CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 avril 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s65E06E64 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s34E49363 { width:9.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sA635F8D0 { width:34.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sEB186BCE { width:13.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF39BD3B6 { width:19.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE5627FA5 { width:22.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sF18EF3B1 { width:9.56%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sC889BA63 { width:34.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s67D3D224 { width:13.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s79FC6FD3 { width:19.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s9B7A7BB6 { width:22.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } Published on 29 April 2024   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 4355/24 Giorgi AKHALKATSI and Others against Georgia lodged on 24 January 2024 communicated on 11 April 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants are journalists who were forcefully removed by police and security guards from a public meeting held by the Kaspi local legislative assembly on 18 February 2022. They lodged criminal complaints alleging that they had been physically and verbally assaulted during the incident and had been prevented as a result from performing their professional duties. An investigation was promptly initiated under Article 333 § 3 (b) of the Criminal Code (the criminal offence of abuse of authority). According to the case file, the criminal proceedings are still ongoing. The applicants were repeatedly refused victim status and their various procedural requests, including concerning the conduct of the investigation into the incident under Article   154 of the Criminal Code (the criminal offence of the hindrance of journalists’ professional activities), were also refused. Relying on Article 3, 10 and 13 of the Convention the applicants allege that they were physically and verbally assaulted during the impugned incident; that their right to freedom of expression was breached on account of an unjustified interference by state authorities with their journalistic activity; and that the criminal investigation into their complaints has been ineffective.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Were the applicants subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention?   2.     Has the investigation by the domestic authorities into the applicants’ complaints been thorough and effective? In view of the fact that the investigation is still ongoing, have the applicants exhausted domestic remedies within the meaning of Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?   3.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of expression, in particular their right to impart information, within the meaning of Article 10 of the Convention (see, among other authorities,   Khadija Ismayilova v. Azerbaijan , nos. 65286/13 and 57270/14, §§ 158-66, 10   January 2019; see also Özgür Gündem v. Turkey ,   no. 23144/93, §§ 42-46, ECHR   2000 ‑ III, and Najafli v. Azerbaijan , no. 2594/07, §§ 57-70, 2 October 2012)?   4.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy or a combination of remedies for their complaints under Article 10 of the Convention, as required by Article 13?       APPENDIX Application no. 4355/24   No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality Place of residence 1. Giorgi AKHALKATSI 1992 Georgian Gori 2. Vladimer BICHASHVILI 1986 Georgian Gori 3. Tornike GELITASHVILI 1997 Georgian Village Sasireti 4. Irakli KOSHADZE 1994 Georgian Gori 5. Malkhaz MIKELADZE 1989 Georgian Gori 6. Vladimer MIKHANASHVILI 1981 Georgian Gori