Tbilisi: As constitutional court has rejected petitioner’s demand to suspend the implementation of foreign agent law. Today the NGO (Non-Governmental Organisations) “Rights Georgia” refused to accept the decision of a constitutional court.
According to the officials of the NGO the Constitutional Court did not fulfil its duty to defend the rights of people. It also added that the Constitutional Court’s decision not to suspend the operation of Russian law lacks legal justification.
At the same time, an NGO official said that the court not considered the legal views and opinions raised by national and international legal experts. The official said decision reflected the judges’ lack of understanding. Moreover the decision of the judges betrayed the Constitution.
Notably the official said that it is sad that the court missed the historic chance to oppose the suspension of the European integration process. The court has the chance to prevent uncontrolled government access to citizens’ confidential information, which the government can misuse to violate citizens’ constitutional rights.
This was also a chance for the court to stand by its own people, who for months, despite government violence, steadfastly opposed Russian law (Foreign Agent law). It is sad as well as unfortunate that the Constitutional Court was not able to make an independent decision that citizens were expecting from it.
It seems that the court once again came under the influence of the ruling party and failed to fulfil the function assigned to it—protecting the Constitution.
On the other hand, two judges expressed dissenting views about the law. Georgian media and non-governmental organizations thank the two judges for their dissent and reiterate their commitment to continuing their fight against the establishment of authoritarianism and censorship in Georgia.
As per NGO their fight will continue against Russian law, both within the country and in international institutions and with the support of the Georgian people, we will definitely achieve its final and unconditional repeal.
