“The Venice Commission’s Opinion is the best example that the Commission has become a compiler of political conclusions rather than legal ones,” Shalva Papuashvili, Speaker of the Georgian Parliament, told journalists.

Papuashvili commented on the Venice Commission’s publication of its opinion on Georgia’s laws concerning foreign agent registration and grants.

According to him, the ruling team has long been saying that, regrettably, the Venice Commission has completely altered its approach over the past few years.

“Previously, the Venice Commission had clear legal opinions, and we have seen for several years now that these are political conclusions, political reports. This report is the best example that the Commission has become a compiler of political conclusions rather than legal ones. For instance, when they discuss FARA, which operates in America, they dare not even say that what operates in America contradicts the rule of law. Venice dares not challenge America, but they say, ‘Well, it exists there, but we’re talking about what is applied in Georgia.’ Let them at least have the courage to say that what is applied in America contradicts the rule of law,” Shalva Papuashvili stated.

According to him, it is clear to any lawyer that this is a political conclusion and has nothing whatsoever to do with the fundamental task that the Venice Commission once had regarding its legal opinions.

“As for stigmatisation, what does stigmatisation consist of? If there’s no stigmatisation in America, how can there be stigmatisation in Georgia? Are we somehow different sorts of people in America and Georgia, or what? This opinion is absolutely absurd: that what is acceptable in America is not acceptable for Georgians. If the Venice Commission must view us in such a segregationist manner, that’s quite another matter,” Shalva Papuashvili noted.