Sioridze: Venice Commission Opinion Legally Invalidates Georgian Dream's Restrictions

According to Giorgi Sioridze, one of the leaders of "Lelo-Dzlieri Sakartvelo", the Venice Commission opinion on the so-called "grants legislation" legally dismantles the repressive restrictions of Georgian Dream with legal arguments.

According to Sioridze, Georgian Dream will pay a serious political price both inside the country and abroad. As one confirmation of this, he cited the opinion of the Venice Commission published today.

According to him, Georgian Dream's speakers, especially Kobakhidze and Papuashvili, argued from the pedestal of qualified lawyers that the adoption of the legislation was necessary to protect Georgia's sovereignty and to neutralize foreign influences and interference. Sioridze says that the response of the Venice Commission experts to this propaganda is as follows:

"These laws do not aim to protect and strengthen Georgia's sovereignty and to protect political parties from foreign influence and external interference. They impose disproportionate and unnecessary restrictions on the fundamental rights and political freedoms of Georgian citizens. The legislation contradicts international standards of pluralism and democracy. Instead of protecting Georgia's sovereignty, constitutional system and political parties from foreign influence and external interference, this legislation poses a threat of undermining them".

According to Sioridze, the legislation restricts not only organizations but in reality bans political activity for thousands of people. In his assessment, the Ivanishvili regime wants to eliminate all political activity in the country and to ban not only opposition parties but everything that stands in the way of "Georgian Dream".

The Venice Commission published an opinion on amendments to the law "On Political Associations of Citizens". The commission considers that the legislation does not serve its declared aim, namely protecting the constitutional order from being changed by violent means, from threats to independence, from undermining territorial integrity, from war propaganda, violence, and national, regional, religious or social hatred. According to the opinion, instead of protecting the constitutional order, this legislation threatens its fundamental erosion and hinders the formation and existence of the opposition.