Georgian Deputy Justice Minister says no fast-track review in ECHR Case on Georgia’s FARA law

Beka Dzamashvili, the deputy minister of justice of Georgia, on Wednesday said that claims by domestic NGOs regarding violations of rights under Georgia’s Foreign Agents Registration Act are not supported by developments at the European Court of Human Rights.

In his remarks over the matter, Dzamashvili noted that either the applicants did not request the suspension of the law before the European Court of Human Rights, or such a request was denied.

“This indicates that their statements suggesting immediate and urgent restriction of rights do not correspond to reality”, he said.

The deputy minister explained that the Court is reviewing the complaint under a standard procedure rather than an expedited process. The case was filed by three organisations and three individuals, who argue that the law violates rights protected under the European Convention on Human Rights.

“The applications were submitted in July and August of last year, and only after nearly nine months did the Court communicate them to the Georgian government for response. This clearly shows the case is being handled through ordinary procedures, without acceleration”, he continued.

He added that the Georgian government has been given a standard deadline to respond by the end of July. Afterward, the applicants will submit their replies, and a final stage of written submissions is expected by the end of the year.

“This means that a decision is not expected before next year”, he said.

Dzamashvili also emphasised that, unlike at the national level - where applicants had requested interim measures from the Constitutional Court to suspend the law - no such communication has been received from the ECHR.

“Had there been an immediate risk, the applicants would certainly have requested interim measures”, he argued.

Another key point highlighted by the deputy minister is that the Court is examining both the admissibility and the merits of the case simultaneously. Among the issues raised is whether the applicants can be considered “victims” under the Convention.

“It is possible that the case could even be declared inadmissible”, he noted.

Dzamashvili further addressed claims that the case had been granted a “significant impact” status, which some portrayed as conferring special privilege.

“This case is indeed precedent-setting, as the law in question is analogous to legislation in force in the United States. It is also well known that similar laws have been adopted or are being considered in several European countries. Accordingly, the Court’s decision will have a broader impact, not only on Georgia but also on regulations in other European states. However, this does not grant any advantage or privilege to the applicants”, he concluded.