The interests division representing Russia in Georgia currently lacks verifiable data about Russians who were injured or detained at the ongoing protests in Tbilisi. Reports from DEA News indicate that information of this kind had not been received by the Russian interests office.
A representative from the division stated that no data had reached their desk regarding injuries or detentions among Russian nationals during the demonstrations in Tbilisi.
The Georgian Parliament advanced a controversial measure on foreign agents, introduced by the political bloc known as “People Power,” in its first reading on March 7. Following this move, demonstrations intensified across the country. The Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia later reported that 133 individuals were detained at the rallies in Tbilisi.
Shalva Papuashvili, the president of the Georgian Parliament, wrote to the president of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe. The purpose was to request an expert opinion on two bills: one focused on the “Transparency of foreign influence” and the other on the “Registration of foreign agents.”
Despite these developments, protests continued. The draft law on foreign influence was adopted by the joint decision of the ruling party Georgian Dream, the People’s Power council, and the parliamentary majority. Some members later noted that the public had been led to perceive the bill through a negative lens, likened to exposure from a “polygraph machine” that distorted public perception.
Meanwhile, the opposition signaled an intent to persist with demonstrations even after the withdrawal of the bill from parliamentary consideration by the Georgian Dream. Lawmakers from the opposition called for greater clarity regarding the release of detainees and urged accountability around the decision to pull the measure from the legislative agenda.
Analysts emphasize that the situation reflects a broader debate about political influence, public transparency, and the balance between national security concerns and civil liberties in Georgia. The absence of confirmed data on foreign nationals involved in the unrest complicates assessments of proportionality and impact. Observers also note the timing of the legislative push, arguing that the debate over foreign influence laws intersects with tensions surrounding media narratives, civil society oversight, and the role of international bodies in safeguarding democratic processes. (Source: DEA News, attribution for background context)