The judge from Kutaisi questioned the constitutionality of the article on insulting public officials.

Judge Tsitsino Kikvadze of the Kutaisi City Court in Georgia has appealed to the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of the article on insulting public officials. In her opinion, this article duplicates others, restricts freedom of expression, stifles any criticism of officials, and excludes the possibility of exemption from liability.

As reported by "Caucasian Knot", on July 24, doctor Georgy Akhobadze was taken to a detention center in handcuffs based on a court ruling. The court sentenced Akhobadze to 25 days of administrative arrest under two articles - for insulting a police officer and for insulting a public official. One of the cases concerned Akhobadze's publications on social media, while the other, according to the activist himself, was about the characterization he gave to the police officers who refused to return his mobile phone seized in a criminal case.

Contradictions between the article of the Constitution and the laws

Judge Tsitsino Kikvadze of the Kutaisi City Court in Georgia has appealed to the Constitutional Court to review the constitutionality of Article 173¹⁶ of the Administrative Code.

The judge believes that this norm, which establishes special administrative liability for insulting state and political officials, as well as public servants, may contradict the freedom of expression, as stated in the article by JamNews "A judge in Georgia challenged the article on punishment for insulting public officials".

Kikvadze reminds that such actions are already regulated by Article 166 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. However, Article 173¹⁶ ties liability to a person's status and therefore provides for harsher sanctions.

According to the contested norm, verbal insults, swearing, offensive remarks, or other insulting actions against a state or political official, state or public servant, if they occur while performing official duties or in connection with their activities, entail administrative liability. Since June, a new department for combating hate speech has been operating in the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia, tasked with monitoring everything people write and say in public places. Lawyers criticized this initiative as an attempt to legalize censorship. On social media, the structure was dubbed the "scrolling department." Dozens of people received fines under the new article. Television presenter Vakho Sanaya was sentenced to two weeks, and activist Giorgi Akhobadze received 25 days for publications on Facebook*.

The basis for the judge's constitutional petition was a specific administrative case - on June 23, 2026, the Human Rights Protection Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs filed a complaint with the Kutaisi City Court against citizen Irakli Kezevadze. According to the complaint, on June 3, Kezevadze verbally insulted Tbilisi Mayor Kaha Kaladze in a Facebook* post. At the court hearing, he confirmed this and stated that he was drunk. Kezevadze also mentioned that his wife died three years ago, he has no children, is unemployed, and cares for his sick mother. When asked if he continues to make similar comments on social media, he replied that he no longer writes and "does not engage in such activities at all."

Judge Kikvadze believes that such an action primarily falls under Article 166 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The purpose of this article is to protect public order and the peace of all citizens. Article 173¹⁶ separately protects a specific category of citizens - public figures, and ties liability to their official position.

The sanctions provided for by these two articles differ. Article 166 provides for a fine of 500 to 3,000 lari (approximately $190 - $1,100) or administrative detention for up to 20 days. Article 173¹⁶ provides for a fine of 1,500 to 4,000 lari (approximately $600 - $1,500), and the term of administrative detention can be up to 45 days.

The judge noted the severity of the article for insulting public officials - the possibility of exemption from liability does not apply. Meanwhile, in the case of Article 166, such a possibility exists for the court.

According to Kikvadze, it turns out that in fundamentally similar actions, the court's options differ only due to the status of the victim and the context of their activities.

Politicians should be more tolerant of criticism than private individuals. Judge Kikvadze pays special attention to the guarantees of freedom of expression in her request.

She notes that Article 17 of the Constitution of Georgia protects freedom of expression. Its restriction is only possible in cases established by the Constitution. In this context, Kikvadze points to the practice of the Constitutional Court of Georgia and the European Court of Human Rights, according to which state and especially political officials bear greater responsibility for tolerance to criticism than private individuals.

The judge also believes that an article with the risk of significant fines or administrative imprisonment for expressing an opinion may cause citizens to refrain from any criticism of the authorities, including criticism permissible by law, causing a "chilling effect."

Kikvadze draws attention to Kezevadze's specific statement that he no longer writes such comments and "no longer engages" in such activities.

These words alone do not prove the chilling effect of the norm for everyone, but this is an example of how sanctions can lead to self-censorship.

The judge notes that the state has the right to protect public servants and political figures from illegal influence while they perform their official duties. But the problem lies in the extent to which the special and stricter regime provided for by Article 173¹⁶ is necessary to achieve this goal.

What answers should the Constitutional Court provide

In assessing the contested norm, the Constitutional Court should consider three questions.

To what extent is a special, stricter sanction needed to protect a public servant, and are there less restrictive means to achieve the same goal, including Article 166 of the Code of Administrative Offenses or civil law mechanisms?

To what extent is the protection of public interests achieved by applying the strict Article 173¹⁶ proportional to the harm that such a restriction on freedom of expression may cause, including its possible "chilling effect"?

How constitutional is it that Article 173¹⁶ establishes special administrative liability for verbal insults specifically against state and political officials, state and civil servants, while excluding the possibility of exempting the accused from liability?

Tsitsino Kikvadze has been a judge in the general jurisdiction courts since 2005. She has been working at the Kutaisi City Court since 2013. In 2016, Kikvadze was appointed as a judge for life. In 2024, she was among the judges who signed a public statement protesting the government's decision to suspend the process of joining the European Union.

Protest participants in Georgia have been demanding since November 28, 2024, to return the country to the course of Eurointegration, new parliamentary elections, and the release of political prisoners. Law enforcement conducted harsh dispersals of protests, using tear gas and water cannons, and detained protesters. During the protests, thousands of people faced administrative prosecution. "Caucasian Knot" has prepared a reference "Main points on the prosecution of protest participants in Georgia".