Kobakhidze and Nransparency International – Georgia
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze made an urgent statement suggesting it would be appropriate to revoke the status of Transparency International – Georgia (TI) as a “subject with a declared electoral purpose.” The Anti-Corruption Bureau assigned this status to the organization and its director Eka Gigauri on September 24, sparking widespread protests from civil society and opposition groups.
As a result, the organization was barred from monitoring the crucial parliamentary elections on October 26. TI announced plans to challenge the decision in court and still monitor the elections through volunteer efforts.
Various international organizations have called for the decision to be overturned. On October 1, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) expressed deep concern that Transparency International – Georgia is forced to halt its election monitoring activities.
The Prime Minister’s unexpected statement, effectively in favor of Transparency International – Georgia, was explained as a “necessity to stop manipulations.”
Irakli Kobakhidze also called on the Anti-Corruption Bureau to refrain from assigning the status of “subject with a declared electoral purpose” to any other organizations until the parliamentary elections.
At this point, alongside TI, only the civil organization “Choose Europe” has been given this status.
The concept of a “subject with a declared electoral purpose” is outlined in the Law on Political Associations of Citizens. Organizations and individuals assigned this status are required to submit financial reports to the Anti-Corruption Bureau and disclose bank account details related to income and expenditures linked to their electoral activities.
The Anti-Corruption Bureau stated that its monitoring revealed Transparency International-Georgia and its executive director, Eka Gigauri, were “actively involved in an election campaign aimed at both supporting specific political parties and urging against the support of others.”
In response, Transparency International-Georgia asserted that they “have always been and remain committed to Georgia’s European choice, as enshrined in the Constitution and aligned with the aspirations of the vast majority of the population.”
What else did Irakli Kobakhidze say?
● For any objective observer, it is clear that Transparency International – Georgia has an electoral agenda and openly engages in propaganda against the ruling party, using relevant financial and material resources for this purpose.
● Therefore, the decision of the Anti-Corruption Bureau can be considered fully justified from a legal standpoint and complies with the requirements of Georgia’s Law on Political Associations of Citizens. It is unsurprising that the correctness of this decision was upheld by the court of first instance.
● However, in the interest of the state and to prevent external manipulation of the electoral process, the first signs of which have already emerged, I find it reasonable to revoke the electoral agenda status from Transparency International – Georgia.
● Moreover, this approach should ideally extend to other similar entities, even though only Transparency International – Georgia has resisted the Anti-Corruption Bureau’s decision.
● Georgian society does not need any legal status for Transparency International – Georgia to draw its own conclusions and exercise caution.