The new head of the State Security Service, Mamuka Mdinaradze, made a number of threatening statements in an interview with Imedi TV on October 1. The addressees of the threats of the new head of the State Security Service were the participants in the rally, who were promised a “very severe response” in case of going beyond the limits of the law. The State Security Service is a formally independent state body, the activities of which must be free from party influence and control. However, the messages of the head of the State Security Service are in full accordance with the threats made by Irakli Kobakhidze[1] and other representatives of Georgian Dream, which is not surprising, given that the one-party Parliament approved Mdinaradze’s candidacy without any discussions or debate.[2]

The obligation of law enforcement agencies to respond promptly and effectively to violations of the law is well known to the protesters. The announcement of punishment by the Georgian Dream leaders through the media several days before the rally only served to intimidate the population, so that as few people as possible dare to participate in the protest rally out of the fear of the so-called “severe and harsh response”.

Politicization of the state security system is an established practice, although Mdinaradze’s predecessors, as a rule, refrained from personally voicing threats against political opponents, thus avoiding at least open and personal involvement in the public political process. The threats voiced personally by Mdinaradze are evidence of the extreme and undisguised political instrumentalization of the State Security Service. Although there was no expectation of political neutrality from one of the leaders of the Georgian Dream parliamentary faction, it seems that with the appointment of Mdinaradze to this position, the role of the State Security Service has changed and now this agency will operate not only with covert instruments, but openly as a “political police”. Under Mdinaradze’s leadership, one of the functions of this agency will be to openly threaten and intimidate people with critical attitudes.

Based on previous years’ practice and observations, as a rule, the heads of the State Security Service did not actively appear before the media. On the one hand, this practice also reduced the possibility of asking questions about the closed activities of the agency, although in this case, Mdinaradze’s publicity serves not the purpose of exchanging information with critical media or informing the public, but rather, using pro-government media, to announce retribution against political opponents and protesters. Using communication with the media would be welcome to increase the accountability of the activities of the agency, but not to voice threats/intimidation. It should be noted that Mdinaradze did not use the long television interview to talk about the dangers associated with the occupation or the security risks facing Georgia given the current geopolitical situation. The main accents of his public speech once again confirm that the agency has completely missed the framework of powers established by law and serves to strengthen the authoritarian power of Georgian Dream, which was expressed in the threat made by a formally independent agency relating to the October 4 rally.

The general goal of the rally is to protest the democratic regression of Georgia, the repressive steps taken by Georgian Dream and the seizure of power as a result of election fraud. In turn, the right to assembly and expression/protest is a good provided for in Article 21 of the Constitution. It is important to ensure that this right is not restricted and the harmful practice is not continued, when, due to individual violations of the law by some participants in the rally (throwing bottles or other objects, etc.), law enforcement agencies cracked down on the entire rally of tens of thousands of people.