According to the information disseminated through media, on September 11, 2018 officers of the patrol police did not allow protesters to set up the tent in front of the Parliament building during the rally of the supporters of Zaza Saralidze and Malkhaz Machalikashvili and explained that doing so needed special permission. The incident was followed by verbal confrontation between the police and participants of the rally.

According to the Public Defender, the fact of setting up of the tent was fully protected by the freedom of assembly since it did not block the entrance of the building or the motorway or did not hinder the activities of the institution. Public Defender of Georgia has addressed similar facts on numerous instances in the past, when representatives of the law-enforcement authorities hindered protesters to set up the tent, bed and banners and assessed such facts as interference into the freedom of assembly.

We would like to underline that limiting the enjoyment of freedom of assembly by the state is inadmissible. It shall be considered that possibility of erecting protest camps or other non-permanent constructions during the demonstration is emphasized in OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly.

Representative of the Public Defender conducted the monitoring of the rally in front of the Parliament. Representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs clarified that the rally was attended by allegedly drunken individuals, who were aggressive towards law-enforcement officers. He also stated that since the tent contained metal construction, it was seized to prevent any further confrontations. Office of the Public Defender cannot share this explanation, as the monitoring and information disseminated by media reflect that aggression of protesters was a result of hindering the possibility to erect the tent; no confrontation has taken place before applying measures of restraint.

It is unfortunate, that rally participants are still hindered from the possibility of erecting temporary constructions, which constitutes illegal restriction of freedom of assembly. Public Defender calls law-enforcement bodies and other relevant institutions to refrain from hindering the realization of freedom of assembly based on artificial and illegal arguments.