On January 14, 2024, the Batumi City Court held the first proceeding in the case of Mzia Amaghlobeli, the founder of "Netgazeti" and "Batumelebi." The Prosecutor's Office charged Mzia Amaghlobeli on January 13, 2024, under Article 353¹, Part 1 of the Georgian Criminal Code and sought using detention as a measure of restraint at the first proceeding. The judge upheld the unsubstantiated motion of the prosecution and applied the strictest measure of restraint – detention - leaving Mzia Amaghlobeli in custody. The next hearing in the case is scheduled for March 4.

Mzia Amaghlobeli's case once again underscores that the judiciary is failing to fulfill its role and is making politically motivated decisions. The charges against her are an unlawful punitive measure based on her professional activities and political motives rather than any criminal wrongdoing. The charges were brought in violation of the law under an article that lacks evidentiary support in this case and does not meet the standard of reasonable assumption required for criminal charges. The Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association (GYLA) will provide further analysis on this matter. As for the application of detention as a measure of restraint - it was also carried out unlawfully and without proper legal justification.

It is notable that Mzia Amaghlobeli was detained twice on the evening of January 11, 2024. Initially, she was arbitrarily detained under administrative law but was later released on a personal guarantee. To date, the court has not reviewed or determined whether her actions constituted a violation of the law. Shortly after her release, she was detained again, this time as part of a criminal investigation.

During the hearing, the Prosecutor's Office presented an unsubstantiated, formulaic, and hypothetical motion that was not grounded in the circumstances revealed during the investigation. The prosecutor is obliged to provide reasons for the appropriateness of the requested measure of restraint and demonstrate why less restrictive measures are unsuitable. One of the prosecution's arguments, accepted by the court, was that the defendant had been administratively detained for disobeying a lawful police order just hours before her criminal detention.

The court dismissed all arguments presented by the defense, including evidence of Mzia Amaghlobeli's personal characteristics, such as her lack of prior offenses, criminal record, or administrative sanctions. Furthermore, her administrative detention could not serve as an argument to substantiate her alleged attitude toward law enforcement, as an individual can only be deemed an administrative offender by a court ruling, not by detention itself. In this case, no such court ruling exists.

It must be emphasized that detention as a measure of restraint should only be applied in exceptional cases where there is a real risk of the accused committing a new offense, absconding, or influencing witnesses. These factors must be taken into account by the court when deciding on the application of a measure of restraint. Furthermore, a court may impose detention only if the goals of the measure cannot be achieved through less restrictive alternatives. In Mzia Amaghlobeli's case, no such risks existed, which made the measure of restraint applied to her unlawful and unjustified.

GYLA and other lawyers involved in the case will appeal the Batumi City Court's decision to the investigative panel of the Court of Appeal, seeking Mzia Amaghlobeli's release from custody.