Coverage of religious rituals remains a persistent problem within the Public Broadcaster. While providing a live coverage of the ritual commonly known as the tradition of "The Descent of the Easter Fire" from Jerusalem on April 12, 2015, the commentators made statements that were discriminatory to Armenians as well as to the Armenian Apostolic Church. It appeared to be a deliberate manipulation of religious sentiments.

Commentators, who were invited by the channel and who fall under the regulations determined in the Broadcasters’ Code of Conduct for original program presenters, used the Public Broadcaster’s airtime to promulgate and preach the primacy of the Orthodox religion over other confessions, making derogatory references to the Armenian Apostolic Church.

Tamila Mgaloblishvili, head of the expedition to Jerusalem:

"Armenians rush out first making a huge fuss ... to show the people waiting outside that the fire has descended, and well they do it in such a childish way, wanting to show the evidence that the fire has descended upon them. And they have been doing so for centuries."

Kakhaber Gogotishvili, Deacon:

"Such a childish behavior on their part always brings about a joy and a smile. They really come out first holding the fire. The fire is actually brought out by the Orthodox Patriarch but they run out childishly joyful and happy showing they had brought it out first ... "

A broadcaster should not use the invitation of an interested party as a commentator to attack a group that is not participating in the given program. A separate discussion about the Armenian Apostolic Church’s attitudes towards this religious ritual might be of interest. The Public Broadcaster is obliged to provide a balanced and unbiased coverage of any issues engaging in it all parties concerned.

In our opinion, the broadcaster failed to safeguard religious neutrality in this case, mandated by Article 16 (h) of the Georgian Law on Broadcasting. The law, in particular, requires the broadcaster to “ensure editorial independence, fairness and impartiality of programs; freedom from government, political, religious and commercial influence”.

At the same time, the Public Broadcaster's in-house Code of Conduct contains a detailed description of the rules that the broadcaster must account for when preparing religious programs. We think that, in this particular case, the Public Broadcaster has violated the following guiding principles spelled out in Article 15.4 of its own Code of Conduct:

• “When preparing programs or plots on religious subjects, one should know what may offend audiences. The authors and presenters of the programs, as well as journalists should take account of the opinions and peculiar features of religious groups existing in Georgia. What can be acceptable for representatives of one religion or faith might be unacceptable for others.”

• "Respondents and program contributors should not be allowed to denigrate the religious beliefs of others or offend the followers of a different religion or religious denomination.”

• “It is impermissible for a religious program to improperly exploit any susceptibilities of the audience, deride the religious views or beliefs, or stealthily promote one religious view or belief.”

We believe that leaving such violations unanswered amounts to a much more serious problem in its turn. On April 23, 2014, the Public Broadcaster’s Board of Trustees rejected the complaint filed by 9 non-governmental organizations and one individual; the complaint concerned a similar case dealing with the expressions of a cleric containing hate speech against the LGBT community. Reiterating our claims to the Public Broadcaster made a year ago, we urge its Board of Trustees and the Monitoring Board to ensure that the management carries out the following measures:

• To prevent further occurrences of similar incidents, pre-brief the invited commentators on the provisions spelled out in the Code of Conduct and decide upon the cooperation with the specific author only in the event of mutual consent;

Although the anti-discrimination provisions are included in the Code of Conduct of broadcasters as well as the Public Broadcaster’s in-house Code of Conduct, given the specific case, we consider it appropriate for the Public Broadcaster to additionally develop more detailed regulations; this will create efficient mechanisms for avoiding similar risks while broadcasting live. To do so, we advise it to share the experience of Western countries, including the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), with respect to the established editorial guidelines for live broadcasting that envisage periodic updates based on practical experience.