The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on 7 March indefinitely suspended Georgia’s Supreme Court ruling on the ownership of Georgia’s most watched TV Channel, Rustavi 2. The suspension means that the channel will remain in the hands of its current owners until the ECHR considers the case.
The latest decision comes after lawyers for Rustavi 2 successfully petitioned on 3 March for the Supreme Court ruling to be suspended, which was initially granted temporarily until March 8.
The Supreme Court decided to hand Rustavi 2 to businessman Kibar Khalvashi, who owned the channel in 2004–2006 and who is viewed by supporters and employees of the channel as a pawn of the current government. Even prior to the conclusion of the case, protesters rallied in support for the channels current owners, claiming that the government was using Khalvashi in an attempt to mute a major opposition-leaning channel.
According to lawyers for Rustavi 2, the ECHR’s order is unprecedented, in its history, the ECHR has never previously reacted so rapidly except in cases of torture or someone’s extradition.
Supporters of Rustavi 2, as well as opposition parties and non-governmental organisations expressed support for the TV station, with activists spending the night after the Supreme Court’s decision outside the company’s offices.
In response to the protests, Prime Minister Giorgi Kvirikashvili announced on 6 March the creation of a Media Ombudsman.
‘Today, I am publicly inviting for cooperation from European media experts and specialists who have proved in deed their professionalism. The Office of Media Ombudsman will continuously monitor the country’s media environment and development, including the processes involving Rustavi 2, the Public Broadcaster, and the media environment as a whole. We are open to cooperation’, he said.
President Giorgi Margvelashvili said that Rustavi 2 is not just a business but an important part of social-political life in Georgia, and that Rustavi 2 offers the opportunity to express different and critical opinions. Suppressing Rustavi 2 will harm Georgia’s democracy and its image, the president said.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that Georgia violated the right to a fair trial in a case involving two key judiciary figures: a judge accused of belonging to the ‘clan’ in Georgia’s judiciary and a constitutional court judge currently reviewing the lawsuits against Georgia’s foreign agent bill.
On 29 August, the ECHR found that Georgia breached the right to a fair trial for Tamar Khachapuridze and Kakhaber Khachidze, along with their son Davit Khachidze.
In August 2016,
The ruling Georgian Dream party has accused the formerly ruling opposition of starting and provoking the August 2008 War, vowing again to punish the opposition after October’s parliamentary elections.
In a statement about the August 2008 War, Georgian Dream railed on the role the formerly ruling United National Movement (UNM) in the conflict. They cited a 2008 Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly report on the conflict suggesting that Georgia’s shelling of Tskhinvali (Tskhinval) without wa
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled that Georgia failed to prevent and investigate an instance of femicide, and ordered the state to pay compensation to the family of the victim.
According to the ECHR ruling on Thursday, the 23-year-old woman took her own life in 2017 after years of reporting physical and verbal abuse by her partner to the police. Her partner and child were at home at the time.
They found that Georgia had violated the right to life and the prohibition of
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the Georgian State Security Services (SSG) violated the right to life of 19-year-old Temirlan Machalikashvili, who was shot dead in a raid on his home in the Pankisi Valley in December 2017.
In their ruling on Thursday, the court found insufficient evidence to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that Machalikashvili was unlawfully killed, finding the state’s explanation that he was reaching for a hand grenade when shot ‘plausible’.
However, the