Vulgar TikToker loses free speech fight over bus lane rant at European court

(CN) — A Georgian food courier who went viral on TikTok for screaming “go fuck your mothers” at city officials over traffic reforms lost his free speech fight Tuesday after Europe’s top human rights court ruled the rant crossed the line into punishable abuse.

The European Court of Human Rights said Georgia did not violate the rights of activist and delivery driver Irakli Miladze when it fined him over a profanity-filled TikTok video attacking Tbilisi officials over the city’s transport overhaul.

Judges unanimously rejected Miladze’s argument that authorities unlawfully punished him for criticizing transport policies and what he saw as double standards in traffic enforcement, finding instead that the video amounted “to an attack on the personal dignity of the individuals concerned and constituted violent verbal aggression rather than political criticism.”

The anger had been building for years as Tbilisi tried to push residents out of cars and onto buses, scooters and public transit. Officials rolled out bus lanes, redesigned major avenues and promoted greener transport, but many residents complained the changes only worsened traffic while politically connected drivers seemed to ignore the rules without consequence.

One recurring target online was the so-called “Škoda-lanes,” a sarcastic nickname for accusations that white government cars, often tied to police or security services, freely used restricted bus lanes while delivery workers and commuters got fined.

Miladze, who described himself in court filings as both a courier and civil activist, filmed his TikTok rant after spending a snowy day weaving through Tbilisi traffic on delivery shifts in December 2022. The public video quickly blew up online, pulling in more than 100,000 views and hundreds of shares.

He warned viewers upfront that obscene language was coming. Then he launched into several minutes of insults aimed at city officials, police officers and security guards.

“Go fuck your mothers,” he repeatedly shouted while accusing authorities of hypocrisy and acting above ordinary residents. He also mocked officials for refusing to ride overcrowded buses and metro cars while scooter couriers working 12-hour shifts in snow and rain got ticketed for using bus lanes.

Georgian authorities charged Miladze with disorderly conduct and insulting law enforcement officers after the video blew up online. An appeals court later tossed the police insult charge, saying the rant targeted officers broadly rather than specific police actively on duty, but still upheld the disorderly conduct conviction and cut the penalty to the minimum fine allowed under Georgian law: 500 lari, roughly 180 euros (about $209) at the time.

Strasbourg judges backed that outcome Tuesday, putting unusual weight not just on the insults themselves, but on the machine powering them. TikTok’s algorithm, the court noted, is built to push short, emotionally charged videos rapidly across enormous audiences, especially younger users, making the platform fundamentally different from an angry comment muttered in a crowd or buried on a small blog.

“The court sees no element of political or social satire in the applicant’s speech,” the judges said. The court said much of the video offered little actual political argument and instead spiraled into degrading personal abuse aimed at identifiable officials.

Judges also brushed aside Miladze’s argument that viewers had effectively opted into the profanity because he warned them beforehand. The disclaimer, the court said, did little to reduce exposure since the video remained fully public and could still be pushed directly into users’ feeds, including minors scrolling TikTok’s recommendation algorithm.

Dirk Voorhoof, professor emeritus of media law at Ghent University and cofounder of the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, said the ruling largely reinforces Strasbourg case law on “wanton denigration” and degrading attacks aimed at identifiable people, while also sharpening how the court approaches abusive speech on platforms like TikTok.

“The impugned speech in this case constituted violent verbal aggression rather than political criticism or social satire,” Voorhoof noted.

He also pointed to the judges’ unusually detailed focus on TikTok itself, especially its “rapid algorithmic amplification and particularly high youth engagement,” along with the platform’s design around short videos that spread heavily among minors.

Judges also emphasized the relatively limited punishment. Authorities never removed the video, restricted Miladze’s TikTok account or stopped him from continuing his political activism online.

“The interference was therefore ‘necessary in a democratic society,’” the court concluded.

The ruling is not fully final yet. Either side can still ask within three months to send the case to the court’s Grand Chamber, though it accepts only a small fraction of those appeals.

Miladze’s lawyers and Georgia’s Justice Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

Courthouse News reporter Eunseo Hong is based in the Netherlands.