**Public Defender and Parliament Disagree on Legitimacy**
The Public Defender, Levan Ioseliani, claims that the new Parliament was convened lawfully. However, his team disagrees with him.
Ioseliani said that he didn’t understand why people questioned the legitimacy of the Parliament. He pointed out Article 38 of the Constitution, which states that the Parliament should be convened within ten days after the final election results are announced. His staff released a statement saying that they regretted Ioseliani’s involvement in what they considered to be an unlawful process.
The statement from the Public Defender’s Office team argued that the powers of some MPs were recognized without waiting for the Constitutional Court‘s ruling on their election. They also pointed out that the President had challenged the legality of all 150 MPs’ elections, which should have meant that their credentials couldn’t be recognized until a final decision was made.
**Different Opinions**
Ioseliani argued that any other article or provision, including the constitutional complaint, couldn’t take precedence over the constitutional requirement for the Parliament to convene within ten days. This view is seen as no surprise given Ioseliani’s reputation and his ties to the ruling party.
The staff of the Public Defender’s Office responded to their head’s justification by saying that they understood how negative events could damage the institution’s reputation, which had been built over the years by its employees.
**What Happens Next**
The issue of the Parliament’s legitimacy remains a topic of debate. The public and the opposition will continue to follow the situation closely, especially given the concerns about Ioseliani’s impartiality as Public Defender.
Read More @ civil.ge