Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

KAKHIDZE AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

Doc ref: 53170/22 • ECHR ID: 001-222934

Document date: January 10, 2023

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 1

KAKHIDZE AND OTHERS v. GEORGIA

Doc ref: 53170/22 • ECHR ID: 001-222934

Document date: January 10, 2023

Cited paragraphs only

Published on 30 January 2023

FIFTH SECTION

Application no. 53170/22 Tinatin KAKHIDZE and Others against Georgia lodged on 4 November 2022 communicated on 10 January 2023

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns verbal and/or physical assault against journalists by ultraconservative groups which held anti-LGBT rallies in relation to a pride event planned for 5 July 2021. The event was eventually cancelled because of the violent incidents. Several individuals were prosecuted in respect of the violent acts.

In particular, the applicants complain about the authorities’ inability and/or unwillingness to prevent and provide appropriate redress for the violence (among other elements, the applicants allege ineffective planning by the Ministry of Internal Affairs; inaction by the police during the events complained of; and ineffective investigation and prosecution in respect of the violence, especially in respect of its instigators/leaders of the different ultraconservative groups). They submit that the official statements made by various high-ranking public officials – claiming, among other things, that the majority of the population did not support the holding of the pride event which had been aimed at sowing chaos and discord in the community – exacerbated the violence. The applicants also state that they were targeted because they are representatives of the media sources critical of the Government and/or they were associated by the homophobic groups with the LGBT+ community.

The first applicant is complaining in respect of her son – a cameraman – who was violently assaulted and later diagnosed with concussion, multiple facial fractures, and haematomas. He died on 11 July 2021 of an unclear cause and a separate investigation was launched into the matter. The latter material is not provided in the case file material and the first applicant does not complain under Article 2 of the Convention.

The applicants rely on Articles 3, 10, 13 and 14 of the Convention. The applicants complain that the Government failed to prevent the violence against the journalists and to adequately investigate the incidents.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Have the applicants exhausted effective domestic remedies in respect of their complaints, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?

2. During the events of 5 July 2021, did the relevant State authorities comply with their positive obligations under Article 3 of the Convention to undertake preventive measures aimed at protection of the applicants from attacks by private individuals? Did the authorities’ statements made in respect of the pride march exacerbate the violence which erupted on 5 July 2021?

3. Have the competent domestic authorities conducted an effective investigation into the applicants’ allegations of ill-treatment and lack of police protection, in compliance with the procedural obligations under Article 3 of the Convention, including in relation to the alleged instigators of the violent incidents?

4. Were the violent acts complained of in the present case related to the applicants’ journalistic activity? Did the Government comply with their positive obligations under Article 10 of the Convention as defined by the Court (see Uzeyir Jafarov v. Azerbaijan , no. 54204/08, § 68, 29 January 2015)?

5. Having regard to the applicants’ complaint that the assault was motivated by hatred against the LGBT community and those seen as supporting it, has there been a breach of Article 14 of the Convention, this provision being read in conjunction with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention?

6. Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy in respect of their complaints, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?

APPENDIX

List of applicants

Application no. 53170/22

No.

Applicant’s Name

Year of birth

Nationality

Place of residence

1.Tinatin KAKHIDZE

1950Georgian

Tbilisi

2.Miranda BAGATURIA

1997Georgian

Tbilisi

3.Irakli BAKHTADZE

1997Georgian

Tbilisi

4.Levan BREGVADZE

1999Georgian

Tbilisi

5.Guga DVALISHVILI

1994Georgian

Tbilisi

6.Tamta KAKHABERIDZE

1998Georgian

Tbilisi

7.Levani KALANDIA

1981Georgian

Tbilisi

8.Vakhtang KARELI

1990Georgian

Tbilisi

9.Luka KHACHIDZE

1993Georgian

Tbilisi

10.Guram MAISURADZE

1999Georgian

Tbilisi

11.Dea MAMISEISHVILI

1995Georgian

Tbilisi

12.Luka PERTAIA

1996Georgian

Tbilisi

13.Ketevan TSITSKISHVILI

1994Georgian

Tbilisi

14.Rati TSVERAVA

2000Georgian

Tbilisi

15.Ilia TVALIASHVILI

1987Georgian

Tbilisi

16.Nino VARDZELASHVILI

1990Georgian

Tbilisi

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846