Day: April 7, 2026
The ruling Georgian Dream party has drafted further amendments to the controversial Law on Grants, explaining that part of the recently broadened definition of what amounts to a grant should not affect the funds disbursed by diplomatic and international organization missions that are “directly related” to their “own activities.”
The ruling party says further amendments are necessary to ensure “uniform interpretation.” Critics, on the other hand, have pointed to broader problems with ambiguity in drafting restrictive laws, suggesting the proposed amendments refer to commercial services contracted by diplomatic missions and predicting that more revisions may become necessary.
The amendments follow a restrictive package adopted by the disputed parliament on March 4, which, among others, significantly broadened the definition of a foreign “grant” that requires government approval. The March amendments also extended the law’s reach to cover technical and free-of-charge assistance, transfers from foreign organizations to their local branches in Georgia, and widened the list of entities considered as grant recipients, including foreign-based organizations working on Georgia-related issues. They also introduced criminal liability for violations, with penalties of up to six years in prison.
According to the March 4 version, grants can be “funds transferred in monetary or in-kind form” from a foreign organization or a foreign citizen to a Georgian organization, citizen, or resident “that are used or may be used for activities carried out or to be carried out to exert any influence on the Government of Georgia, state institutions, or any part of society, that are directed toward the formulation, implementation, or alteration of Georgia’s domestic or foreign policy, as well as used or may be used for activities arising from the political or public interests, approaches, or relations of a foreign government or a foreign political party.”
Under April’s proposed amendments, diplomatic missions accredited in Georgia, consular offices, or representations of international organizations will be exempt from the second part of that definition – funds that “used or may be used for activities arising from the political or public interests, approaches, or relations of a foreign government or a foreign political party.”
The proposed amendments do not provide any further specification of what type of funds exactly will be covered by the exemption. The explanatory note of the draft law, however, specifies that it affects the funds that “are directly related to the activities of the diplomatic mission itself.”
According to the note, diplomatic missions are already excluded from the law’s scope, though the amendment is intended to “ensure a uniform interpretation” of the legislation. It further argues that diplomatic missions and international organizations operate to “protect and advance the interests” of their respective states or entities in host countries, where “political or public interests” often play a central role in their activities, making the clarification “expedient.”
The bill is being considered under an expedited procedure, with its first reading scheduled for April 7 at the disputed Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee.
‘Poorly Written’ Laws
Critics argue that the latest amendment underscores broader issues with the law’s drafting.
“This law, overall, is among the most poorly written, and this amendment fails to clarify it; even with the changes, it still leads to ten different interpretations,” said Nona Kurdovanidze, the former head of the Georgian Young Lawyers Association (GYLA), a local human rights watchdog.
Lawyer Nika Simonishvili, who had also led GYLA in the past, argued that Georgian Dream rushed the March amendments inadvertently extending their scope to cover a far broader range of foreign financial flows than intended, including commercial services contracted by diplomatic missions, thus necessitating further revisions.
“The rules are so broad that they can capture virtually any foreign transaction, which is what has led to this latest amendment,” Simonishvili wrote. “The primary target of this repressive law has not changed,” he added. “This initiative once again confirms that independent civil society and media organizations are not meant to receive funding.”
The March 4 amendments drew widespread criticism from international actors, who warned that the changes could significantly restrict civic and political activity. Beyond grant regulations, the legislation also criminalized “external lobbying,” restricted political activities, imposed new limitations on businesses, and introduced penalties for “systematic acts” aimed at establishing the perception of the government’s illegitimacy.
Also Read: