Statements

ISFED responds with grave concern to the complaints filed by politicians of the Georgian Dream party with Georgia's Ministry of Internal Affairs, targeting civil activists, journalists, and politicians solely because they expressed critical opinions regarding public figures on social networks in a form deemed unacceptable by these figures. Such practice represents another dangerous step taken by the Georgian Dream against freedom of speech and expression. 

The aforementioned complaints are based on Article 173¹⁶ added to Georgia's Code of Administrative Offenses by the Georgian Dream on February 6, 2025. According to the article, verbal insult, cursing,  or other offensive actions against a Georgian public political official, political official, state servant, person equivalent to a state servant, and/or public servant, during the performance of official duties or in connection with the performance of official duties or activities results in a fine ranging from 1,500 to 4,000 GEL or administrative imprisonment for up to 45 days. 

Following the adoption of these amendments, complaints have been filed against numerous citizens, primarily aimed at imposing administrative liability for their expression of critical views regarding persons holding political office (including through social media). The amendments implemented in Georgia's Code of Administrative Offenses and their practical implementation create risks of arbitrary restriction of freedom of expression contrary to constitutional and international standards. 

Freedom of expression, protected by Georgia's Constitution, represents one of the essential prerequisites of a democratic society. The essence of freedom of expression lies in ensuring the dissemination of ideas and views that are essentially connected to the diversity of opinions on issues significant to society. According to the standard established by Georgia's Constitutional Court, freedom of expression protects the dissemination of critical views. 

Furthermore, persons holding political office and public servants, according to international standards, have a significantly higher obligation of tolerance toward criticism expressed against them than private individuals. Expression by certain individuals may not always be acceptable to parts of society; however, this circumstance does not render such expression beyond constitutional-legal protection. 

The practical restriction of freedom of expression on social media is particularly alarming against the backdrop of Georgian Dream representatives, public political officials, and public servants themselves being engaged for many years in insulting and hate campaigns against critics of the government and vulnerable groups. Additionally, according to established practice in the country, public servants mostly do not face consequences for illegal involvement in election campaigns through social media.