42 Georgian NGOs: "The government is responsible for putting the visa-free regime at risk"
42 Georgian non-governmental organizations issued a joint statement declaring that if the European Union suspends the visa-free regime for Georgian citizens, the responsibility will lie with the Georgian Dream government.
The statement reads:
'According to reports from July 15, the EU has sent an official letter to the Georgian government regarding a possible reassessment of the visa-free regime. The letter reflects the EU's serious concern over the current situation in Georgia – democratic backsliding, violations of legal norms, and disregard for European values.
We, the undersigned organizations, respond to the legitimate concerns raised by the European Union and firmly state the following:
Georgian citizens earned visa-free travel not thanks to the government, but because of the efforts of society as a whole — it was a historic achievement based on the implementation of democratic reforms, respect for the rule of law, and the protection of human rights;
It is obvious that the actions of the Georgian government in recent years have significantly deviated from the reforms agreed with the EU. The persecution of critical media, civil society, and political opponents poses a serious threat to the democratic future of the country and its European path;
If the visa-free regime is suspended, full responsibility lies with the government, which has dismantled progress built through decades of hard work and is deliberately undermining Georgia's Western future against the will of its people.
We believe this warning from the EU is a message to both the Georgian Dream government and to society: it is clear that the European family will not tolerate the rejection of democratic values. This is a final warning urging a reversal of the destructive course pulling the country away from Europe.
We emphasize that Georgian NGOs — like the vast majority of Georgian society — remain unwavering supporters of Georgia's European integration. We continue to stand for the values that bind us to Europe not just on paper, but in essence — freedom, dignity, and the rule of law.
We call on Ivanishvili to stop sabotaging the European choice of the Georgian people and the Georgian Constitution.'
Earlier, the Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs of the European Commission sent a letter to Georgia's Foreign Ministry requesting updated information on the country's implementation of the Commission's recommendations – or, if they have not yet been implemented, to take immediate steps to do so.
In response to what it calls 'serious democratic backsliding' in Georgia, the European Commission is considering suspending visa-free travel.
The letter notes that, due to the government's failure to take corrective measures, the EU already suspended visa-free travel for holders of diplomatic and service passports from Georgia as of January 2025 — a step supported by 12 EU member states.
News in Georgia
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
11 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Brexit isn't to blame for the Tate's woes, wokery is
If in doubt, blame Brexit. This has been the go-to for every failing business, politician and cultural enterprise for the last decade. And, with the news that the Tate is suffering from embarrassingly low attendance figures, director Maria Balshaw has reached for the same old script. 'The combination of Brexit changing their educational and work opportunities and then Covid profoundly affecting the end of their studies and the way they choose to live their lives' is stopping European youngsters from coming, says Balshaw. This blame game is telling for a number of reasons. For starters, the idea that Erasmus kids were what was holding Tate's attendance figures together is ludicrous – Brexit hasn't stopped youngsters from holidaying in the UK. Perhaps more revealing is the fact that Balshaw seems more concerned with attracting members of the European Union than addressing the nonchalance among punters from her own isle. Tate Modern has recently announced a slew of late openings to attract a Gen-Z audience. Museums having to masquerade as clubs to get the youth in is not a sign of good health. But aside from the Remaniac whining that is so typical in arts circles, why are Tate's numbers so low? A clue might be found in the shake-up of another event in 2016 – not Brexit but the revamping of Tate Modern as a 'museum for the 21st century', along with its Switch House 10-floor extension. There was a conscious reorientation by former directors Nicholas Serota and Frances Morris towards a focus on the political – think decolonisation, deconstruction, and lots of woke little plaques. At one point, an accompanying explanation next to Tate Britain's early 17th-century Cholmondeley Ladies informed the public of a possible lesbian subtext, which might have caused alarm to the sisters who feature in the work. One section of the Tate extension called 'Performer and Participant' informs viewers that they will be 'directed by an artist and political activism'. For your average Goldsmiths student this might be an exciting opportunity, but most ordinary museum goers are there to see the great art – never mind the politics. Perhaps Tate's failures are down to its own institutional cowardice. Over the years, both Tate Modern and Tate Britain have acted like museums who are embarrassed not only of their own collections but by their very own existence. The formerly famous Tate restaurant was not reopened after the pandemic thanks to criticism of the murals on the wall by Rex Whistler that included images of slave boys. Despite explanatory plaques, booklets and other apologetic scripts being produced around the mural for years, the museum decided that hungry members of the public simply couldn't be trusted to eat next to such a work. You can once more view them, but only in the context of an installation 'contextualising', ie condemning, the work. Likewise, Sir Stanley Spencer's Resurrection, Cookham has been quietly filed away into storage after critics argued that he had used images from a 'National Geographic magazine' to paint the black figures, instead of using people he knew – despite the obvious lack of black people to befriend in 1920s Cookham. Museums are not supposed to be entertainment factories, serving the political whims of colourfully dressed members of our cultural elite. These institutions seem to have forgotten their duty to curate and conserve art history in its entirety, without layering modern political fashions onto the past. In her book published last year, Gathering of Strangers, Balshaw insisted that 'we should not go back to the turn of the twentieth century and the Victorian civilising mission that motivated many museums', but instead look to the heroes of climate justice for direction as to which content should end up on the hallowed walls of our museums. A choice between the Victorians and Just Stop Oil? I know which exhibition I'd rather go to.
Reuters
40 minutes ago
- Reuters
Second US appeals court open to blocking Trump's birthright citizenship order
Aug 1 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship appeared on Friday to be headed toward being declared unconstitutional by a second federal appeals court, as judges expressed deep skepticism about a key piece of his hardline immigration agenda. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sharply questioned a lawyer with the U.S. Department of Justice as to why they should overturn two lower-court judges who blocked the order from taking effect. Those lower-court judges include one in Boston who last week reaffirmed his prior decision to block the order's enforcement nationally, even after the U.S. Supreme Court in June curbed the power of judges to broadly enjoin that and other policies. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week became the first federal appeals court to hold Trump's order is unconstitutional. Its ultimate fate will likely be determined by the U.S. Supreme Court. Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur said on Friday that the citizenship clause of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, which was ratified in 1868 after the U.S. Civil War, rightly extended citizenship to the children of newly-freed enslaved Black people. "It did not extend birthright citizenship as a matter of constitutional right to the children of aliens who are present in the country temporarily or unlawfully," he said. But the judges questioned how that argument was consistent with the Supreme Court's 1898 ruling interpreting the clause in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, long understood as guaranteeing American citizenship to children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. "We have an opinion by the Supreme Court that we aren't free to disregard," said Chief U.S. Circuit Judge David Barron, who like his two colleagues was appointed by a Democratic president. Trump's executive order, issued on his first day back in office on January 20, directs agencies to refuse to recognize the citizenship of U.S.-born children who do not have at least one parent who is an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, also known as a "green card" holder. Every court to consider the order's merits has declared it unconstitutional, including the three judges who halted the order's enforcement nationally. Those judges included U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston, who ruled in favor of 18 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, who had swiftly challenged Trump's policy in court. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized children born to individuals who are here unlawfully or who are here on a temporary basis are nonetheless birthright citizens," Shankar Duraiswamy, a lawyer for New Jersey, argued on Friday. The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court on June 27 sided with the administration in the litigation by restricting the ability of judges to issue so-called universal injunctions and directing lower courts that had blocked Trump's policy nationally to reconsider the scope of their orders. But the ruling contained exceptions, allowing federal judges in Massachusetts and New Hampshire and the 9th Circuit to issue new decisions stopping Trump's order from taking effect nationally. The rulings on appeal to the 1st Circuit were issued by Sorokin and the New Hampshire judge, who originally issued a narrow injunction but more recently issued a new decision in a recently-filed class action blocking Trump's order nationwide.
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Putin not swayed by Trump's Ukraine war ultimatum
Russian President Vladimir Putin has voiced hopes for further peace talks with Ukraine - but stressed his troops were "advancing on the entire front line", despite the threat of tougher US sanctions if a ceasefire was not agreed upon."All disappointments arise from inflated expectations," Putin said, in an apparent reference to Trump's "disappointment" with the Russian leader for not bringing an end to the a day after one of the deadliest Russian air attacks on Kyiv, he repeated his demands for Ukrainian neutrality and recognition of the occupied territories, which Ukraine views as a President Volodymyr Zelensky said he was ready to meet Putin "any time". Speaking on Friday at the Valaam Monastery on an island in north-western Russia, Putin said he expected negotiations with Ukraine to continue, adding that he viewed "negotiations positively".But in a veiled reference to growing pressure from Ukraine and its Western allies to agree to a long-term ceasefire, he said: "As for any disappointments on the part of anyone, all disappointments arise from inflated expectations."Our enemies and ill-wishers... now have one fiery passion: to stop our advance [on the front line in Ukraine] at any cost".Ukraine and its allies have repeatedly accused Russia of stalling peace negotiations and rejecting any meaningful ceasefire, saying Moscow is trying to seize more Ukrainian rounds of Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul, Turkey, in recent months ended without any major breakthrough. The two sides, however, agreed to swap several thousands of prisoners of shortly after Putin's comments, Zelensky questioned whether Russia was showing "serious readiness to end the war with dignity and establish a truly lasting peace" or whether it was "just an attempt to buy more time for war and postpone sanctions". In recent weeks, Russia has intensified its deadly drone and missile strikes on Thursday, at least 31 people - including five children - were killed in a Russian aerial assault on the Ukrainian capital. US President Donald Trump condemned Russia's actions, threatening new sanctions."Russia, I think it's disgusting what they're doing," he told in July Trump announced his original 50-day deadline for Russia to end the war, Putin didn't react. When that was reduced to 10-12 days, Putin said on Friday the Kremlin leader left little doubt that he would not be swayed by a White House ultimatum. Trump may claim to be "disappointed" with Putin for not making peace - but the Russian leader is guest on the Valaam island, Belarus' authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko, was more direct in his dismissal of Trump's deadline."50 days, 60 days, 10 days. You don't do politics like that," Lukashenko shows that, for Trump, deadlines are not set in stone. But on paper, at least, his latest deadline expires on 8 August. If by then Russia hasn't signed up to a ceasefire in Ukraine, it will face more sanctions – so in theory will countries that buy Russian judging by what the Russian state media has been saying in recent days, many in Moscow doubt the White House will go through with its threat of tougher more, from what Putin said on Friday about Russia advancing along the entire front line in Ukraine, he clearly believes a ceasefire now is not in Moscow's best officials on Friday said Kyiv had received "positive signals" from the US about potential new sanctions.A day earlier, senior US diplomat John Kelley told the UN Security Council that Russia and Ukraine "must negotiate a ceasefire and durable peace"."It is time to make a deal," he special envoy Steve Witkoff, who is currently in Israel, would visit Russia next, the US president said earlier this week. He gave no further details.
