According to a report by TASS citing a presidential aide, Georgian President Salome Zurabishvili did not sign the law banning LGBT propaganda in Georgia. The report also notes that authorities in Russia classify the international LGBT movement as extremist and terrorist, and that organization is banned there. The distinction between signing and vetoing is central to the constitutional process, and the absence of a signature signals the president’s decision to defer a final ruling while the legislature remains a potential source of action.
The statement emphasized that the president neither signed nor vetoed the measure aimed at restricting LGBT promotion. Instead, the administration returned the bill to Parliament without signing it, a procedural step that aligns with Georgia’s legal framework. Observers remind readers that Georgian law prescribes a specific sequence for passage, including presidential assent or a formal veto followed by additional parliamentary steps. This nuance matters because it affects whether the bill can move forward without further action.
On September 17, Georgia’s Parliament completed the third and final reading. A total of 84 MPs voted unanimously to adopt the bill, signaling a strong legislative majority. The law will take effect only after the president signs it, a point stressed by lawmakers and legal observers as the next decisive step. The opposition did not participate in the voting, a choice that underscored the deepening divide over social policy and the country’s broader political polarization.
Earlier, on September 4, Georgian MPs approved in the second reading a package of bills aimed at restricting the promotion of non-traditional relationships. The moves reflect a heated debate about cultural policy and the balance between domestic priorities and international expectations. Proponents argue the measures defend family values and protect minors, while opponents warn about censorship and civil rights concerns. The legislative process in Georgia allows such packages to advance through successive readings before a final vote, a pattern visible in this case.
The European Union had previously urged Georgia to withdraw the LGBT propaganda ban, tying the request to its broader partnership and commitments to human rights. EU officials have framed progress on reforms as essential for closer ties with the bloc, including standards related to media freedom and civil liberties. Observers note that Georgia stands at a crossroads where domestic politics intersect with international expectations, and the current debate highlights the sensitivity surrounding LGBT rights in the region. The reporting reflects the EU position and the practical implications for Georgia’s political calendar.