Georgia's Day of shame Huge outcry after Orthodox priests lead mob in violent breakup of peaceful rally

There has been a huge outcry from international quarters, as well as within Georgian society, following the violent break-up by a mob led by Orthodox Priests of a small peaceful rally marking the International Day against Homophobia in the Georgian capital Tbilisi. Participants in the rally, that was also attended by a number of foreign diplomats, had to be evacuated after the police nearly lost control of the situation. The Georgian government has condemned the violence and has promised an investigation but as yet nobody has been arrested.

Six leading Georgian civil society organisations have issued a toughly worded statement criticisng the government's handling of the events. The statement, issued by Transparency International Georgia; Georgian Democratic Initiative (GDI); Human Rights Education and Monitoring Center (EMC); Georgian Young Lawyers' Association; Article 42 of the Constitution of Georgia and the International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) says:

"On May 17, the state failed to secure the area designated for the pre-arranged rally on International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. This is an infringement of the rally participants' freedom of assembly and demonstration.

The measures which had been put in place by the police to ensure the safety of the rally participants were both inadequate and ineffective. They failed to withstand the number and unrestrained behaviour of the counter-demonstrators.

According to information and material provided by our observers, counter-demonstrators faced no resistance when they came to break down the cordon. Having given a group of Orthodox clergy priests (who represented the counter-demonstrators) an opportunity to enter the scheduled anti-homophobia rally, the police were then unable to stem the flow of activists who followed them.

The mass of counter-demonstrators started aggressively moving towards the rally participants and proceeded to occupy the space allocated for the rally. Only a few rally participants managed to escape the scene safely.

At this stage we can make the initial assessment and state the following:


■ The Ministry of Interior failed to adequately assess the potential risks posed by the counter-demonstrators, and failed to prepare a suitable safety strategy. It was clear from the start that the number of police mobilized would be inadequate, and that the measures prepared against the offenders would have no effect;

■ The police were uncoordinated and unable to protect the citizens' freedom of expression. Furthermore, it seemed that the Ministry of Interior's focus was on the safe removal of the rally participants from the area rather than protecting the rally itself. The police did not make enough effort to ensure the safety of the rally participants throughout the demonstration;

■ As soon as the rally territory was occupied by the counter-demonstrators, the police simply stood back. This gave the counter-demonstrators freedom to behave aggressively and increased their opportunities to harass individual rally participants; an occurrence which unfortunately happened far too often;

■ Most alarming is the attitude of police officers towards the participants of the planned rally on the Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. All our observers affirmed that the police officers frequently referred to the rally participants in a cynical and insulting manner and were seen sympathizing with the counter-demonstrators. This attitude was also evident in their general behavior.

At this point thousands of counter-demonstrators were still swarming the streets, marking themselves out by their patent aggression towards those they identified with the initial rally. The police force once again failed here, and limited their actions to simply diffusing various incidents of aggression.

Based on all of the above, we call on the Ministry of Interior to:
■ Immediately undertake effective measures for securing public order and the safety of citizens;

■ Hold all those officials responsible who failed to adequately assess the existing risks, and bring to justice those who did not ensure the safety of the rally participants and their right to assembly and demonstrate;

■ Investigate and bring to account all those who prevented the citizens from holding the planned rally on the Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia, who resorted to violence against those with different views and insulted them both verbally and physically.

Observer organizations shall monitor these developments and will provide the public with more information and assessments at a later date."

There have been statements of condemnation from the European Union, the United States and other governments and international organisations. The Foreign Minister of the Netherlands summed up the international outrage, "It is unacceptable, particularly on the International Day against Homophobia, that lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgenders cannot exercise their fundamental rights, like the right to free expression and peaceful demonstration," said Dutch Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans, who expressed "shock" over the violence in Tbilisi.

"The Netherlands, together with other EU countries, will continue to remind the Georgian authorities that the Georgian police are obliged to respect the rights of these individuals," he said. The Dutch government said in a press release that it summoned the Georgian ambassador on May 17, following violence in downtown Tbilisi; it also says that defending LGBT rights is one of the cornerstones of Dutch human rights policy.

Commonspace.eu political editor said in a comment

"The incidents on 17 May highlighted more deep-rooted problems of intolerance and religious fundamentalism in Georgian society. Whilst the Georgian Orothodox church remains an important symbol of Georgian statehood, it has remained largely caught in a time warp , unreformed since the middle ages. The incidents have now put the church in the spotlight.

Observers also think that the size and the character of the protests indicates that it was a well-planned and resourced operation, likely aimed at distabilising the new government of Bidhzina Ivanishvili which has been going to great lengths to promote human rights issues but which now finds itself caught between a rock and a hard place."

source: commonspace.eu with CEW and agencies.

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)