Georgian Parliament Speaker: “hidden spending” in foreign country does not suit “European values”

Georgian Parliament Speaker Shalva Papuashvili on Thursday said “hidden spending” of money in foreign countries “does not suit European values” in reaction to the ongoing controversy around the bill on transparency of foreign influence, reintroduced by the ruling Georgian Dream party after its original retraction last year.

The legislative piece was withdrawn last year after public protests but has now been reintroduced to criticism from a part of the domestic opposition, non-governmental sector and diplomatic representations in the country, with the opposition branding it as a “Russian law”.

The draft law calls for registration of non-commercial legal entities and media outlets in the country as “pursuing the interests of a foreign power” if they derive more than 20 percent of their funding from abroad.

“[W]hat does not suit European values is the hidden spending of money in another country. Unfortunately, this is done by some European and American foundations [in Georgia]”, Papuashvili said.

The Speaker noted he had “spent a year trying to convince donors and diplomats” that it was “important that when money is spent from their budgets in Georgia, this money should be transparent” to the Georgian public.

“Unfortunately, I could not convince them - this funding is still hidden, and it turned out by chance that this money goes to a partisan moneybox, to radical groups”, he alleged.

So, the questions should be addressed not to Georgia and its citizens, but on the contrary, the Georgian citizens have questions regarding European and American foundations [and] why they are hiding this funding. They themselves know best that this funding is hidden”, he added.

“There is an old Roman saying: what is permissible for Jupiter is not permissible for a cow. I have the impression that some people consider themselves to be Jupiter, and the Georgian people - a cow”, Papuashvili continued.

The lawmaker also said “some European and American foundations act in Georgia using the methods of special services and fund domestic parties and radical groups in secret” and called it “not a[n example of] European approach”.

He further noted in the circumstance “the Georgian people have the right to regulate this matter through legislation and receive information” on purposes of funding of organisations.