CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 juin 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 30 June 2025   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 34267/23 Tekla TEVDORASHVILI against Georgia lodged on 5 September 2023 communicated on 10 June 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns an alleged hate-motivated violent disruption of the applicant’s performance, which took place on 15 May 2021 in connection with the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia. In particular, G.P., the founder of the Society for Children’s Rights, who is known for his conservative and anti-liberal views, allegedly destroyed the applicant’s installation titled “Welcome to the Closet” – a cabinet-shaped structure painted in rainbow colours, intended for individuals to enter and leave notes. In the presence of members of the LGBTQ+ community, media representatives, and his own followers, G.P. allegedly dismantled the installation and physically and verbally assaulted the applicant. The incident occurred in broad daylight in a public park and was partially captured on video by eyewitnesses. The applicant alleges that the police was also present at the scene but did not intervene. Criminal proceedings were initiated under Article 156 § 2 (a) of the Criminal Code (violent persecution), and various investigative actions were promptly undertaken, including the questioning of the applicant, G.P. and his followers. On 22 July 2021 the applicant, along with two other members of the LGBTQ+ community, was granted victim status. According to the case file, the investigation remains ongoing. G.P. has not been charged to date, and, as alleged by the applicant, no investigative actions have been conducted since October 2021. The applicant alleges under Article 3 of the Convention that: (i) the police failed to protect her from G.P.’s verbal and physical attack, and (ii) the relevant authorities failed to conduct an effective investigation into her subsequent allegations of ill-treatment. She further complains under Articles   10 and 11 of the Convention about being prevented from proceeding with her performance, which represented a form of expression of her views on tolerance and equality. Lastly, the applicant complains that the above-mentioned alleged breaches of her rights under Article 3, 10, and 11 of the Convention resulted from discriminatory intent on the part of the relevant State authorities, in violation of Article 14 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article   3 of the Convention? In this regard, did the State authorities in the present case comply with their positive obligation under Article 3 of the Convention to prevent and stop the violent behaviour towards the applicant (see   Identoba and Others v. Georgia , no. 73235/12, 12   May 2015; Women’s Initiatives Supporting Group and Others v.   Georgia , nos.   73204/13   and 74959/13, §§   70-78, 16   December 2021; Verzilov and   Others v. Russia , no. 25276/15, 29 August 2023; and Hanovs v.   Latvia , no.   40861/22, 18 July 2024)?   2.     Have the competent domestic authorities conducted a thorough and effective investigation into the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment, in accordance with the procedural obligations under Article   3 of the Convention (ibid.; see also Romanov and Others v. Russia , nos. 58358/14 and 5   others, 12 September 2023, and Georgian Muslim Relations and Others v.   Georgia , no. 24225/19, 30 November 2023)?   3.     In view of the disruption of the applicant’s performance, has there been a violation of her rights to freedom of expression and/or freedom of peaceful assembly, in violation of Articles   10 and/or 11 of the Convention (see Identoba and Others and Verzilov and Others , both cited above; see also Berkman v. Russia , no. 46712/15, 1 December 2020)?   4.     Has the applicant been subjected to discrimination on the ground of her actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity, in breach of Article   14 of the Convention, read in conjunction with Articles 3, 10 and 11 (see Identoba and Others and Women’s Initiatives Supporting Group and   Others , both cited above)?