“Young Barristers” responds to the Tbilisi City Court’s decision of May 18, 2018, which restrained manifestation right of drivers during working hours.  

According to Chief Lawyer of “Young Barristers”, Ruslan Aleksidze, this decision is in conflict with the Constitution of Georgia, international acts and violates not only Georgian laws, also is in conflict with Article 10 of European Convention of Human Rights. 

Ruslan Aleksidze remarks, that employers’ manifestation right is protected by the article 33 of Constitution of Georgia which clarifies – “The right to strike shall be recognized. The procedure for exercising this right shall be determined by law. The guarantees for the activity of offices of vital importance shall also be established by law.” Constitutional rights are general, which are specified with regulations and laws, so restriction of constitutional rights by laws is impermissible. Realization standards of the strike is enacted by Labor Code of Georgia. According to the 50th article, If human life and health, safety of the natural environment, or a third person's property, or the work of a vital importance is in danger, the court may postpone the start of a strike or a lockout for a maximum of 30 days, or suspend a started strike or lockout for the same period.

The resolution of Minister of Labor, Health and Social Affairs N01-43/ნ was enacted for realization of Article 33 of Constitution. This resolution restrains right to strike for employers, employedin specific sectors, but there is no metropolitan employees in this list. The right to strike is enforcing mechanism to employer by employees their arguments and demands to be shared and realized. 

In this case, there are two important legal aspects: First – what is disputable for this suit and second – is legal or not restricting right to strike before the beginning of legal actions and process. In the article 51 of Labor Code of Georgia we read: “The court shall make a decision to declare a strike or a lockout illegal that shall be promptly notified to the parties involved. A court decision on declaring a strike or a lockout illegal shall be executed without delay.” According to this part, avoid of cooperation and negotiation from employees can be the reason of restriction. 

For this case, there isone important circumstance – collision of legal norms. According to Labor Code of Georgia, restriction could be delayed for 30 days but Civil Procedure Code of Georgia clarifies that restriction can be valid until the end of case. But there is a case of hierarchy, established byLaw of Normative Acts of Georgia and according to this law, organ law is superior thanusual law, that’s why, court should have restricted right to strike for only 30 days according to organic law - Labor Code of Georgia. 

In conclusion, except circumstances mentioned above, this decision degrades constitutional right to strike because real explanation of this right is employees problems or demands to be revealed and employer to realize real opportunities and meanings of jobs done by strikers. Also, halt of Metropolitan would makea collapse of transport issues for the city, which is clear drawback of the State. 

Constitution declares the rights of all persons and citizens. Therefore, arguments about correlation between city population and strikers is very strange and unacceptable for democratic society.