Article 369: Falsification of Evidence by a Participant in a Civil or Administrative Case
Article 369 of the Criminal Code of Georgia governs liability for the falsification of evidence in a civil or administrative case. If you are facing investigation or court under this article, this page explains what this particular norm says: who the subject of the crime is, which cases it applies to, and what punishment is provided. Every conclusion on this page is built on the article's own text; the remaining questions — what may count as evidence in a concrete case, how the investigation and the court hearing proceed — are determined by other legislative norms.
The article is single-part: it has no separate aggravating parts, and in a single sentence it prescribes both the elements of the offence and the punishment. That is exactly why the defense case under this norm rests entirely on a precise analysis of the text, which is broken down in detail below. With a norm of this structure every word is decisive: the interpretation of the subject, the type of case and the conduct must derive directly from the text, and not from a general notion of what falsification "usually" means.
The Subject of the Crime: Who Can Be Accused
The text of the article names the subject of the crime precisely: it is a participant in a civil or administrative case, or that participant's representative. These two categories are the first matter the defense examines:
- a participant in the case — a person taking part in a civil or administrative case;
- a representative — a person acting on that participant's behalf.
If the accused person does not fall within either of these categories, the question of liability under this article stands entirely differently. The defense therefore first establishes the nature of the case and the person's role in it — this is the foundation on which the whole composition of the offence is built. The detailed content of the concepts of participant and representative — who counts as a participant and in what form representation is conferred — is not explained in the text of this article and comes from other legislation; a mistake at this stage often sends the entire course of the case down the wrong track.
Which Cases the Article Applies To
The text of the norm clearly defines two types of cases: a civil case and an administrative case. Only falsification committed within these two types falls under this article. This detail is often overlooked, yet its significance is direct: determining the type of case decides whether this norm applies to a given set of facts at all. The classification of a case and the procedure for changing it are not regulated by this article — they are determined by other legislation.
The Conduct: Falsification of Evidence
The objective side of the crime is conveyed in the text by a single term — falsification of evidence. For the defense this means two direct questions. First, was there anything in the case that the law recognizes as evidence? Second, can the conduct imputed to the person be assessed as its falsification? What constitutes evidence and what carries the sign of falsification must be defined in detail by other legislative acts — this criminal article itself contains no such definitions, and this is precisely why assessing a concrete case requires a lawyer's involvement.
The Punishment: Three Alternatives
The article states the punishment in three alternative forms, and each must be read separately:
- a fine;
- corrective labor for a term from one to two years;
- imprisonment for up to one year.
So for this conduct the law begins with a fine and ends with imprisonment — with an upper limit of one year. Which alternative is chosen in a concrete case is not determined by the text of this article: it depends on the circumstances of the case and is resolved under other norms. Knowing all three forms of punishment matters also for properly assessing your negotiating position and the possible outcome of the process.
How a Defense Lawyer Works on an Article 369 Case
The defense case under this norm unfolds in three steps. First, verification of the subject: whether the person was a participant in a civil or administrative case or that participant's representative. Second, determination of the case type: whether the case fell within the two types listed in the text of the article. Third, assessment of the conduct itself: whether it carried the sign of falsification. Each of these steps flows directly from the text of the article, and negating any one of them changes the entire qualification. The procedural rules — how the investigation proceeds, what rights the accused holds, how evidence is obtained and examined — are not determined by this article and are regulated by other laws.
On Legal.ge you can review defense lawyers working on criminal cases, compare their experience and arrange an introductory consultation. In Article 369 cases an early legal assessment is especially important, because the initial questions of qualification — the subject, the type of case and the nature of the conduct — take shape precisely at the beginning of the case.