Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has criticized the Venice Commission’s recent conclusion on the controversial foreign influence bill, asserting that the Commission’s findings lacked substantial legal arguments. In an interview with the public broadcaster, Kobakhidze expressed his disappointment and disapproval of the Commission's report.
"I read the conclusion and as a lawyer I can say that the Venice Commission has been denied professional dignity at all. I just felt uncomfortable as a lawyer when I read this document, so weak was the face that the Venice Commission showed. They have nothing to say and the document is full of absurd entries and lies. Along with a lot of lies, there is a completely absurd legal reasoning without arguments," Kobakhidze stated.
Kobakhidze further claimed that the public was less concerned with the Commission's statements and more focused on the underlying truth of the matter. He emphasized the importance of national sovereignty, suggesting that Georgia’s current level of independence was “unprecedented”.
"That's why we sometimes say that today our country is sovereign, like never before. This means that he appreciates the independence of our country more than he did even 3-4 years ago," Kobakhidze added.The Prime Minister also criticized the Venice Commission for allegedly opposing transparency, implying that the Commission was influenced to view transparency negatively.
On May 21, the Venice Commission issued an urgent conclusion regarding the bill, saying it could restrict media and civil society activities in Georgia. The Commission’s assessment was highly critical, highlighting significant concerns about the bill’s potential impact on fundamental rights and democratic values.
The Venice Commission’s report strongly recommended that the law be withdrawn in its current form. It warned that the bill’s inherent flaws could severely undermine freedom of association and expression, the right to privacy, public participation, and the prohibition of discrimination. The Commission concluded that the enactment of this law would be detrimental to open, informed public debate, pluralism, and democracy in Georgia.
