On October 28, 2026, a bill—initiated by six "Georgian Dream" MPs and proposing amendments to the "Election Code" and the "Local Self-Government Code"—was reviewed by parliamentary committees on November 6–7.

The initiators are Nodar Turdzeladze, Archil Gorduladze, Tornike Cheishvili, Davit Matikashvili, Aluda Ghudushauri, and Irakli Shatakishvili. The draft was presented to the committees by Davit Matikashvili.

The Legal Issues Committee and the Regional Policy Committee began their review on November 6; according to Adjara TV, the legislative package was approved in its first reading on November 7. Three readings are required for final adoption, and the first plenary session is expected to take place on November 10.

This represents the most extensive intervention in electoral legislation since the contentious 2024 parliamentary elections.

1. What is changing? 7 key points
According to documents published on the Parliament’s website [parliament.ge/legislation/32532]:

1. District election commissions will no longer consolidate election results. Instead of a three-tier system—precinct > district > central—a two-tier system remains: precinct protocols are sent directly to the CEC (Central Election Commission), which then compiles the final results.

2. Challenging the CEC’s summary protocol is permitted only on the grounds of technical errors.
A challenge to the protocol is admissible only if:
a) Data from precinct commissions is either omitted or incorrectly recorded;
b) The outcomes of court decisions that have entered into legal force are either omitted or incorrectly recorded.
Any claim filed on other grounds will not be accepted for consideration; even if accepted, the court will deliberate exclusively on these two circumstances.

3. The mandatory random recount of 5 polling stations is abolished.
Under the current procedure, district commissions were required to randomly select 5 polling stations and conduct a recount by the 6th day following the vote. This provision is being removed from the Code entirely.

Authors' clarification: Where electronic devices are used, the count takes place following the printing of result summaries; where they are not used, ballots are digitized and published within 2 days. Consequently, an additional recount is no longer necessary. 4. Timeframe for Final Tabulation: 26 days > 15 days.
For all types of elections—parliamentary, Tbilisi Mayor and City Council (Sakrebulo), and municipal—the final results shall be tabulated no later than the 15th day following the vote. The explanatory note states: "14 days is entirely sufficient... the additional 11 days merely delay the process."

5. Financial Reporting: 12 days > 5 days.
An electoral subject that has surpassed the threshold (based on preliminary data) must submit its expenditure report to the Audit Office by the 5th day, rather than the 12th. If a violation is deemed substantial, the Audit Office may recommend that the CEC (Central Election Commission) petition the court to have the results tabulated excluding the votes cast for that specific subject.

6. Unilateral Registration of Observers.
Decisions regarding the registration of—or refusal to register—local and international observer organizations, as well as the appointment of observers to oversee the printing of ballots, will be made by the commission chairperson (i.e., the CEC Chairperson or the District Election Commission Chairperson) rather than by the commission as a collective body. The registration period for observers and media for the second round is also being shortened—from no later than the 5th day before the second round to the 7th day.

7. Advertising Time.
If a party does not utilize its allocated free airtime or newspaper space, the broadcaster or newspaper is prohibited from reallocating it to other parties. In political advertisements, the inclusion of the subject’s name and number during the final seconds is now mandatory; failure to comply will result in a prohibition on the advertisement being aired.

2. Who Said What
The Ruling Team: Changes of a “Purely Technical Nature”

David Matikashvili, Chairman of the Procedural Issues Committee and presenter of the bill:

“The amendments to the Election Code are of a purely technical nature; all existing mechanisms for challenging the summary protocols of precinct election commissions remain in full effect.”

“The radical opposition and certain non-governmental organizations are attempting to deceive the public with a false narrative—claiming that we are stripping interested parties of their right to file appeals during the process.” "Once the content [of a decision] has acquired legal force—whether based on a court ruling or a precinct election commission protocol—it is not referred back to the court. In reality, the place where elections are conducted is the polling station; therefore, all political forces should take the initiative to file their complaints there."

"There is an immature attempt to mislead the public by mischaracterizing these changes—implying that someone’s right to appeal is being taken away. This is complete nonsense and a lie! The protocol drawn up by the precinct commission is precisely the mechanism through which any interested party should take appropriate action."

Matikashvili’s logic is as follows: the role of the CEC during the final tabulation is "purely technical," substantive disputes must be addressed at the polling station level, and the reduction of the timeframe from 26 days to 15 days is a consequence of the transition to electronic elections.

Irakli Kobakhidze, Prime Minister (November 5, speaking to journalists):

"Nothing is being prohibited. The protocol from any polling station can be appealed." "Given that the elections are being conducted electronically, it became possible to simplify certain procedures—a change that is explicitly provided for in the legislation."

Official position: The amendments represent an adaptation to electronic technologies and an optimization of timelines.

Observational 

Organizations: "Less Verifiable Results"

GYLA + ISFED + Transparency International – Georgia – Joint Assessment, November 4–5:

"The changes will lead to less verifiable election results, limited judicial oversight, and an even more centralized election administration."

"Particularly alarming is a provision in the bill stating that a summary protocol compiled by the CEC can be challenged in court only for the purpose of correcting mechanical or technical errors."

Their arguments:

The scale of systemic irregularities often becomes apparent only through a comprehensive analysis of all polling stations; disputes concerning individual polling stations cannot serve as a substitute for this.
The abolition of the mandatory recount for five polling stations "will reduce the transparency of the process and further weaken public trust in the official results."
A decision made solely by the chairperson "increases the risk of subjective and politically motivated decisions," as members appointed by political parties are excluded from the process. The preparation process was “not preceded by public discussion or preliminary consultations,” which runs counter to the Venice Commission’s standards regarding openness, predictability, and inclusive dialogue.
Context: “Legal rules are increasingly being tailored to the interests of the ruling group, while mechanisms for public oversight are being consistently weakened.”
Nona Kurdovanidze, Director of GYLA (Georgian Young Lawyers' Association):

“This change effectively abolishes the possibility of challenging election results.”

The lawyer explains: Currently, results are tabulated at three levels—the polling station, the district, and the CEC (Central Election Commission)—and the protocols from all three levels can be challenged without any preconditions. Under the new rules, the district level is removed, and challenging the CEC’s protocol will be possible only on technical grounds.

As an example, she cites the precedent from Tetritskaro: During the October 26, 2024 elections, the secrecy of the vote was compromised due to ink bleeding through the ballots. GYLA requested the annulment of the results from the affected polling stations, and on November 4, Judge Vladimir Khuchua annulled the results from 30 polling stations in the Tsalka-Tetritskaro district (a decision later overturned by the Court of Appeals). According to Kurdovanidze, had the new procedure been in effect, "it would not have been possible to challenge a violation of ballot secrecy—not even on formal grounds."

3. Analysis: Why this dispute is a matter of principle
The dispute is not merely about deadlines. Two distinct legal philosophies are at odds here:

The ruling team’s model: Elections are decided at the polling station. If no complaint is filed there, the CEC (Central Election Commission) merely performs an arithmetic aggregation of the results. This streamlines the process and reduces the risk of "baseless" political challenges at the final stage.

The observers’ model: An election is a unified, nationwide process. Individual violations—such as intimidation, breaches of ballot secrecy, or vote-buying—might go unrecorded at a specific polling station, yet collectively, they impact the final outcome. Therefore, comprehensive judicial oversight of the final protocol serves as an essential safeguard.

This is precisely why critics view this change within the context of the post-2024 period—a time marked by OSCE/ODIHR reports of an "environment of intimidation and pressure," and a situation where a significant portion of the opposition is boycotting Parliament. Practical risks highlighted by NGOs include:

A narrowing of judicial oversight regarding the final outcome;
The loss of an audit mechanism (the recount of 5 polling stations);
Centralization—the abolition of the district-level tier and the consolidation of power among commission chairpersons;
Hindered participation—requirements for 5-day financial reporting, a reduction in the registration period for media and observers for the second round (shortened to the 7th day), and a ban on the reallocation of advertising airtime.
The ruling team, however, maintains that the right to challenge polling station protocols remains intact, and therefore, rights are not being restricted.

Committee discussions on November 6 indicate that the authorities intend to fast-track the adoption of this legislative package ahead of the 2028 parliamentary elections. The issue has moved beyond mere technical details to become a matter of trust: one side claims they are improving timelines, while the other argues they are dismantling oversight.
The next critical juncture will be the first plenary session, which will reveal whether "Georgian Dream" heeds the calls from observer organizations to submit the package to the Venice Commission and conduct public consultations.

Irakli Managadze, Editor-in-Chief