The Social Justice Center responds to the recent incidents of protesters being detained both in the streets and near their homes. The Center raises concerns that the factual circumstances suggest these detentions may be aimed at punishing individuals for participating in demonstrations, rather than addressing administrative violations.

According to media reports, over the past few days, several individuals have been detained by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia on charges of petty hooliganism and disobedience to police orders. Among the detained are Dr. Konstantine Chakhunashvili, Rondeli Foundation researcher Vato Bzhalava, and civil activist Niko Managadze. Additionally, Dr. Ramaz Zosiashvili was taken to a police station but later released under a signed statement.

Notably, none of the detained individuals were apprehended during the protests themselves. Instead, they were arrested in the streets after the protests had concluded or near their residences in the days following the demonstrations. This pattern of detentions raises serious concerns about the real motives behind these actions, highlighting the potential use of administrative processes to suppress dissent rather than ensure public order.

Detention of Konstantine Chakhunashvili

On December 9, 2024, law enforcement officers detained Konstantine (Kote) Chakhunashvili on Nutsubidze Street for an alleged violation under Article 173 of the Administrative Offenses Code of Georgia. Police stated that Chakhunashvili had disobeyed their lawful orders. However, Chakhunashvili explained that he was stopped while driving, surrounded by a patrol police vehicle in front and two criminal police vehicles behind. After exiting his car, he was taken into custody.

Chakhunashvili’s family and friends were unaware of his whereabouts for several hours. His car was found abandoned, and it was only later confirmed that he had been taken to a police station.

Notably, since November 28, 2024, Chakhunashvili has been actively participating in ongoing protests in Tbilisi. According to his statements to the media, he had been summoned by the Ministry of Internal Affairs for questioning as part of an ongoing criminal investigation. He declined to appear at the police station, requesting instead to be questioned in the presence of a magistrate judge. Shortly after, he was detained.

This incident raises concerns about the potential misuse of administrative procedures to suppress activism and discourage participation in protests.

Detention of Vato Bzhalava

On December 12, 2024, Rondeli Foundation researcher Vato Bzhalava was detained on Abashidze Street. Police claimed that while performing their duties, they deemed Bzhalava suspicious, stopped him for identification purposes, and alleged that he refused to present his ID card and insulted them.

According to Bzhalava, he was walking his dog on Abashidze Street, entered a supermarket to buy food, and upon exiting, three law enforcement officers approached him, demanding his ID. After he handed over the ID, they instructed him to turn off his live stream on his phone and informed him of his detention. Bzhalava stated that the officers did not allow him to contact his brother or arrange care for his dog before being taken into custody.

One day prior to his administrative detention, police had questioned Bzhalava in the presence of a magistrate judge as part of an ongoing investigation by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

This case raises questions about the proportionality of the police response and whether the detention was aimed at intimidating or silencing a vocal protest participant.

Detention of Ramaz Zosiashvili

On December 12, 2024, Dr. Ramaz Zosiashvili was detained and later released on a signed statement. According to Zosiashvili, he was driving in Ortachala when patrol police stopped his car, conducted a cursory search, and found a flashlight, which they deemed a suspicious item. He was taken to a police station, where he provided an explanation before being released. Dr. Zosiashvili has been an active participant in the recent protests. He stated that earlier that day, during a protest, he was shining a flashlight on the Christmas tree set up in front of the Parliament building. The circumstances surrounding his detention raise concerns about whether such actions were aimed at discouraging protest activities rather than addressing any legitimate legal concerns.

Detention of Niko Managadze

On the night of December 14, 2024, civil activist Niko Managadze and his friend were detained on Kostava Street. According to police, Managadze disobeyed their lawful orders. However, his lawyer stated that individuals, some masked, unlawfully apprehended him, forced him into a vehicle, and transported him to the Digomi police station. The individuals were dressed in civilian clothing, making it impossible to immediately identify them as law enforcement officers.

While being transported, the officers allegedly accused Managadze of verbally insulting police officers. Managadze had been summoned for questioning at the police station the previous day but refused to appear, requesting instead to be questioned in front of a magistrate judge. Following his detention, masked officers reportedly questioned him in the vehicle about why he failed to appear and "why he was troubling" the police.

This case raises significant concerns about the methods used during the detention and the potential targeting of activists for their protest-related activities.

In all the cases described above, law enforcement officials claimed that the detentions were conducted under the Law on Police, citing the need for identification or superficial searches. According to the police, the detainees allegedly insulted officers or disobeyed lawful orders during the interaction, prompting their detention.

In contrast, the detainees consistently reported that they were stopped in public by individuals in civilian clothing, identified themselves, and were then detained. Civil activists maintain that they committed no administrative violations.

Additionally, in three cases (Managadze, Chakhunashvili, and Bzhalava), the detainees had been previously summoned for questioning by investigative bodies regarding criminal cases related to demonstrations. All three requested to be questioned in the presence of a magistrate judge instead of appearing at the police station. This preference for judicial oversight is a legal right, yet it seems to have led to subsequent detentions. Notably, during his detention, Niko Managadze was reportedly asked by police officers, “Why didn’t you come?” and “Why are you troubling us?” Such remarks suggest a punitive motive rather than a legitimate enforcement of administrative rules.

Under Article 244 of Georgia’s Administrative Offenses Code, administrative detention is considered a measure of last resort. It may only be used when other means are exhausted and must serve specific purposes, such as determining identity, preparing an administrative offense protocol (when it cannot be done on-site), ensuring the proper review of the case, or enforcing a decision. If these conditions are not met, the use of administrative detention is unlawful.

The circumstances of these cases raise questions about whether the principle of last resort was adhered to. Instead, the pattern of targeting activists, especially those who exercised their right to request judicial oversight, suggests a potential misuse of administrative detention as a tool for silencing dissent.

The alignment of these detentions with activists’ prior refusal to appear for police questioning and their active participation in protests highlights the possibility that law enforcement may be leveraging administrative detention as a punitive measure. Such actions risk undermining fundamental rights, including the right to protest, the presumption of innocence, and access to fair legal procedures. The apparent use of administrative measures to punish or intimidate “uncooperative” activists is deeply concerning and requires further scrutiny to ensure compliance with legal standards and the protection of human rights.

The reviewed cases reveal clear signs of unlawful detention, despite formal allegations of administrative violations by law enforcement. In none of these cases has concrete evidence been presented to substantiate claims of misconduct by the detainees. In practice, the Ministry of Internal Affairs relies solely on the testimonies of two police officers as evidence, while the activists consistently deny any wrongdoing. The absence of objective evidence strengthens the suspicion that the detentions of civil activists by the Ministry of Internal Affairs are unjustified.

The detained activists have expressed concerns that their targeted and seemingly premeditated arrests near their homes are intended to punish and intimidate protest participants. This behavior by the police fosters a perception among citizens that they are unsafe not only at protest sites but also in their private spaces, and that police persecution and control may take on more pervasive and oppressive forms.

Unlawful detention is punishable under Article 147 of Georgia’s Criminal Code, which applies when law enforcement officials detain individuals without proper legal grounds. It is crucial that the recent cases of activist detentions be thoroughly investigated by the Prosecutor's Office, and that responsible officers face appropriate criminal liability.

It is regrettable that the current judicial system fails to meet even the basic standards of an independent and impartial judiciary, leaving citizens unprotected from police arbitrariness and repression. To date, in the cases of 500 individuals detained during or related to protests, the courts have not terminated administrative proceedings against any of them. This reflects a lack of judicial oversight and highlights the dysfunctionality of an independent judiciary.

Considering all of the above, the Social Justice Center calls on:

• The Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia to ensure proper respect for the rights of civil activists and protest participants to assemble and express themselves, and to cease the practice of arbitrary detentions and violations of their rights during such processes.
• The Prosecutor's Office of Georgia to investigate suspected cases of unlawful detention and hold responsible individuals accountable under criminal law.
• The Common Courts of Georgia to uphold constitutional and legal requirements and adhere strictly to human rights standards when making decisions.

Share