Georgia's Public Defender clashes with ruling party over critical human rights report

Georgia's Public Defender Levan Ioseliani faced criticism from members of the ruling Georgian Dream party after presenting his 2024 activity report to parliament on Tuesday. 

Ioseliani, who has held the role since 2023, focused his 400-page report on what he called systemic issues affecting the protection of rights in Georgia - including alleged police misconduct, conditions in social housing, and the need for greater institutional accountability.

His comments struck a nerve with Georgian Dream MPs, some of whom openly questioned both the content of the report and the impartiality of the Public Defender's Office.

The first to react was MP Nino Tsilosani, who challenged Ioseliani’s mention of journalists allegedly mistreated by police during recent pro-European demonstrations.

"I heard that the report includes claims that the police acted inappropriately toward journalists during rallies," said Tsilosani. "I was truly surprised. I haven’t seen a single fact proving police misconduct toward journalists - and if there was only one case, it shouldn't be generalized."

Vice Speaker Thea Tsulukiani took aim at Ioseliani's staff, suggesting they could be remnants of the previous Public Defender’s tenure under Nino Lomjaria, who was often at odds with the government.

"You are a professional and a dignified person," said Tsulukiani. "But perhaps your staff is selectively highlighting topics. Have you conducted a reorganization or are you still relying on Lomjaria’s team to protect our rights?"

Tsulukiani went further, questioning Ioseliani's understanding of human rights law. “You seem ashamed to protect us,” she said. “I am a human rights specialist, unlike you.”

In a response from the parliamentary rostrum, Ioseliani defended his approach, stressing that his role was not to praise the government but to spotlight the problems citizens face.

"I get the impression that, since the opposition is absent from this hall, you decided to direct your criticisms at me instead,” he said. “A Public Defender should not be someone who only talks about achievements. If that’s all I did, I would not be fulfilling my mandate.”

He added that the report included many positive evaluations - nearly 30 sections beginning with words like “welcome” or “positive assessment” - but chose to emphasize issues needing urgent attention.

Addressing Tsulukiani's remarks directly, Ioseliani said, “I am not going to respond in the same style. I don’t want to call her ignorant or incompetent, but clearly, we have fundamentally different views on human rights.”

He also clarified the limits of his role, particularly regarding electoral processes. “Election observation is not the Public Defender’s mandate - that lies with organizations like OSCE/ODIHR. But the right to vote is absolutely within the human rights domain, and I will defend it.”

Ioseliani reiterated that, regardless of political pressure, future reports will continue to focus on unresolved problems. “There will never be a time, in any country, where all human rights issues are resolved. My duty is to draw attention to those that persist.”

He concluded by underlining his “nonpartisan stance”, saying “I will not engage in political debates. My only focus is people - their rights and their dignity.”