GYLA: administrative proceedings for social media comments raise concerns over freedom of expression

The administrative proceedings launched against activist Tornike Razmadze constitute another example of restrictions on freedom of expression, the Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association (GYLA) has said.

The organisation on Thursday said national courts should strike an appropriate balance between protected political expression or speech concerning matters of public interest and unjustified personal insults.

GYLA stressed proceedings were launched against Razmadze over a comment he posted on Facebook under a video discussing statements by Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze and Russian state media figures Margarita Simonyan and Vladimir Solovyov.

The Interior Ministry determined that the comment contained signs of an administrative offence.

The ministry told TV Pirveli that it works on a daily basis to identify offences involving insults against individuals and abusive language in public spaces. According to the ministry, insulting comments by Razmadze and another citizen, Ana Bdeiani, had been identified, with administrative proceedings launched under the articles covering abusive language in public spaces, harassment or insulting behaviour towards citizens and other similar conduct that disrupts public order or peace. It carries a fine of between GEL 500 and GEL 3,000, or administrative detention for up to 20 days.

GYLA said the comment should be assessed in the context in which it was made, noting that the video concerned statements by Simonyan about Georgia-Russia relations. Simonyan, editor-in-chief of Russian state media outlet RT, and Solovyov, a presenter on Russian state television, have been widely associated with pro-Kremlin and pro-war rhetoric.

GYLA added Razmadze had published a video comparing Simonyan’s remarks about Georgia with statements made by Kobakhidze at a briefing on Russophobia. He subsequently posted a vulgar comment under the video.

The organisation argued that the mere use of vulgar language is not sufficient to classify a statement as insulting or disruptive of public order, referring to European Court of Human Rights case law.

“Vulgar expressions may have merely a stylistic function. National courts must strike an appropriate balance and distinguish protected political expression or expression concerning matters of public interest from unjustified personal insults,” GYLA said.

The organisation described the proceedings against Razmadze as another example of restrictions on freedom of expression and said the case demonstrated what it called the “absurdity and cynicism” of such proceedings.

GYLA further alleged that the authorities were disregarding the context and public-interest dimension of the comment and creating a chilling effect not only on political expression but also on criticism of Kremlin propaganda targeting Georgia.