On May 11, 2018, the Public Defender of Georgia filed an amicus curiae brief with Tbilisi Court of Appeals, in which she discussed the importance of neutral evidence in the criminal case of G.Sh., who was arrested and stands accused for illegal purchase and possession of drugs.

The amicus curiae brief of the Public Defender analyzes the practices of the European Court of Human Rights and national courts and the importance of neutral evidence, by considering that: 1. The evidence adduced by the prosecutor was based only on the testimonies of police officers and procedural documents drawn up by them; 2. Doubts were raised regarding the credibility of these evidence after the defense adduced its evidence. 3. Even though it was possible, no neutral evidence has been adduced, which would prove or rule out the parties' versions.

Community’s suspicions about false drug charges make each case, in which the defendant claims that illicit substance was planted on him/her, of special importance. In the fight against drugs, the state is obliged to examine all circumstances of the case before delivering a verdict in order to exclude all risks of human rights violations as much as possible.

The Public Defender of Georgia considers that the Court of Appeals should rely on the constitutional standard and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights when considering a case. To this end, introduction of the practice of obtaining neutral evidence in criminal cases would significantly reduce the risk of arbitrariness by law enforcers towards certain individuals.