Expert questions Venice Commission’s authority after US withdrawal

Expert David Chikhelidze has commented on the recent US decision to end cooperation with the Venice Commission, raising questions about the body’s professional independence and real influence.

Writing on social media on Thursday, he noted that for years, Georgia’s opposition had actively cited Venice Commission reports and recommendations as ultimate truths, pressuring the government to implement them fully, while any dissent was portrayed as a rejection of Western values or democracy.

Chikhelidze emphasized that the government repeatedly pointed out that some of the Commission’s assessments exceeded legal frameworks, were politically motivated, and often impractical. He argued that the US withdrawal now highlighted concerns over the Commission’s impartiality and its evolution from a body providing deep legal analysis to one serving specific political agendas.

He further suggested that the Commission has been used by European bureaucrats as a tool to influence domestic affairs in countries they sought to pressure. 

Against this backdrop, Chikhelidze said the Georgian opposition faced a dilemma - either acknowledge that the Venice Commission’s authority was not absolute and its conclusions could be biased, or openly contradict the US president’s decision - both politically risky options that tested the opposition’s principles and willingness to critically reassess international institutions.