Public Procurement & Budget Funds

Delay in transferring or disbursing budget funds (Art. 165³)

What fine is provided for delaying the transfer or disbursement of budget funds?

Under Article 165³, such an offence carries a fine of eight hundred to one thousand lari, that is, from GEL 800 to GEL 1,000. The specific amount is determined according to the circumstances of the case.

Which funds are covered by this article?

The article covers monetary funds allocated from the central, emergency or territorial-unit budget of Georgia or from a state budgetary fund for financing a significant social event, another targeted programme or another special purpose, as well as funds owned by these budgets and funds.

When does a delay not trigger liability?

When the delay is caused by a valid excuse. Which circumstances count as valid is not written directly in this article — it is assessed under other provisions of the Code and the concrete circumstances of the case.

Who is punished for this offence and how does the case proceed?

The article does not define a detailed circle of liable persons; this is resolved by the general norms of the Code. The drawing up of the protocol, the time limits and the appeal procedure are likewise regulated by other provisions of the Code.

5 min·22 Aug 2026

Article 165³ and its purpose

Article 165³ of the Georgian Code of Administrative Offences establishes administrative liability for an unjustified delay in transferring, forwarding, allocating or disbursing monetary funds that have been allocated from the central budget or a state budgetary fund, as well as funds owned by such budgets or funds, when those operations are not carried out in accordance with the designated purpose and within a reasonable time. The provision serves one of the foundational principles of public finance: money planned and earmarked by the state must reach its intended recipients on time. A delay harms both the specific social events and targeted programmes concerned and the overall credibility of public financial management, which is why the legislator attaches an administrative penalty to this conduct.

What counts as an administrative offence

Under the wording of the article, the offence consists of a delay, for inexcusable reasons, in the transfer, forwarding, distribution or disbursement of monetary funds allocated from the central, emergency or territorial-unit budget of Georgia, or from a state budgetary fund, for the purpose of financing a significant social event, another targeted programme, or for another special purpose. The norm therefore covers funds earmarked for social-type events, targeted programmes and any other specially designated purpose, and it protects their timely delivery to the intended beneficiaries.

The same article also covers a delay in the transfer, forwarding, distribution or disbursement of monetary funds owned by the central, emergency or territorial-unit budget or by a state budgetary fund, carried out in accordance with the designated purpose of those funds. In other words, the offence may be committed through four distinct types of conduct — delaying a transfer, a forwarding, a distribution or a disbursement — and it applies both to funds allocated for a specific purpose and to funds generally owned by these budgets and funds. Whether the reason for the delay was inexcusable is assessed in each concrete case.

The fine: from GEL 800 to GEL 1,000

For this conduct, Article 165³ prescribes a fine of eight hundred to one thousand lari, which means that the lower limit of the administrative fine is GEL 800 and the upper limit is GEL 1,000. The exact amount within this range is determined according to the circumstances of the case, including the duration of the delay, the consequences of the offence and the conduct of the offender. Detailed criteria for selecting the measure of the fine are not set out in the article itself and derive from the general provisions of the Code.

It is important to note that liability arises from the essence of the conduct: the case concerns the delaying of the movement of monetary funds, and not the non-target spending of the amount or other financial irregularities, which may be punishable under other norms of the Code. Accordingly, when the article is applied, the authorities specifically assess whether an operation involving allocated or owned funds was delayed and whether the reason for that delay was inexcusable.

Updated: 14 Oct 2026