The Public Defender is echoing the Batumi incident of June 22, 2016, during which police dispersed a rally and detained several protesters.

The rally was monitored by employees of the Public Defender's Batumi Office. As a result of study of the case, the Public Defender considers that the actions of law enforcement officers went beyond legal frames. Police violated protesters' freedom of assembly and freedom of expression.

On June 22, 2016, Gonio residents held a protest rally in front of the Batumi City Council building. Protesters were demanding restoration of their land property rights, which were revoked in 2010.

Some of the protesters moved to the Government Office building, in front of which they tried to put up a tent. Law enforcement officers called on them not to put up a tent near a street. However, the protesters did not obey and put mattresses in a park near the street. They said they would go on a hunger strike and would continue it until the fulfillment of their demands. Law enforcers urged them to leave the territory, though protesters did not obey, after which police officers took away their mattresses and detained one of the participants without any explanation.

Police demanded withdrawal of one of the protesters’ car from a special parking lot. Law enforcement officers also detained a protester, which was trying to take mattresses out of the car, after which one of the police officers drove the car with one of the protesters inside in an unknown direction. Meanwhile, other police officers arrested a person who was trying to find out why the car was driven away.

Freedom of assembly and freedom of expression are internationally recognized rights and freedoms, the primary guarantor for the protection of which is the Constitution of Georgia. The Public Defender reminds the law enforcement authorities that Article 25 of the Constitution of Georgia grants individuals the right of public assembly without prior consent, if the assembly or manifestation is not held in a public thoroughfare, while dispersal of an assembly or manifestation is allowed only if it is of a criminal nature.

Under the mentioned circumstances, the Public Defender believes that the dispersal of the peaceful rally of Gonio residents by law enforcement officers did not have legitimate grounds. The protesters did not violate any applicable normative act, did not block a road, did not obstruct movement of vehicles or pedestrians. Police did not have grounds to protect public order. It should also be noted that the use of restrictive measures by law enforcement authorities during the election period escalates the already tense environment, which can serve as a prerequisite for discredit of the electoral process.

The Public Defender expresses concern about the fact that the Government still does not express readiness to implement the principles defined by the international standards of freedom of expression or to carry out the positive and negative obligations defined by the European Court in its decisions delivered against a number of states. The Public Defender calls on the Government and the Prosecutor's Office to investigate the dispersal of peaceful demonstrators and the actions of police officers involved in the dispersal.