What Article 67¹ penalises
Article 67¹ of the Administrative Offences Code of Georgia deals with breaches of the rules on restoring renewable natural resources and improving their condition, within a precisely listed set of zones inside protected areas. Those zones are: the managed nature protection and restoration zones of a national park; a sanctuary; and the managed nature protection (manipulation) and restoration zones of a biosphere reserve.
That list is not decorative, and it has direct practical consequences. Article 67¹ applies to those categories — not to the protected areas system as a whole. If the conduct took place in a different zone, or on a territory of a different category, that circumstance needs to be checked on its own, because it determines whether this article applies to your case at all. In administrative offence practice, questions of place and category are decided on the documents, so the first thing to establish is exactly where the protocol says the act occurred.
The sanction the law sets
Article 67¹ provides a single sanction: breach of the rules on restoring renewable natural resources and improving their condition, in the zones listed above, results in a fine of 200 to 300 GEL.
The lower and upper limits are therefore close together, and the specific amount within that narrow range is a matter of assessment for the body examining the case. The article provides no confiscation and no other supplementary measure — the sanction consists of the fine alone. Nor is the article divided into paragraphs, which means it contains no separate, heavier sanction for repeat commission.
What the article does not say, and why that is decisive
Article 67¹ does not itself list the rules that govern the restoration of renewable natural resources and the improvement of their condition. It establishes liability for breaching those rules, while the rules themselves are laid down in other instruments.
Three questions therefore arise separately in every case: which provision was treated as breached, to whom that provision is addressed, and whether it applied to your particular activity. Citing the article number in the protocol does not answer any of them. In the same way, Article 67¹ says nothing about the period for challenging a decision, which body examines the case, or what the decision must contain. Those questions are governed by other provisions of the Code and must be verified in your own file rather than assumed from this text.
From protocol to decision: how the case runs
An administrative offence case begins with a protocol drawn up by an authorised official, either on the spot or following an inspection. The case is then examined and a decision is issued, fixing the specific amount of the fine within the statutory range. Between those stages you have the opportunity to submit a written explanation and supporting evidence, and that is the moment at which your version of events actually enters the file.
The practical advice is simple. Before signing the protocol, read what facts it records and which location it ties them to. If you disagree with the description, note your objection there and then — reconstructing it later is far harder. Keep every document that establishes the date of service as well. As noted above, this article sets no time limit of its own; time limits come from other provisions of the Code and have to be settled on your own file, which is exactly what that paperwork makes possible. For the same reason, record precisely which zone the work was carried out in: Article 67¹ is built on its list of zones, and the fine it provides — 200 to 300 GEL — attaches only to conduct inside them.
Who the article reaches in practice
Liability falls on whoever breached the rule. In practice that usually means:
- individuals carrying out work or using resources within the listed zones;
- companies and organisations that are required by the applicable rules to carry out restoration or condition-improvement measures;
- contractors and subcontractors performing such work to another party's order;
- project teams whose work does not correspond to the regime of the zone they are operating in.
Where several parties are involved in the same works, the real dispute is often about who carried the specific obligation. Contracts, work orders and internal instructions are the main source of the answer.
What you can do, and where a lawyer changes the outcome
The fine under this article is modest, but the decision records a finding, and that finding can follow you into later works, permissions and reputation. That is reason enough to take the case seriously from the start. Prepare:
- the protocol and the decision, with the date each was served;
- documentation showing which zone the work was actually carried out in;
- the contract, work order or internal instruction identifying who bore the obligation;
- the inspection material: photographs, written explanations, description of the site;
- any correspondence with the authority that preceded the start of the work.
Representation changes three things: it tests the classification (whether this is genuinely an Article 67¹ case rather than some other provision), it tests the factual basis (whether what the protocol describes was actually recorded), and it addresses the choice of amount within the statutory range. Nobody can promise you a particular result. What can be insisted on is that the case is decided under the provision that fits the facts, on evidence you have seen.
One further point is worth keeping in view. If the works are still under way, it is worth clarifying, alongside the case itself, exactly which regime applies in the zone you are operating in, so that the same objection does not arise a second time. A lawyer helps here too: the requirement treated as breached is extracted from the case file and compared against the procedures you actually follow on site.