This article discusses self-defense in the context of domestic violence. In Georgian reality, the boundaries of self-defense are generally narrowly defined; however, when self-defensive violence ...occurs in the family when the aggressor is an intimate partner and the defender is a woman, the accused faces even more barriers to justice, which is determined by gender stereotypes and traditional views on domestic violence. There is a difficult situation regarding femicide in Georgia; in 2021, 22 women were killed just because they were women. Women are killed by their intimate partners, and the antecedents of the murder are similar. Women turn to the police for protection from violence, but to no avail. In such a horrifying reality, where the state, whose obligation it is, does not protect a woman from a violent partner, limiting the right to self-defense is another violation of the state’s obligation to protect life and physical integrity. A correct and bold interpretation of the right to self-defense by the court is necessary to weaken the aggressor on the one hand and to strengthen the defender on the other hand. In the Georgian reality, by trivializing domestic violence and leaving it in the personal space, more barriers are created for women to reach justice by being obliged to endure the aggression of a tyrant husband/partner. In the article, the author tries to show by observing a judicial practice that artificial barriers limit the right to defend oneself against the aggression of an intimate partner; a woman is punished for injuring the aggressor, while the law should justify her. Single acquittals cannot change systemic injustice, but the author’s goal is to show and analyze such significant decisions so that more people can learn about correct judicial interpretations. According to the author, discrimination based on gender is characteristic of Georgian justice; by identifying problems and critically analyzing court decisions, she tries to show the ways of legal regulation of the problem. KEYWORDS: Self-defense, Battered Woman, Discrimination.
Prostitution is prohibited by Georgian regime of prostitution, and a sex worker is punished, but not a client. The actions of third parties are also criminalized. Even today, the sex work is still ...considered in the moral context, and the addressee of criticism is both, the buyer of this service, and the sex worker, and all critics judge them from the standpoint of their subjective moral prism of admissibility or inadmissibility, and require the punishment of either one, or another. The purpose of the article is to review the regimes of prostitution and to select the best experience. Consideration of these issues is important for revision of Georgian regime of prostitution, which is the source of violation of human rights and unjustified police repression. The purpose of this article is not to romanticize prostitution, but rather to identify the source of the harm (that is inherent to this work) and seek ways to reduce it in order to make the environment safe for sex workers, so that they enjoy all of the rights that are guaranteed to all by the Constitution. The question of the constitutionality of the legislation defining prostitution in Georgia was brought to the Constitutional Court in 2018, although the claim has not been considered yet. Against this background, in this article, we will try to make our small contribution to the identification of the problem and the ways to solve it.
The article analyzes the case where, according to the factual circumstances, the person should have been acquitted of murder, but instead he was punished. self-defense is the human right to defend ...oneself from an aggressor. The basis of self-defense justification is the human right to life, the right to protect it from an aggressor. The article is a critical analysis of the judicial interpretation of the limits of self-defense. The article refers to the decisions of the Zugdidi District Court and the Supreme Court of Georgia regarding a specific case. According to the author's perception, both judgments present a narrow interpretation inconsistent with the essence of self-defense, and both instances came to different results due to different legal assessments of the facts. The author of the article lists the necessary criteria for the justification of self-defense and analyzes how it should be interpreted, simultaneously criticizing its judicial interpretations. Judicial definitions, made case by case, do not serve to foresee the defining norm of self-defense, which undermines legal security. Every person has the right to defend himself against an aggressor, to use effective and proportionate means of self-defense, so as not to put himself at risk. A person has the right to know precisely when and what kind of force he can use against the aggressor. In the Georgian reality, this right is systematically violated, and analyzing a specific criminal case serves to identify this problem. According to the author, Georgian judicial practice misses the essence and purpose of the norm, which contributes to the discrediting of the right to self-defense, and everything only strengthens the aggressor
The purpose of this article is to show the narrow boundaries and incompleteness of the Georgian legislation regarding rape, which fails to cover all the actions from which the protection of an ...individual's negative sexual freedom is the responsibility of the state. The article aims to show the reader the advantages of the new approach in parallel with the critique of the old law regarding rape, which means expanding the scope of the definition of rape and hence criminalizing more actions. For this purpose, the importance of non-consent as the main element of the rape actus reus is discussed. The article also analyzes the importance of protecting the boundaries of rape so that the state does not unjustifiably restrict a person's positive sexual freedom while protecting negative sexual autonomy. The purpose of this article is neither to criticize nor support any of the consent-based rape models ("no means no" or "only yes means yes" models), but rather to highlight the importance of consent to sex crimes and to emphasize the basic guideline for consent
The article critically discusses the special definition of infant homicide by the mother. Unlike traditional Georgian books, this essay analyzes the causes of neonaticide and its historical, cultural ...and socio-economic contexts, under the influence of which it has taken the form it has today. The traditional argument for the lenient punishment of neonaticide is the direct link between a woman's psychosis and childbirth trauma, which is criti- cized in this article and supports a new understanding of neonaticide and ways to solve it, which is based on the findings of old and new research on neonaticide conducted in various countries (including Georgia). Therefore, the article supports the position that neonaticide (art. 112) should be abolished because it is sexist and consti- tutes an echo of patriarchal consciousness in law. The position is supported in the article, according to which the medicalization of neonaticide is assessed as a "legal concoction". The article focuses on the causes and contexts of neonaticide, which is important for a critical understand- ing of neonaticide and the development of Georgian criminal law in this regard. Thus, the article supports the view that neonaticide is discriminatory based on the gender and age of the child. The mitigation or complete exculpation should be based on an individual analysis of each case. This re- quires the application of the general provisions of diminished responsibility and insanity and the increase in the practice of examining them concerning neonaticide. Taking into account the analysis of the modern Georgian context, the article supports the change of the mentioned norm in parallel with the promotion and strengthening of the practical realization of women's rights by the state.
PDF