
Watchdogs Criticize Court’s Authorization to Access Information of “Vote for Europe” Movement
On September 16, Georgian watchdogs issued condemnatory statements regarding the Tbilisi City Court’s decision to authorize the Anti-Corruption Bureau to access the personal data – bank account information and information related to the activities, of the founders of the newly launched “Vote for Europe” movement and the organization itself.
GYLA’s Assessment
The Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association underlines that according to international standards during the pre-election period “non-party members of the campaign” or in other words “third actors” play an important role and have the right to collect donations independently, without cooperating with other political actors, and within the framework of the right to freedom of expression to conduct a campaign supporting or opposing a certain political party.
Although there are some “reasonable” and “proportionate” regulations and restrictions that the state can apply with proper justification, they must not unconditionally restrict the rights of “third actors”. The state should refrain from exercising excessive and arbitrary control” and these restrictions must be proportionate and duly justified.
GYLA also notes that the mandate of the Anti-Corruption Bureau includes monitoring the financial activities of three types of entities- political parties, electoral subjects and individuals with declared electoral ambitions. It has the authority to request information, except for state secrets, from any person, and may petition the court to obtain non-public information. The Bureau’s requests must be justified and must specify the purpose, scope, and duration of the data requested, the watchdog stresses.
GYLA notes, that no document was attached to the request to confirm that any of the entities mentioned were under official surveillance. Instead, the Bureau described “Vote for Europe” as engaging in pre-election political activities to discourage support for a particular political party. Consequently, the Bureau considered the campaign subject to the legal provisions governing donations. However, the Bureau did not clarify the legal basis that gave it the authority to submit the petition or to enforce the rules on this matter, as outlined in Article 25(4).
GYLA also notes that the Bureau must justify and the court must review not only the purpose of the information request, but also the need for the amount of information and its compatibility with the purpose, which neither the Bureau nor the court did in this case.”
The watchdog says that financial oversight powers related to revenue transparency should not be used to restrict civic activism or freedom of expression, essential to holding governments accountable through public debate. It is particularly important to protect the free dissemination of constitutionally protected information during election periods, the watchdog said.
The watchdog notes that the lack of institutional independence of the Anti-Corruption Bureau raises concerns about the arbitrary use of its authority, especially when its decisions are unsubstantiated. This undermines public trust in the institution. In such circumstances, it becomes crucial for the court to act as a balancing force and protector of rights by ensuring fair and impartial judgment. However, in this case, the court of first instance failed to fulfill its role, as its ruling did not address any key issues relevant to the case.
GYLA calls on the Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Court to be guided by compliance with the requirements of the law and legal principles, to conduct their activities on the basis of relevant justifications, and in the process of monitoring to assess the risks of disproportionate restriction of the fundamental rights of individuals.
GDI’s Assessment
The Georgian Democracy Initiative also responded to the Anti-Corruption Bureau’s decision noting: “We believe that the decision of the Anti-Corruption Bureau to start checking the personal financial accounts of the civic movement and its founders due to statements about the resignation of the Georgian Dream government is completely illegal and represents a gross and unprecedented case of violation of freedom of expression.”
The watchdog notes that the Bureau views the NGO “Vote for Europe” as having a political goal and seeks to monitor its finances. The Bureau cited “Vote for Europe’s” civic activities and the founders’ public statements, which the Court interpreted as political actions aimed at discouraging support for the Georgian Dream party. However, according to the law “On Political Associations of Citizens,” political goals must involve a public declaration of intent to gain power through elections, and the law protects freedom of expression, civil activity, and pre-election agitation from such restrictions unless this intent is explicitly stated. Therefore, public political statements should fall under the law on freedom of expression.
Therefore, GDI believes that the actions of the Anti-Corruption Bureau and the decision of the Court violate the rights of the organization, as well as the rights of its founders to freedom of expression and private life.
The organization says will defend the rights of the organization in the Appeals Court and believes that the Anti-Corruption Bureau must stop interpreting the law “On Political Associations of Citizens” against freedom of expression and using its mandate for repression. The organization says that the Appeals Court of Tbilisi should declare the decision of the Court of First Instance illegal.
Also Read:
- 27/08/2024 – Anti-Corruption Bureau Head Demands Financial Transparency from Opposition Parties, IRI, NDI
This post is also available in: ქართული (Georgian) Русский (Russian)