When history repeats itself: Justice, propaganda and public broadcasting in Georgia

History may not repeat itself exactly, but as we all know, it often rhymes. A spectacle is currently unfolding in Georgia that bears disturbing parallels to some of Europe's darkest chapters - a justice system that sanctions obvious injustice, a media that puts propaganda above the truth, and a public fighting to defend its voice . The case of 19-year-old student Saba Jikia has become symbolic of this development. In July 2025, Jikia was sentenced to four and a half years in prison by the Tbilisi City Court for allegedly kicking a police officer during protests, even though the alleged victim himself stated that he had not suffered any injuries . Even more explosive: pro-government media simply claimed that Jikia had attacked a police officer with a knife , even though no knife was ever mentioned during the entire trial .

While pro-regime channels distort the facts, a deafening silence reigns on Georgia's officially public broadcaster . The taxpayer-funded broadcaster, which by law is supposed to provide citizens with independent and objective information , has failed to correct this blatant disinformation campaign or provide a platform for the families of political prisoners. This failure has sparked outraged protests: Demonstrators gathered in front of the Georgian Public Broadcaster building to demand precisely the independence that a public broadcaster must have. Their demand: Give voice to the truth before it's too late.

With bitter sarcasm, one might ask: Is Georgian state television now what the People's Receiver once was for Goebbels' Propaganda Ministry? And does the Georgian judiciary practice a "justice system" that is more reminiscent of Roland Freisler's People's Court than a modern European court? This report illuminates—tongue-in-cheek, yet fact-based—the astonishing analogies between events in Georgia today and historical lessons from the Nazi era , particularly regarding the role of judges and the media in times of injustice.

Justice in the service of injustice: Lessons from Nuremberg

In authoritarian systems, the court becomes the sword of the rulers – or, as in the case of the Nazi era, the proverbial dagger beneath their robes . The harshness and absurdity of Saba Jikia's conviction seems like a distant but ominous echo of the Nazi justice system . Back in the 1940s, Nazi jurists issued a whole cascade of terror laws to "legally" eliminate opponents of the regime and undesirable persons. Ordinances such as the infamous "People's Pest Ordinance" of 1939 or the Night and Fog Decree served as a pretext for persecuting undesirable people – whether political opponents, Jews or other minorities – with the semblance of legality. Special courts imposed countless death sentences on this basis, turning the judiciary into a willing executor of an unjust state.

Although there are no death sentences handed down against opponents of the government in Georgia today , the principle is frighteningly similar: criminal laws are abused to make examples and stifle protest . Saba Jikia's alleged crime - kicking an armored police officer in the middle of a chaotic protest situation - was treated as if he had committed a capital offense. Four years and six months in prison for a teenager who caused no serious harm to anyone seems completely disproportionate. By comparison: in Germany such an act - if it could even be proven - would probably be classified as simple bodily harm or resistance and would hardly result in such a prison sentence. However, the Georgian judge Tamar Mchedlishvili was clearly setting an example in the interests of those in power .

Judge Mchedlishvili is no stranger to the country. Her name is on the sanctions list of several Western states, which have banned people from entering Georgia who “implement repressive measures on behalf of the ruling Georgian Dream party .” In March 2025, for example, Estonia imposed sanctions on a total of 16 Georgian judges – including Tamar Mchedlishvili – for their role in the persecution of protesters and opposition figures . The Baltic states wanted to send a message that “violence against protesters, journalists, and opposition figures is unacceptable and criminal.” One could therefore say that while Ms. Mchedlishvili may have believed that her harsh verdict represented a stand against law and order, democratic states have long since pilloried her – just as the willing helpers of the Nazi judiciary were pilloried throughout world history after 1945.

A bitter historical irony suggests itself: In Nuremberg in 1947, German jurists were brought to justice for “merely executing laws” that were valid at the time but which clearly violated humanity and justice . Their defense – that they had done nothing wrong because they were following the law – was contemptuously rejected by the court. The verdict at the Nuremberg Jurists’ Trial stated, in essence, that universally accepted principles of law always prevail over positive injustice, and that the civilized world must pass judgment on a “ draconian, corrupt, and depraved legal system ” such as that of the National Socialists. In other words, “orders” or “laws” are no excuse when they clearly violate fundamental legal principles . The Nazi judges could not get away with saying that they had only applied the regulations in force at the time – such as the aforementioned anti-terror laws. The tribunal clearly recognized that anyone who carries out injustice under the guise of law is guilty.

One would like to shout to Georgian judges – and prosecutors too – "Haven't you learned anything from history?" When a justice system is used to lock up innocent young people as a "deterrent example ," then the robed elite is also betraying its very mission. The Georgian Constitution (like all modern constitutions) places human rights and the rule of law at the forefront. The moment judges begin imposing draconian punishments on political opponents at the behest of the powerful, the judiciary transforms from a shield for citizens into a sword of oppression.

Sarcasm is permitted here: Perhaps Roland Freisler's manual for show trials has been rediscovered in Tbilisi? Freisler, the notorious president of the Nazi "People's Court," insulted the defendants – mostly resistance fighters – in show trials and handed down death sentences in batches. While trial observers in Georgia did not witness a comparable spectacle, they did witness similarly dubious practices: Jikia's lawyer, Guja Avsajanishvili, reports that the judge had apparently already prescribed the verdict before the closing arguments had even ended – an indication that the verdict was politically predetermined . Then, as now, the verdict is decided first, and the trial becomes a farce . Perhaps we are just glad that today's unjust verdicts "only" mean prison and not hanging – a small consolation in the face of the ruined youth of innocent people.

All these parallels are by no means intended to suggest that the situation in Georgia corresponds exactly to the Hitler dictatorship – that would be an unacceptable exaggeration. But the warning signs cannot be ignored. Even the European Union is observing the developments with concern. Kaja Kallas , the Prime Minister of Estonia, recently warned that the Georgian “judicial system appears to be part of this repressive machine” and that the EU is even discussing whether to sanction those judges “who do these things” . When highest-ranking EU politicians openly speak of the Georgian judiciary as an instrument of repression , then that carries weight – it is a diplomatic warning shot. In Germany, one would say: By now at the latest, the alarm bells should be ringing for those responsible in Tbilisi. Because the “civilized world” – to quote the Nuremberg judges – is watching . And history has a long memory for those who take the wrong side . This is precisely what Saba Jikia recognized with impressive clarity in his final words: He would one day proudly tell his grandchildren that he was on the right side of history – a sideswipe at the fact that the judge and her clients might be on the wrong side.

The silent broadcaster: public service or government mouthpiece?

Voices for truth: Protesters demand honest reporting from their broadcaster.

The parallels to the dark past become even clearer when one considers the way the media – especially public broadcasters – handle their affairs. In a democracy, a public broadcaster has the important task of providing balanced, independent reporting in the interest of society . It is financed by the people and should belong to the people , not to a party. In Germany, ARD and ZDF are committed to party-political neutrality by state treaty; in Georgia, there is a law on public broadcasters with similar goals. In fact, until recently, Georgian law even stipulated a very concrete guarantee: The public broadcaster (GPB) was to receive an annual budget of at least 0.14% of the gross domestic product . By comparison, in 2021, this amount was 69.6 million lari; by 2024, thanks to economic growth, this amount had risen to 110.3 million lari (around 38 million euros). A handsome sum – raised by Georgian taxpayers , with the clear social mandate to provide appropriate content oriented towards the common good.

But what does the broadcaster do with this money? Currently, it's doing very little of what it's supposed to. Important trials of political prisoners, grotesque miscarriages of justice, official disinformation – none of this is covered in public broadcasting, if at all . It's as if the Tagesschau news program had decided not to broadcast a single report about a political scandal because the government doesn't want it. But that's exactly what the Georgian demonstrators are accusing their public broadcaster of: 'Do your job! Be independent, report objectively!' That's how activists described it at a protest rally in front of the broadcaster's headquarters on July 10. Davit Gunashvili , one of the organizers, put it bluntly: The Georgian “public broadcaster has become a weapon of the Russian hybrid occupation ,” and the journalists there are “tools of propaganda” who deliberately misinform the population and conceal important grievances – he publicly called it a “treacherous activity” (a choice of words that sticks in your throat but aptly reflects the citizens’ frustration). After all, according to Gunashvili, the people finance this broadcaster , but the broadcaster turns its back on the people at the crucial moment and closes its eyes to the “unimaginable injustice raging in Georgia .” As a citizen, you are therefore forced to pay for a source of information that then lets you starve – informational malnutrition, so to speak .

One particularly outrageous aspect is the role of broadcasting in court proceedings . After the ruling Georgian Dream party recently passed a law banning all independent media from filming and recording court proceedings , exclusive permission to record now lies solely with the public broadcaster. Under the old law, GPB was allowed to film in courtrooms and was obliged to share the material with other media – if it didn’t, others could step in. The new amendment to the law has abolished all of that. In other words: if the public broadcaster doesn’t film, there is simply no video or audio material available to the public. And this is precisely the scenario that occurred at Saba Jikia’s trial. The verdict on July 10 was virtually closed to the public because neither private television stations nor independent journalists were allowed to use a camera or microphone in the courtroom. The only camera that was allowed to be used – the GPB’s – remained cold.

The government cynically justified the restrictions by saying they wanted to ensure “orderly proceedings” and avoid “circus in the courtroom.” Orwell would have delighted in this distortion: one restricts transparency in order to ensure transparency. The result is clear: the “open trials” now take place in the dark, unless something leaks out through unofficial channels. This was also the case with Jikia: his handwritten closing statement was later photographed by supporters and posted online because no one was allowed to film it. In it, the 19-year-old bravely declared that while he was afraid of defeat “because I don’t want future generations to judge us for this ,” he would “fight to the end” and “not give up .” These are impressions that a public broadcaster in a functioning democracy would naturally have broadcast to demonstrate to all citizens the significance and significance of these events. In Georgia, on the other hand, the broadcaster remains silent and leaves the field to the distortions of the propaganda media.

With burning sarcasm , one could say: Georgian radio has taken neutrality so literally that it has been completely neutralized – it no longer broadcasts anything relevant, so it cannot be accused of taking sides. A silent press, after all, is the most perfect form of Gleichschaltung: no contradiction, no anger – only embarrassed silence in the forest. Unfortunately, silence in the face of lies actually means consent. When Imedi TV spread untruths about an alleged knife attack, and even an absurd, apparently AI-generated caricature depicting Saba Jikia as an armed violent offender circulated on social media, an independent public broadcaster should have immediately broadcast a fact check and correction. But nothing of the sort happened. One could almost assume that the Georgian public broadcaster had internalized Goebbels's maxim: "The best way to lie is to say nothing at all and not correct the other lies."

This failure has consequences: the population's trust is dwindling. If state television - which should belong to all citizens - degenerates into an extension of the government, it will lose its legitimacy. Georgian citizens are already derisively calling the station "Kartuli Osdinareba" - Georgian Dream TV (in reference to the name of the ruling party). The public broadcaster is therefore perceived as state broadcaster , similar to the news reels of the German weekly newsreels in the Third Reich , which only broadcast reports of success and enemy propaganda. Zurab Tsezkhladze , the father of one of the political prisoners, delivered a harsh but apt verdict at the protest rally: the station does not serve the country, but a party and ultimately a single man - Bidzina Ivanishvili (the oligarch and unofficial government puppet master) - and has the "harmful mission of portraying white as black and black as white" in order to cover up his machinations. "It's his job to spread the voice of the people—instead, he's producing disinformation himself ," the father shouted indignantly to the crowd (free translation based on eyewitness accounts). The perversion of a public media outlet could hardly be described more clearly.

Propaganda 2.0: When facts are unwanted

Authoritarian regimes have always attempted to control information throughout history . What we are observing in Georgia is, in many ways, propaganda in a modern guise , yet one that nevertheless follows familiar patterns. A demonstrator who rebels against the government is summarily labeled a “violent criminal.” It is fatally reminiscent of the language used by the Nazis, who vilified resistance fighters as “enemies of the people” and “terrorists” to justify draconian punishments. In Berlin in 1933, the Reichstag burned down – a scapegoat was immediately presented (the young Marinus van der Lubbe) and a narrative created that helped legitimize the seizure of power. In Tbilisi in 2023/24, although no parliament burned, the Georgian Dream government suddenly announced a halt to the EU accession process in November 2024, which triggered mass protests. The protesters were immediately portrayed as foreign-controlled rioters. When tens of thousands demonstrated against an "agent law" in June 2023, the government even spoke of an attempted coup, and Russian narratives implied Western masterminds .

Now that young people like Saba Jikia are on trial, the demonization is being taken to the extreme : A pro-government broadcaster (TV Imedi) is trumpeting a story about a knife that never existed in order to make the delinquent appear more dangerous. Another channel (POST TV) is taking it a step further and illustrating this lie with an anime graphic in which Jikia is stylized as a knife stabber - as if we were living in an absurdly bad comic. The caption is cynical: "Prisoner of conscience for the opposition, violent criminal in reality." This is Propaganda 2.0 in its purest form: mixing reality and fiction, spicing it up with artificial intelligence to create the appearance of modern creativity, and serving the population a distorted image that stirs up emotions .

The technology may be new, but the principle is well-known. Joseph Goebbels already knew: emotionalization and enemy images are the key. Then as now, fears are stoked – of "violent youths," of "chaotic protests," of "troublemakers controlled from abroad." And what could be better than showing a demonstrator with a knife in his hand, attacking police officers? The fact that it never happened doesn't bother the propagandists in the slightest. "In the end, something always sticks," is a cynical motto of the opinion makers. In Nazi Germany, after years of incitement against Jews, communists, and other enemy images, all the lies stuck with many as "perceived truth" – with devastating consequences.

Today, authoritarian tacticians have an even more perfidious tool: social media and AI-generated content that spreads at lightning speed. A pretty anime picture of Saba Jikia with a knife may seem harmless at first glance – but posted in high-reach Facebook groups or on television, it reaches an audience of millions and solidifies a false narrative. Thus, an innocent teenager is transformed in the public perception into a dangerous criminal before he even has a chance to be heard. And once again, the public broadcaster remains deafeningly silent. No fact-checking, no correction – nothing to remove the poisonous teeth of this lie. In democratic countries, independent journalists or NGOs often step in in such cases. In fact, opposition media and human rights groups in Georgia reported extensively on the hoax of the “knife attack” and denounced the infamous smear campaign . But their reach is limited, especially since many of these outlets are already under pressure.

This makes the failure of the public broadcaster all the more serious. Imagine if a large private broadcaster in Germany were to spread such false information about a demonstrator – the public broadcasters would most likely clarify in the news what really happened and thus fulfill their duty of objectivity. This is precisely not happening in Georgia . On the contrary: the state-dominated media are apparently sticking together . "We have seen that television, which is financed with people's money, is itself creating pieces of disinformation ," complained Father Z. Zetzchladze (as mentioned above). In doing so, he said, the public broadcaster is poisoning the country instead of informing it – an apt description (because fake news is always poisonous in a society).

At this point it is appropriate to look back at the history books: After 1945 the whole of Germany asked itself how it was possible that a civilized nation could have been so blinded and manipulated. The Gleichschaltung of the media was one of the main reasons. Radio, newspapers, newsreels - everything spoke with one voice , the voice of the NSDAP. Critical journalists were either driven into exile or silenced. Conscious of this experience, from 1949 onwards the Federal Republic created a system of public media that was intended to be independent of state control - financed by fees, organized by pluralistic committees. The Georgian system was partly based on such models: the GPB has a supervisory board, nominally pluralist in composition, and was financially secure through the GDP link. But constructs on paper are of no use if the political culture undermines them. Georgia's public broadcaster was, critics say, degraded to a cog in the government apparatus through political influence. It is precisely the development that the German Allies warned against in 1945: Never again should the state have full control over broadcasting – otherwise, propaganda would be threatened instead of freedom of the press.

The current situation is reminiscent of that bitter Soviet-era joke: "We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us." Applied to Georgia: We pretend to have independent broadcasting, and the broadcasting pretends to inform the people. In reality, however, at the crucial moment, it doesn't provide information , and certainly not independently.

It should therefore come as no surprise that civil society is sounding the alarm. It is no coincidence that the protests in Georgia have recently been increasingly directed against the regime's media front . Action groups are calling for demonstrations in front of the headquarters of pro-regime broadcasters , including the Public Broadcaster. "The epicenter of the protest must be where this flood of disinformation and malice is pouring down," Tsetzchladze said emphatically, explicitly naming the offices of Georgian Dream and those television stations that broadcast the government line as places where public pressure must be increased (loosely based on his speech, which was recorded by activists). People have understood that without true information, no true change is possible. This is no longer "just" about individual unjust judgments – it is about the fight for the right to interpret , about nothing less than the freedom of thought of a society . The most effective tool of the oppressors is not the club, but control over what the majority considers to be true . And it is precisely this control that committed Georgians are trying to wrest from their regime.

The crucial role of an independent public

Given this situation, it is important to highlight why independent media – especially public broadcasting – is so central to the outcome of this struggle . In a well-established democracy, the idea that state television could provide completely one-sided reporting might seem absurd. But Georgia is a young, “unconsolidated” democracy , as activist Gunashvili put it. In countries like this, a strong, independent public broadcaster ensures that there is at least one source of information that is not controlled by oligarchs or political parties . Private broadcasters can (and some do in Georgia) do great journalistic work, but they are always vulnerable to pressure from owners or political interference.

A true public service broadcaster, on the other hand, has the mandate to make all voices heard—minorities and majorities, opposition and government—while acting in the public interest. Public funding is only justified if the benefit is also public. Or to put it simply: The people pay, so the broadcaster must serve the people—not the government. Any deviation from this principle is a fraud against the public.

This fraud has enraged many in Georgia. The protesters' demands read like the ABCs of public broadcasting, something we should really take for granted: Give airtime to the families of political prisoners! Report objectively on the protests and court cases! Correct lies instead of sitting them out! The mothers and fathers of the prisoners repeatedly emphasize how important publicity is to them . "What do publicity and public support mean to you?" they were asked. "Everything" could be summarized as the essence of their answers. Because only when society at large knows what is happening to their sons and daughters is there hope for justice. Dictatorships and authoritarian regimes prefer to operate in the dark - the proverbial "night and fog" operation (appropriately the name of a Nazi decree) means making people disappear without anyone finding out . Creating publicity is therefore the first step towards protecting victims and mobilizing resistance.

One almost gets the impression that the Georgian government and its allies know this rule perfectly : After initial hesitation, they pulled out all the stops to dim the media coverage of the trials. The new restrictions on journalists in courts come into effect precisely as the trials against protesters enter their final phase. At the same time, the judiciary is being rewarded with pay raises—the proverbial silver coin for the servants of the system, one could sarcastically remark. This timing is unlikely to be a coincidence: They bought loyalty and made it more difficult for critics to document abuses.

But the plan doesn't seem to be working out. The louder the silence of the public broadcaster, the louder the voices on the streets become. The protests may be (still) comparatively small, but they carry strong symbolism. On the day of Jikia's verdict, after the rally in front of the broadcasting building, activists led a protest march through the streets and even through the subway - they literally wanted to mobilize both underground and surface before joining the ongoing protest in front of parliament. These actions are half symbolic, half concrete : On the one hand, they want to show the government that they are present everywhere and that they are not giving up - "our protest will never end ," they shouted. On the other hand, they are of course hoping for a concrete effect: perhaps a change of heart from the broadcaster's management, perhaps pressure from international partners, perhaps a jolt among the population.

Is this hope naive? History teaches us: sometimes yes, sometimes no. In the 1980s, people in Eastern Europe certainly wondered whether their small-scale protests against an overpowering state apparatus would ever have any effect – and in 1989 we saw the answer. In many cases, the role of independent information was crucial: samizdat writings, Western radio stations, church communities – all of this contributed to the truth slowly undermining lies . Today, people have the internet and social media, which is both a blessing and a curse. A curse because governments also use them for surveillance and propaganda; a blessing because it is more difficult to shut down all channels of information.

In Georgia, this is evident in the fact that, although the public broadcaster remains silent, independent news portals such as Civil.ge , OC Media, Netgazeti, Publika and others report in detail . Anyone who wants to know the truth can find it – but the average television viewer will not pick it up by chance, as it is left out of the most-watched channel. This discrepancy is dangerous: it divides society into informed and misinformed camps. The protest aims to bridge precisely this gap by raising awareness. Everyone who sees the protesters on the street or in the subway car becomes curious: “What is this about?” They may then do their own research or talk to others about it. In this respect, the protest creates a public sphere beyond the controlled screens .

The independence of public broadcasting would be key here – as all critics emphasize. If GPB were to follow its statutory mission, it would have to immediately begin objectively reporting on the trials, give the opposition and civil society an appropriate voice, and proactively counter disinformation . That would be a game changer in this peaceful battle for the soul of Georgian democracy. It is the reason why many say that regaining free public broadcasting is a decisive step in winning this battle. Gunashvili put it this way: If we take back the public broadcaster – in other words, free it from political influence – then the truly painful issues for society can finally be discussed on the major channels. Then it would no longer be possible to look away when injustice is done to young people; then the government would also have to face the public debate.

It hasn't gone that far yet. On the contrary, at the moment it seems as if the Georgian public broadcaster has adopted a position of complete denial about reality. While outside the broadcasting building people are shouting "Finally do your duty!" , inside there is no reaction. An attempt by the demonstrators to enter the building after their rally and speak to those in charge was brusquely rebuffed. The protesters then improvised a street theater ("performance") directly in front of the station . The message of this little spectacle: This is how we assess your current situation, dear state television - and we want to let you know that our protest will never die down until you fulfill your role. With symbolic gestures they tried to make it clear that they see the fight for media sovereignty as a marathon, not a sprint.

History is watching – which side will you be on?

An uncomfortable conclusion suggests itself: Georgia stands at a crossroads regarding the rule of law and freedom of expression. Judges like Tamar Mchedlishvili have chosen a path that – by historical standards – leads to darkness. Journalists and directors of the public broadcaster have decided (perhaps under pressure, but ultimately of their own free will) to betray their mission and side with the powerful. But the future is not yet written.

History is full of examples of individuals suddenly realizing they no longer wanted to be part of injustice . Some Nazi judges secretly harbored doubts, but too few had the courage to rebel. After the war, quite a few regretted their cowardice—but by then it was too late. Today, Georgian judges and journalists have the chance to learn from history . They could ask themselves: When people look back on this period in a few years or decades, where do I stand? Am I the one who participated in injustice or looked the other way, or did I stand on the side of justice when it mattered?

Saba Jikia and many of his fellow activists have already made that decision. "We are on the right side of history ," he wrote from prison. He may be very young at 19, but he understands what's at stake. He fears defeat, he said , because he doesn't want future children to grow up in a dictatorship and be accused of failing their generation . This fear drives him to continue despite all adversities.

The other side, however – the judges, the police officers, the propagandists – may believe themselves safe. They still have the means of power at their disposal. They can still lock up protesters, silence broadcasters, and spread lies. But they are mistaken if they believe this will remain without consequences. Some of them have already been hit with international sanctions; their reputation outside their own bubble has been ruined. The EU has sharply condemned the “democratic regression” of the leadership in Tbilisi , and Georgia’s hoped-for EU candidacy is in jeopardy, primarily because of the suppression of the media and the opposition. This means that even in political terms, this course ultimately harms the country – and perhaps at some point also the careers of those involved.

There's a cynical saying: "Those who ignore the past are bound to repeat it." Georgia's rulers appear to view the past very selectively – they resort to authoritarian recipes and hope for a different outcome. But authoritarianism almost always ends in crisis, isolation, or rebellion . The voices of resistance do not fall silent; quite the opposite. Every unjust court ruling, every delayed report only fuels their anger. It's a paradox: because the public broadcaster absolutely refused to show the protest, the activists had to get creative and take the protest to the people – in the subways, in public squares. This way, their message may even have reached people it would never have reached on television. The government has thus achieved a Pyrrhic victory: it controls the official narrative, but in doing so has only hardened the resolve of civil society.

The crucial question now is: Are there enough people of conscience within the system who can turn things around? Will journalists be found who say, "That's it, we won't allow ourselves to be used as a mouthpiece any longer"? Will judges find the courage to occasionally disobey a political order and instead, when in doubt, decide in favor of freedom? Hard to say. Authoritarian systems function until cracks suddenly appear – sometimes from unexpected directions.

But one thing is certain: The world is watching – and remembering. It may seem expedient for some actors in Georgia today to side with those in power and ignore inconvenient facts. But power can change; public opinion can shift. What remains, in the end, is history's obituary . And that is unlikely to be a flattering one for the current perpetrators of injustice.

Finally, allow me to sarcastically draw a parallel once again : In a fictitious future "Tbilisi Trials" – based on Nuremberg – those responsible must explain themselves. A former news director stammers: "We only broadcast what we were told..." A former judge justifies himself: "The law provided for these punishments..." What do you think a future tribunal will say in response? Probably something along the lines of: "Didn't you have a conscience of your own? Shouldn't you have known that you were supporting injustice?" The Nazi lawyers were asked these questions, and their answers convinced no one.

So there is still time to turn the tide . Georgian society is facing a crucial test, but also an opportunity. If we succeed in restoring the independence of public broadcasting and freeing the judiciary from the clutches of political influence, that would be one of the most important steps back on the path to democracy. It is no coincidence that the protesters are demanding precisely this – for they have understood the lessons of history . They know: a free press and an independent judiciary are the cornerstones that make a democracy immune to tyranny.

It remains to be hoped that those who are on the wrong side today will also take a look at the history books and realize that there is no glory or honor waiting for them there, but at best disgrace . It would be in the interest of all Georgians if things could be turned around before the abyss is reached. Because history has also taught us one thing: the deeper a country sinks into propaganda and unjust justice, the harder and more painful the impact of reality will be later. Georgia can still prevent this from happening. The voices of reason and freedom are there - we just have to let them be heard , loudly and unmistakably .

The world—and history—are watching. Let us decide wisely which side we are on.