What is the highest fine under this article?

The highest figure is in subparagraph (c): 5,000 GEL, for unlawful movement of a whole elephant tusk or a whole rhinoceros horn in unworked form. Next is subparagraph (e), at 4,000 GEL for each individual bird of prey. Both are accompanied by confiscation of the object of the offence.

If several birds were involved, is the fine charged once?

Subparagraphs (d) and (e) refer expressly to each individual: 3,000 GEL for each primate under (d), 4,000 GEL for each bird of prey under (e). The figure is attached to the unit rather than to the consignment as a whole, which is why the number of individuals is one of the first things to check against the file.

I bought the item abroad as a souvenir. Does that change anything?

The article names not only a specimen but also a part or derivative of a listed species, and it provides no exception based on the purpose of the purchase. The decisive question is whether the item belongs to a species listed in the Convention's appendices, which is a matter of identification rather than of intention.

Should my episode be assessed under Part 1 or Part 2?

That question is what sets the amount. Part 1 covers illegal trade and carries 1,000 GEL. Part 2 covers unlawful export, import, transit, re-export or introduction from the sea, where the figure comes from the subparagraph: (a) 3,000 to 4,000 GEL, (b) and (d) 3,000 GEL, (e) 4,000 GEL, (c) 5,000 GEL. Confiscation of the object of the offence accompanies the fine under both parts.

Can I get the items back if I pay?

In both parts the text places confiscation alongside the fine, not instead of it, so the two apply together and payment is not in itself a basis for return. What can be contested is the reach of the confiscation — in particular whether it should extend to an entire consignment or only to specific items.

Illegal trade in and transport of CITES species (Art. 66³)

What Article 66³ covers

Article 66³ of the Georgian Code of Administrative Offences deals with two independent forms of conduct. Part 1 concerns illegal trade. Part 2 concerns unlawful export, import, transit, re-export and introduction from the sea. In both cases the object is the same: a live or non-live specimen of a species listed in the appendices to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora — CITES — or a part or derivative of such a species.

That division is not a technicality; it has a direct financial consequence. For trade the law sets one fixed sum. For the conduct connected with crossing a border it sets a five-tier scale on which the amount depends on the category the object itself falls into. In both parts the fine is accompanied by confiscation of the object of the offence.

Illegal trade — Part 1

Under Part 1, illegal trade in a live or non-live specimen of a species listed in the Convention's appendices, or in a part or derivative of such a species, carries a fine of 1,000 GEL, with confiscation of the object of the offence. The sum is fixed: the law names no minimum and no maximum here, and it does not vary the figure according to the species involved.

The article does not itself define what makes trade illegal. It takes that as given and attaches a sanction to it, so why a particular transaction is unlawful follows from the rules that govern species listed in the Convention's appendices rather than from Article 66³. What the article does define precisely is the object: alongside a live and a non-live specimen it names a part and a derivative expressly, which is how items that no longer resemble an animal or a plant come within the same provision.

Unlawful movement — Part 2 and its five subparagraphs

In Part 2 the law stops naming a single sum. For unlawful export, import, transit, re-export or introduction from the sea, the fine is set out as follows, and in every case it is accompanied by confiscation of the object of the offence:

(a) a live species listed in the Convention's appendices, other than those covered by subparagraphs (d) and (e): from 3,000 to 4,000 GEL;
(b) a non-live species listed in the appendices, other than that covered by subparagraph (c): 3,000 GEL;
(c) a whole elephant tusk or a whole rhinoceros horn in unworked form: 5,000 GEL;
(d) each individual primate listed in the appendices: 3,000 GEL;
(e) each individual bird of prey listed in the appendices: 4,000 GEL.

These figures do not form one continuous range. The only bracket in the list is in subparagraph (a), from 3,000 to 4,000 GEL; the other three amounts are fixed sums, and Part 1 stands apart from all of them at 1,000 GEL.

How the subparagraphs work together

The subparagraphs are linked by exclusions, so they have to be read in sequence. Subparagraph (a) is the general rule for live species, but primates and birds of prey are carved out of it and given their own entries at (d) and (e). Subparagraph (b) is the general rule for non-live species, out of which (c) is carved: a whole elephant tusk or a whole rhinoceros horn in unworked form. Reading (a) or (b) without their exclusions produces the wrong figure.

In (d) and (e) the law says expressly that it is speaking of each individual. That is not a drafting flourish: in those two subparagraphs the figure is attached to the unit — 3,000 GEL for each primate under (d), 4,000 GEL for each bird of prey under (e) — and it repeats as many times as there are individuals counted. The article names no quantity of its own; only the file does. That is why counting the individuals, and identifying the species of each, is not a secondary technical detail in these cases but part of what determines the amount, since moving one individual into a different subparagraph moves the figure with it.

Confiscation, and what it reaches

In both Part 1 and Part 2 confiscation sits in the text alongside the fine rather than as an alternative to it. The financial scale of a case is therefore not measured by the fine alone. The practical question is what will be treated as the object of the offence — an entire consignment, or particular items within it — and in many cases the answer matters more than the amount of the fine itself.

What you can do, and what to bring

Article 66³ sets no appeal deadline and names no reviewing body; those are governed by other provisions of the Code and by the circumstances of the case, so both the period and the addressee have to be checked against the document issued in your case rather than assumed from a general rule. On the substance, the questions that decide these cases are:

which part has been applied — trade, or conduct connected with the border;
which subparagraph the amount was calculated under, and whether it matches the actual category of the object;
how many individuals have been counted where (d) or (e) is in play;
whether the species has been established by expert examination, and whether it is in fact listed in the Convention's appendices;
how far the confiscation has been extended.

Bring the report or decision served on you, the customs and transport documents, proof of provenance, any permit or certificate, and any expert identification of the species that has already been carried out. Representation does not change the sums the law sets. What it addresses is whether the right part and the right subparagraph were chosen, and whether what the fine and the confiscation were applied to was counted correctly.