82,500 euros for a road blockade: The Gota Tchanturia case and the political price of civil protest

A verdict that reveals more about Georgia than any government speech.

There are decisions that describe a country more precisely than any political report, and the case of Georgian activist and teacher Gota Tchanturia falls squarely into this category. On November 18, Judge Manuchar Tsatsua sentenced him to a total fine of 245,000 lari , equivalent to approximately €82,500 , for 49 counts of blocking a road. In a European legal system, this would be a sum conceivable in cases of organized economic crime or large-scale tax fraud. In Georgia, apparently, simply standing in a street is enough to incur this kind of financial burden. The fact that the state increasingly treats protests as a disturbance rather than a fundamental right makes the sentence appear less like a legal decision and more like a political message to all those who speak out in public despite growing repression.

The economic context: A country caught between minimum wage and maximum penalties

The severity of the sentence only becomes truly apparent when considered in light of the realities of life in the country. The effective monthly minimum wage in Georgia is currently around 1,700 Lari , which is approximately €570 . Even this amount offers little leeway, as the cost of living in cities is constantly rising, and the social security system of this developing country remains correspondingly fragile. The average male wage is 2,601 Lari , which is about €875 per month. Even under optimistic conditions, an average worker would have to live without any expenses for seven years and ten months to pay off the fine. Realistically speaking, in a world where people need to eat, have housing, and care for children, Chanturia would have to set aside half of his total income for over fifteen years solely to pay this fine.

The discrepancy between income and penalty is so massive that it cannot be accidental. A state that ignores income realities and imposes fines completely disproportionate to its citizens' economic survival sends a message that extends far beyond the individual affected. The verdict is not only directed against Tchanturia, but against the very idea that protest is a legitimate democratic tool. It suggests that civic engagement comes at a financial price that no one can bear for years without suffering political or social collapse.

An activist targeted by an irritated state power

Gota Chanturia is not just any figure in civil society. He is a teacher, an education expert, the father of three minor children, and one of the leading voices of the so-called Sazmau marches, which in recent years have attempted to keep democratic values visible in an increasingly authoritarian political environment. That he, of all people, has become the focus of the sanctions is hardly surprising. The government has pursued a clear policy in recent years: not to prevent protest, but to make it more expensive. The forty-nine cases that were used to calculate Tsatsua's sentence date back to a time when blocking roads was merely a minor offense. The later criminalizing legislation, which placed blocking a road close to a serious crime, was not yet in effect. The fact that this historical distinction apparently plays no role in the verdict is a telling indication of the flexibility of Georgian law in dealing with political opposition.

A justice system that fragments where it should consolidate.

Particularly noteworthy is the courts' decision not to consolidate the numerous cases. A total of 73 fines are pending against Chanturia, distributed among four judges: Koba Tshagunava , Nino Enukidze , Manuchar Tsatsua, and Zviad Tsekvava . The idea of examining identical or nearly identical cases in a single proceeding is not only common practice in constitutional systems but essential to avoid contradictory rulings. In Georgia, however, the request for consolidation was rejected without any explanation. This fragmentation appears to be a strategic tactic of attrition: each case individually, each penalty separately, each decision in isolation. It is a methodical approach that conveys the impression that the judiciary is not primarily interested in the truth, but rather in exerting the greatest possible political and financial pressure.

European comparison as a reflection of disproportionality

The €82,500 fine seems even more drastic by European standards. While such sums are levied in Germany for complex fraud cases or serious economic crimes, in Italy for systematic tax evasion, and in France for large-scale environmental or labor law violations, in Georgia a mere demonstration is enough to trigger such a sanction. The government likes to talk about "approaching European standards," but in this case, the distance from Europe is more apparent than any diplomatic progress report. European democracies don't punish protest with fines equivalent to a family's annual budget; they protect it. Georgia, on the other hand, imposes a financial penalty that is ruinous for the average citizen. The result is a creeping erosion of political participation—not through prohibitions, but through economics.

The social weight of the punishment

Tchanturia is a father of three. The punishment affects not only him, but his entire family. It impacts his children's future education, healthcare, housing, career prospects, and every form of financial stability. It is a punishment that doesn't simply punish a past, but destroys a future. And that makes clear what this is really about: not order, but deterrence.