Council of Europe calls for repeal of “foreign influence” law

One of the commissions of the Strabourg institution considers that the measures provided for by the law “do not correspond to the requirements of legality, legitimacy, necessity in a democratic society and proportionality”.

Published


Update


Reading time: 1 min

The headquarters of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg (Bas-Rhin), February 12, 2024. (PHILEMON HENRY/SIPA / SIPA)

Its adoption in Parliament sparked massive protests in Georgia. In a document published Tuesday May 21, the Council of Europe “highly recommend” in Tbilisi to repeal its law on “foreign influence”. The Caucasian country is one of the 46 member states of the Strasbourg institution, which ensures respect for human rights on the continent. According to one of its commissions, the European Commission for Democracy through Law (or Venice Commission), “the restrictions imposed by law on the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of association and respect for private life are incompatible with the strict conditions established by the European Convention on Human Rights”.

Restrictions required by Georgia’s controversial ‘foreign influence’ law “do not correspond to the requirements of legality, legitimacy, necessity in a democratic society and proportionality”, she adds. The Venice Commission also regrets the conditions for the adoption of this law. This procedure, which gave rise to of the “massive reactions in the country”, “left no room for genuine debate and meaningful consultation”.

Adopted on May 14, the bill carried by the Georgian government and the Georgian Dream party in power, which draws inspiration from the legislation in force in Russia to repress opponents, plans to require any NGO or media receiving more than 20% of its funding from abroad to register as “an organization pursuing the interests of a foreign power” and to submit to administrative control.

For the Council of Europe, “the law has the objective effect of risking stigmatization, silencing and ultimately eliminating associations and media that receive even a small part of their funds from abroad”. Especially since “the risk is great that the associations and media concerned are those which criticize the authorities and that their elimination will harm an open and informed public debate”.


source site-25