The Same Law is Adopted by Turkey More Stringently, Yet the West Has No Comments on It: Kobakhidze

The Prime Minister of Georgia, Irakli Kobakhidze, while justifying the necessity of the foreign agents law, stated that the authorities do not want the country to face "Ukrainization," "Maidan," or a "second front" against Russia.

"We cannot find common ground on the main issues. Some want to muddy the waters; we do not want that. Some want a 'Maidan' here; we do not want that. Some want a second front; we do not want that. This is the main reason for the disagreements. Therefore, there is no room for discussions, since the main question is the subject of these disagreements," he said in an interview with Georgian Public Broadcaster First Channel.

Kobakhidze commented on the Venice Commission's proposal to repeal the foreign agents law, adding that the authorities should not allow "Ukrainization" of Georgia. For this, he emphasized the need for transparency in funding non-governmental organizations, which, according to him, have attempted twice to initiate a revolution in the country.

The Prime Minister expressed his belief that the Venice Commission has "abandoned professional integrity." He highlighted that the primary goal of the proposed law is to protect national sovereignty and the security of the country.

According to him, since 2022, Georgia has attracted the interest of Global forces as a potential second front against Russia, which explains the West's attacks on the law regarding "transparency of foreign influence." "Since early 2022, there has been a serious interest in opening a 'second front' in Georgia that would weaken Russia's positions, but it would destroy our country. Such interest still exists today," he noted.

He pointed out that Turkey has adopted the exact same law, "even more stringently than we have," yet the West has no comments regarding it. Earlier, Georgian media disseminated the Venice Commission’s report urging the republic’s authorities to "repeal the law in its current form." The document states that the law does not meet the stringent requirements contained in the European Convention on Human Rights, and its fundamental flaws will negatively affect freedom of expression, the inviolability of private life, participation in public affairs, and the prohibition of discrimination.