The legislative process carried out by Georgian Dream in 2024-2025 is directed against human rights and democratic principles. A number of amendments were made to the Administrative Offences Code, adopted during the Soviet Union, in an accelerated manner, which disproportionately restricted the rights of assembly and expression, making the already flawed Code even more repressive. In addition, legislative amendments were made to the Criminal Code as well, criminalizing the repeated commission of specific actions.

After October 16 alone (which is when the latest amendments took effect, at this stage), administrative proceedings were launched against about 150 protesters.[1] In most cases, the ground was part 10 of Article 1741, namely, artificially blocking a road and covering a face during a protest rally. In more than 100 cases, administrative detention was used, of which about 50 were used against women. Criminal prosecution was launched against one person.

Amendments made to the Administrative Offences Code

5 amendments have been made over the past 11 months to Article 1741 of the Administrative Offences Code, which regulates the violation of the rules for organizing assemblies and demonstrations. In relation to human rights, the most severe is the latest amendment of October 16, according to which, among other things, in case of a protester covering his face with a mask or any other means... partially or completely blocking the roadway (if the demonstration can be held otherwise, considering the number of people), the judge is obliged to apply detention of up to 15 days (20 days in the case of an organizer).[2] In addition, according to the amendments to the Administrative Offences Code, a protester shall be subject to administrative detention for up to 60 days if he possesses a prohibited item at the rally.

According to international human rights standards and the European Court of Human Rights, detention should not be the only sanction, including for artificially blocking a road.[3]

Enforcement of repressive laws

Georgian Dream will enforce Soviet-style repressions using the Code adopted during the Soviet Union.

In particular, since October 16, the Ministry of Internal Affairs has been arresting demonstrators under the pretext of artificially blocking a road. According to the established vicious practice, representatives of the criminal police or patrol police draw up an administrative offence report in relation to individuals, whose identification is carried out through video camera footage requested from 112.[4] In addition, the arrest takes place later, after the rally, or the next day. The arrest procedure is also noteworthy. As the demonstrators note, during the arrest, representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs provide false information to the protesters that they will be taken to the relevant institution for the purpose of drawing up a report and that then they will be released. Later, they are either taken directly to court or to a temporary detention center. And a detention report is also drawn up.

The form of arrest of demonstrators is particularly alarming. On October 22, representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs arrested approximately 30 demonstrators on the sidewalk, using force, without any legal grounds. The reasons for the arrest were artificial blocking of the road, disobedience to the lawful order of the police officer, and petty hooliganism (in rare cases).

During the trials, it was particularly difficult for the representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to prove the offence of blocking the road, as they could not present video footage of the arrested people blocking the road. Because of this, some of the trials are still pending.

Court bias and the sanctions used

Trials of the arrested demonstrators often took place in Tbilisi City Court in the middle of the night. In addition, the lawyers' motions to postpone court hearings in order to effectively implement the defence were usually not granted by the judge. According to the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, when a person's right to liberty is restricted, Articles 6 and 3 of the European Convention apply to him.

Conducting trials late at night (sometimes all night long) can be considered a mechanism of psychological pressure.[5] In addition, this approach of the court is another manifestation of the political motive of the trials.

As already noted, the main evidence of the roadblocking trials is video footage. In their speech, representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs did not justify how proportional, commensurate the nature of the sanction requested by them was with the nature of the action. In all cases, the judges granted the request of the agency - regarding the detention sanction.

In addition to blocking the road, according to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, one of the types of offences was the covering of the face. The court applied administrative detention against several people for wearing a face mask. Along with the detention sanction, the item of the offence (mask) was confiscated. The only circumstance that the judge assessed was the proof of the fact whether the person was wearing a face mask. Apart from a face mask, law enforcement officers stopped a protester, who was walking home with a scarf wrapped around him in the cold weather, for identification purposes, took off the scarf and sealed it. The court sent the person to four days of administrative detention.

Verbal reprimand mechanism

Despite the aforementioned repressive legislative amendments, the sole purpose of which is to suppress the protest mood, the Administrative Offences Code still leaves the possibility for representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs to request a verbal reprimand, and not administrative detention. In turn, the judge is authorized to use the reprimand mechanism, but under specific conditions.

Although the combination of the above conditions was present in several cases, the judge applied the measure of detention. The use of a reprimand mechanism by the court is important as the latter does not constitute a sanction and, accordingly, its application does not criminalize the action. 

Criminalization of the right to assembly and expression

In October, amendments to the Criminal Code criminalized the right to assembly and expression. For example, repeated commission of the aforementioned act is grounds for launching criminal prosecution. The mentioned legislative amendment contradicts the Constitution of Georgia and the practice of the European Court, according to which, peaceful demonstrations should not be subject to sanctions that entail deprivation of liberty. The sole purpose of the norm is to have a chilling effect on the constitutional right to assembly and expression.

Enforcement in practice

After October 16, one person, 61-year-old Zura Menteshashvili, was arrested on charges of repeatedly artificially blocking a road. Pre-trial detention was used against him as a restrictive measure. On the same grounds, he was arrested on October 24, for which he spent 5 days in a pre-trial detention center.

The use of the most severe measure is politically motivated. According to the Court of Human Rights and international standards (e.g. Letellier v. France, Clooth v. Belgium, Ilijkov v. Bulgaria), detention should be an extreme form and it can be justified only when there is no possibility of achieving the goal with a lighter measure. In such a case, the court is obliged to use alternative measures. Otherwise, the violation of Articles 5 (Right to liberty and security) and 6 (Right to a fair trial) of the European Convention are clear.