On May 21, the Venice Commission issued its Urgent Opinion on the foreign agents law, criticizing the law and strongly recommending that the Georgian government should repeal it.
We have compiled the initial reactions from across the international and domestic, Georgian political spectrum:
Domestic Reactions
Ruling majority
Kakha Kaladze, GD Secretary General, Mayor of Tbilisi: “The opinion of the Venice Commission confirms only one thing: that there are no legal or other arguments against the Transparency Law. Unfortunately, instead of legal discussions, the Venice Commission presented a politically biased assessment, distorting the facts and telling us that the law should be repealed, although it did not consider it necessary to provide any legal justification or substantive argument. The Venice Commission gives the recommendation that Georgia should not require transparency of civil society and media, as if this is an undemocratic act. Of course, the Georgian population was waiting for reasoned, professional and concrete arguments, but instead we were left with the political messages of certain groups. This published opinion is saturated only with political messages and has no legal objection, no substantive discussion and no clarification of why transparency is bad”.
Nino Tsilosani, GD MP: “It is already clear that whether it is the opinion of the Venice Commission or other international reactions, the only thing they serve is to raise the protest impulse and do not in any way address the content of the law…The very fact that the Venice Commission contends that Georgia already had a legislation ensuring transparency of grants and funding, and a number of such factual errors that do not correspond to reality, once again assure the Georgian society that no matter how loud the name of the institution may be, the Venice Commission or any other, it cannot take the precedence … over the common sense… So the Georgian society has reasoned correctly and decided to support the Law on Transparency”.
Guram Macharashvili, People’s Power’s MP: “The Venice Commission could have added “No to the Russian law” [popular slogan at the ongoing protest rallies against the law] at the end of the opinion -this was its content. In addition to the legal objections, the whole political process was described in it, which is completely beyond the competence of the Venice Commission. This is the organization that gives the legal opinion on the draft law, i.e. it writes the legal objections to the draft law. Except for two or three sentences, we have actually seen the political rally “No to the Russian Law”, which actually failed in Georgia… All in all, they have made the Venice Commission say that “transparency is bad”.
Opposition
Mamuka Khazaradze, Lelo for Georgia: “The opinion of the Venice Commission unfortunately makes it impossible for us to achieve the opening of accession negotiations with the EU and gives the Member States of the European Union a basis to start working on the suspension of visa liberalization. This is the result of the Russian policy of the Georgian Dream. This is a direct message! The Russian law violates Georgia’s obligations under the European Convention. After this, there is nothing left to say, the Georgian Dream government betrays the interests declared by Georgia and established by its Constitution!”
Tina Bokuchava, UNM: “To put it simply, rejecting the recommendations of the Venice Commission is sabotaging the European future of our country. Ivanishvili’s Russian government, using faceless loyalists, is not only openly saying that it will not implement the Venice Commission’s recommendations, but it also attacks the Venice Commission and casts doubt on its competence”.
Paata Manjgaladze, Strategy Aghmashenebeli: “How can one say about the Venice Commission that it makes political assessments? It is you [Georgian Dream] who are making political assessments, it is you who are out of touch with reality. In short, what the Venice Commission has said is that this is a Russian passport and with this Russian passport we will not be able to get to Europe”.
Mikheil Daushvili, For Georgia: “The Venice Commission, stemming from legal judgment and reasoning, has directly …very strictly urged the Georgian Dream to repeal this law. The Georgian Dream has always had the argument for the others to enter into substantive discussions, and the Venice Commission has explained, in very substantive terms, why this law should not have been adopted and why it must be repealed now.”
Khatia Dekanoidze, Euro-optimists parliamentary faction: “Such a strict opinion, where the Venice Commission directly says about the adopted law…that it must be immediately withdrawn and repealed, I think is very rare.”
International Reactions
Josep Borrell, EU High Representative: “The Council of Europe Venice Commission has strongly recommended Georgia to repeal the Law on Foreign Influence in its current form. We call on the authorities to follow the recommendation in view of safeguarding the fundamental elements of Georgia’s democracy.”
Marija Pejčinović Burić, Secretary General of the Council of Europe: “I call upon Georgian authorities to implement the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission’s recommendations with a view of bringing the Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence in line with European standards. Council of Europe stands ready to provide assistance.”
Gabrielius Landsbergis, FM of Lithuania: “As Chair of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, I thank the Venice Commission for strongly recommending repeal of the “foreign influence” law, and I express hope that Georgia’s leaders will do so.”
Margus Tsahkna, FM of Estonia: “The Venice Commission of the Council of Europe strong recommendation to repeal the “foreign influence” law should be a clear sign to Georgian leadership not to adopt it and turn Georgia back to European norms and principles.”
Petras Auštrevičius, MEP: “Venice Commission concludes that restrictions set by the Law on Foreign Agents adopted in Georgia is incompatible with the strict test set out in ECHR and ICCPR and do not meet the requirements of legality, legitimacy, necessity in a democratic society. It’s a Russian law!”
More to follow…
Also Read:
This post is also available in: ქართული (Georgian) Русский (Russian)