Categories
Journalistic Survey
Articles
Reportage
Analitic
Photo Reportage
Exclusive
Interview
Foreign Media about Georgia
Editorial
Position
Reader's opinion
Blog
Themes
Children's Rights
Women's Rights
Justice
Refugees/IDPs
Minorities
Media
Army
Health
Corruption
Elections
Education
Penitentiary
Religion
Others

MP Pavle Kublashvili Justified Retroactive Effect of Article 26/1 as “Necessary”

December 30, 2011

MP Pavle Kublashvili from the parliamentary majority justified the retroactive effect of the Article 26/1 of the Law on Political Unions of Citizens as necessary provision.

The article stated that “Political parties “which have received funding in violation of regulations of this law [i.e. corporate donations] and by the time of enacting this law these funds are not spent, are obliged to return these funds to a donor within three days after this law goes into force Unless the requirements are met, the fund will be assigned to the state.”

The new provision to the Article 26/1 applies to the following legal entities: a) directly or indirectly related to a political party or are otherwise under the control of a political party. b) legal entity, who will call on voters to support or refrain from supporting any political force; c) legal entity, who has declared political and election purposes and goals, and person linked with it, has political and election purposes or his/her activities impact the political will of Georgian citizens in elections, plebiscite and referendum and his/her activities neglect the regulations of this particular law.

Today the ruling party MPs declared that the abovementioned regulation did not envisage retroactive effect and the parties misinterpreted it. They allege the law requires the political parties to meet the requirements of the old law if they had received funds through the violation of the old laws.

However, if this article did not have retroactive effect, why the obligations of certain entities were written in the Article 26/1 provision; the majority members do not comment on it. More precisely, the entities envisaged in the Article 26/1, were not regulated by the previous law; so they could breach neither old nor new law.

Lawmaker Pavle Kublashvili, chair of the legal committee, told Interpresnews that enclosing Article 26/1 to the corresponding norm was “necessary”. However, Kublashvili did not define the law which the listed legal entities have to comply with.

Interpresnews

News