The Georgian parliament approved the draft of the new Constitution in the first and second readings. One of the controversial points of the updated Basic Law, which is finally transforming the country into a parliamentary republic, the prohibition against the sale of agricultural land to foreign nationals. The Constitution does not abolish private ownership of land, but significantly limits the concept of property (possession, use, disposal), forbidding owners to handle land at their own will, for example, sell it to foreigners.
The constitutional provision says that agricultural land is considered to be a "resource of special significance", so it can only be owned by "Georgian citizens, the association of citizens of Georgia, the municipality and the state itself". In fact, the Constitution prohibits citizens of other states from owning agricultural land in Georgia, even if they already own it. However, the authorities make it clear that they will try, within the final reading of the Constitution, to lay down legal mechanisms for "softening" the law for those foreigners who already own real estate in Georgia. There will be no expropriation. But the fundamental provision saying that from now on the land can only be bought by a citizen of Georgia will remain in force, since, as the prime minister said, "the majority of citizens oppose the purchase and sale of the country's main asset."
Indeed, judging by public opinion polls, the 'land trade' is considered indecent in Georgia. One of the leaders of the right-wing opposition party 'European Georgia' Giga Bokeria reacted with a rhetorical question to emotional considerations about the 'inadmissibility of mother-land trade': "Well, can you lease your motherland?"
The new legislation imposes no barriers for foreigners wishing to rent agricultural land. As before, they can use the land for 50 and 100 years, growing different crops. But experts argue that potential investors will not consider leasing as a sufficient guarantee of preserving their investments. Especially if they were planning to grow long-term crops on the ground. For example, large tracts of land were acquired by foreign investors for the cultivation of hazelnut in western Georgia, the Samegrelo region. But these investments will be able to recoup expenses and bring income only after 5-7 years. It is unlikely that now the country will be able to rely on serious investments in this area.
As the agriculture of Georgia remains a catastrophically underdeveloped industry, it would seem that the government should cherish every investor willing to buy land and produce products for the domestic and foreign markets. But, apparently, on the one hand, the Georgian Dream ruling party resorted to a populist reception, reacting to the mood of society, and on the other hand, it clearly expects that producers of such crops as grain and vegetables will not give up investment projects even under the conditions of a lease of lands. It remains to be seen whether these calculations are justified.
Another contradiction is the fact that only agricultural land is prohibited from selling - foreigners can still buy land for construction and home ownership. Responding to criticism of opponents, the representatives of the ruling party remind that even in those times when the law did not prohibit foreigners from buying land, their share in total land use did not exceed 1%.
However, whatever one thinks about this sort of arithmetic, but there is a more disturbing fact that the political elites of the country seeking integration into the EU succumbed to social forces whose tolerance, interethnic toleration and rejection of xenophobia in any form raises serious doubts.
