acknowledge that the 11th part of article 243 of the Criminal Code of Practice of Georgia is unconstitutional, in compliance with 1st paragraph of the 42nd article of Georgian Constitution.
  Additional Information: Sulkhan Molashvili required his presence at the lawsuit   on the basis of organic law about the Constitutional Court. According to the law, the Constitutional Court has no right to deny the plaintiff’s participation in the case, but is obliged to apply to the Ministry of Justice to provide to Molashvili the ability to bring the case to court. The Ministry of Justice in turn has no legal grounds to refuse carrying out the court’s demand.  Therefore, it is possible that Sukhan Molashvili will attend the lawsuit and will take part in the examination of his claim.