The Criminal Risks and Protection of the Expert Witness
The figure of the expert witness is addressed from both sides: the expert's conclusion is often the decisive evidence in a case, and the legislator therefore builds a two-sided criminal regime around the expert. On one side, Article 370 of the Criminal Code regulates the expert's own liability — a false conclusion or false testimony, and the deliberate or negligent endangering of the object of expert examination, constitute obstruction of justice. On the other side, Article 372 protects the person subjected to influence — persuasion, bribery or coercion of an expert (or a witness, an examined person or an interpreter). Between these two norms lies the boundary on which the expert's position stands. It should be noted that the special admissibility standards for expert evidence known from United States evidence law acquire no analogue in Georgian law — the qualification and appointment of experts follow the procedural regime, which is not the subject of this page.
Article 370 — False Conclusion and Endangered Object
Under the first part, a false conclusion or false testimony given by an expert, as well as the deliberate or negligent endangering of the object of expert examination — during the investigation or in court — is punished by imprisonment for up to four years. The same act committed for mercenary motives or other personal interest — from two to six years; on a case where the accused is charged with a grave or especially grave crime — from three to seven years; and committed more than once — from four to eight years. The architecture of this ladder shows that the legislator treats the expert's integrity as a foundation of justice. For the defence, the central contested points are: intent in giving the false conclusion (the distinction from error — an examination may simply be methodologically wrong), and the form of endangering the object — deliberate or negligent; that distinction directly determines both the qualification and the sanction.
Article 372 — Influence Exercised on the Expert
The second norm protects the expert and prohibits the surroundings: an approach to, or persuasion of, an expert to give a false conclusion, to refuse to testify, or to alter a conclusion already given, is punished by a fine or community service from one hundred eighty to two hundred forty hours, or corrective labour for up to two years, or imprisonment for one to three years. Bribery or coercion — through the offer of any property benefit, threats, damage to or destruction of property, violence — is punished by a fine or imprisonment from three to six years; committed with violence — from five to eight years; and dangerous to life or health — from six to nine years. The law provides that a legal person, too, is punished for these acts — by a fine, or deprivation of the right to carry on activity and a fine. The practical conclusion for an expert is this: every fact of influence — a proposal or a threat — must be fixed promptly, because that fixation is what makes the protection effective.
The Expert's Practical Position in the Case
For the expert, the conduct of the file is best governed by three rules. First: the formulation of the conclusion and its methodological base must be fixed together — the expert who can show that the conclusion stands on a defined method, defined data and defined limitations naturally protects himself from an accusation of a false conclusion. Second: the transfer and receipt of the object of examination must be recorded in protocols — an accusation of endangering the object unfolds precisely on those protocols. Third: every attempt at influence — by telephone, in writing, through intermediaries — must promptly be made known to the authorities, because Article 372 works precisely on that fixation. Observing these three rules not only protects the expert from accusation — it also turns his conclusion into a sound piece of evidence in court.
Frequently Asked Questions
Below we answer the most common questions about expert witnesses.
What penalty faces an expert for a false conclusion?
Under the basic composition — imprisonment for up to four years; for mercenary motives — two to six years; on a grave case — three to seven years; committed more than once — four to eight years.
What is endangering the object of examination?
The deliberate or negligent damage or loss of the research object; the form determines the qualification and the sanction.
How is influence on an expert punished?
Persuasion — from a fine to three years; bribery or coercion — three to six years; with violence — five to eight; dangerous to life — six to nine years.
Is an error distinguished from a false conclusion?
Yes — a false conclusion is deliberate; a methodological error is a different category, though it changes the assessment of the case.
How We Help on Legal.ge
A person in the expert's position — whether accused or a victim of influence — needs a precise legal assessment. On Legal.ge you can consult an experienced criminal advocate who will assess your situation and protect your interests at every stage. Fill in the request form on the site and receive qualified assistance.