The November 3 statement by the State Security Service, in which the agency announced an investigation into a conspiracy to overthrow the state government, is an attempt to subordinate the country's ongoing political processes under the security logic and criminalize political expression. At the same time, the statement raises doubts about the instrumentalization of the security system in the political party interests.

On November 3, the State Security Service issued an official announcement informing the public that the SSSG was investigating a conspiracy to overthrow the government (a crime under Article 315 of the Criminal Code). The statement also said that calls on social networks or the media for a revolution and overthrow of the constitutional government are signs of a crime. The agency will take all legal measures to address these threats.

Firstly, it is unclear, based on which specific circumstances and on what grounds the investigation into the conspiracy to overthrow the government is launched. It is also concerning the interpretation of criminal norms and the range of the crime, on which speaking and discussing the revolution in a public format contains signs of a crime. Article 315 of the Criminal Code, cited by the SSSG, requires the existence of an element/test of violence to overthrow the government, and without it, crime cannot take place. So far, the statements made by many political actors are more related to the various ideas aimed at political change that does not go beyond the freedom of political expression. Moreover, political expression is protected by high standards, and its criminalization is detrimental to democratic processes.

We want to point out that the announcement of such an investigation by the SSSG is not new, and the service has been making so-called preventive statements about launching an investigation into various experiences of public discontent and criticism. Instead of exposing actual criminal acts or punishing the perpetrators, the purpose of such notice was to manipulate public opinion and weaken the existing protest.

Unfortunately, the November 3 statement again shows the tendency to politicization and instrumentalization of the SSSG based on narrow political interests. This kind of approach toward the security system substantially weakens its public trust. At the same time, it is clear that in the current challenging political circumstances, the government, instead of pushing for the political dialogue and public consolidation, continues to choose the language of punishment and control, which immediately excludes the possibility of resolving the situation through constructive dialogue.

In this process opposition groups need to take maximum measures to bring themselves and their supporters' mobilization strategies within the framework of democratic constitutional order and principles, assisting social peace protection and the peaceful action of participation and democratic control.

It is unfortunate that after unfair elections with significant flaws, the political crisis and polarization in the country reached its peak. So far, no rational, agreement-based efforts to exit from this reality are seen.

In view of the above, the Social Justice Center, calls on

The State Security Service of Georgia

• Inform the public about the specific facts and circumstances surrounding the investigation into the government's conspiracy;
• Refrain from making statements that would have a detrimental effect on the rights of expression, peaceful assembly and demonstration;
• The government should avoid instrumentalizing the State Security Service for party purposes and take effective political and social consolidation steps.

Political Parties:

• Take into consideration the interest of maintaining social peace in their action plans and do not allow escalating attempts to create social polarization.

Share