The material in question was presidential debates between Grigol Vashadze, Davit Bakradze and Salome Zurabishvili aired on Public Broadcaster. The host, Giorgi Gvimradze mentioned that Nika Gvaramia was a supporter of Grigol Vashadze. Grigol Vashadze asked why he thought like this to which Gvimradze did not provide a response. Council thought that for supporting ethical journalism, it’s important that journalist differentiates clearly between a fact and his own subjective opinion. According to the decision, it is very likely that based on Nika Gvaramia’s positions and activities and Rustavi 2’s editorial policy’s evaluation, Giorgi Gvimradze had an opinion and/or personal evaluation that Nika Gvaramia was Grigol Vashadze’s supporter, but in this instance, this “Support” was provided to the audience as a fact mentioned by Nika Gvaramia. Giorgi Gvimradze could not provide an argument he based his opinion on neither during the debates nor later while communicating with the Council. He also did not tell the audience whether his phrase was a fact or his own opinion based on analyzing different information. The council decides that 1st (accuracy) and 5th (correction) principles were violated.

Only applicant attended the case hearing. Responding journalist was absent, He did not provide response neither via e-mail.