Georgia Court Hears Ruling Party Bid to Ban Pro-EU Opposition

Georgia’s Constitutional Court must decide whether five opposition parties violate the country’s constitution. The ruling Georgian Dream party says the groups are fundamentally unconstitutional because they allegedly threaten Georgia’s constitutional order and independence. The opposition rejects that accusation.

The lawsuit was filed by 88 Georgian Dream lawmakers. It targets the United National Movement, Coalition for Change, Lelo-Strong Georgia, the Federalists and For Georgia. Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze called the parties unconstitutional and accused them of spreading an “unconstitutional spirit.”

The case matters because these are Georgia’s main opposition groups. Critics warn that banning them could destroy democratic pluralism and fair political competition. The court began hearings in Batumi and has until June 2027 to issue its decision. Opposition parties have announced a major protest rally for November 28.

The lawsuit involves five of Georgia’s main opposition groups. They are jailed ex-president Mikheil Saakashvili’s United National Movement, Coalition for Change, Lelo-Strong Georgia, the Federalists and former prime minister Giorgi Gakharia’s For Georgia party.

The case was brought by 88 lawmakers from the ruling Georgian Dream party. They accuse the opposition parties of seeking to overthrow Georgia’s constitutional order and undermine Georgia’s independence. Opposition leaders reject the allegations and say the lawsuit is aimed at Georgia’s sovereignty and freedom.

The scale is significant because the case covers all of the country’s main opposition groups named in the article. If the court accepts the lawsuit, the decision could reshape political competition across Georgia. Hearings opened in Batumi, and the Constitutional Court has until June 2027 to deliver its ruling.

Georgian Dream’s central claim is that the five opposition parties are not simply political rivals. The lawsuit says they seek to overthrow Georgia’s constitutional order and undermine Georgia’s independence. Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze says the parties are inherently unconstitutional and are infecting the political system with an unconstitutional spirit.

The government presents the case as a defence of the state’s constitutional structure. Kobakhidze also described opposition leaders as “liberal fascists.” Georgian Dream says its opponents are seeking to destabilise the country, while opposition leaders reject the accusations and call the lawsuit an attack on sovereignty and freedom.

The article does not provide specific evidence supporting the government’s allegations. Instead, it shows a sharp political dispute over the opposition’s role and the government’s use of the court. The Constitutional Court must now decide whether the accusations justify banning the five parties.

If the court bans the parties, Georgia could lose the main opposition groups named in the case. That would sharply reduce the range of political choices available to voters. Critics warn that the move could sound the death knell for democracy and damage democratic pluralism and fair political competition.

The European Commission says the proceedings put fundamental freedoms, democratic pluralism and fair competition at risk. The Council of Europe warns that restrictions on civil society, independent media and peaceful assembly could undermine the checks and balances needed for democratic governance. These concerns connect the party case to wider restrictions described in the article.

The court has not yet ruled. It opened hearings in Batumi and has until June 2027 to decide. Opposition parties say they will continue fighting even if banned, and they have announced a major protest rally for November 28. The outcome could shape Georgia’s political system and its European path.

Georgia’s current crisis began with disputed parliamentary elections in 2024. The political conflict continued when the government decided in November 2024 to shelve efforts to open European Union membership talks until at least 2028. That decision placed the government’s European direction at the centre of the dispute.

The suspension sparked mass protests across Georgia. Authorities responded with a violent crackdown, according to the article. Critics say the government then jailed opposition figures and activists and adopted laws tightening restrictions on protests, civil society and independent media. These steps intensified the confrontation between Georgian Dream and its opponents.

The EU says democratic backsliding has brought Georgia’s accession process to an effective halt. EU membership is written into Georgia’s constitution, and opinion polls cited in the article show support above 80 percent. The court case now adds a possible ban on five opposition parties to the crisis, with a major protest announced for November 28.

The European Union and Council of Europe see the court case as part of a wider democratic decline in Georgia. The European Commission warned that the proceedings risk eroding democratic practices and pointed to a worrying instrumentalisation of the judicial system. It said fundamental freedoms, pluralism and fair political competition were at risk.

Council of Europe Secretary General Alain Berset raised similar concerns. He said the hearings came alongside growing restrictions on civil society, independent media and peaceful assembly. Critics also say authorities have jailed opposition figures and activists and tightened laws affecting protests and media. Together, these developments could limit public scrutiny and political challenge.

The institutions are concerned because democratic systems depend on independent courts, open civic space and genuine competition. The Council of Europe said the combined developments risk undermining checks and balances. The EU says democratic backsliding has effectively halted Georgia’s accession process, while EU membership remains constitutionally enshrined and widely supported.

Constitutional checks and balances are safeguards that prevent one part of government from holding unchecked power. They usually involve separate institutions, such as courts and lawmakers, reviewing decisions and limiting abuses. Political competition and protected freedoms also help voters and civil society scrutinise those in power.

In this case, the Constitutional Court is being asked to decide whether five major opposition parties should be banned. The ruling Georgian Dream party filed the lawsuit through 88 lawmakers. Critics say the court is dominated by ruling-party loyalists, while the government says the opposition threatens the constitutional order. The case therefore tests how political power is constrained.

If a government could eliminate its main opponents without effective review, voters would have fewer choices and public debate could narrow. The European Commission and Council of Europe warn that the proceedings, alongside restrictions on media, civil society and protests, risk weakening democratic pluralism and checks and balances in Georgia.