What Article 172⁵ regulates
Article 172⁵ of the Code of Georgia on Administrative Offences imposes liability on the administration of a medical institution for failing to inform the guardianship and custodianship body about a woman in labour admitted without an identity document, about her secret departure from the institution, or about the abandonment of an infant by the mother. The norm is aimed at ensuring that the guardianship and custodianship body learns in due time about the difficult situation of the mother and the newborn and is able to react to it.
This page explains in detail what duty this article imposes and on whom, which three circumstances require notification, what fine applies and against whom, and what the norm itself leaves unregulated. Every explanation is anchored in the text of the article, and no detail on this page goes beyond its content.
The material is intended for the management and administrative staff of medical institutions, as well as for lawyers dealing with administrative offences. Knowing the terms of the article allows an institution to review its internal procedures in due time and to organise its work so that the duty to inform does not remain dependent on chance.
Whom the administration of a medical institution must inform
The recipient of the information is named directly in the norm: the guardianship and custodianship body. As its very name suggests, this body deals with matters connected with guardianship and custodianship; its precise competence is defined by separate legal regulations. The essence of the article is that the medical institution — the first instance to encounter such a situation — must not stay silent and must pass the information on in due time to the body that responds to it.
It is important that this duty is imposed on the administration of the medical institution — the structure that manages the institution’s activities. The internal distribution of tasks between clinical staff and administration is an internal matter of each institution, but the legal liability scheme of the norm is linked to the subject named in the norm.
The three circumstances about which information is mandatory
The article names three concrete situations that are the subject of notification to the guardianship and custodianship body:
- a woman in labour admitted to the institution without an identity document;
- the secret departure of such a woman from the institution;
- the abandonment of an infant by the mother.
All three circumstances are united by one common feature: the newborn or the mother remains in the focus of state attention at a moment when identification has become difficult or family support has proved doubtful. That is precisely why the legislator declared silence an administrative offence and attached a fine to it.
Each circumstance is listed separately in the norm, so the subject of the notification must correspond exactly to this list: the first concerns the situation where a woman in labour enters the institution without an identity document; the second — her secret departure from the institution; the third — the situation where the mother abandons her infant. Where a circumstance does not correspond to the list, the applicability of the article must be assessed separately.
The fine and the liable person
Article 172⁵ contains a single sanction: the offence entails a fine of 5,000 GEL imposed on the legal entity. The subject of liability is accordingly the legal entity — the medical institution as an organisation, and not an individual employee. The article does not provide a separate, increased sanction for a repeated offence.
Experience shows that the practical significance of such cases may exceed the amount of the fine: silence hampers the work of the guardianship and custodianship body and stands in the way of protecting the interests of the child. It is therefore important for medical institutions to arrange their internal procedures so that the situations listed above are recorded immediately and the corresponding notification is sent.
It is useful for an institution to determine in advance who is responsible for sending such information, how the fact is recorded in internal documentation and who verifies compliance. The article does not lay down these organisational rules, so the decision is an internal matter of the institution — what matters is that the outcome is what the norm requires: the guardianship and custodianship body must be informed in due time.
What the article does not regulate
The article does not fix the time limits within which the guardianship and custodianship body must be informed, nor does it say who draws up the administrative offence report, which body examines the case and how a fine may be appealed — these matters are governed by the norms of the Code and other legal acts. If a fine has already been imposed, the practical first steps are to study the case materials, verify the factual circumstances of the alleged breach and prepare a reasoned position.
History of the provision and how Legal.ge can help
The text of the article refers to the Law of Georgia No. 5627 of 18 December 2007 and the Law of Georgia No. 2384 of 18 December 2009. The Legal.ge team assists medical institutions in matters connected with Article 172⁵: we explain the scope of the administration’s duties, assess the qualification of an alleged breach and prepare positions for the examination of a case and for appeal. A timely consultation costs far less than the fine.