“Although the endless fines imposed by the government are a heavy burden for critical channels, we still do not intend, even indirectly, to support Georgian Dream’s Russian propaganda and mockery of the Ukrainian people. We fully share the EU Ambassador’s assessment that this is a ‘shocking, shameful and horrifying’ campaign, and therefore refuse to air these video clips,” declare TV Pirveli, TV Formula, and Mtavari Arkhi. The Media Ombudsman has published a legal assessment on this issue, a brief overview of which we offer in this article.
On October 11, Tbilisi City Court Judge Lela Tsagareishvili fully endorsed the position of the Georgian National Communications Commission and fined critical broadcasters – “TV Company First”, “Formula” and “Mtavari Channel” – each with 5000 GEL for refusing to place Georgian Dream’s pre-election video clips.
The video clips presented by Georgian Dream depict footage of bombed Ukrainian cities (for example, on banners with the same content, the left side shows a church destroyed by bombing in the village of Bogorodychne, Donetsk region of Ukraine, while on the right is the Holy Trinity Cathedral of Tbilisi). On the left side of the banners, where Ukrainian buildings destroyed during the war are depicted, the following opposition political parties’ electoral numbers are crossed out: Number 4 – “Coalition for Change Gvaramia Melia Girchi Droa”, Number 5 – “United National Movement”, Number 9 – “Strong Georgia-Lelo, For the People, For Freedom!”, Number 25 – “Gakharia for Georgia”.
The lawyers of the “Media Ombudsman” organization share the position of the fined television stations and assess the material placed on these video clips and banners as indirect war propaganda and an attempt to intimidate voters (which is prohibited by Article 45, Paragraph 3 of the Electoral Code of Georgia). They explain that the content of Georgian Dream’s advertisement “may turn out to be indirect propaganda, both in justifying the grounds for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and in assessing Russia’s occupation of two important parts of Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.”
The Media Ombudsman’s lawyers explain that the Communications Commission’s approach also contradicts the Constitution of Georgia, the Law on Broadcasting, the Electoral Code, the Law on Advertising, and the guideline developed by the Communications Commission itself: “Before distributing any advertisement, the broadcaster must assess its compliance with the general requirements and principles established by the Constitution, as indicated in the decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia. If it is determined that the advertisement prepared by the electoral subject and submitted to the broadcaster is illegal, the broadcaster should not place it on air.”
The Media Ombudsman’s lawyers also mention that the TV companies appealed to both the National Communications Commission and the Central Election Commission (CEC), requesting an expedited assessment of the legality of the presented political advertisement. However, the Central Election Commission delayed the proceedings, while the National Communications Commission did not wait for the CEC’s decision, thereby violating the obligation to thoroughly study the circumstances of the case and make a decision only on the basis of a detailed investigation. The Communications Commission also refused to assess the legality of the advertisement, contrary to its previous practice.
According to the Media Ombudsman, the alignment of the ruling party Georgian Dream’s demand with the decisions of the Communications Commission and subsequently the court, contrary to legislative requirements, indicates coordinated action “to punish critical media.”
On the same issue, see the statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine regarding Georgian Dream’s political advertisement.
