Head of Council: Nana Biganishvili
Members of Council: Giorgi Mgeladze, Gela
Mtivlishvili, Kamila Mamedova, Lika Zakashvili, Irma Zoidze, Giorgi
Suladze, Maia Merkviladze, Tamuna Uchidze
Georgian Supreme Court applied to the Georgian Charter of
Journalistic Ethics vs. online publishing ITV.ge. Applicant
thought, that the article: “Scandal about 3 Million Bribe – What
Awaits Eka Beselia and Ivanishvili’s Judge Todua?” published on
22nd of January, 2019, violated Charter principles 1, 3 and 5.
There was no author indicated in the article. Coucil secretariate
asked the media company to identify who was responsible for the
material, but the information was not given and therefore, nobody
was identified. In these situations, according to Charter
guidelines, “unidentified person” can be given in the decision.
Specifics of the case: The decision was made by distant voting from
Members of Council. According to the Charter’s rules: “Council
members can state their opinion about the case/get involved in
council’s work by distant communication means [social networks,
electronic mail, online video and audio calls]”.
Motivation
Part
According to the Charter principle 1 – Journalist must respect
truth and society’s right to get precise information. There were
different factual circumstances in the article, for example:
“The information has already leaked to media that the Omega group
founder, Zaza Okuashvili, paid 10% of the sum in question (which is
3 million from 30 million) to win the case”.
“Supreme Court interim head Mzia Todua, who is a trusted person of
Ivanishvili and ex lawyer of Kartu, took responsibility to Eka
Beselia, that she would decide the case in favor of Zaza Okuashvili
and the case will be closed like that”.
“Because Beselia and Ivanishvili’s judge Todua could not solve the
problem of Okuashvili, he asked his bribe to be returned”.
“To be more precise: Omega group founder says that he has evidence
on how one of the founders of Georgian Dream and the interim head
of Supreme Court take bribe.
The circumstances have the signs of a crime, in which a Parliament
Member and Supreme Court judge are accused. The information is not
verified. At the end of the article it says: “Mrs. Beselia says
that there are no evidences or bribes. “I don’t want to believe
that Gia Abashidze was told to write this” – says she. Mzia Todua
is hiding from media. Zaza Okuashvili is quiet for now, in London”.
Council does not think that this phrase stands as verification
trial. Council does not believe, that “Mzia Todua is hiding from
Media” is true.
Supreme Court shared a statement as soon as the article was
published and denied the details, which proves, that they were
ready to comment on the information. It is also important to note
about the information’s nature and importance. Article accused a
Parliament Member and judge of the Supreme Court in corruption.
Therefore, journalist should have done everything to verify the
information, when there were no open, proven sources. The
journalist did not specify which media companies it based the ideas
upon, when they said that “there was a leak to media”. Journalist
could have asked Supreme Court for information, could have
contacted expert Gia Abashidze, whose Facebook status they were
using as a source. Therefore, Charter Council thinks that the first
principle was violated, as the journalist did not use many ways to
verify information.
According to the 3rd principle of the Charter “Journalist must
share information which is bases on verified sources. Journalist
should not hide facts or falsify information and documents”. The
applicant thought that the third principle was violated based on
the argumentation of the first principle; therefore, the 3rd
principle violation was not proven.
According to the 5th principle of the Charter: Media is obligated
to correct the published information which was not correct and lead
audience to errors”. After publishing the material, Supreme Court
sent the statement to the media denying the information. ITV.ge did
not use this information. They neither changed the published
article, nor published the statement itself. The article [which
violates the first principle] can still be found as it was.
Therefore, the 5th principle of the Charter was also violated.
Resolution
Part:
According to information provided above:
ITV.ge unidentified journalist violated 1st and 5th principles of
the Charter.
ITV.ge unidentified journalist did not violate 3rd principle of the
Charter.