Return Risk Assessment: Georgia (2026) — DV Victims and LGBTQ+ Individuals

Last updated: 7 October 2026

Photo: Georgia - Gill M L

Georgia return risk varies by group, but for domestic violence victims and LGBTQ+ individuals, it is high. Georgia is often seen as a democratic, reforming country. It received EU candidate status in December 2023. Some asylum decision-makers assume this means Georgia is safe. That assumption is wrong for specific groups. The EU itself suspended Georgia's accession process in 2024 because of human rights concerns. This report assesses the Georgia return risk for each category of vulnerable individuals. It is designed for expert witnesses and asylum decision-makers who need to evaluate whether returning someone to Georgia would expose them to serious harm.

The "Georgia Is Democratic" Problem

Georgia presents a difficult challenge for asylum decision-makers. On paper, Georgia looks like a country that should be safe. It has a Constitution that protects human rights. It has anti-discrimination laws. It ratified the Istanbul Convention. It was granted EU candidate status. Decision-makers sometimes rely on these facts to refuse asylum claims from Georgians.[1]

However, the gap between Georgia's legal framework and its practical application is enormous. The EU suspended Georgia's accession process specifically because the government failed to meet democratic standards. The foreign agents law, the crackdown on protests, the anti-LGBTQ+ legislation, and the failure to protect domestic violence victims all contributed to this decision. Georgia's formal legal provisions do not translate into effective protection for vulnerable groups.

The correct approach to Georgia return risk is individual and evidence-based. A general assumption that Georgia is "safe" or "democratic" is not enough. Each case must be assessed on its own facts. The question is not whether Georgia has laws. The question is whether those laws actually protect the specific person being returned. For many DV victims and LGBTQ+ individuals, the answer is clearly no. For detailed country of origin information, see our country reports section.

Categories at Risk: Detailed Assessment

Domestic Violence Victims: HIGH Risk

Women returning to Georgia after fleeing domestic violence face a high risk of further harm. The evidence is clear and consistent. Georgia has only five state-funded shelters with approximately 100 places for a population of 3.7 million. Police routinely treat domestic violence as a "family matter." Restraining orders are issued but not monitored. When abusers break them, prosecution is rare. The GREVIO baseline evaluation report (2022) documented "systemic failures" in the Georgian response to domestic violence.[2]

For a woman who has already fled, returning means going back to the abuser or to the same community where the abuser lives. There is no witness protection. There is no anonymous relocation system. Georgia is a small country where family networks make hiding nearly impossible. Femicides continue to occur despite women having previously reported abuse. The pattern is well-documented: report, police inaction, escalation, serious harm or death.

The economic barriers to leaving an abusive relationship are also severe. Many Georgian women have no independent income. Property is in the husband's name. Social stigma punishes women who leave. Their own families may refuse to support them. Without resources, alternatives, or state protection, returned DV victims face a real and immediate risk of persecution.

LGBTQ+ Individuals: HIGH Risk

LGBTQ+ individuals face high Georgia return risk. Social hostility is extreme. Over 80% of Georgians oppose LGBTQ+ rights. The Georgian Orthodox Church actively promotes anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment. Mob violence has occurred repeatedly. The July 5, 2021 attack on Tbilisi Pride left 53 people injured and one cameraman dead. No successful Pride event has ever been held in Georgia.[3]

The police response to anti-LGBTQ+ violence is a critical factor. Research consistently shows that police refuse to take reports, mock victims, and sometimes threaten to out them to their families. The 2024 anti-propaganda law has made the situation worse. It gives the state a legal tool to persecute LGBTQ+ expression. Combined with police inaction against violence, this creates a situation where the state is both unwilling and unable to protect LGBTQ+ individuals.

An LGBTQ+ person returned to Georgia faces violence from non-state actors (family, community, organised groups) with no state protection. Internal relocation is not viable because social attitudes are hostile nationwide. There are no LGBTQ+ community spaces or support networks. Being outed in any Georgian city carries the same risks.

Political Activists Post-2024: MEDIUM-HIGH Risk

Since the contested October 2024 elections and the subsequent protests, political activists face an increased Georgia return risk. The government has arrested protest organisers, student leaders, and civil society workers. The foreign agents law targets anyone connected to internationally funded organisations. Individuals who were visible in the protest movement are at risk of criminal prosecution, administrative harassment, and surveillance.[4]

The risk level depends on the individual's profile. High-profile opposition leaders face the greatest danger. Rank-and-file protesters who were not identified face lower risk. However, Georgia's security services have been documented photographing and filming protesters, so even less prominent individuals may be identified. Those who spoke publicly against the government, posted on social media, or were detained during protests face a higher risk upon return.

Journalists: MEDIUM Risk

Journalists working for independent media face a medium Georgia return risk. Physical attacks during protests have been documented. The foreign agents law affects media outlets that receive international funding. Some journalists face criminal charges related to their reporting. However, the risk varies by profile. Journalists who work for government-aligned media face no risk. Journalists who have publicly criticised the government or covered sensitive topics face higher risk. The Committee to Protect Journalists and Reporters Without Borders have both documented the worsening environment for press freedom in Georgia.[5]

Documented Harm Upon Return

There is evidence of harm occurring to individuals returned to Georgia. DV victims who were returned to Georgia or who returned voluntarily have been documented as suffering further violence from their abusers. In several cases documented by the Public Defender's Office, women who had previously been abroad returned to abusers who had not changed their behaviour. Some of these cases ended in serious injury.[6]

LGBTQ+ individuals who returned or were returned have reported attacks, harassment, and family violence. The Women's Initiatives Supporting Group (WISG) has documented cases of LGBTQ+ people who were outed after returning from abroad. In some cases, their asylum applications abroad had become known to their families. This led to violence and expulsion from the family home. For expert assistance with these cases, see our expert witness directory.

The fact that a country has ratified international conventions or has adopted domestic legislation does not, in itself, demonstrate that effective protection is available. What matters is whether those protections operate in practice.
Horvath v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] 1 AC 489 (HL)

State Protection Assessment

For DV victims and LGBTQ+ individuals, state protection in Georgia does not meet the standard required by the Horvath test. The Horvath standard requires that the state be willing and able to provide a reasonable level of protection. It does not require perfect protection, but it does require a system that operates in practice and not just in theory.[7]

For DV victims, the police response is inadequate. Restraining orders are not enforced. Shelters are severely insufficient. The GREVIO report confirms systemic failures. For LGBTQ+ individuals, the police are not just inadequate but actively hostile. The 2024 law makes the state itself a source of persecution. In both cases, the state fails the Horvath test.

The judiciary is improving in some areas but faces its own problems. The "clan" of judges, political interference, and slow proceedings all undermine access to justice. For DV and LGBTQ+ cases, courts are rarely used because police fail to bring cases in the first place. The entire system depends on a police force that does not take these cases seriously. Even if a case reaches court, the process takes months or years, during which the victim has no effective protection.

Internal Relocation Assessment

Georgia covers only 69,700 square kilometres. It has a population of 3.7 million. Social networks are strong. Family connections cross regional boundaries. In a country this small, hiding from an abuser or from social stigma is extremely difficult. There is no witness protection programme for DV victims. Shelter addresses are not always confidential.[8]

For LGBTQ+ individuals, social attitudes are hostile everywhere in Georgia. Moving from one city to another does not change the fundamental environment. The anti-propaganda law applies nationwide. There are no LGBTQ+-friendly areas or communities. For political activists, the state apparatus operates nationally, so relocation within Georgia does not remove the risk of prosecution or surveillance.

Key UK Case Law

Several legal principles are relevant to Georgian asylum claims in the UK. The following case law should be considered:

• Horvath v SSHD [2001] 1 AC 489: Establishes the sufficiency of protection test. The state must provide a reasonable level of protection that is willing and able to operate in practice.
• HJ (Iran) v SSHD [2010] UKSC 31: The "discretion reasoning" is impermissible. Decision-makers cannot expect LGBTQ+ individuals to hide their identity to avoid persecution.
• K and Fornah v SSHD [2006] UKHL 46: Establishes that women fleeing domestic violence in countries where the state fails to protect can constitute a particular social group.
• Home Office CPIN: Georgia: The country policy and information notes on Georgia acknowledge protection gaps for DV and LGBTQ+ cases, though they require careful reading alongside independent evidence.[9]

Representatives preparing Georgian cases should present a combination of general country evidence and individual-specific evidence. GREVIO reports, ECRI reports, WISG research, and Public Defender's Office data provide strong general evidence. Individual evidence such as police reports, medical records, shelter referrals, and witness statements strengthen the case further. For guidance on building asylum claims, see our asylum guide.

Conclusion

The Georgia return risk for DV victims and LGBTQ+ individuals is high. These groups face persecution from non-state actors and cannot obtain effective state protection. The legal framework exists but does not function in practice. Police are inadequate for DV victims and hostile toward LGBTQ+ individuals. Shelters are desperately insufficient. The 2024 anti-propaganda law has made the situation for LGBTQ+ Georgians even worse. Internal relocation does not solve these problems because Georgia is small and social attitudes are uniform across the country.

For political activists and journalists, the risk has increased since the contested 2024 elections. The foreign agents law and the crackdown on protests create a more dangerous environment for anyone who criticises the government. Each case must be assessed individually, but the general trend in Georgia is moving in the wrong direction for human rights.

Asylum decision-makers should not assume that Georgia is safe because it has EU candidate status or because it has progressive laws on paper. The evidence shows clear protection gaps for DV victims, LGBTQ+ individuals, and increasingly for political dissenters. Every Georgian asylum claim requires careful, evidence-based assessment that looks beyond the legal framework to the reality on the ground.