Hotline2 405 505

News

Wednesday, 27 March, 2024
Share

Showcasing the Winning Project: Digital Academy of Law Technologies from the Ministry of Justice Grant Competition

The Digital Academy of Law Technologies project stands as a beacon of innovation in the legal landscape of Georgia, aiming to equip legal professionals with the essential skills in legal technology. By empowering lawyers with technical prowess, the project endeavors to integrate modern innovative tools into their daily practices, thereby elevating the standards of legal service delivery.

Throughout the theoretical segment of the program, participants will delve into the realm of legal service provision via algorithm-based computer systems, unraveling the intricacies and potentials of this evolving field. Practical workshops will equip attendees with the ability to craft digital solutions, including automated legal consultation bots, contract and lawsuit generation systems, leveraging the Legaltech program Logos and the rulemapping methodology.

Addressing the project's significance, Deputy Minister of Justice of Georgia, Tornike Cheishvili, emphasized its timely relevance, highlighting the transformative impact it promises for the legal profession. The event participants, including Professor Giorgi Khubua from Tbilisi State University, Professor Zviad Gabisonia from the University of Business and Technology, and Project Manager, Natia Sirdadze, provided comprehensive insights into the curriculum and training methodologies.

Associate Professor Lado Sirdadze, representing the University of Business and Technology, offered a detailed overview of the practical modules slated for implementation within the project, emphasizing hands-on learning experiences.

In a testament to international collaboration, the project enjoys partnerships with institutions such as the Oxford University Fintech and LegalTech Society and the German LegalTech company, KnowledgeTools International. Distinguished experts including Professor Stephan Breidenbach, Dr. Tilo Wend, Hatim Hussain, and Daniel Foa will lead lectures alongside Georgian counterparts.

The Ministry of Justice's annual grant competition serves as a catalyst for innovation, aiming to foster the adoption of pioneering services, fortify human rights protection, and enhance legal security. This year, the Ministry awarded funding to 17 deserving projects.

Other News

Share
Print

According to the Strasbourg Court, Publicly Made Insulting, Obscene, and Degrading Statements Fall Outside the Scope of Freedom of Expression

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg upheld the position of the Ministry of Justice in the case of Miladze v. Georgia, confirming that publicly made insulting, obscene, and degrading statements directed at public officials are not protected under the right to freedom of expression.

The case concerned a video published on the social media platform TikTok in 2022, in which the applicant, civil activist Irakli Miladze, used obscene and insulting language toward the Mayor of Tbilisi, City Hall employees, and police officers. As a result, the national courts imposed a fine of 500 GEL, the minimum penalty provided for by law.

The Strasbourg Court unanimously held that the applicant’s statements did not amount to political criticism or the expression of views on a matter of public interest. According to the Court’s assessment, the language used was intended primarily to humiliate and insult public officials.

The Court also agreed with the reasoning of the national courts, noting that they had properly distinguished between harsh political criticism, which is protected in a democratic society, and personal insults, which are not. The judgment further emphasized that the sanction imposed on the applicant was minimal and proportionate, as he received only the lowest fine available under the law.

Today’s ruling by the Strasbourg Court reaffirmed an important principle: freedom of expression is one of the fundamental values of a democratic society and protects even strong and offensive criticism; however, it does not extend to humiliating or personally insulting statements directed at others, including public officials and civil servants.

The judgment further underscores that the state is entitled to protect political officials and public servants from unjustified verbal abuse and insults, ensuring that they are able to perform their duties in an environment free from attacks that undermine their dignity.

The Court’s assessment once again highlights the fundamental importance of freedom of expression, while clearly establishing that the exercise of this right — particularly on the internet and social media platforms — must not infringe upon the dignity and rights of others.