The Social Justice Center (SJC) has issued an assessment of recent legislative amendments passed by the ruling party Georgian Dream, which now restrict public gatherings even on sidewalks.
According to SJC, these amendments constitute another repressive measure that limits the freedom of assembly, further narrowing the space for peaceful gatherings. The organization considers the changes unconstitutional and an unjustified interference in the domain protected by the right to assembly.
On December 8, 2025, Georgian Dream initiated legislative amendments restricting freedom of assembly. The amendments were fast-tracked and entered into force on December 12. They modify the Law on Assemblies and Demonstrations and the Administrative Offenses Code to expand the scope, conditions, and responsibilities for regulating gatherings. Authority over assemblies has also been centralized from municipal bodies to the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA).
SJC notes that this is the fifth wave of restrictive measures following the demonstrations that began on November 28. Similar to previous rounds, these amendments conflict with international human rights standards and the principle of the rule of law. Under the new provisions, repeated obstruction of pedestrian movement even on sidewalks can now trigger criminal liability, including imprisonment for up to one year.
The amendments grant the MIA the power to instruct assembly participants to change the location, time, or route of a demonstration if it obstructs “unhindered movement of the public.” Violating such instructions carries 15 days of administrative detention under Article 174¹ of the Administrative Offenses Code, with repeated violations becoming criminal offenses.
Even if a court is later asked to review the MIA’s instructions, the amendments allow the assembly to be declared illegal if the obstacles are not removed within 15 minutes. The law no longer requires consideration of whether participants have taken reasonable measures to restore legality, making almost any sidewalk gathering potentially unlawful.
SJC emphasizes that these provisions undermine constitutional and European standards. The Georgian Constitutional Court has consistently recognized that minimal obstruction of movement is an inherent, unavoidable consequence of public assembly and cannot justify prohibiting the assembly itself. The court also establishes a clear hierarchy: the freedom of assembly takes precedence over minor disruptions to movement, and the state must make appropriate preparations to accommodate both.
The current amendments effectively invert this hierarchy, prioritize preventing any disruption, and provide discretionary power to criminalize assemblies even when obstruction is natural or temporary. The law also fails to specify the consequences for participation in an assembly declared “illegal,” leaving the risk of arbitrary prosecution.
SJC concludes that these legislative changes are unconstitutional, violate the European Convention on Human Rights, and serve primarily to punish government critics rather than to manage legitimate public gatherings. They reflect a broader trend of accelerated authoritarianism, undermining the rule of law, citizen trust, and the fundamental moral function of law to protect, rather than repress, the public.