{"id":3680,"date":"2021-09-27T17:10:04","date_gmt":"2021-09-27T16:10:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rcstaging.co.uk\/ehrac\/?post_type=resources&p=3680"},"modified":"2022-06-22T14:24:04","modified_gmt":"2022-06-22T13:24:04","slug":"tkhelidze-v-georgia","status":"publish","type":[30,75],"link":"http:\/\/ehrac.org.uk\/ru\/tkhelidze-v-georgia\/","title":{"rendered":"\u0420\u0435\u0448\u0435\u043d\u0438\u0435 \u0415\u0432\u0440\u043e\u043f\u0435\u0439\u0441\u043a\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0441\u0443\u0434\u0430 \u043f\u043e \u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0430\u043c \u0447\u0435\u043b\u043e\u0432\u0435\u043a\u0430 \u043f\u043e \u0434\u0435\u043b\u0443 \u0422\u0445\u0435\u043b\u0438\u0434\u0437\u0435 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0442\u0438\u0432 \u0413\u0440\u0443\u0437\u0438\u0438"},"content":{"rendered":"

Forum<\/strong>: European Court of Human Rights
\nCase No<\/strong>.: 33056\/17<\/span><\/a>
\nJudgment date<\/strong>: 8 July 2021<\/p>\n

This case concerns the femicide of M.T., a university professor, by her ex-husband L.M. after a prolonged period of domestic violence. Despite more than eleven reports of violence and threats made to the police by M.T. and her relatives in a six-month period, not a single protective measure was put in place.<\/p>\n

This case is representative of the systemic discrimination by the law enforcement authorities in Georgia in failing to adequately respond to victims of domestic violence.<\/p>\n

EHRAC brought the case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in collaboration with Union Sapari on behalf of M.T.\u2019s mother.<\/p>\n

The ECtHR embedded its consideration of discrimination into right to life complaints for the first time in a domestic violence case, and was robust in its criticism of the authorities\u2019 \u2018major failings\u2019, representing a highly progressive judgment by the Court.<\/p>\n

What Happened?<\/strong><\/p>\n

M.T and L.M. lived together in a flat with L.M.\u2019s parents and M.T.\u2019s young daughter from a prior relationship. The police attended the flat twice, in April and September 2014, following reports from L.M.\u2019s father and M.T. that L.M. was physically and verbally assaulting M.T. and making threats to her life.<\/p>\n

L.M.\u2019s parents reported that L.M. suffered from pathological jealousy, was mentally unstable and became aggressive when drunk. L.M.\u2019s father also reported that the death threats made by L.M. towards M.T. were frightening and that he wanted the police to force L.M. to leave their home. After the latter incident an ambulance was called and M.T. received medical attention, yet the incident was recorded as a minor family altercation, with the physical abuse recorded as just a \u201cshove\u201d.<\/p>\n

When interviewed, L.M. admitted to being jealous and making multiple death threats against M.T. The police filed reports but failed to open a criminal investigation or place any restrictive measures on L.M. The day after the second incident, M.T. and her daughter moved into her mother\u2019s home, at which point L.M. began to send abusive messages. The messages included the statements \u201cI can easily make you disappear\u201d; \u201cI\u2019m going to commit suicide, I can\u2019t live without you\u201d; and \u201cNo one can stop me, I\u2019m not afraid of the police\u201d. L.M. also made death threats against M.T.\u2019s young daughter.<\/p>\n

Over the next three weeks, M.T. reported a further five incidents to the police informing them that L.M. was repeatedly threatening to kill her, that he had attempted to break into her mother\u2019s flat, that he had accosted her outside her mother\u2019s flat and at her place of work, and that he had followed her to her daughter\u2019s school. M.T.\u2019s mother also filed four reports with the police stating that L.M. was stalking and threatening her daughter daily, that he had turned up at her workplace with a grenade which he threatened to detonate, and that her and her daughter\u2019s lives had become unbearable due to L.M.\u2019s terrorising behaviour.<\/p>\n

The police repeatedly and inaccurately told M.T. that no restrictive measures could be a taken against L.M. and that they could not arrest him. At one point they said that they couldn\u2019t make an arrest as a police officer had not witnessed the violence. On another occasion they suggested that M.T. tell her brothers about L.M.\u2019s behaviour so that they could take revenge by \u201cbreaking his bones\u201d.<\/p>\n

On 17 October, the day after M.T. reported to the police that L.M. had followed her to her daughter\u2019s school, L.M. turned up at Ilia State University, Tbilisi, where M.T. was teaching and asked to speak to her in the corridor outside a class of students. When she stepped into the corridor L.M. shot her dead, and then fatally shot himself.<\/p>\n

Neither the applicant (M.T.\u2019s mother) nor her daughter were ever advised of their procedural rights or the legislative and administrative measures of protection available to them under the Criminal Code and the Domestic Violence Act.<\/p>\n

An investigation was opened into the double homicide on 17 October 2014, however it was discontinued on 31 December due to the death of the perpetrator. In 2015\/16 the applicant lodged multiple complaints with the District Prosecutor\u2019s Office and with the Chief Prosecutor requesting an investigation into negligence by the police towards her daughter, which she argued constituted gender-based discrimination. No investigation was opened.<\/p>\n

EHRAC brings case to European Court of Human Rights<\/strong><\/p>\n

We lodged the application with the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in 2017, in collaboration with Union Sapari, raising:<\/p>\n