A controversial set of legislative amendments proposed by Georgia’s ruling Georgian Dream party is sparking alarm at home and abroad as lawmakers prepare to tighten control over foreign funding and civic participation. Rights groups warn the changes could criminalize independent activism, jeopardizing fundamental freedoms and further isolating the country from its European aspirations.
The proposals, set for parliamentary debate following recess, would broaden the legal definition of “grants,” require prior government approval for most foreign funding, and introduce prison terms for violations. Opponents describe the move as a major setback for democratic freedoms in Georgia.
Government Moves to Expand Control Over Foreign Money and Support
The Georgian Dream party announced on January 28 a comprehensive legislative package expanding restrictions on foreign funding, foreign-supported activity, and political engagement. The amendments would revise the Law on Grants, Criminal Code, Political Associations Law, and several other statutes.
Under the proposed measures:
• A broad range of financial transfers and in-kind support from abroad would fall under an expanded definition of “grant,” including payments, services, technical assistance, and even pro bono contributions, if deemed to influence public policy.
• Receiving such foreign funds without explicit prior government approval could trigger criminal liability with imprisonment of up to six years.
• Additional provisions would criminalize “external lobbying,” barring financial support for political activities abroad without authorization and imposing fines or jail time for violations.
• Individuals employed by organizations receiving significant foreign funds would be barred from joining political parties for eight years.
The ruling party frames the initiative as a measure to prevent “financing unrest or violence from abroad,” framing it as needed to protect Georgia’s sovereignty and political stability. However, legal experts and civil society activists argue the vague definitions of grant and political influence grant the state sweeping powers to restrict dissent.
Civil Society, Media, and Rights Groups Warn of Repression
Human rights organizations have condemned the legislative package as an attack on freedom of expression, association, and civic participation. Amnesty International called the amendments “highly damaging,” and said they would entrench power by criminalizing dissent and civil society activity outside government control.
Legal critics argue the proposed law would go beyond transparency and accountability, effectively placing independent voices under state supervision and control. Prior efforts, such as the controversial “foreign influence” law adopted in May 2024, already required organizations and media outlets receiving substantial foreign funding to register and disclose their sources. Many activists say that law led to increased scrutiny and restrictions long before the latest amendments were introduced.
Independent media outlets and civil society organizations have faced inspections under existing laws, and several have suspended operations amid mounting legal and financial pressure. There are fears that the proposed changes could force even more groups out of operation.
Critics also point to the potential chilling effect the law could have on Georgia’s remaining independent journalism and civil society. Expanding criminal penalties for what could be considered normal civic activity, such as receiving expert advice or research support from abroad, might deter ordinary citizens from engaging in public life.
Political Backdrop and International Reaction
Georgia has been navigating a turbulent political landscape following a disputed 2024 parliamentary election and the suspension of the country’s EU accession talks. Mass protests have persisted since late 2024, triggered by halted EU negotiations and concerns over democratic backsliding. The government has responded with a series of legislative changes tightening restrictions on assemblies, expression, and media.
In 2024, the controversial “foreign influence” law drew significant criticism from European institutions and human rights groups, prompting the EU to impose visa restrictions and reduce diplomatic engagement with Georgian authorities. Reports indicate that opposition parties boycotted the new parliament, claiming election irregularities and a lack of democratic legitimacy.
International organizations have repeatedly called on Georgia to align its legal framework with democratic norms and human rights standards. In 2025, a coalition of rights groups urged the EU and its member states to take coordinated action against the crackdown on civil society, citing freezing of bank accounts and prosecutorial pressures against human rights organizations.
Local Voices on the Ground
Georgian civil society leaders express deep concern about the potential impact of the new law. “Independent voices are the backbone of a healthy society,” said one NGO representative. “If foreign funding becomes a crime without government approval, many organizations like ours will struggle to survive.” Analysts say the law could widen the gap between the Georgian state and its Western partners, including the EU and United States.
Political analysts warn that the broad wording of the amendments could be used to target a wide range of activities deemed political or influential — from academic research to civic advocacy. Such expansive powers risk undermining basic freedoms and deterring foreign investment and cooperation.
Opposition and Civil Society Prepared for Long Fight
Opposition parties and civic groups have vowed to challenge the proposed legislation, both inside and outside parliament. Protests have drawn thousands in previous years, including sustained demonstrations lasting months in 2025, with activists decrying what they see as an assault on democratic values.
While the Georgian Dream party remains firmly in power and poised to pass the amendments once parliament reconvenes, many Georgians see the law as part of a broader pattern of authoritarian consolidation. Legal experts emphasize that the right to seek, use, and receive foreign funding is protected under international human rights law and essential for civil society’s functioning.
Facing mounting criticism at home and abroad, the Georgian government insists the measures are necessary to preserve national security and prevent external actors from destabilizing the country. Whether that argument will carry enough weight to shape the law’s final form remains uncertain.
In the wake of growing tensions, Georgians from across the political spectrum are watching closely as debates unfold in parliament. Many fear the new law could mark a turning point in the country’s democratic trajectory and its relationship with the West.
