Georgian Dream
continues to exert pressure on civil society organizations and human rights
defenders. Georgian Dream fully controls the repressive apparatus in the
country, and therefore uses various restrictive measures against the civil
sector. In particular, it adopts laws aimed at restricting funding
sources for civil society. Examples of such laws are: the Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence passed in 2024 and the FARA Act passed in 2025, as well as the amendment to the Law on Grants, according to which, a donor organization must seek permission from the
Georgian Government before
issuing a grant in Georgia.
Along with the
tightening of repressive legislation, the Georgian Dream
propaganda is deliberately continuing its campaign to discredit civil activists,
calling them foreign agents and traitors. The activities of
independent organizations are portrayed as activities managed by foreigners or
Georgian opposition parties. During 2024, the offices of a number of civil society organizations became the targets of organized attacks,
including the office of the
Democracy Research Institute, namely with offensive inscriptions
and photos. Similar inscriptions were made near the house of the
organization's founder, Ucha Nanuashvili and his parents. Phone calls containing threats of violence were also
made. None of these cases has been investigated
to this day, and not a single organizer or participant in the attack has been
punished.
In addition to the informational propaganda attacks against civil society organizations and restrictions on funding,
Georgian Dream further tightened its actions in recent months and began to use criminal prosecution mechanisms through
the Prosecutor's Office. As part of the absurd investigations into
sabotage and“coup d’état,” the accounts of several human rights organizations
have been seized, and the payment of disproportionate fines imposed on citizens
for participating
in protests has become more difficult. As part of the same
investigations, searches are periodically conducted in the houses of various organizations and activists.
It is in this context that the attacks on the Democracy Research Institute and its director, Ucha Nanuashvili, were
carried out. The falsified
and propaganda TV story
aired by the First Channel of Russia, about Ucha
Nanuashvili creating informal groups and organizing the Maidan, was quickly used by the Georgian Dream propaganda. In fact, the
conversation with Russian prankster journalists concerned the attacks on protesters by masked individuals in
Tbilisi in November-December 2024, which did not result in a response from law
enforcement agencies or an effective investigation.
The Georgian Dream leaders, without verifying the
facts, completely “blindly” repeated the recordings of a falsified conversation
prepared by a television station controlled by the Putin regime. The Georgian Dream MPs openly demanded the launch of an investigation against Ucha Nanuashvili. In particular, Irakli Zarkua
noted: “There is a reasonable suspicion that we are dealing with a crime,
treason and conspiracy against the state. The relevant agencies should get interested in the content of the video call of
these people.”
According to Georgian Dream MP Eka Sepashvili:
“This person (Nanuashvili) has voiced the kind of information that several criminal cases may be
launched. According to him, it turns out that there are
private individuals who work in security services and are ready to fire a
weapon at the right time and harm or take away a person’s life. This is very important
information and, in my opinion, the relevant services should get interested.”
Tbilisi Mayor and Georgian Dream Secretary
General Kakha Kaladze also responded to the falsified video: “Yesterday’s video
recording is yet another proof that these traitors are directly involved in the
topic of overthrowing the state, directly carrying out
orders and tasks from outside. They have neither a homeland nor their own
family. They directly represent agents’ network and are ruled from outside.”
According to Archil Gorduladze, an MP from the Georgian Dream party: “Salome
Zurabishvili unwittingly said in the recording that it was unthinkable to change
the Government peacefully in the country and that they
needed funds for this, and Ucha Nanuashvili’s words were also about violent
groups. They should answer what they needed the funds received from foreign forces
for.”
The assessment of Mamuka Mdinaradze, the leader of the majority
of the Georgian Dream: “Starting from financing, were not we talking about this? That they tried to create groups?! Now it has become
clearer what we are really dealing with. They [the opposition] are in complete
agony for one main reason – in reality, this was not a sincere protest. Maybe someone was deceived and protested sincerely, believing that he woke up in Chelyabinsk, but in reality, the
degree of protest and the mood became directly proportional to the inflow of money.”
The statement by Georgian Dream Vice-Speaker Giorgi Volski: “We know from the past experience that not a single tetri, not a
single cent of the money they received has been spent for good. This is an absolutely
treacherous plan that could not be implemented because it was simply
ridiculed.”
The fact is that completely identical narratives have been developed by the Russian propaganda television, representatives of
Georgian Dream and Georgian media outlets under their control. Against the
backdrop of active civil protests, Georgian Dream is intensifying repression,
while Russia is clearly providing them with propaganda assistance against the Georgian civil society.
The decision taken by the state in relation to Azerbaijani journalist constitutes a grave violation of human rights, including breaches of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights.
Russia continues to pursue deliberate efforts aimed at the annexation of Georgia’s occupied territories with soft power instruments.
The Anti-Corruption Bureau was established in 2022 in response to recommendations issued by the European Commission, which called for strengthening the independence and functional capacity of anti-corruption institutions.