Democracy emerges the winner from local elections in Georgia.

Most Georgia politicians expected that their parties will do better at local elections held throughout the country on Sunday. But as Jospeh Alexander Smith reports from Tbilisi in this fourth and final report on the elections for commonspace.eu, the poll confirmed that Georgian democracy is taking roots, and that is good news for the Georgian people.

Georgia went to the polls on Sunday to elect local mayors, municipality heads and local council members after a campaign period strained by a fierce political rivalry between the ruling Georgian Dream coalition and the former governing United National Movement (UNM).

Across the country, the ruling Georgian Dream coalition maintained a clear lead over the UNM in mayoral races, winning almost 83% of the vote in the North-Western city of Ambrolauri and 58% in Zugdidi.
However, in eight cities, including the capital Tbilisi, a run-off vote will be held after the Georgian Dream candidates failed to pass the 50% threshold required to elect a mayor. Run-offs may also be held in up to a dozen municipalities where the candidates for municipality head (gamgebeli) failed to win seats outright.

Despite having promised an outright victory to supporters before the election, Prime Minister Irakli Gharibashvili welcomed the results as "revolutionary", and hailed the elections as "an historic day for our country". "This is very good for our democracy, our country and our people. This is a unique opportunity to further consolidate Georgian democracy" Gharibashvili said at a news conference a day after the poll.
Accepting the 50% threshold was a huge political risk for the ruling coalition, which had initially proposed a threshold of 40% for mayors and 33% for gamgebelis back in January, when the legal framework for these elections was still being debated. Eventually the government yielded to opposition and civil society demands that local government officials be elected by an absolute majority.

As expected, the UNM of former president Mikheil Saakashvili remained the second largest political force in the country, taking 22.4% of the party-list vote across Georgia and nearly 27.97% in the Tbilisi mayoral election. These results correspond roughly to the party's performance in last year's presidential election and indicate a stable level of support rather than the ‘disappearance' from the political scene predicted by PM Gharibashvili.

In third place in the polls with 10% is the coalition of Christian Democrats and ex-parliament speaker Nino Burjanadze's Democratic Movement. Burjanadze, a key figure in the 2003 Rose Revolution that swept President Saakashvili to power, went into opposition politics in 2008 and has since positioned herself as an ‘accomodationist' vis-à-vis relations with Russia, and a critic of the government's pro-EU foreign policy.

Despite local and international observer groups delivering a positive assessment of the polls, several serious violations of electoral procedure were reported. In Martvili in Western Georgia's Samegrelo region, ‘armed and masked men' broke into a polling station before dawn and removed ballot papers, which were later found dumped nearby. In nearby Anaklia, angry residents of one village smashed ballot boxes and destroyed election documents, claiming that local authorities hadn't done enough to search for their missing relative.

On Monday, the UNM released a video which it claims shows ballot-box stuffing in the southern Marneuli district, prompting an immediate investigation by the prosecutor's office. The results from two precincts in the area have since been annulled and repeat elections will be held there on the 29th June. Burjanadze's more grandiose claim that arch-rivals Georgian Dream and UNM actually collaborated to rig the vote in their favor has been dismissed by election officials.
So what do the results mean for the state of Georgian democracy? "As a Georgian citizen, I'm shocked", says Ramaz Sakvarelidze, political commentator and former head of President Shevardnadze's press service, "that the ruling party can fall short of the threshold by 5% and not try to falsify the results somehow. This is something the previous government did ... and the fact it's not happening now means we might be entering a new period of respectable elections."
It's also important to note that voters were not mobilized by the political death-match rhetoric of the two biggest parties' campaigns, as evidenced by a relative low turnout of 43%. "It's clear that voters are looking for new political forces" says Sakvarelidze, "as you can see Burjanadze has maintained a strong third position in this vote as in the presidential elections last year".

Parties like the conservative Alliance of Patriots of Georgia, which garnered 5% of the vote nationwide are "filling a political vacuum" according to Sakvarelidze. Voters are also starting to choose personalities over parties - the popular TV anchorman Aleko Elisashvili stood as an independent majoritarian for the City Council in Tbilisi's Saburtalo district and beat the ruling party's candidate by 5%.
While the election results are a wake-up call for the ruling coalition, they are an even bigger pill to swallow for the UNM. The party failed to win any mayoral or municipality head contests, and will need to work a lot harder to achieve the political comeback predicted this week by jailed former Prime Minister Vano Merabishvili.

The polls have also been a boost for public confidence in the Central Election Commission, the body which administers the polls. Transparency International Georgia noted that "polling stations mostly opened on time and the vote launch procedures were conducted in compliance with the law. Polling stations had been supplied with all the necessary documents."

So, is democracy winning in Georgia? Well, Sakvarelidze is cautious, but acknowledges that "compared to what we had before, this is a huge step towards democracy, and a very important moment for Georgia."

Source: Jospeh Alexander Smith is a free lance journalist based in Tbilisi. He contributed this article to commonspace.eu.

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
European Union and Canada agree on "Alliance for the future" at milestone Montreal summit

European Union and Canada agree on "Alliance for the future" at milestone Montreal summit

António Costa, President of the European Council, and Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, represented the EU at the 21st EU-Canada summit, which took place in Montreal on 29 and 30 October 2026. Prime Minister Mark Carney represented Canada. The summit marked a major milestone in EU-Canada relations, paving the way for an even broader and deeper political partnership. Leaders took stock of progress made since the previous EU-Canada summit and issued a joint statement launching an Alliance for the Future. Building on their longstanding strategic partnership, the alliance aims to deepen cooperation and create a common prosperity and economic security space. This is a moment to act with clarity and ambition. By aligning more closely – economically, technologically and strategically – Canada and the EU are building an Alliance for the Future based on trust and shared values that meets the scale of today's challenges and opportunities and will reinforce the freedom, prosperity and safety our citizens expect and deserve. We are stronger together. Building on their existing Strategic Partnership Agreement, the EU and Canada will deepen political engagement and coordination on shared priorities. Leaders welcomed the increasingly frequent exchanges with Canadian ministers at relevant Council and ministerial meetings. The EU and Canada will build on these exchanges through regular summits, joint ministerial meetings and cooperation committees. The partners will work to define the concept of an ever-closer association of Canada to the EU, short of full membership, by the 2027 EU-Canada summit. (click image to read more)

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)