09:32, Tuesday, 29.09.2020
ქართული English

Web Portal on Human Rights in Georgia

Advanced Search

Human Rights Defenders’s Appeal on the Case of Gvantsa Kuparadze


 Georgian human rights defenders are appealing to the Georgian Government, the public defender, the Human Rights and Legal Issue Committees of Parliament, international human rights organizations and the diplomatic corpus accredited in Georgia to urgently study the case of Gvantsa Kuparadze, who was sentenced to 10-year-imprisonment. We ask them to take all the necessary measures to ensure that justice is served in this case.

In our opinion, the bill of indictment,  the validity of the verdict and its compliance to Georgian legislation raise serious doubts and questions regarding the real outcome and the success of reforms implemented in the Georgian judiciary.

According to the verdict, on November 9th of 2006, in the yard of Tbilisi #12 public school, juvenile G. Kuparadze unexpectedly inflicted numerous wounds (approximately 30) on her classmate, juvenile T. Tkemaladze with a knife in the area of the back, neck and hand. The inflicted wounds were severe and life threatening. T. Tkemaladze was taken to the hospital by ambulance and was in a severe medical condition. His wounds required the intervention of emergency surgery in order to save his life.

On November 14th of 2006, Gvantsa Kuparadze was detained and sentenced to 10 years in prison by the Tbilisi City Court. 5 years were supposed to be served in the penitentiary department, the rest 5 years – under conditional arrest as a probationary term. At that time, Gvantsa Kuparadze was 14 years old. The verdict was appealed, but on 07.12.07, the Appellate Court upheld  the original verdict made by the Criminal Case Chamber of Tbilisi Appellate Court. On September 15th of 2008, G.Kuparadze’s cassation appeal was found inadmissible. on the following grounds: a) the case is not significant for the development of judiciary and establishment of the common judiciary practice b) this decision does not contradict with the practice established earlier by the Supreme Court of Georgia g) The Appellate Court has not heard the case with significant legal or procedural violations that could gravely impact the outcome of the hearing.

In addition, after the court imposed imprisonment on Gvantsa Kuparadze as a preventive measure, she was placed in the prison for adult female convicts. Later, she was placed in an isolated cell where she spent 5 months. Some time later, an underage girl was placed in the cell together with her. The cell was called - Department for Female Juveniles. G. Kuparadze is still in the department which is an isolated cell.
The independence and impartiality of the court in this case and the compliance with the material and procedural legislation of Georgia raises serious doubts, particularly, according to the criminal legislation and Constitution of Georgia: “A resolution on preceding a person as an accused, a bill of indictment and a judgment of conviction shall be based only on the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. An accused shall be given the benefit of the doubt in any event” (Paragraph 3 of article 40 of Constitution). “The verdict must be well-grounded, and based on the aggregate of authentic evidence sufficient for ascertaining the truth on the criminal case” (paragraph 3 of article 496 of Criminal Procedural Code of Georgia). “The investigation of the case circumstances must be wide-ranging, impartial and complete. The aggravating and  palliative circumstances, as well as the accusative and justifying circumstances must be studied with  equal zeal” (Article 18 of the Criminal Procedural Code of Georgia). “An individual shall be presumed innocent until the commission of an offence by he/she is proved in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law and under a final judgment of conviction.” (Paragraph 3 of Article 40 of the Georgian Constitution, paragraph 3 of Article 132 Criminal Procedural Code of Georgia). “In order to find a person guilty, the aggregate of evidence excluding the suspicion is needed.” (Paragraph 5 of Article 132 of Criminal Procedural Code of Georgia).

These requirements of legislation are gravely violated in this case:
•    There are grave contradictions in the case evidences. These contradictions have not been eradicated by the court hearing. The court rejected one evidence and accepted another, but never presented the arguments for its decision (for example, the testimonies of witnesses that proved Kuparadze’s innocence were not shared, while the testimonies of those people who were not the witnesses, but testified against Kuparadze, were considered);

•    The guilty decision of the court does not supervene from the aggregate of the evidence on the case. Moreover, there is evidence proving Kuparadze’s innocence (for example: alternative legal-medical and trasology expertise presented by the defense side. The court never discussed this evidence; nor did it present the arguments for neglecting them. The alternative complex court-medical and trasology expertise singlehandedly prove that two people took direct part in the wounding of T. Tkemaladze. They hit him with two different sized knives.)

•    There are important unanswered questions, (for example, the motive of the crime was  not ascertained by either the investigation or by the court. However, the case materials confirm that they had a friendly relationship).

•    The court hearing was not complete and all-round (the court never evaluated the inspection protocol of the place of incident. The opinions and evidence expressed by the defense side for invalidating the conviction was not checked, for example, the inferences of alternative expertise etc. In addition, the convict- G. Kuparadze- categorically rejects the commission of the crime for which she is accused).

It is evident, that the verdict does not supervene from the aggregate of the authentic evidence, as established by Georgian legislation; the case was not studied fully and thoroughly; the court didn’t eradicate the contradictions among the evidence and never annulled the evidence presented by the defense side argumentatively, the solutions presented in the verdict do not comply with the evidence presented in the case; the court never interpreted the suspicion in favor of the defendant.
Thus, Kuparadze’s rights have been gravely violated, including her right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence.
We urge the abovementioned government officials, bodies and organizations to take all  measures necessary in order to ensure  justice in this case.


 Human Rights Center  (HRIDC)
Former Political Prisoners for Human Rights
Women's Initiative for Equality
Public Movement Multinational Georgia
Article 42 of the Constitution
Union EEH (education, ecology, human)
Media Union Objective
Movement No (Alliance of Young Reformers)
Center for Constitutional Rights
Prisoners Friendship of Georgia (PFG)
House of Free Opinion
Center for Civil and Political Rights
Public Movement “Solidarity to Illegal Prisoners”
Charity Foundation for Prisoners Assistance

Print Send to Friend Send to Facebook Tweet This
Name: თავისუფალი სასამართლო
2011-05-07 01:02
თავისუფლება გვანცა ყუფარაძეს!!!!
Name: ნათლის მხედარი
2011-03-13 19:05
თავისუფლება გვანცა ყუფარაძეს.
Name: ნინი
2011-02-19 10:33
"შეაყარე კედელს ცერცვი."წერეთ და იკითხეთო!!!
Name: ვახტანგი
2011-01-27 12:18
ხომ არ იცით თ. ტყემალაძემ (თუ აგეკვატურია) რა ჩვენება მიცა? მე არ მგონია გვანცა დამნაშავე იყოს!
Name: მარია
2010-12-28 10:21
გვანცა ყუფარაძე არის უკანონო პატიმარი, მხარს ვუჭერ და ვეთანხმები მიმართვის ტექსტს!!!
Name: გიორგი
2010-12-18 19:05
ჩატარდეს სამართლიანი სასამართლო პროცესი.
Name: გიორგი ალანია
2010-12-15 20:23
გვანცა ყუფარაძე არის უკანონო პატიმარი. საქართველოს ხელისუფლებამ დაუყოვნებლივ უნდა გადადგას ნაბიჯები სამართლიანობის აღსადგენად.
მხარს ვუჭერ ზემოთ აღნიშნულ ორგანიზაციების მიმართვას.
"სოციალ-ლიბერალუი" პარტიის სახელით გიორგი ალანაია
Name: გიორგი
2010-12-15 11:31
Name: სანდრო
2010-12-15 10:45
როგორც მივხვდი ამ გოგომ ვიღაცა დანით დაჭრა ხო ?
Leave your comment
Your name:
Your comment:

Security code: Code
Do you support the idea to restore Irakli Shotadze to the position of the prosecutor general?
Yes No do not know


They wait for me in Abkhazia
Last time, I visited Abkhazia five years ago. Since then, not a day goes by without thinking about it, without missing the Abkhazian
Another proposal on agreement
Women – victims of violence


Forgotten by government veterans
Every year, fewer and fewer veterans of the World War II meet the Victory Day. The society receives information about them only on
Villages of the Hopeless
What happened to Dream of Justice Revival?


Copyright © 2004 - 2020 HRIDC