Ban on Peaceful Assembly on Victory Day
On 6 May 2024, an NGO notified Tbilisi City Hall of a peaceful assembly on 9 May in front of Parliament to protest a draft 'foreign agents' law; expected 200 people, 15:00–17:00. City Hall banned it on 7 May, citing Victory Day events, traffic disruption, and a counter-rally by 500 veterans at the same time. It offered an alternative site 3 km away, outside the city centre, from 10:00 to 12:00. The NGO says the counter-rally is not a reason to ban, police can separate groups, and the alternative time prevents working people from attending. The ban order does not explain why less restrictive measures were insufficient. The NGO files a court challenge on 8 May and asks for urgent review before 9 May. Under the Constitution and ECHR Article 11, assembly is protected; restrictions must be prescribed by law, necessary and proportionate.
1. What standard should the court apply when reviewing the ban on the assembly?
Read the worked answer
The court should begin with the presumption that peaceful assembly is lawful and that prior notification is not a request for permission. A ban is an extreme measure. The authority must identify a legal basis, a legitimate aim such as public safety or the protection of the rights of others, and concrete evidence that the assembly would create a real and serious risk. Restrictions must be necessary and proportionate and must not be based on hostility to the message.
Traffic disruption and the presence of a counter-rally are not automatically sufficient. The state has a positive duty to facilitate peaceful assembly and to protect participants, including by separating opposing groups where possible. The counter-rally cannot be treated as a veto over the NGO's rights. The authority must explain why less restrictive measures-rerouting traffic, barriers, police cordons, time limits, or a nearby alternative location-would not suffice. The ban order's failure to address less restrictive means is itself a strong indication of disproportionality. The court should also consider whether the ban is content-neutral in appearance but targeted at the anti-government message.
2. Is the alternative venue and time sufficient to cure the ban?
Read the worked answer
An alternative venue can cure a restriction only if it is genuine and preserves the essential purpose of the assembly. Moving the event 3 km away from Parliament and changing it from 15:00–17:00 to 10:00–12:00 substantially alters its expressive impact. A protest in front of Parliament is directed at legislators; a site outside the city centre may not reach the same audience. The morning time may exclude working people and reduces visibility. The alternative therefore does not fully cure the ban.
The court should also reject any post hoc justification that is not in the original order. If City Hall did not explain at the time why the alternative was adequate and why less restrictive measures were insufficient, it cannot rely on new reasons invented during litigation. The proper question is whether the original ban was proportionate when adopted, not whether some later compromise might have been acceptable.
3. How should the court handle the request for urgent review before 9 May?
Read the worked answer
The right to assembly includes the right to an effective remedy before the event becomes moot. The court should expedite the case, hold a hearing on 8 May if possible, and issue a reasoned decision the same day. Interim relief suspending the ban may be granted if the NGO shows a serious prima facie violation and irreparable harm to the exercise of assembly rights. The court should consider conditions, such as police protection and separation from the counter-rally, rather than a blanket ban.
If the event passes before a decision, the court should still rule on the legality of the ban and consider declaratory relief and, where national law allows, compensation. Otherwise authorities could evade review by delaying. The court should not treat the passing of 9 May as automatic mootness if the underlying restriction is capable of repetition.