What Article 195 is and what it protects
Article 195 of the Georgian Administrative Offences Code protects a seal — a plomb or a lock — placed by an authorised official. The norm contemplates two acts: its deliberate damage and its deliberate removal. In both formulations, two details carry decisive weight: the seal must have been placed by an authorised official, and the act must have been deliberate — accidental damage does not fit the description of this article.
If you have been fined under this article, this page helps you understand what the norm says, what fine it provides for, and where the case deserves to be disputed. Even where the amount is small, a recorded breach stays in the documents, and assessing it correctly matters later as well.
The elements of the offence: what the charge rests on
The first element is the object. The seal, plomb or lock must have been placed by an authorised official: a seal placed by a private person is not the object of this article. The second is the form of the act: damage or removal. The third is intent. The accusation that you acted deliberately must rest on established facts, and it is exactly here that a lawyer most often raises lawful questions.
The article also contains an exception: it does not extend to certain cases provided for by other articles of the Code. This means that one and the same factual situation involving damage to a seal may be assessed under different norms, and the correctness of the classification is a decisive point of the case.
The amount of the fine
Article 195 provides a fine of up to 100 lari. The wording "up to one hundred lari" means that an upper limit is written and a lower one is not: the article names no minimum amount. How the concrete figure within that ceiling is chosen is not stated in the text of the norm; it depends on the assessment of the deciding authority and should be apparent from the decision.
The smallness of the amount does not mean the case deserves no attention: admitting or refuting the breach may matter in other processes too, so forming a position and reacting in time are worthwhile.
What the article does not say
Article 195 does not say who draws up the offence record, what deadlines apply to payment and to challenging the decision, or how the fact of intent is established. These questions are governed by the general norms of the Code and by the rules of procedure. Note that the possibility and the deadlines for an appeal appear from the penalty documents, not from the article itself.
What to do after receiving the fine
The first step after receiving the penalty document is to read it carefully: which seal is at issue, who placed it, when, and what act is counted as deliberate. Then fix the condition of the place with photographs and find witnesses if any exist: with time the details vanish, and in this article the details decide the case.
Do not delay your reaction on the ground that the amount is small. Agreement or disagreement with the fact of the breach may surface in later questions as well, and a position formed from the start always beats improvisation. If you believe the act was not deliberate, that is already the basis of a structured objection, and a specialist can draft it. Remember: every detail in the record that does not match the facts is part of your position.
How a lawyer helps and what to bring
A lawyer will examine whether the person who placed the seal was genuinely an authorised official; what established the intent and whether evidence of it exists; whether the case is correctly classified and does not fall within the exception the article mentions; and whether the procedural rules were observed. For a consultation, bring:
- the penalty decision or act;
- your identity document;
- the document or record on the placing of the seal, if you hold one;
- photographs and evidence of the condition of the object and of how the damage occurred.