Hotline2 405 505

News

Thursday, 11 November, 2021
Share

Rati Bregadze: "There Are Shots Where It Is Clearly Visible That the Emergency Vehicle Is Parked Directly in Front of the 18 Facility and Not 30 Meters Away and He Was Taken Straight to the Door of The Facility"

Minister of Justice, Rati Bregadze spoke at the briefing about the transfer of Mikheil Saakashvili to N18 medical institution in Gldani.

According to the Minister, the Penitentiary Service has released footage due to high public interest, where it is clearly visible that the emergency vehicle is parked directly in front of the 18 facility and not 30 meters away, as one of the lawyers said. According to him, Mikheil Saakashvili was taken directly to the door of 18 institution and no one could see him there. Consequently, Saakashvili did not spend any time near the building of prisoners. Rati Bregadze also noted that Saakashvili himself did not obey the lawful request of the penitentiary staff and resisted them:

"This is a very big lie, which we will expose in just a few minutes and it will be clearly visible where the emergency vehicle, in which prisoner Saakashvili was transferred to 18 facility, has stopped, and the public will see that it is parked directly at the entrance of the facility where no one could see him at all. The whole campaign is built on a similar type of petty lie. This is about the torture and inhuman treatment that we allegedly inflicted on this prisoner. We are - I emphasize - the people who cared, care and, of course, will continue to care about the health of the prisoner. Our interest is the stable health condition of all prisoners. I would like to say one more thing - the prisoner himself did not obey the lawful request of our employees when he had to get out of the emergency vehicle and be accommodated in this facility,” said Rati Bregadze.

According to the Minister, since his transfer, Mr. Mikheil Saakashvili has had 179 visitors, he is under 24-hour supervision by doctors. Exactly two days after the transfer, a bank card was issued during non-working hours. He has a TV, and when he ran out of money and wanted a refrigerator, the administration, in good faith, complied with his request.

In addition, emergency vehicle was on duty 24 hours a day, as well as doctors who took care of his health.

A council was set up to work with the penitentiary staff to make certain recommendations that the agency took into account each time. Also, a separate working group has been set up in order to monitor Mikheil Saakashvili’s condition.

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.