The following is based on a communication written by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts to the Government of Georgia on 24 July 2025. The communication remained confidential for 60 days before being made public, giving the Government time to reply. Regrettably, the Government did not reply within this timeframe. If a reply is received it will be posted on the UN Special Procedures communications database.
This is a shorter version of the original communication.
BACKGROUND
Topic: the administrative charges against human rights defenders, journalists and politicians, including Ms. Baia Pataraia; and the legal and administrative harassment of CSOs in Georgia.
Ms. Babutsa (Baia) Pataraia is a woman human rights defender, lawyer, and the Director of the human rights NGO Sapari.
Special Procedures mandate holders have previously expressed their concerns about the intimidation of human rights defenders in Georgia, including opponents of the Foreign Agents Law (GEO 2/2024, dated 29 August 2024). Up to date, no reply to this communication has been provided by the Government.
Special Procedures mandate holders have also previously expressed their concerns about the re-introduction to Parliament and subsequent adoption on 28 May 2024 of the so-called ‘Foreign Agent Law’ (AL GEO 1/2024, dated 10 May 2024). The communication also addressed allegations of excessive use of force against demonstrators in Georgia, who were protesting against the reintroduction and subsequent adoption of the law. Up to date, no reply to this communication has been provided by the Government.
ALLEGATIONS
Application of article 173 of the Administrative Offenses Code
On 11 June 2025, twenty activists, journalists and politicians were summoned for court hearings scheduled to take place the following day. These individuals, including Ms. Baia Pataraia, were accused of insulting members of the Georgian Dream Party through their Facebook posts.
Ms. Pataraia’s lawyer was informed that she was charged under article 173 of the Administrative Offenses Code of Georgia. This relatively new provision was introduced to the Administrative Offenses Code on 6 February 2025. Article 173 prohibits ‘Verbal abuse, insult, or offensive conduct toward a public official’ and carries penalties of a fine from 1.500 to 4.000 GEL (500 to 1300 Euros), or administrative detention or up to 45 days.
The evidence presented against Ms. Pataraia consisted of screenshots of her three Facebook posts, in which she criticized Mr. Mamuka Mdinaradze, Tea Tsulukiani and Mariam Lashkhi, MPs from the ruling Georgian Dream party.
The case was brought by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which argued that Ms. Pataraia’s posts were offensive due to their overall tone and context, claiming that they were ‘written with hate’.
On 18 June 2025, the Tbilisi City Court fined Ms. Pataraia 4.000 GEL for her three Facebook posts criticizing the three MPs. The judge reportedly did not provide the reasoning for the ruling, only the outcome of the decision.
The judge disregarded the request of Ms. Pataraia’s legal representatives to suspend the process while the Constitutional Court considers the constitutionality of article 173.
Legal and administrative harassment of civil society organizations
On 17 June 2025, the Anti-Corruption Bureau sent requests through a court order to several civil society organizations, including Transparency International Georgia, Media Development Foundation, SAPARI, the Civil Society Foundation, the Economic Policy Research Center, and the Future Academy of Georgia.
These inquiries appear to be the first application of recently adopted pieces of legislation targeting civil society in Georgia.
On 19 June 2025, the Social Justice Center received a court order notifying them that the Anti-Corruption Bureau has initiated an inspection of the organization’s activities and is demanding unrestricted access to information relating to the work of the Social Justice Center.
The request covers comprehensive legal, technical and financial data relating to their activities between 1 January 2024 and 10 June 2025. Furthermore, it also demands detailed information regarding the support provided to their beneficiaries within the framework of legal aid and human rights defence services. The Anti-Corruption Bureau has given the NGO three days to comply.
The court order cites the Laws on Combating Corruption, Political Associations of Citizens and Grants as the legal basis for the request, rather than the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).
Furthermore, the order requests all types of information for the specified period without establishing any limits related to the purpose of the inspection. The request also extends to the personal data of their beneficiaries, organizational correspondence and communications, representing severe and unlawful interference in the advocacy and legal defence work of the Social Justice Center.
During a briefing on 18 June 2025, the head of the Anti-Corruption Bureau claimed that the information requested from civil society organizations was intended to examine the purpose of the activities of grant recipients or politically active organizations, and that full protection of professional and personal data would be assured.
CONCERNS
In the communication, we express our serious concerns about the use of the newly introduced article 173 of the Administrative Offenses Code of Georgia to criminalize and sanction human rights defenders and journalists for their posts on social media, including Facebook.
We note that, if confirmed, these allegations could be contrary to human rights norms and standards contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), acceded by Georgia on 3 May 1994, notably the right to freedom of expression enshrined in article 19 of the Covenant. We recall that such right includes political discourse and commentary on public affairs and can only be restricted under the carefully crafted restrictions in articles 19(3) and 20 ICCPR. We note that the allegations above do not seem to fall under any of these restrictions allowed under international law.
