ODIHR Issues Urgent Opinion Over Georgia's Expanded Protest Penalties
By Liza Mchedlidze
Monday, November 17, 2025
The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights has released an extensive urgent opinion on Georgia's recent legal amendments that significantly increase penalties for protest-related activities. The changes affect both the Code of Administrative Offences and the Criminal Code and were adopted by parliament in October 2025.
According to the opinion, published on 12 November, the new legislation introduces far stronger sanctions for conduct that often occurs during peaceful protests. ODIHR states that these changes weaken essential democratic guarantees, particularly the rights to peaceful assembly, expression and political participation.
The amendments remove the option of using lighter measures such as fines or warnings for several non-violent offenses. Courts now have far less room to consider the specific circumstances of a case. Administrative detention of up to 60 days becomes mandatory for certain behaviors that previously resulted in minor penalties. ODIHR notes that this shift makes the overall penalty system more severe and less flexible.
One of the most controversial changes is the introduction of criminal penalties for repeated administrative offenses. Under the updated Criminal Code, a person can be charged with a crime even if the repeated conduct caused no actual damage. These charges can result in prison sentences. ODIHR warns that this approach contradicts key principles of criminal law, which usually require actual harm or a clear threat of harm before criminal punishment is applied.
ODIHR highlights that several amended provisions are formulated in very broad terms. One provision allows prison sentences for repeated "offensive" or "insulting" actions toward officials. The opinion states that there is no clear legal definition of what qualifies as an insult in this context. The lack of clarity creates a high risk of arbitrary enforcement and may suppress legitimate criticism of public authorities.
According to ODIHR, vague wording also allows the authorities to interpret peaceful protest actions as violations. This creates uncertainty for demonstrators and may discourage people from participating in public gatherings.
The organization also criticizes the manner in which the amendments were adopted. Parliament completed all stages of the legislative process in less than two weeks. The amendments became effective the day after they were published. ODIHR states that major reforms affecting basic rights should undergo broad consultation with civil society, legal experts and the wider public. The rapid procedure used in this case prevented meaningful debate and reduced public trust in the new rules.
ODIHR expresses particular concern about the potential use of criminal sanctions against minors for repeated administrative offenses. The opinion notes that international human rights standards require states to use criminal law against children only as a last resort. The new Georgian provisions fail to include sufficient safeguards for young people and may lead to disproportionate punishment.
ODIHR recommends that the Georgian government either repeal or substantially revise the amendments. It advises lawmakers to reintroduce a wider range of proportionate penalties and to give judges greater flexibility when considering each case. The opinion also calls for the removal of criminal penalties in situations where the conduct did not cause real harm.
The organization stresses that restrictions on peaceful assembly must meet strict international requirements. These restrictions must be clearly defined, necessary for a legitimate purpose and proportionate to the specific situation. ODIHR warns that the new measures may place Georgia in violation of its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The opinion concludes that the combination of harsher penalties, vague definitions and the absence of public consultation creates a serious risk of misuse. ODIHR states that the amendments could discourage peaceful protest and weaken democratic participation at a time when public trust and open political dialogue are essential.
