“For any person, any person.”
“For any activity carried out or to be carried out with the belief or intention of exerting some influence.”
The measures announced by the Georgian Dream government yesterday go beyond a crackdown and put participation in public life an obsolete danger.
With a single legislative package, the ruling party moved to criminalize intent, association, expertise, and thought itself, placing virtually all civic, political, and intellectual life under prior state permission. The amendments unveiled on January 28 mark a decisive transition from competitive authoritarianism to an openly coercive system where the state claims the right to pre-approve who may think, organize, fund, speak, or belong.
The changes center on a significantly broadened definition of a “grant.” Under the new provisions, any transfer of funds or resources between individuals may be considered a criminal act if authorities believe it could influence government, institutions, policy, or any segment of society. This approach shifts from regulation to preemptive criminalization, targeting not only actions but also beliefs, intentions, and potential future outcomes.
The scope is deliberately boundless. Funding is criminalized not only when it is political, but when it is interpreted as political. Technical assistance, expertise, knowledge-sharing, professional services, or hiring Georgian experts by foreign entities are all reclassified as suspect “grants,” requiring government approval. Even foreign organizations funding their own Georgian branches are brought under this regime. Noncompliance carries prison sentences of up to six years; in cases framed as “money laundering related to political issues,” up to twelve.
At the same time, the amendments undermine political pluralism. Party leaders may face criminal prosecution for foreign funding violations. Individuals employed by organizations receiving more than 20% foreign funding are barred from party membership for eight years, effectively excluding many civil society professionals, researchers, journalists, and activists from political participation.
The amendments also criminalize so-called “external lobbying.” Any exchange of resources connected, directly or indirectly, to advocacy on Georgia-related political issues abroad becomes a criminal offense. This effectively prohibits international advocacy, solidarity, and representation, legally isolating the country.
Businesses are also affected. Entrepreneurs who engage in public political activity unrelated to their core business may face significant fines, indicating that economic participation is now contingent on political neutrality.
Collectively, these measures do not seek to address abuses or enhance transparency. Instead, they are designed to suppress independent activity. Following three years of legal actions against media, NGOs, and the opposition, the government appears to be moving from managing dissent to eliminating the conditions necessary for dissent.
This legislation appears intended to instill fear rather than provide effective governance. It adopts elements of Russian-style repression and extends them through vague provisions, granting authorities broad discretionary power. When intent is criminalized and permission is required, freedom is no longer a guaranteed right but a conditional privilege.
Yet the logic driving these laws betrays their failure. If free thought could be eliminated, it would not require prison terms. If civic commitment could be extinguished, it would not require criminal codes. Love of freedom does not disappear by statute. Neither does dedication to one’s country, nor the resolve to defend one’s beliefs.
As of today (January 29), the official text of the legislation has not yet been made public; the analysis above is based on the government’s announcement.
