This was the conclusion of the European Court of Human Rights in Rustavi 2 Broadcasting Company Ltd and Others v. Georgia (application no. 16812/17).

In the circumstances of the case, in March 2017, the Supreme Court of Georgia stated that the former owner of the popular TV channel Rustavi 2 had previously been forced to relinquish his rights to the channel and the new owners were not bona fide acquirers.

Following that decision, the TV channel and the owners applied to the ECtHR, stating that the judges who considered the property dispute were not independent and impartial.

Having analyzed the circumstances of the case, the ECtHR found that all but one of the bias allegations were either unsubstantiated or unconvincing.

In particular, according to the ECtHR, Rustavi 2's involvement in disciplinary proceedings against the Chief Justice, who was eventually dismissed from office as a judge, raised some doubts about impartiality. The court also noted that the owners of Rustavi-2 systematically filed unsubstantiated allegations against many different judges at all three levels of jurisdiction, presumably trying to paralyze the administration of justice. And the CEO of the TV channel was making unreasonable and vicious attacks on the media against the judges who were involved in the ownership of the TV channel and the judicial system in Georgia as a whole.

Finally, the ECJ concluded that there had been no violation of Article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the Convention in all instances of the case. The court unanimously dismissed the remaining complaints as inadmissible, including that the court proceedings were a state campaign to force the opposition media to remain silent.

The subject of the ECtHR judgment in Rustavi 2 Broadcasting Company Ltd and Others v. Georgia (Application No. 16812/17) can be found at a link.