PM claims ODIHR’s conclusion on domestic transparency law lacks legal arguments

Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze on Friday claimed the conclusion of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe on the domestic controversial law on transparency of foreign influence was “not based on any legal arguments” and was mirroring the opinion of the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe.

Kobakhidze’s comments followed a statement by the ODIHR, which on Thursday concluded that Georgia’s newly approved law on transparency of foreign influence contained “serious deficiencies” that made it “incompatible” with international human rights standards and the country’s commitments as an OSCE state, calling it to be rescinded.

In a statement the Office said the law, which defines civil society and media outlets as “organisations pursuing the interests of a foreign power” if they receive over 20 percent of their  funding from abroad, was falling short of the “strict requirements laid down in international human rights law”.

The OSCE/ODIHR document has exactly the same value as the Venice Commission document. This is a recommendation document and we are bound to share only those comments that are based on legal arguments. In this case, the OSCE/ODIHR document is not based on any legal arguments”, the PM claimed.

The Government head also noted that a document, which claimed that the transparency was “bad” can not have any legal significance.

Therefore, we will act according to the principles, on which the European Union was founded from the beginning”, he added.

The Venice Commission last week “strongly recommended” the Georgian Government to repeal the legislative piece in its current form, saying its “fundamental flaws” would involve “significant negative consequences” for the freedoms of association and expression, the right to privacy, the right to participate in public affairs, as well as the prohibition of discrimination.