Joint Committee on European Union Affairs debate -
Wednesday, 29 Mar 2023

Engagement with Parliamentary Delegation from the Republic of Georgia

An Cathaoirleach

I welcome the delegation from the Georgian Parliament. They are very welcome.

I will begin by giving in advance what may be our apologies. As I said to members of the delegation before the meeting started, we have a potential vote and believe it might take place within the next hour. If a vote is called, we will have to adjourn this session very quickly to allow committee members to take part in the vote. We will start and see if we can get through all of our engagement today.

Before we begin, I must attend to some housekeeping which is known as the note on privilege. All witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of any person or entity. Therefore, if a statement is potentially defamatory in relation to any identifiable person or entity, witnesses will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside of the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that members participating, but not physically present, must be within the confines of the Leinster House complex to participate in any public meeting. In this regard, I ask any member partaking via MS Teams to confirm they are on the campus prior to making a contribution to the meeting.

I call Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze to make his opening statement.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

I thank the Chair and his colleagues. It is a great privilege to meet the committee to talk about the situation in Georgia, our foreign policy priorities, and the challenges and problems the Russian occupation poses to Georgia.

I am the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee at the Parliament of Georgia. Today, I am joined by my fellow colleagues: Mr. David Songulashvili, who is the chairman of the economic policy committee in the Parliament of Georgia, and Ms Maia Bitadze, who is the chairwoman of the environmental and natural resources committee in the Parliament of Georgia. We also have here our great ambassador, Mr. George Zurabashvili, Mr. Nikoloz Khatiashvili, who is the chief of staff of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Ms Nino Shamugia, who is consul of our embassy here in Dublin.

I will start by outlining our foreign policy priorities. These are, obviously, integration into NATO and the European Union. These are the constitutionally guaranteed foreign policy priorities for Georgia because Article 78 of the Georgian Constitution, which was amended four years ago, says clearly Georgia will strive for membership of the European Union and NATO.

Georgia faces fundamental challenges, however, and these challenges are not new to us. Since we regained independence in the early 1990s, Georgia has been a victim of Russian aggression three times. First, in the early 1990s - 1991, then 1992 to 1993, and then in 2008. That resulted in the occupation of 20% of Georgia's territories and the ethnic cleansing of ethnic Georgians living in those areas. Today, we have 250,000 internally displaced people who cannot go back to their homes because of the ongoing occupation.

With the Russian aggression against Ukraine, the situation in our occupied regions has worsened. There are numerous human rights violations. There are numerous problems at the occupation line where citizens are kidnapped and illegally taken into custody, which poses a great challenge to the Georgian Government and Georgian society. Steps have been taken by the Russian occupying regime towards the annexation of Georgia's sovereign territories to the Russian Federation. What is happening in Ukraine comes from the same playbook and is a copy and paste of what Russia did to Georgia. Therefore, we are very worried by the developments in Ukraine. We are very worried by Russia's aggressive attitude and aggressive stance it has shown to its neighbours. Therefore, we firmly believe that for Georgian statehood, independence and sovereignty, there is no alternative other than joining the European Union and NATO.

Our number one national priority is the restoration of Georgia's territorial integrity. We have pledged many times to our society and international community that we will never resort to arms to restore our territorial integrity. Our firm stance is that the reintegration of Georgia's occupied territories should only be based on talks and negotiations and should be done in a peaceful way. We are very thankful to our society that the overwhelming majority of Georgian citizens support the peaceful reintegration of our territories and, therefore, there is a wide consensus in Georgia that the occupied territories should only be regained through peaceful means.

On integration into NATO and the EU, we believe that, today, Georgia is ready to be a NATO member. More than 80% of Georgia's armed forces have served under different NATO command missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo and other missions. There is no question, therefore, about interoperability or NATO standards being matched by the Georgian armed forces. This has also been mentioned many times by our NATO allies. Unfortunately, we lack the political will from the side of NATO for further enlargement. Of course we understand that there are sensitivities related to enlargement and we understand the Russian factor in this context. We also understand that in the current circumstances, when there is ongoing Russian aggression against Ukraine, it will be very difficult to make a decision about NATO enlargement.

What we need from our friends in NATO is a clear pathway for Georgian membership. As I said, we were promised this membership 15 years ago and we are still knocking on the door. NATO says the door is open but this has to become a reality soon. Otherwise, we see clearly that Russia has been attacking the countries that are not members of the security alliances. This was proven by the attack against Georgia and now against Ukraine. Exactly these two countries, which were promised NATO membership in 2008, are under attack from the Russian Federation.

Our second foreign policy priority is EU membership, and here we have made quite good progress in the past decade. Georgia signed the association agreement and a comprehensive free trade agreement with the European Union and we also got a visa-free regime with the European Union. This is not the ultimate aim of our people and Government. We want to become fully fledged members of the European Union. Last year, the European Council gave Georgia a European perspective and provided us with 12 recommendations to get candidate status. These recommendations mostly deal with changes to legislation and the adoption of action plans and strategies in different areas. I will list a few of them as follows: the improvement of the electoral framework, strengthening the democratic oversight of state institutions, fighting against organised crime, gender equality, the election of a new public defender, and so on. In all of these areas we have already made significant progress. Eight out of 12 recommendations have already been implemented and we are hopeful that, by the end of May or the beginning of June, we will be able to implement all 12 recommendations. Then the timeline for the decision is that the European Commission will make an evaluation of the progress of all candidate countries in the western Balkans and in Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova and it will come up with recommendations for the European Council, which will meet in October. Then the European Council will decide on further steps in December.

As we speak, Georgia is the only country that has applied for EU membership but is still not a candidate country. All the others have already received candidate status, but the European Commission report clearly stated in February that Georgia is ahead of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Ukraine when it comes to our approximation of the European Union and the reforms that are needed to become a member. This report already showed that Georgia is well advanced in its reform path. We are hopeful that at the end of this year we will have a merit-based decision by the European Commission and then the European Council on granting Georgia candidate status and starting accession negotiations with our country.

I will give the committee a short overview of that. Georgia has been a frontrunner in implementing the association agreement with the European Union. The association agreement with the European Union is pretty much the same as the accession agreement because we have compared our association agreement with the accession agreements of the candidate countries like Montenegro and Serbia and almost 75% of the text of these two agreements and the reforms that need to be carried out are the same. As we speak, Georgia has already implemented half of the association agreement. That means that when we start negotiations with the European Union, we will not start from scratch but we will already have reached quite an advanced stage in certain areas and we will have a good opportunity to catch up with the western Balkan states in the near future. From our perspective, after the start of the accession negotiations, Georgia would need four to five years to complete negotiations. This is what we are projecting. Georgia has a most pro-European population. We had 80% support of the Georgian people for European integration and that has been a constant figure for the past 20 years. Georgia never had a government, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, which did not favour European and western integration. All of the successive Georgian governments after independence have been promoting a pro-western course and foreign policy.

I refer to our economic situation and policy. Georgia is an open market country and we strive to have free trade agreements with as many nations as possible to make Georgia an attractive hub for investment. Georgia is the only country in the wider region which has free trade agreements with the European Union, Türkiye, all the former Soviet republics and China. Anyone producing a product in Georgia has access to more than 2 billion customers in the world and we want to expand this scope. We are in talks with South Korea, India and the United States to have similar trade regimes, meaning free trade agreements with these countries. Georgia is an important energy hub. All the major pipelines that deliver central Asian gas and oil to Europe run through Georgia, and this is becoming even more important given that the Russian aggression against Ukraine basically blocked the so called northern corridor. Most of the goods are now shipped from east to west through the middle corridor, where Georgia is playing a key role. We recently signed, to my understanding, a milestone agreement with the European Union on putting an underwater cable in the Black Sea, which will provide Europe with green energy from the south Caucasus and beyond. This will connect Georgia to the European grid, which is important, especially nowadays when Europe is trying to decrease its dependence on Russian energy.

I have sought to give members an idea of the problems and challenges we face on the one hand and about our aspirations on the other hand. We should also allow time for questions, which I will be happy to take. I thank members for their attention.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Samkharadze very much. We appreciate his detailed presentation. Several members have indicated that they wish to follow up. First will be Deputy Howlin.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

The Members of the Georgian Parliament are most welcome. At the outset, I wish to say that they have the most active ambassador of any ambassador to Ireland. Ambassador Zurabashvili is a regular attendee in these Houses and a consistent advocate for all the interests of Georgia. I want to formally put that on record. All our guests are welcome.

As the delegation will know, the general position of Ireland is very supportive of enlargement. Members of this committee have already visited George and we have indicated our support for Georgian membership of the European Union, as we have done in respect of other candidate and potential candidate countries. However, there are obvious issues. I very much welcome Mr. Samkharadze's presentation. It was a comprehensive presentation of all the difficulties involved in membership and in complying with the Copenhagen criteria, the rule of law and the conditions of good neighbourliness, which are all requirements of membership. All the positive points are acknowledged and considered good, but it would be remiss of us, as a committee, if we did not delve into the matters that are discordant.

First, I raise the issue of the foreign agents Bill. I know has been withdrawn and we all saw the resulting hiatus within the Georgian Parliament, but there is a fear among NGOs. It is a bit like the Israeli Bill on judicial reform; it was withdrawn but it is not dead. I am interested to hear about the motivation behind putting forward legislation that does not sit well with the principles of the European Union. That would be a strongly held view of most if not all members of this committee. What motivated the tabling of the Bill? What reassurances can be given that it will not reappear and that it is actually withdrawn?

The second issue is human rights. Our guests will know of the deep concern we have, as expressed by the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs, about the so-called LGBT propaganda Bill in Hungary that outlaws the presentation of homosexuality in a positive light in that country. There are fears that such a law might be replicated in Georgia. These stem from comments by Prime Minister Garibashvili and the chair of the Georgian Dream Party, Irakli Kobakhidze, indicating that there may be some intention to follow that path. It would be useful to us, and to those who have voiced their concerns, if the delegation could be very clear on this. It has been presented to us that LGBT issues have already been removed from the state's human rights agenda and from strategic documents that have been published. These are the presentations given to us by human rights organisations working in this country. For us to better understand the situation in Georgia, it would be helpful if the delegation provides a clear and unequivocal statement, on behalf of the Georgian Parliament, first, on the full and complete vindication of LGBT rights and, second, on the so-called foreign agents Bill, that it was an aberration and will not re-emerge, in addition to how it emerged in the first place.

An Cathaoirleach

I will take two Deputies together because their questions are probably linked. Deputy Ó Murchú is next.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I add my voice to that of Deputy Howlin. We would like a statement about dealing with the worries relating to LGBT issues. I raised this matter when we were lucky enough to visit Georgia.

On the foreign agents or foreign influence Bill, I would like to know the ins and outs of how it came about, what the notion behind it was and, as Deputy Howlin said, where the future lies in regard to it. I do not think there will be an incredible amount of support for it. We all saw the huge issues it created in Georgia.

It was stated that the occupied territories is priority number one, while accepting the difficulties of dealing with a much bigger neighbour. We understand this can create huge difficulties and legacy issues that go on for a considerable time. When we spoke before, Mr. Samkharadze was incredibly au fait with the peace process in Ireland. We would like to see some sort of peaceful rectification of that situation. We visited the border areas and saw the process of borderisation, as well as the forced demographic changes and all the rest of it. It is an incredibly serious situation. At that time, Mr. Samkharadze was not particularly happy with the decision made by the Commission. He feared how this would progress and how the Ukrainian crisis would go and whether the Western world would maintain solidarity. It has done so to a large degree, probably better than we would have expected, and this is how it should be. What is Mr. Samkharadze view on that?

Like it or not, the European Commission has given Georgia a roadmap. From our interactions, it is apparent considerable action has been taken. There are big issues with regard to polarisation and deoligarchisation, which I did not pronounce correctly - I am not sure anyone can actually do so. It is about where the delegation sees that journey progressing, whether there are any difficulties anticipated and whether we can help in that regard. Mr. Samkharadze spoke about what Georgia can bring to the table, notwithstanding the difficulties faced by Georgia being in very close proximity to Russia. He mentioned supply chains in terms of Azerbaijan and how Georgia could play a huge part in the European energy map - for want of a better term. Will he go into more detail in that regard? It will probably take about 14 hours to do so, but I ask that he say whatever he can within the time allowed.

An Cathaoirleach

We do not have 14 hours, unfortunately. In terms of watching the clock, we are working toward 11.30 a.m. We have plenty of time. I call Mr. Samkharadze next, after which we will take more questions from members.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

I thank the Deputies for their questions. I will take them in the order they were asked. The law is entitled the law on transparency of foreign funding; it is not the foreign agents law. Unfortunately, it was branded or labelled by our opponents as a foreign agents law and a so-called Russian law. The first article of the draft Bill stated that the law would not restrict the activity of any non-profit organisation in Georgia. The reason we needed the initiation of this draft was because there are several hundred non-profit organisations operating in Georgia.

Most of them, I would say 95%, are doing good for their country. They are supporting vulnerable people and they are supporting developments in different areas. In the area of the environment, for example, they are very prominent and they are supporting the State in carrying out important reforms. However, there is the other 5% of the non-profit organisations that have dubious sources of funding. They sometimes come out and protest against Georgia's energy independence, for example. They also take some subversive actions in certain areas of Georgia.

The aim of the law was to provide transparency around foreign funding for Georgian NGOs. According to Georgian legislation, it is voluntary for Georgian non-profits to publish information about foreign funding. It is not compulsory and it is not mandatory. The aim of this draft was to create a register in the public registry where the non-profits who get their funding from foreign sources would register how much income they got in a calendar year. That was the only principle of this law, which was for transparency; it did not restrict the activity of any non-profit organisation. That is why we had to face the reality when there was lots of fake news and speculation about the draft law, comparing it to Russian or Hungarian laws. However, if you really read the content of the draft, there was nothing that would have been similar to Russian or Hungarian law, because in Russia they can use the law to close down a non-profit organisation, initiate criminal proceedings against it or even to label individual people or the employees of an organisation as being foreign agents. This was not the case in the Georgian draft legislation.

Unfortunately, people protested. This was genuine protest by the people. The protest was not against the law itself, but against the fact that this law could have impeded Georgia's European integration. The statements that were made by our European partners clearly pointed to the fact that this was not a good time for the law to be adopted. Then, there was an attack on policemen, Molotov cocktails thrown at them, and there was an attempt to storm the Parliament. Things were getting nasty. We decided to reject the Bill because, on the one hand, it might have caused unrest and destabilisation in Georgia. That is the last thing we need right now. On the other hand, we basically thought that the timing was for good in the context of discussing the law. The law has been rejected. It is not on the table anymore. Ironically, when we rejected the law, the European People's Party and European Parliament initiated the same type of law. We are hearing that the same type of law is now being debated in the UK Parliament and also in the Canadian Parliament. All three of them will be dealing with having greater transparency for the funding of non-profit organisations from abroad.

In Georgia's case, given the complexity of our security situation, we need to be aware of which non-profit organisations are receiving funds from non-friendly countries. This is also a security challenge for us. To give one example, Georgia is short of energy generation and we need to build new hydropower plants. Two years ago, a decision was made by the Government of Georgia to build a big hydropower plant in the western part of Georgia. Then, there were massive protests against the power plant and against the construction of the hydropower plant. This led to the stopping of the project. It turned out that the non-profit organisations that started this mass protest against the hydropower plants were funded from Russia. This is not just an isolated case; there are other cases. That is why we need a greater transparency around the work of non-profits and the funding of non-profits. This is even more the case because the non-profit organisations are now more and more involved in decision-making and policy-making, because all of them sit on committee sessions.

In Georgia, non-profit organisations can attend committee sessions. Their representatives can even speak during those sessions. They can propose their ideas during the sessions. The same goes for the governmental working groups when the Government is developing a strategy or action plan. Non-profit organisations are always part of the process. We want to have a transparent decision-making process. In Georgia, all declarations of assets are public. Someone can go online and see how many cars or apartments I own. Even my wife's income is transparent. The same goes for all public servants who work for the Government. If we are all transparent, the funding of the non-profit organisations, which are part of the decision-making process, should also be transparent. That was the idea behind the law. However, since we basically failed to bring this idea forward or to tell Georgian society in detail about the content of the law, and since it created some unrest and disturbances, we decided to reject the Bill. It is off the table for now. We will wait to see the outcome of the UK's experience, the Canadian experience and the experience of the European Parliament. Maybe the next convocation of Parliament will discuss it. We will find other ways to ensure transparency of non-profits.

On the second question, I do not really know what to say because this is the first time I am hearing about the Hungarian law. There are no plans or ideas to have a law on this issue. On the contrary, we have adopted the law on equality and the eradication of discrimination, which states very clearly that people cannot be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation. This law has been in force for the past five years.

We have just adopted the action plan on the human rights strategy for the next ten years, and it was last week that we voted this strategy in. In the action plan, we have included certain actions that are directed at improving or upholding the rights of LGBT people. This is the first time I have heard about a law that somebody wants to initiate. I assure the committee that there will be no law in the Georgian Parliament on this topic.

On the question regarding the difficulties on the road towards the European Union, the Deputy mentioned deoligarchisation, which is a word that we just learned several months ago. As the committee knows, this has been a recommendation not only to Georgia but also to Ukraine and Moldova. The first draft of the law was sent to the Venice Commission. We were waiting for the Venice Commission's recommendations, which arrived just last week. What we will do now is have committee hearings and plenary hearings - the second and third hearings. We will include the Venice Commission's recommendations in the text of the draft law, and we will adopt the law accordingly. Deoligarchisation, which is one of the recommendations, will be fulfilled, hopefully by the end of April, and this will then be off the table. There are basically no other major obstacles to fulfilling the other recommendations. They are more or less clear to us and, as I said, by the beginning of June we will be done with all of them.

The Deputy is right in that the issue of polarisation will remain. Political polarisation, unfortunately, is not unique to Georgia. It is everywhere in Europe and in the United States. It is a recommendation that is very vaguely formulated. It is extremely difficult to measure the level of polarisation or the level of depolarisation because there is no internationally accepted scale of polarisation. We will try our best. One of the examples of depolarisation is that when we need to implement some of the EU recommendations, we need support from the opposition to implement those recommendations and we need their votes. On many occasions, for example, in the context of election reform, we had the votes of the Opposition. We also had the votes of the Opposition on the gender document, on the human rights strategy and on the election of the new ombudsman and public defender. All of this can be regarded as an attempt to depolarise. Of course, we are not naïve. We do not think we will not have political polarisation in a country where there are nine political parties in Parliament, starting from the extreme left all the way to the anarchists.

Deputy Brendan Howlin

We have some of those ourselves.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

Of course, this political polarisation between the political parties of different ideologies will continue. To go back to the Deputy’s question, a short answer is that polarisation is the biggest problem in all of these 12 recommendations.

On the issue of regional security and the regional dimension, the committee will know that Georgia is playing a very important role in mediating the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. We are basically the only country, if not in the world, then for sure in the wider region that enjoys trust and credibility both in Yerevan and in Baku. We want to use this asset for establishing peace and stability in the south Caucasus. We have initiated the idea of a peaceful Caucusus and we invited the foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan to come to Tbilisi. They have met already in Tbilisi. We have also invited the Heads of State of Armenia and Azerbaijan. We have approval for the Azeri President to come to Tbilisi and we expect that the Armenian Prime Minister will also take up this offer, and we will have a high-level trilateral meeting in Tbilisi for possibly getting closer to a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Of course, it will be difficult but we believe it is our duty to spare no effort to have this peace treaty achieved between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and we will continue to mediate in these talks.

As for strategic projects, the middle corridor is becoming more and more active and there are more and more goods that are transported from Central Asia to Europe through the middle corridor. We will start to build a deep-water seaport on the Black Sea this year at Anaklia, which will increase the volume of cargo transit through the south Caucasus. We also have good relations with Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan and we try to attract their goods through the south Caucasus and on to Europe. Georgia is also becoming very interesting to and is a key transit route for the European Union. Georgia's independence and its integration into the European Union is becoming a vital interest for the EU because it opens up a vast region of Central Asia to Europe whereby Europe can get connected to that region through Georgia. I am not only talking about-----

An Cathaoirleach

I must ask you to wrap up because I want to bring in other members.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

I have one final sentence. I am not only talking about hydrocarbons or about oil and gas but, in general, there are also other goods that can be brought from east to west or from west to east through the middle corridor.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Samkharadze and call Deputy Haughey.

Deputy Seán Haughey

I suspect the vote will be called at 11 a.m., but we will see how it goes.

I welcome the witnesses to Dublin. We met with Mr. Samkharadze and Mr. Songulashvili when we visited Tbilisi last year. It is great to have them in Dublin. When we were there, the decision of the European Council came through that Georgia was not going to get candidate status. That was a great disappointment. All of the parliamentarians we met were very disappointed. It is very clear that Georgia wants to be a member of the European Union. That is the wish of its population, as the witnesses have outlined.

Obviously, there are the 12 points that the European Commission brought forward. When we were in Georgia, reference was made the EU's first recommendation, which is on polarisation, and the fifth, with relates to deoligarchisation. The latter was discussed earlier. There is concern as to how it can be measured or implemented. It seems Georgia is making progress in that regard.

I have two questions. One is on Georgia's relationship with Russia, which was dealt with in Mr. Samkharadze's presentation. Is the Russian Federation endeavouring to influence the politics of Georgia and how is it doing that? Obviously, I appreciate that it has annexed some of its territory and there are the other issues that were mentioned. Is that an ongoing threat to Georgia? How is Georgia doing with regard to the sanctions imposed by the European Union and others on Russia? Is Georgia committed to imposing sanctions on Russia?

The Georgian ambassador has briefed me on my second question, in case we do not have time. It relates to the former president. It matters that he is in prison and it would be remiss of us not to raise it here. I would be interested to hear the witnesses' take on that. I hope that Georgia will be a member of the European Union sooner rather than later. It has my full support in that regard.

Deputy Robert Troy

I welcome our guests this morning. I remarked to my colleague, Deputy Harkin, a moment ago that Georgia's ambassador to Ireland is in the Houses so frequently that he is like the 167th Member of Dáil Éireann. He is doing incredibly good work in representing his country.

I will not rehash previous contributions but one area in which, as the ambassador knows, I have a particular interest is people coming from Georgia to seek asylum. To his credit, he has always acknowledged that they are predominantly economic migrants looking for an opportunity to work. However, because of our system, there are no opportunities for them to seek a work permit and contribute to society. They are seeking asylum and costing the State a considerable amount of money at a time when we do not have capacity. I would like to know what Georgia is doing to try to alleviate that pressure on our system. It does not look good, as I have said before, for a country that is actively pursuing an application to become a member of the EU, to have such a volume of people seeking asylum. I have said to my colleagues previously, and especially to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, that we should be much more flexible in granting work permits, particularly in sectors of our economy in which we have issues in filling jobs, such as hospitality, haulage and construction, rather than forcing people to fake asylum. They can spend six months claiming asylum, after which they have an opportunity to work. We should be working with countries such as Georgia. I am aware that the Georgian ambassador has put forward proposals to the Department and we should be doing more on that.

An Cathaoirleach

I will take the opportunity to make some remarks myself. It is a pleasure to meet everyone. As I am new to the Chair of this committee, I did not have the opportunity to travel with the committee, but I gather from talking to members that it was an excellent visit. I put on record my absolute support for enlargement and membership for Georgia of the European Union. I will follow up on one or two issues that have come out of this exchange.

My understanding of the witnesses' replies to various members about the withdrawal of the legislation, was that they stand over the legislation fully but decided to withdraw it because of a perception issue. Without nitpicking through every detail, I think that would worry a number of people who have genuine concerns about that legislation. I am a passionate advocate of European Union enlargement. Most people of every persuasion in Ireland are. However, there must be an understanding, not only of the literal means of enlargement but also of the value system of the European Union and what it means with regard to the mindset of how legislation is framed and how it comes before a parliament. For the information of the witnesses, I will explain that our committee system works in the same way as in Georgia. NGOs do not have the right to participate in every meeting but we work with our NGOs and with civil society and engage with them on the formulation of legislation and especially on Committee Stage in the Oireachtas to hear their views. It is therefore worrying when many respected NGOs in Ireland have raised such serious concerns about this. The principle that there was nothing wrong with the legislation and that it was only withdrawn because of the perception, is worrying.

Some of the major points the witnesses made about how they are dealing with the process are welcome. I wholeheartedly agree that matters such as polarisation cannot be quantified. There is no scale or agreement and it is almost an impossible issue. The witnesses were interesting in the way they spoke about that issue. The original aspect was how the idea that legislation could come to the fore. By the way, I fully respect the point the witnesses made as it is imperative, in any society where there is strategic input from civil society and NGOs, that they are governed by transparency which is the same transparency in place for political representatives. To have equality in the process, there must be equality in the treatment but that should never veer even remotely towards a situation where legislation is used as a curtailment.

We are heading towards 11.30 a.m. I want to give the witnesses plenty of time to reply before we have to conclude our meeting.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

I thank members for the question and remarks. Is Russia trying to influence Georgian politics? Yes, it is. It does so using different means. After Ukraine, Georgia is the country that is most exposed to Russian hybrid warfare. It is not only about occupation of our territories, it is also about the daily provocations the Russians are staging and the Russian propaganda that is active in Georgia. Russia is working against the Government and the people. The propaganda and certain actions that try to destabilise the internal situation in the country are another big headache we have to fight on a daily basis. This is not new to us. We have been fighting it for the past several decades, but it intensifies when Russia realises that Georgia is getting closer to the European Union, and to NATO for that matter. The intensity of Russia's statements and attempts to undermine Georgian statehood increase. We did not have pro-Russian parties in Georgia for quite a long time or the ones we had were marginal. Now certain forces are becoming more vocal and they are pro-Russian forces. They are not in the Parliament yet, but we will have elections in 2024 and we do not know what support they will get. Therefore we must always be cautious and vigilant about fighting all types of Russian hybrid warfare against Georgia.

Georgia supports the EU's financial sanctions and was the first country where Russian banks ceased to exist, three days after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. We are fully committed to upholding sanctions against Russia. As members will be aware, Georgia is a border state, so many people and stakeholders might want to evade sanctions through Georgia, but there has not been a single case or fact until now that Georgian territory is being used by anyone to evade sanctions.

We stand firm on this. We work in close co-operation with our European partners in that regard.

As for bilateral sanctions, the committee will be aware that Georgia does not have bilateral sanctions on Russia because most of our trade with Russia is food products and foodstuff. We export wine, mineral waters and fruit and vegetables to Russia, as well as fertilisers, and we import grain, wheat and foodstuffs such as buckwheat, sugar and sunflower oil from Russia. These are the major commodities for export and import. We also import certain oil products. Other than that, our trade with Russia is not big. It is only €2 billion per year, which is, I believe, very little compared to the volumes of the European countries' trade with Russia.

Economically, trade with Russia is 11% of Georgia's overall trade and, therefore, still significant but if you look at the trajectory, we are increasingly oriented towards the European Union and we are increasing our exports to the European Union. Last year, the export increase to the European Union was 27%. We want to continue that trend.

On Saakashvili, I can only say that he is in a private clinic. He is in the hospital. He has been in the hospital for the past year already and his health condition is in his own hands. If he co-operates with the medical staff that are there, his health condition will improve. The problem is that he is not co-operating with the medical staff. With this, he perhaps is trying to get a release on humanitarian grounds. However, as the committee will be aware, we have to look at the Georgian legislation as well. The Georgian legislation clearly says that a convict can be released on humanitarian grounds if that person has a terminal illness and this is not the case with the former president. This is the situation. He has also applied to the European Court of Human Rights on his case but the European Court of Human Rights replied that his case was not admissible because it did not see any problem with the case.

It is a problem. I have to inform the committee that he also signed a contract with a lobbying company in the United States worth $1 million. The lobbying contract envisages publication of articles in different media outlets, including newspapers and magazines, coverage on TV and approaching different politicians in different countries to lobby for his release. This is, to our understanding, a very unfortunate development because it is unclear where the former president has the funds to sign a contract with a lobbying company worth $1 million. It is really pointing at some dubious financial interactions.

Also, some of the doctors that provided certain reports on-----

An Cathaoirleach

I think we will leave this. There are guidelines on how we work and if Mr. Samkharadze is going into doctors and everything else like that, we might leave it.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

Okay. I wanted to-----

An Cathaoirleach

I appreciate that but as I said at the start, in terms of the declaration I made, we have rules and regulations around people and their reputations and what can be said about them within the confines of the Irish Parliament.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

Fine. Since the question was asked-----

An Cathaoirleach

We do not want to cross into that area.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

No problem. Since the question was asked, I wanted to give the committee the full information. This information is public. One can also access the information about the lobbying contract and one will see the names and the actions that are listed there.

On the asylum seekers, we have had a meeting with the Department of Justice and we have addressed this issue. Deputy Troy is completely right. These are mostly economic migrants who seek to come to Ireland. There are certain ideas on how we can help mitigate this problem. The first is that very soon, we will have a police attaché attached to the Georgian Embassy who will work closely with Ireland's immigration authorities. The second is that all Georgians who come to Ireland require visas. Obviously, one cannot come to Ireland without a visa. Most of the asylum seekers, as we understand it, do not have visas. That means that the air carriers have to check them rigorously prior to departure and if these Georgian citizens do not have Irish visas, they can even be not allowed to travel to Ireland. This is something also that should be discussed with the air carriers. The third option is the circular migration scheme that we have with many European Union member states, which gives an opportunity for Georgian citizens to work legally in European Union member states for some time and then they return to Georgia. We had a similar situation with Austria, Germany and France several years ago and legalisation of the work flow has drastically decreased the number of such Georgian citizens. Plus, Georgia is a safe origin country and the accelerated procedure of considering the asylum applications is also helping there because, for example, in Germany, the approval rate is just 0.1%. There are certain legal remedies that can be used but also there are certain tools, one of which is circular migration, to make this process legal and to allow people to come to work here legally and then go back to Georgia. A combination of these steps will solve the problem very soon.

Finally, on the Cathaoirleach's remark, I do not want to be misunderstood. The law is off the table. This convocation of Parliament will not discuss the law but then we will have elections and there might be other people who will be elected to the Parliament who might have other views about this. What I wanted to say is that we are for transparency of funding. Of course, transparency of funding is an important principle for every organisation that wants to be involved in decision-making and policymaking but, of course, this transparency of funding does not imply that their activities should or can be restricted at any stage or in any manner. This is what I wanted to make clear from our side.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Samkharadze for an incredibly comprehensive performance. Mr. Samkharadze's colleagues were there with him but he did it on his own. There was a lot of questioning and answering and we really do appreciate Mr. Samkharadze's engagement.

To confirm that view from the committee and from the members here, we are for total engagement on, and support for, enlargement and Georgia's membership, which is very important.

Unless there are any other comments, I will bring the meeting to a conclusion. We will now adjourn until the next meeting of the committee.

Mr. Nikoloz Samkharadze

I wish to use this opportunity first of all to thank the committee for inviting us to this hearing. I would also like to thank the Republic of Ireland for supporting Georgia's territorial integrity and Georgia's European future, which we really appreciate. We appreciate all of the statements and resolutions this Parliament has adopted regarding Georgia and our foreign policy priorities. The Georgian people feel that support and we hope Ireland will further support and assist us on our way to EU membership. I thank the committee on behalf of the Georgian Parliament for this opportunity.

An Cathaoirleach

The wonderful Georgian ambassador, who has already been complimented, wishes to say a few words.

H.E. Mr. George Zurabashvili

I thank the committee and the Chair for the warm welcome of our delegation. The main purpose of the delegation's visit to Dublin and the Oireachtas is to share the progress we have made on our path to the European Union and to bring topics of interest to the discussions. It would be of immense importance for the Irish Government to reciprocate and open the Irish Embassy, which would create an additional pipeline for communication to exchange views and at the same time tackle challenges we have, especially with immigration issues, visa release and work permits. It would be wonderful to celebrate one day - we hope soon - with the raising of the Irish flag on one of the premises owned by the Irish Government. I thank the committee for a very warm welcome and I hope we will continue our partnership, cooperation and friendship.

Ms Maia Bitadze

I thank the committee for hosting our delegation. I have a few remarks and will wrap up then. We are colleagues and politicians and we know we are living in an era of headlines and propaganda. The location of Georgia, our geopolitical situation and our history show how challenging the path to the European Union is for us. I remind the committee that our Government and our party signed an association agreement and worked on visa liberalisation to the European Union. It was our pre-election pledge to submit an application to join the European Union. I am talking about the hard work we have been doing all these years to harmonise all legislation, to make big reforms in all fields, to boost the economy, to work on human rights, decision-making and open transparency governance methods. A member mentioned how laws should be elaborated. We are working in this direction and it may be that we failed in the case of the draft transparency law, which was withdrawn. We failed and we recognise that.

All of the other things are related to fake news and propaganda from the opposition, some of which are partially radical and turbulent parties, which just want to return to government. It is the elections that would help them do that. They can participate in the elections, trying to use propaganda methods and call us Russian. I want to remind the committee that if members have any questions, they can contact us. For example, one member mentioned LGBT draft law or ideas, which was surprising because that is not a case on the agenda and will never be in our country. Members have our contact details. If they have any questions or they feel the information they have been given is not correct, they can contact the ambassador or one of us and we will give them information that is true and reliable. I thank the committee.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms Bitadze for the extra contribution.

Mr. David Songulashvili

I will be brief; I know committee members are in a hurry for the voting. I thank the committee for its warm welcome. Politics-wise, we are on the same page. If anybody understands the importance of being in the European Union to strengthen the economy, Ireland does, and it understands it very well. That is why I wish to thank Ireland for its support on our way to integration with the European Union. It is one of the biggest goals when you are the bridge between the east and the west and struggling with big interests. The support of the European Union is very important, as is the support of Ireland, to strengthen the economy of Georgia to be the gateway for Irish businesses to the rest of the eastern countries insofar as we are a bridge and can promote Irish businesses in the region. We can be a gateway to countries in the east and strengthen our common economic ties. I thank the committee.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Songulashvili. It is something we are always conscious of, certainly for people like me who were born in the 1960s. The journey this country took both economically and in reform made it the country it is today and has changed it beyond recognition. Much of that is down to our membership of the European Union and the benefits we attained from that. I thank all of the witnesses for their contributions today. I conclude the meeting.

The joint committee adjourned at 11.17 a.m. until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 19 April 2023.