On June 30, 2022, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) published its ruling on the case - Akhalaya v. Georgia and declared the appeals inadmissible as clearly unfounded.

The applicant - Bachana Akhalaia argued before the Strasbourg court that the restraining measure - imprisonment - used against him in the framework of various criminal cases in 2012-2014 was illegal, because the total term of imprisonment exceeded the maximum term defined by law - 9 months. The applicant also claimed that his detention was not properly justified by the national courts and served the purpose of a politically motivated criminal prosecution (Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to liberty and security) in conjunction with Article 18 of the Convention (scope of application of restrictions of rights).

According to the assessment of the ECHR, the detention of the applicant as a preventive measure was in full compliance with Georgian legislation and court practice. The Strasbourg Court found that there was no intentional delay in the investigation or any arbitrariness on the part of the investigating authority/prosecutor or the court within the framework of the ongoing criminal proceedings against the applicant.

The European Court also clarified that the decisions of the Tbilisi City Court regarding the application of the restraining order were properly justified in accordance with both Georgian legislation and European standards and were based on the proven dangers of concealment and impact on witnesses.

As for the applicant's claims of political persecution, the court clarified that since the claims regarding the legality of the detention are clearly unfounded, the applicant's position that his detention was politically motivated should also be declared inadmissible.

On June 30, 2022, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) published its ruling on the case - Akhalaya v. Georgia and declared the appeals inadmissible as clearly unfounded.

The applicant - Bachana Akhalaia argued before the Strasbourg court that the restraining measure - imprisonment - used against him in the framework of various criminal cases in 2012-2014 was illegal, because the total term of imprisonment exceeded the maximum term defined by law - 9 months. The applicant also claimed that his detention was not properly justified by the national courts and served the purpose of a politically motivated criminal prosecution (Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to liberty and security) in conjunction with Article 18 of the Convention (scope of application of restrictions of rights).

According to the assessment of the ECHR, the detention of the applicant as a preventive measure was in full compliance with Georgian legislation and court practice. The Strasbourg Court found that there was no intentional delay in the investigation or any arbitrariness on the part of the investigating authority/prosecutor or the court within the framework of the ongoing criminal proceedings against the applicant.

The European Court also clarified that the decisions of the Tbilisi City Court regarding the application of the restraining order were properly justified in accordance with both Georgian legislation and European standards and were based on the proven dangers of concealment and impact on witnesses.

As for the applicant's claims of political persecution, the court clarified that since the claims regarding the legality of the detention are clearly unfounded, the applicant's position that his detention was politically motivated should also be declared inadmissible.