Month: September 2026
Georgian IT worker Giorgi Kvitsaridze, who was reportedly behind the leak of footage showing police abuse of detainees to opposition-leaning TV Pirveli, has been sentenced to 17 years in prison on serious drug charges, in what the family and lawyers allege to be retribution through drug planting and pressure.
Kvitsaridze, 32, reportedly gained access to police internal chats and obtained video files depicting abuse, at least some of which Eter Khatiskatsi, his mother, handed to TV Pirveli months after his arrest on drug charges in December 2025.
Kutaisi City Court Judge Ketevan Tkhelidze delivered the verdict in September and found Kvitsaridze guilty of “purchasing and possessing drugs in an especially large quantity and facilitating their sale.”
According to Otar Rukhadze, the lawyer of Kvitsaridze, the evidence presented in the case consisted primarily of testimony from the police officers who arrested and searched the IT worker. He said that Kvitsaridze “categorically denies” the charge of facilitating the sale of drugs.
“As for the purchase and storage, he says he did use drugs and had a small amount, but according to him, the rest, the large quantity of narcotics, was planted on him by police at the time of his arrest,” he was quoted as saying by RFE/RL’s Georgian bureau.
He further said that Kvitsaridze says that “all of this was orchestrated against him precisely because he obtained footage capturing instances of exceeding official powers by police.”
The case file also contains a forensic report stating that Kvitsaridze’s DNA trace was found on the packaging of the seized drugs. According to Rukhadze, however, Kvitsaridze disputes the finding and says his DNA should have been found only on the one package containing the drugs he possessed for “personal use.”
Meanwhile, TV Pirveli, citing Kvitsaridze’s mother, reported that “police officers” visited him in prison and offered him a plea agreement and early release if he handed over additional video material in his possession. According to the report, Kvitsaridze rejected the offer.
Kvitsaridze’s lawyer and family members say they will appeal the Kutaisi City Court ruling. TV Pirveli said that, if the verdict is upheld by the higher courts, Kvitsaridze’s mother is reportedly considering releasing the remaining files in her possession.
Police Abuse Footage
Kvitsaridze, 32, came to public attention in June after TV Pirveli aired footage showing police officers beating and humiliating detainees at the Kobuleti police department, in Georgia’s Adjara region.
According to media reports, Kvitsaridze had gained access to internal police correspondence or chats and obtained 33 video files. His mother, Eter Khatiskatsi, subsequently handed five of the files to TV Pirveli.
The footage shows at least three different scenes in a closed room, with faces of victims blurred, and three identifiable perpetrators, apparently police officers. The latter are seen insulting their victims and pressuring them with phrases like “tell me quickly,” as victims are heard saying in response, “I don’t know anything,” and “I don’t know who is who.” The recordings also appear to show officers kicking the detainees and striking them with their hands, while one officer is seen pulling the hair of one of the victims.
Shortly after TV Pirveli released a teaser featuring the recordings, the Interior Ministry confirmed that they depicted a 2022 incident and said three former police officers had already been arrested in February 2026.
According to the February 23, 2026, statement by the Prosecutor’s Office of Georgia, accessed on June 13, the agency “has arrested three former employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on charges of exceeding official powers with violence.”
The statement said that in July 2022, three employees of the Interior Ministry’s Imereti, Racha-Lechkhumi and Kvemo Svaneti Police Department “were seconded to the Adjara region for the performance of their official duties,” noting: “while working on a criminal case, the above-mentioned individuals brought three citizens to the administrative building of the Kobuleti District Division, where they exceeded their official powers by subjecting them to verbal and physical abuse.”
The agency said that the probe was launched upon the referral from MIA’s General Inspection, and all three suspects were arrested and will be charged with “exceeding official powers with violence.” It is unknown whether the suspects remain in custody.
Also Read:
Georgian Dream Parliamentary Speaker Shalva Papuashvili traveled to Brussels on September 22 for an official visit, accompanied by a GD parliamentary delegation. According to a Georgian Parliament press release, Papuashvili is scheduled to hold meetings with the presidents of the Senate and the Chamber of Representatives of Belgium’s Federal Parliament.
The delegation includes Nikoloz Samkharadze, Chair of Parliament’s Foreign Relations Committee; Levan Makhashvili, Chair of the European Integration Committee; and Davit Matikashvili, Chair of the Procedural Issues and Rules Committee.
The visit comes amid strained relations between Georgia and the European Union over Georgian Dream’s anti-Western rhetoric and concerns over democratic backsliding, and as Georgian ruling party lawmakers have tried to use their visits in European capitals to advocate for a “renewal of dialogue” with the EU.
More to follow…
Also Read:
Georgian Dream Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze is attending the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York and is scheduled to address the General Debate on September 24.
Kobakhidze is accompanied by Georgian Dream Foreign Minister Maka Botchorishvili and Levan Zhorzholiani, head of the Government Administration.
During the visit, Kobakhidze participated in the Partners for Multilateralism summit, an initiative launched by the EU together with co-sponsors such as Australia, Barbados, Brazil, Canada, India and Kenya in the margins of UNGA and focused on “peace, stability, inclusive and sustainable development, shared prosperity, human dignity and rights.”
He also held a bilateral meeting with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and is set to take part in a Finland-organized panel discussion on peace.
Georgia and Nauru also established diplomatic relations during the visit. The agreement was signed by Kobakhidze and Nauru President David Adeang.
Multilateral Partnership Summit
Kobakhidze participated on September 21 in the Partners for Multilateralism Summit, which was opened by European Council President António Costa.
According to a Georgian government press release, in his address, Kobakhidze focused on international peace, security, and conflict prevention.
“The ongoing occupation of 20% of Georgia’s territory affects the lives and rights of local communities,” Kobakhidze said, according to the release. “We remain committed to the peaceful resolution of the conflict, including through de-occupation, reconciliation and building trust among conflict-affected people.”
Kobakhidze said international support for Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity remained important and called for closer regional cooperation in the South Caucasus.
“The South Caucasus is undergoing a period of significant change,” he said, adding that “broader opportunities exist for practical regional cooperation.”
Kobakhidze also welcomed progress in the peace process between Georgia’s neighbors, apparently referring to Armenia and Azerbaijan, noting that “enhanced regional cooperation can create new opportunities in areas such as trade, connectivity and economic development.”
The government said summit participants adopted a declaration emphasizing joint efforts, respect for international law, and multilateral cooperation amid growing pressure on the international order.
More to follow…
Also Read:
- 06/07/2026 – In Geneva, Kavelashvili Addresses UN AI Dialogue, Meets UN Secretary-General Guterres
- 02/07/2026 – UN Human Rights Council Hears Critical Report on Georgia
- 27/01/2026 – Georgia Presents Report at UN Human Rights Council for 4th Cycle of Universal Periodic Review
- 09/10/2025 – UN Human Rights Council Adopts Resolution on Occupied Georgian Regions by Consensus
Russia State Duma elections
Based on a report by Novaya Gazeta Europe
Russia’s first State Duma elections since the start of the full-scale war in Ukraine have brought few surprises. According to preliminary official results, the ruling United Russia party has retained its constitutional majority.
Political observers say there is now little genuine political competition left in the country.
But if the vote does little to determine either the composition of the real centers of power or the direction of the Kremlin’s policies, why does the Kremlin continue to hold elections? And what significance do they still have for the authorities and for Russian society?
To explore those questions, Novaya Gazeta Europe spoke with political scientists, a sociologist, a political strategist and an electoral expert.
Yabloko disrupted the script of a quiet campaign
According to an electoral expert who asked not to be identified for security reasons, the authorities had initially planned a campaign that would be as uneventful and tightly controlled as possible.
“Overall, all the candidates and parties that made it onto the ballot tried to run their campaigns as inconspicuously as possible, so as not to give the authorities grounds to target them. Everyone except Yabloko played by the system’s current rules. Yabloko, by contrast, played by the rules the system had five years ago,” he said.
The situation surrounding Yabloko became the campaign’s main development to break from the prescribed script. According to the expert, the party’s position had not changed, but after years of war, the authorities had come to view it as radical.
The federal list of Yabloko was barred from the election by a decision of the Supreme Court. The Central Election Commission removed information about the party from the federal ballot.
“In the end, the authorities chose the coercive route: they removed Yabloko, barred all the more or less prominent candidates, and eliminated the regional lists — with the exception of Novgorod Region. This really became the central story of the election campaign,” the expert said.
Sociologist Igor Eidman said that Yabloko’s attempt to take part in the election at least demonstrated that opponents of the war still exist in Russia. But it produced no meaningful electoral result.
Political analyst Ivan Preobrazhensky does not consider the campaign a genuine election at all. In his view, it was closer to a “performance” or a “special electoral operation,” resembling the Soviet-era plebiscitary votes in which voters were offered no real alternative.
Eidman likewise argues that voters had little meaningful influence over the distribution of political power.
“This was pure political farce — a staged performance, a fake imitation of a political process that does not exist in Russia. The script was written long ago, and all the figures were determined in advance,” he said.
Yet the predetermined outcome does not make the elections meaningless for the Kremlin.
State Duma elections as a political ritual
Political strategist Stanislav Belkovsky describes the elections as a political ritual.
“The event is meaningless in terms of the actual political process, but it is an integral part of the rituals of power. In that sense, it can be compared with the Victory Day parade on Red Square or the Kremlin reception held to mark June 12.”
In his view, Vladimir Putin regards adherence to such rituals as part of maintaining the stability of his own rule.
Belkovsky says the Kremlin is also interested in preserving a liberal façade in the form of the New People party. In his view, its presence allows the authorities to project an image of Russia as a country where legal liberal political forces still exist.
At the same time, he argues that on fundamental issues, the party does not differ from the other established political forces.
There was also uncertainty surrounding A Just Russia, which was hovering near the 5 percent electoral threshold. According to preliminary official results, the party cleared the threshold.
Preobrazhensky argues that even if the party disappeared from Parliament, it would not fundamentally change Russia’s domestic politics.
“There is not a single genuine political party that would be allowed to take part in Russian elections today,” he said.
Was there any point in voting?
Preobrazhensky believes that taking part in the election may have had a primarily psychological significance. For some people, simply going to the polls, deliberately spoiling a ballot or taking part in the “Noon for Peace” protest became a way to engage in at least a symbolic political act.
Eidman takes a different view. He argues that mass participation helps the authorities maintain the appearance of a normal electoral process.
He points to the 2024 presidential election as an example. At the time, large lines of Putin opponents formed outside polling stations abroad. Yet the official election results remained unchanged.
An independent electoral expert disagrees.
“The greatest joy for anyone rigging an election is absenteeism — people staying away from the polls. It makes their job much easier. High natural turnout is always a problem for those who manipulate elections,” he said.
What happened with election fraud
According to the anonymous expert, opportunities for independent election monitoring have sharply diminished in these elections. As a result, it has become far more difficult to compare the official results with what actually happened at polling stations.
“In my view, even the information that is available is enough to conclude that, in the overwhelming majority of regions, the official results do not correspond to how people actually voted,” he said.
That is the assessment of the newspaper’s source. Russian authorities, by contrast, said the voting took place without violations capable of affecting the outcome. Independent observers and opposition groups reported violations and restrictions on election monitoring.
The expert believes the nature and scale of possible manipulation may also be changing. In the past, observers focused primarily on precinct-level election commissions. Now, he said, some manipulation may be taking place higher up, at territorial election commissions where results from individual polling stations are consolidated.
As an extreme example, he points to Chechnya, where, according to official figures, Ramzan Kadyrov received 99.85 percent of the vote.
“That would mean that across the entire republic, fewer than 1,000 people supposedly voted against Kadyrov, despite turnout being virtually 100 percent. That is even more extreme than in the Soviet Union,” the expert said.
The source also drew particular attention to Moscow. On the final day of voting, the system for issuing paper ballots experienced a failure there.
The expert stressed that there is no evidence that the disruption was deliberate. But many voters who had deliberately chosen not to vote electronically were planning to go to polling stations precisely on the final day.
Preobrazhensky points to another change. In the past, he said, discussion centered on individual regions with particularly conspicuous electoral anomalies. Now, in his view, the anomalies are becoming regions where the alleged falsifications are less extensive and less obvious.
The question of how to legitimize the results, however, remains. Preobrazhensky argues that it is important for the Kremlin to convince both Russians and audiences abroad that the official figures genuinely reflect public sentiment.
“In the West, there is, in my view, a mistaken argument: ‘Perhaps no one elected Putin, but we know anyway that he is supported by an absolute majority of Russians.’ That is not true, because no one knows that,” the political analyst said.
What will change after the election
Belkovsky believes it would be a mistake to view the State Duma election as a turning point after which the Kremlin should embark on a fundamentally new course.
In his view, the State Duma is not an independent center of key political decision-making.
“The State Duma election in itself is neither a milestone, nor a turning point, nor a ‘barometer’… It is simply part of a ritual, and that ritual has been completed,” he said.
Belkovsky said any decision on a new formal mobilization would likewise not be directly linked to the election results. At the same time, he said, the Kremlin still has ways of replenishing the armed forces through less visible and indirect means.
Eidman believes the official results could serve a different purpose for the authorities — as evidence of a public “mandate” for further decisions.
Preobrazhensky points to another possible consequence of the campaign: a struggle for influence within the Russian government itself.
In his view, the election exposed a conflict between the Federal Security Service, or FSB, and the presidential administration over control of domestic politics.
“The main question that emerged during the election was: Who controls domestic policy? During the so-called election campaign, domestic policy was quite clearly controlled primarily by the FSB,” the expert said.
According to Preobrazhensky, the future direction of Russia’s domestic politics will depend to a significant extent on whether the FSB retains that control.
exchange