"Georgian Dream" May Exploit the Institutional Weaknesses of the Council of Europe to Consolidate Power – Kakha Gogolashvili

International politics expert Kakha Gogolashvili does not rule out the possibility that "Georgian Dream" might exploit flaws and time delays inherent in the Council of Europe’s decision-making and enforcement mechanisms to consolidate its power.

Writing on social media, Gogolashvili outlines a scenario in which, should the Constitutional Court ban opposition parties, the ruling team could call snap parliamentary elections and attempt to secure a constitutional majority.

According to the expert, while the banned political parties would be able to appeal the decision to the European Court of Human Rights, the review process and the issuance of a final ruling could take several years. He suggests that, during this period, the ruling team would have the opportunity to hold snap parliamentary elections without the participation of certain opposition groups. "Under these conditions, the ruling party gains the opportunity to secure a constitutional majority. It is likely unnecessary to explain why 'Georgian Dream' might need such a majority, or what additional leverage the ability to amend the Constitution would provide," writes Gogolashvili.

In his view, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Committee of Ministers could simultaneously adopt relevant resolutions and decisions, urging the Georgian authorities to restore political pluralism and warning of potential sanctions—including the suspension of membership rights.

Gogolashvili suggests that the authorities might use diplomatic consultations during this process, potentially hinting at certain concessions in order to buy time. He assesses that before the issue of suspending or expelling Georgia from the Council of Europe reaches a critical stage, the authorities might agree to legislative changes that would allow for the restoration of the rights of banned parties.

However, as the expert notes, this scenario faces a significant legal obstacle: the constitutional... The court’s decision is final and not subject to appeal through standard procedures. Consequently, a mere change in the legislation regarding the banning of political parties would not automatically overturn a decision already rendered; restoring their legal status might require the establishment of additional legislative and judicial mechanisms.

"This process could take so long that the banned parties might be unable to participate not only in the 2028 parliamentary elections but potentially even in those of 2032," writes Gogolashvili.

According to the expert’s assessment, while Georgia might ultimately avoid expulsion from the Council of Europe, the ruling team could still retain the constitutional majority it previously secured, as well as the political advantage gained through the consolidation of power. Gogolashvili believes that a constitutional majority would grant the government the opportunity to fundamentally alter the constitutional order—including by further weakening democratic oversight mechanisms, revising the constitutional commitment to integration with the European Union and NATO, and radically shifting the country’s foreign policy course.

In his assessment, the potential use of such leverage to reach political agreements with Russia—agreements that would affect Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity—would be a source of particular concern.

"The primary danger in this scenario is that, while the Council of Europe might eventually succeed in securing the reversal of specific anti-democratic decisions, it might no longer be able to rectify their political consequences," notes Kakha Gogolashvili.