Kakha Gogolashvili criticizes misinterpretation of NGO registration law, highlights its flaws

Kakha Gogolashvili, a Senior-Fellow and the Director of European Studies at the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies, has responded to “misunderstanding” over the registration of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) under the Foreign Influence Transparency Law requiring entities receiving foreign funding to register as pursuant of foreign interests.

Gogolashvili noted in a social media post that while 33,000 NGOs were often cited as needing to register, the reality was far different. He emphasized the majority of the organizations neither receive foreign funding nor were actively functioning, challenging the assumption that all NGOs were affected by the law.

“The law mandates the registration of organizations that receive at least 20% of their funding from abroad, whether directly or indirectly, such as through sub-grants or service contracts,” Gogolashvili explained. He estimated that only about 400-500 organizations were directly funded from abroad, with possibly another 1,000-1,500 receiving indirect funding. He stressed that approximately 250 organizations currently planning to register accounted for about 10-15 percent of those actually required to do so.

Gogolashvili argued that this discrepancy revealed a significant flaw in the law. “In any democratic state, a law that 85-90 percent of its subjects do not comply with – or even 50% – would be immediately repealed by the government or struck down by the courts because it’s impractical to enforce such a law. A law cannot be considered democratic if such a high percentage of its subjects do not adhere to it,” he said.

Drawing a parallel with Lope de Vega’s 16th-century play Fuente Ovejuna, Gogolashvili illustrated the broader implications of enforcing unjust laws. In the play, the king pardons an entire village for their collective rebellion against an oppressive feudal lord, recognizing the injustice of punishing the entire community for the actions of a few.
“This historical example shows that even centuries ago, the unjust application of law was recognized and rectified. Yet, here we are in the 21st century, facing similar issues,” Gogolashvili concluded.