“I have seen many cases involving fabricated evidence or testimony from interested witnesses, but this is the first case I have encountered where there is absolutely no evidence at all,” said Malhaz Velijanashvili, lawyer for Bacho Akhalaia, in an interview with TV Pirveli.
According to the lawyer, even if it were confirmed that Bacho Akhalaia called Paata Burchuladze or Murtaz Zodelava on October 4, that fact alone proves nothing, as the investigation has no evidence of what the parties discussed.
“He might have been saying the opposite, ‘Come on, do not do it.’ You do not know that, do you?” Velijanashvili said.
“At this stage, we physically have no access to the evidence. Therefore, I can only assess the statement made by the State Security Service. Certain things are clear. They cannot physically point to any concrete evidence. They only talk about communication originating from a specific IP address. Even that does not establish who exactly was communicating from that IP address, but that is not essential anyway. The people they claim he may have been connected to are friends. One is a neighbor. Others are godparents or relatives by baptism. Communication with such people cannot, in itself, be considered evidence of anything. The State Security Service does not know the content of these conversations.”
Asked whether it was possible that the State Security Service knew the content of the alleged communications but was not disclosing it yet, the lawyer responded:
“From a legal standpoint, it is impossible for anyone to know the content, because the investigation began later, after the conversations had already taken place. For content to be known, surveillance would have had to be conducted based on a court order. They are hoping to find messages or evidence in the phones that were seized yesterday, but I can reassure everyone that there is nothing in those phones.
They may have evidence only of the fact that communication occurred, but they physically cannot find anything about the content of the communication. Even if they retrieve data, it will contain ordinary greetings and nothing related to a crime. During questioning, Bacho himself stated that he came to Georgia, met family members and godparents, and that they had contact and conversations. He confirmed this, but these facts cannot serve as proof that someone was organizing anything,” the lawyer said.
Velijanashvili also commented on an issue raised publicly by Akhalaia’s wife, who stated that the former official had recently wanted to leave the country but was prevented from doing so.
“As you probably know, Bacho came to Georgia due to the death of a family member. Then, due to certain circumstances and Georgian traditions, he had to remain in the country for a period of time. After that, October 4 and his questioning coincided. He was planning to leave shortly thereafter, according to the information I have, but he refrained from doing so in order to avoid any suspicion that he was fleeing or trying to escape. He waited for several months while the investigation continued. As far as I know, in December, around mid-December, he applied, or rather went to the border, and tried to leave again to return to work in the country where he had been living. However, he was not allowed to cross the border.
This raised suspicions that something was being planned against him. This was also Ani’s position, that there was an expectation that something was being fabricated. But honestly, for me as a lawyer, the idea that someone could be charged based solely on the existence of some form of contact is something I could not even imagine legally. I have seen many cases with fabricated evidence or biased witness testimony, but a case with absolutely nothing at all is a first.
When you accuse someone of being the main organizer and you have no witness testimony and do not know the content of any conversation, that is absurd. Even if we hypothetically assume that contact between Bacho and those individuals did take place, how can you call him an organizer without knowing the content? Even if he called or sent a text message on October 4 saying ‘How are you?’ why do they assume this was related to a protest?
No matter how events coincide, we need evidence. ‘I believe Akhalaia would have done this’ is not evidence. Hypothetically speaking, discussing someone as an organizer without evidence is unserious. He might have been saying ‘Do not do it.’ We do not know what he was talking about. You journalists may also have called Paata Burchuladze or others. Does that mean you should be arrested just because you made a call before some event?” the lawyer said.
According to Velijanashvili, equipment was seized from Akhalaia’s home, including a tablet, a laptop, and other devices.
“I am confident this will not help the investigation in any way, because there is no information related to the case on those devices. As for Ani’s public statements, that is her position and nothing more. From a legal standpoint, they had no warrant, no protocol was drawn up, and nothing was left behind. They simply came and took the equipment,” the lawyer stated.
Former high-ranking official Bacho Akhalaia, who served nine years in prison under the rule of Georgian Dream, has been detained again. According to a briefing held by the State Security Service, investigators consider him the “main organizer” of the events of October 4.
On what basis? According to the State Security Service briefing, it was established that from the IP address located at Akhalaia’s residence, a person or persons systematically contacted individuals whom the investigation considers organizers of the October 4 events. These individuals include Paata Manjgaladze, Murtaz Zodelava, Lasha Beridze, Irakli Nadiradze, and Paata Burchuladze.
The State Security Service claims that these contacts via internet applications occurred directly on October 4 as well, including at moments when protesters were informed from the stage about a plan related to the Presidential Palace, as well as during developments unfolding near the palace.
What was discussed during these internet communications? The State Security Service has not disclosed anything about the content of these communications.
It also emerged that the State Security Service detained Akhalaia’s wife, Ani Nadareishvili, but later released her and, at least for now, does not appear to plan legal action against her.
According to the State Security Service, Bacho Akhalaia refused to give testimony.
Who Is Bacho Akhalaia?
Bacho Akhalaia is a Georgian former high-ranking official and ex-politician who was considered one of the most influential and controversial figures during the presidency of Mikheil Saakashvili.
Akhalaia’s career advanced rapidly after the Rose Revolution. He initially worked at the Office of the Public Defender and served as Deputy Public Defender. He later became head of the Penitentiary Department from 2005 to 2008. His name became associated with efforts to curb the influence of so-called criminal authorities in prisons and to impose a strict regime. However, this period also marked the beginning of allegations of inhuman treatment of inmates.
He was later appointed Minister of Defense, a position he held from 2009 to 2012. In 2012, he became Minister of Internal Affairs but served only a few months, resigning in September 2012 following the so-called prison abuse videos scandal, just days before parliamentary elections.
Opposition parties and human rights organizations frequently accused Akhalaia of abuse of power, torture, and serious human rights violations. He was widely perceived as one of the leaders of the “hardline” wing of Saakashvili’s team.
After the change of government in 2012, Akhalaia returned to Georgia after a brief stay abroad and was subsequently arrested. Several criminal cases were brought against him. He received convictions in multiple cases and was ultimately sentenced to nine years in prison, which he served in full.
In March 2022, Bacho Akhalaia was released from prison.
His name resurfaced several months ago following the events of October 4, when he was again summoned for questioning over an audio recording circulated on social media. Akhalaia denied its authenticity, stating that it was 100 percent fabricated.