Organization ,,Young Barristers’’ responds to the ongoing process of legal proceeding on the microfinance organization ,,Lazika Kapital’’ case and notes that the recent decisions taken by the investigative authorities increases questions about bias and disorganization of the investigation.
According to the head of the ,,Young Barristers’’, Archil Kaikatsishvili, after publication of research and its public presentation, the party is aware that the case has been referred again to the Samegrelo-Zemo Svaneti office of investigative department of the Ministry of Finance of Georgia. The case still investigates Lasha Kolbaia and the supervisor prosecutor is still Miranda Tsereteli. Hence, Mr. Lasha Kolbaia and Ms. Miranda Tsereteli have already participated in the process of investigating the case, party had reasonable legal claims against them about directing the case with bias, based on these arguments, the case was dismissed and was sent to the Chief Prosecutor's Office of Georgia, today return of the case in this terotorial b ody again and appointment of above-mentioned investigator and superior prosecutor, significantly violates principles of directing certainty investigative activities and impartial investigation principles.
,,Young Barristers’’ have already reffered to the investigative office with official letter and requested legal substantiation on the fact of returning case again to the territorial body, however, organization has not received responste at this stage.
Besides that, investigative activities and supervisory authority on the case are currently being carried out by the persons to whom company has claims and General Inspection of the Chief Prosecutor's Office of Georgia is investigating the Company's complaints. According to another letter of the Chief Prosecutor's Office of 12 July 2017, a number of investigative actions were conducted on the case, the witnesses were questioned from Zugdidi City Hall, Service Agency of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia, Zugdidi District Court and other departments, the documentation has been requested. A specific person who is victimized or accused in the case is not known. Investigation continues, but the company remains unclear what is involved with the persons interrogated by the investigative agency from the structures and how important documents have been requested.
According to the "Young Barristers", from Prosecutor's Office and / or the Ministry of Finance investigators, there is no convincing argument, what is impeding the prosecution of the investigation, who operates against businesses and protect or do not protect public officials the persons connected with crime commited against the company. The organization notes that the investigation has sufficient evidence for a summary decision on the case and for the company to be noticed as victim. Besides that, as a result of investigative actions, the alleged authorization of the persons whose legal liability is revealed when committing a financial crime.
The organization's research has shown that the newly revealed circumstance in the case of financial crime in 2013 was the content of the official electronic correspondence of 26 December 2008, 1 October 2009, 15 February, 10 March, 11 June, 3, 4 and 24 August, which left the company a reasonable believe that the organization's strategic development manager had information and was also related to financial crimes committed in the company. According to the Zugdidi District Court decision of March 18, 2014: ,,In the interrogation process of the head persons of microfinance organization JSC ,,Lazika Kapital’’ and by other materials in total , there was a reasonable assumption that in 2008-2010 years, there was a criminal banking-internal networking correspondence between JSC "Lazika Capital" loan officer Soso Zarkua and JSC "Lazika Capital" Operations Manager E.Ts.
For information: The organization published a research on JSC "Lazika Capital" case in June, 2017. The research was delivered to the executive, legislative and judicial government, international organizations and diplomatic corps. Recommendation proposals have been prepared, and the Public Defender's Office continues to monitor the case with the Chief Prosecutor's Office of Georgia about obtaining information on legal proceedings.
