'We definitely won’t repeal the laws': Georgian Dream’s response to Venice Commission

JAMnews

Tbilisi

Georgian Dream’s response

The Georgian Dream parliamentary speaker, Shalva Papuashvili, said the latest Venice Commission report on the party’s recently passed laws is a clear example of the commission producing “politicised conclusions” rather than focusing on legal analysis.

On 15 October, the OSCE’s Venice Commission published its assessment of the repressive laws passed by Georgian Dream restricting foreign funding, calling on the government to repeal the law on the registration of foreign agents — Georgia’s equivalent of the US FARA — as well as amendments to the laws on grants and broadcasting that limit media and NGO access to foreign financing.

In six months, Georgia passed five laws restricting media. Here’s a breakdown

These laws ban foreign-funded media, increase state control, and punish journalists for criticizing authorities

Tbilisi Mayor Kakhi Kaladze said that those funding the [Western-backed] coup do not want these laws to be adopted.

Levan Makhashvili, chair of Georgian Dream’s Euro-Integration Committee, also responded to the Venice Commission’s critical report, saying the party had “not sought the commission’s opinion.”

Georgian Dream’s response to Venice Commission

Comment from Shalva Papuashvili

Georgian Dream’s response to the Venice Commission. Shalva Papuashvili

“Unfortunately, the Venice Commission completely changed its course several years ago. Previously, it issued clear legal opinions, but in recent years we have seen politicized conclusions and reports.

This opinion is a clear example that the Venice Commission now focuses on drawing political conclusions instead of legal analysis.

For instance, when discussing the foreign agents registration law in the United States, they do not dare claim it violates the rule of law, <…> yet they make such claims regarding Georgia’s foreign agents registration law,” said Shalva Papuashvili.

Georgian vs. American 'foreign agent' law: What's the difference?

Experts: “What matters is not where the law comes from, but who enforces it.”

Comment from Kakha Kaladze

“With these laws, we and society can monitor where the funds coming into Georgia are coming from, who provides them, and how they are spent—whether on politics, attempts to divide society, increasing polarization, or financing extremist and violent groups. Society has the right to know all of this.

That is why these laws face such aggressive opposition. The law on ‘foreign agents’ has long existed in European countries and the United States. There, they even call for stricter rules to make NGO funding more transparent.

But in Georgia, those seeking to fund coups naturally do not want such laws, because it would make everything clear. Society knows who stands for the country and who works against it.

Our position is simple. We are ready to sit down, discuss, and hear arguments about why these laws are supposedly harmful and how they contradict Georgia’s European future,” the capital’s mayor said.