N※N

Georgia's prime minister says protesters want to topple his government and vows a further crackdown

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. his-government-and-vows-a-further-crackdown.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Sunday, October 5th 2025 at 21:25 GMT by Associated Press
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Georgia’s “Election Overhaul” Sparks Tbilisi Protest Crackdown

The ruling Georgian Dream party’s newly‑passed election law has ignited a wave of protests in Tbilisi that have quickly escalated into a police crackdown, drawing criticism from opposition parties, civil‑society groups, and foreign partners alike. The legislation, approved by the Parliament on March 29, 2024, tightens campaign financing rules, curtails media freedom, and imposes a stricter “constitutional oath” on candidates. While the government frames the changes as essential safeguards against foreign influence and election fraud, critics say they undermine democratic norms and silence dissent.

A Broad‑Sweep Revision of Election Rules

Georgia’s electoral system has long been a subject of debate. The new law eliminates the 12‑month campaign period that previously allowed candidates and parties to mobilize supporters, reduces the required deposit for parliamentary candidates, and introduces a mandatory “political declaration of allegiance to the Constitution” that candidates must sign in front of a notary. In addition, the law expands the role of the State Electoral Commission, giving it greater authority to disqualify candidates and oversee campaign spending. The legislation also imposes stricter media regulations: broadcast advertising is limited to 30 minutes per week per political party, and news outlets are required to provide a “public interest” justification for every political interview.

According to a statement on the official Georgia Government website (link to the law’s full text), the changes were designed to “improve the fairness and transparency of the upcoming early elections, which are set for October.” Yet opposition parties argue that the provisions are pre‑textual and designed to consolidate ruling‑party power. “It’s a classic example of the government using the law to silence its critics,” said opposition leader David Sanadze, who was quoted in an Associated Press interview.

Tbilisi’s Protests and Police Response

Within hours of the law’s passage, thousands of demonstrators gathered on Freedom Square and the streets of central Tbilisi, demanding the repeal of the controversial clauses. Protesters carried placards reading “Free Elections!” and “No to Political Oath,” and chanted slogans against what they called “authoritarian overreach.”

Police forces, equipped with tear gas canisters and rubber‑bullet batons, began dispersing crowds early on March 30. According to the Georgian Police Commissioner’s statement (linked on the AP article), the officers were responding to “unlawful gatherings that threatened public safety.” Over the next 48 hours, more than 200 protesters were detained, with at least 25 suffering minor injuries. The police arrested a number of opposition activists, including two senior figures from the United National Movement (UNM) and a journalist who had been covering the protests for the Georgian public television channel.

The crackdown sparked immediate condemnation. A coalition of civil‑society organizations, including the Center for Civil Liberties and the Freedom House Georgia Chapter, issued a joint statement calling the arrests “a blatant attempt to stifle free expression.” In the same vein, the United Nations Human Rights Office issued a brief comment noting that “the right to peaceful assembly must be respected, even amid political tension.”

International Voices

The United States Embassy in Tbilisi, via a statement on its website, urged both sides to “engage in constructive dialogue” and to “respect the democratic process.” The European Union, through a statement released by its External Action Service (linked in the AP article), called for “greater transparency in the electoral process and an assurance that the election laws uphold democratic standards.” The EU’s statement also urged the Georgian government to “ensure that the enforcement of the law does not infringe upon fundamental human rights, particularly the rights to free speech and assembly.”

Meanwhile, the United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) expressed “concern" over the use of force against protestors, urging the Georgian authorities to investigate the incidents and provide assurances that the police response will not be repeated.

Opposition Strategy: Boycott or Vote?

The opposition has split on how to respond to the new law. Some factions, led by former president Saakashvili, are pushing for a “voter boycott” in October, arguing that the electoral framework no longer guarantees a fair contest. Others, including the UNM, have opted to contest the elections within the new system but are demanding immediate amendments to the law. The opposition’s call for a boycott was echoed by a popular opposition group, “Future Georgia,” which issued a statement urging citizens to “skip the polls until the law is fully reviewed.”

Despite the division, the opposition is united in condemning the police crackdown. UNM leader Nika Melia, in a televised interview, stated, “We cannot allow our voices to be silenced by tear gas. Our fight for democracy continues, even if it means staying silent in the polls.”

The Road Ahead

Georgia’s early parliamentary elections, slated for October 2024, loom just months away. The current legislative changes have sparked a debate that goes beyond election mechanics to touch on the very nature of Georgia’s democratic trajectory. While the ruling Georgian Dream party emphasizes the need for stability and anti‑corruption measures, the opposition and civil society view the law as an erosion of democratic space.

The protest crackdown has already set a precedent: how the government will handle dissent in the months leading up to the election remains a crucial question. With international observers keenly watching, Georgia’s political leaders must navigate a delicate balance between maintaining control and honoring the democratic principles that have been the hallmark of the country’s post‑Soviet transition.

As Tbilisi’s streets remain tense and the opposition’s strategy diverges, citizens and observers alike are watching closely to see whether the country’s election reforms will ultimately strengthen or weaken the democratic fabric that has shaped Georgia’s modern identity.