On April 24, Tbilisi City Court has terminated proceedings in yet another defamation lawsuit brought by journalist Mzia Amaglobeli against Georgian Dream Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze.
The hearing was held in Kobakhidze’s absence, as neither he nor his legal representative attended court. The court was also informed that no written defence had been submitted, despite the fact that the lawsuit had been served approximately four months earlier, on 17 December 2025.
Amaglobeli’s lawyers requested that the court proceed in the defendant’s absence and issue a ruling. However, Judge Liana Kajashvili said she would consider this request only after deciding whether the case should proceed to a full hearing on the merits. She noted that if the case does not move forward to substantive examination, there would be no need to rule on whether a decision could be issued in Kobakhidze’s absence.
Speaking in court, founder of Batumelebi and Netagzeti, Mzia Amaglobeli criticised the defendant’s failure to participate in the proceedings. She questioned whether the absence should be interpreted as an assertion of political power or as a lack of respect for the judiciary.
“As a remark, I will say that I do not see the other party here. As far as I know, no statement of defence has been submitted by the defendant. I do not know how the court interprets this, whether it is a demonstration of power by the defendant or contempt for the court. I don’t know; I don’t think he is denying the legitimacy of the court. It will be interesting for me to hear the court’s reasoning on this as well,” she said.
The lawsuit alleged that Kobakhidze defamed Amaglobeli, violated the presumption of innocence, and attempted to damage her reputation and dignity. It related to statements made in 2025 on pro-Georgian Dream broadcasters Imedi TV, Rustavi 2, and the Georgian Public Broadcaster, while Amaglobeli’s criminal proceedings were still ongoing.
Mzia Amaglobeli was seeking a court order requiring Kobakhidze to retract false information he had spread on the same media outlets where the statements were originally made.
The lawsuit challenged statements by Irakli Kobakhidze in which she argued he falsely portrayed her as having committed unlawful actions, including allegations that she placed stickers on police officers, acted as a “party activist,” and carried out actions under “foreign orders”. She also disputed claims that she used violence against police or engaged in politically commissioned activity aimed at undermining law enforcement. She argued that these statements were factually incorrect, damaged her reputation, and violated the presumption of innocence.
Mzia Amaglobeli also explained in detail why she filed the defamation lawsuit, saying she considers the case a matter of principle concerning freedom of expression and the spread of false information.
“Being in this situation feels like an irony of fate, and I will explain what I mean. As you noted, the court today is expected to decide on the admissibility of the case. In short, the subject of this dispute is defamation.
The court must assess the case in line with the law on freedom of expression. I am the claimant. I am a person who represented independent media, for whom freedom of expression is one of the most important values. Throughout my conscious life, I have worked to strengthen public debate and discussion.
The defendant is Irakli Kobakhidze, who uses the status of Prime Minister and, from that position of power, has subjected freedom of speech and expression to repression.
If the disputed statements in the case were merely value judgments, and I did not see them as the deliberate dissemination of false facts, believe me, no matter how unacceptable, provocative, or shocking they might have been emotionally or morally, I would not have considered them serious enough to take to court.
Why did this case reach the court? I will read an excerpt from one of Kobakhidze’s statements: ‘The fact was as follows. As you remember, there was an initial incident where this person was putting stickers on police officers… .’
I will not continue or focus on other statements. This “fact” did not exist in reality. I very much want to hear the court’s reasoning, and at least for the question to be raised: when Mr. Kobakhidze made these statements, was it deliberate or negligence? Did he verify them? Did he make any effort to do so?
I sincerely hope the court does not dismiss this case. This was the dissemination of false facts. The court should determine whether this was intentional or the result of negligence,” Amaglobeli addressed the court at length during the hearing, but the judge ultimately ruled the case inadmissible.
What did Kobakhidze say?
“The said statements, in addition to their clearly defamatory nature, directly violate the presumption of innocence of Mzia Amaglobeli as a defendant in a criminal case, serve to create negative public perception about her, and — most alarmingly — encourage the public to believe she is guilty of a serious violent crime and to form a premature position on the court’s assessment of the facts before a lawful judgment is issued,” the lawsuit stated.
In addition, Amaglobeli’s lawyers argued that Kobakhidze’s statements were intended to influence both the judge hearing her case and the judiciary as a whole.
Amaglobeli was requesting the retraction of three separate statements made by Irakli Kobakhidze:
1 . Statement aired on Imedi LIVE on 29 January 2025:
“The fact was as follows. As you remember, there was an initial incident where this person was putting stickers on police officers… This violation was in no way related to journalistic activity; she acted there as a (political) party activist. Therefore, linking this fact to the media is absolute speculation… She does not even express remorse, neither she nor her colleagues from the collective United National Movement,” Kobakhidze said.
According to the lawsuit, this statement contains factually incorrect information. In particular, it is false that Mzia Amaglobeli placed a sticker on a police officer. This is confirmed by video evidence recorded on the day of her detention, which is publicly available. There is also no official report documenting any such action.
It is also factually incorrect, the claim states, that Amaglobeli acted as a “party activist” or that she is part of the “so-called collective United National Movement.”
Amaglobeli’s lawyers argue that the purpose of these statements was to damage the journalist’s reputation, discredit her, and harm her public standing.
2. Statement aired on the Georgian Public Broadcaster on 30 January 2025:
“Regarding Mzia Amaglobeli in particular, her donors should take responsibility. You know she is a foreign-funded person, her organisations are funded from abroad, and none of her donors take responsibility for the violence she committed against a police officer. All of her donors, every contributor to her organisations, are responsible for the party-political violence carried out by Mzia Amaglobeli. Therefore, if anyone has something to say, they should first repent and express regret for encouraging violence,” Kobakhidze said.
The lawsuit states that, as with the Imedi TV statement, this claim is also false. In particular, it is untrue that Amaglobeli engaged in “violence,” let alone “party-political violence.” This was not established at the time of Kobakhidze’s statement, nor has it been confirmed by the Batumi City Court.
According to the lawyers, Kobakhidze deliberately sought to create negative public sentiment against Amaglobeli.
3. Statement aired on Rustavi 2 on 16 April 2025:
“A large part of those currently in prison are victims. I would not say this about Mzia Amaglobeli, who is not a victim, who was carrying out a specific assignment when she insulted a police officer. Her task was to undermine the police and insult the dignity of law enforcement,” Kobakhidze said.
In this case, it is false that Amaglobeli was acting under a “specific assignment” or that she was tasked with “undermining the police and insulting their dignity.”
“This statement serves to damage her reputation as a conscientious and impartial journalist with 24 years of professional experience in Georgia,” the lawsuit says.
If Judge Liana Kajashvili upheld Amaglobeli’s claim, Kobakhidze would be obliged to retract the statements within two weeks after the court decision enters into legal force.
This is not the first lawsuit filed by Amaglobeli against Kobakhidze on similar grounds. In previous proceedings, she also requested a retraction of defamatory statements.
Those earlier claims concerned remarks made on 10 July 2025 on Imedi TV and on 23 July 2025 on the Adjara Public Broadcaster. In both cases, Kobakhidze alleged that Amaglobeli’s actions — slapping then Batumi police chief Irakli Dgebuadze in response to provocation — were allegedly commissioned by “foreign forces” and aimed at discrediting the police. A hearing in that case was held at Tbilisi City Court on 24 November 2025. The defendant did not attend, and neither Kobakhidze nor his representative appeared in court. Judge Davit Akhobidze terminated the proceedings.
