Justice

Fadi Asli charged with 3 000 GEL for insulting the judge’s dignity

Tbilisi City Court has taken a precedent decision – as the court has announced, for the first time in the judicial history, the court has charged a citizen with 3 thousand GEL for insulting the honor and the dignity of the judge.

The defendant at that hearing was businessman Fadi Asli.

The details of the proceeding was reported in a special statement released by the Tbilisi City Court, which Medianews has quoted below:

“Tbilisi City Court has taken a precedent decision. For the first time in the judicial history, the judge restored his honor and dignity insulted by a businessman, by means of the court. Defendant Fadi Asli was ruled to, in accordance with the form established by the court, publishing a notice with the purpose of restoration of judge’s honor and dignity by means of those media sources, where the controversial information had been reported earlier. The court has partly satisfied the claim and charged Fadi Asli with the payment of 3 thousand GEL instead of 20 thousand GEL requested for the restoration of moral harm.

Judge Vladimer Kakabadze filed an action following the statement of businessman Fadi Asli, who accused the judge of corruption. The release of the information, which was insulting for the dignity, reputation and honor of the judge referred to the judgments taken by Vladimer Kakabadze on the disputes between Philip Morris and Tbilisi Tobacco, also between Omega Group and British American Tobacco. According to the claim, the subject, disappointed with the judgment of the court, not only insulted the business reputation of the judge with his unsubstantiated statements, but those statements were also aimed at discrediting the judge and the court, thus roughly violating the presumption of innocence.

The defendant defined that the statements he made was only his personal opinion protected with absolute privilege.

Under the decision of the court, the universal right of the freedom of speech and expression is not an absolute right and it is limited to the violation of others’ rights and insult of their honor, dignity and business reputation. The court decided that the formulation of the disputed statement exceeded the frames of expression and it was the allegation of corruption against a person. Such allegations need to be properly responded and they should become the grounds for starting an investigation, which in the given case, did not happen.” – says the statement.