Former Georgian Deputy Prime Minister Levan Davitashvili, after leaving the building of the Georgian State Security Service, where he was summoned for questioning on February 17, stated that the issue of Georgia's natural gas supplies had been discussed.

According to Davitashvili, the discussion concerned the stability of future gas supplies, existing contracts, and the need to extend or revise some agreements.

"You are probably aware that Georgia has been playing an active role in Europe's gas supply for several years. In particular, we are making a significant contribution to European energy security, and we are cooperating with the Republic of Azerbaijan in this area. I believe I have provided very detailed and comprehensive information. Accordingly, this took time. There were very logical questions. There were questions about the extent to which our active participation in the supply plan might or might not entail risks. Based on this, it was entirely logical for me to discuss all these issues in detail. "This is the main issue we discussed," he concluded.

The State Security Service, however, responded to his statement by emphasizing that the former official was at the Anti-Corruption Agency not for "discussion," but for questioning in connection with a specific criminal case. The agency insists that the subject of the questioning was the risks associated with Georgia's gas supply and the possible deterioration of the terms of the concluded agreement, which is being investigated, not supplies to the European Union.

"Davitashvili was at the Anti-Corruption Agency for questioning in connection with a specific criminal case, not at a meeting to discuss issues. The questioning concerned the risks associated with Georgia's gas supply and the deterioration of conditions for Georgia based on the concluded agreement, which is the reason for the investigation, not gas supplies to the European Union. Not a single question was asked in this regard in the context of risks. If any further similar interpretations, false information, or speculation are voiced in this regard, we are prepared to publish the interview protocol (with the consent of the interviewee),” the Georgian State Security Service stated.

Thus, the parties differ in their interpretations of both the format of the meeting—a “discussion” or an interrogation—and its content: Davitashvili speaks of the country's European direction and strategic role, while the State Security Service points to an investigation into a specific agreement and the risks for Georgia itself.