Article 364 – Obstruction of Justice: What the Law Treats as a Crime
Article 364 of the Criminal Code of Georgia protects the unhindered administration of justice, investigation and defense. The article punishes unlawful interference, in one form or another, in the activity of a prosecutor or an investigator with the aim of obstructing the comprehensive, full and objective investigation of a case; interference with the aim of obstructing the conduct of the defense in an advocate's activity; gross interference in the activity of a court with the aim of influencing the administration of justice; and unlawful interference in the activity of a juror or a candidate juror.
The norm thus covers all three branches – investigation, court and defense. In the charge it is therefore decisive whose activity the interference is attributed to and what its aim was: obstructing the investigation, influencing the administration of justice, or obstructing the defense. Establishing the aim is not a formality – it is precisely what determines which part of the article applies and, accordingly, the penalty the person faces.
What the Prosecution Must Prove – the Elements
The prosecution must establish two principal circumstances. First, the fact of interference: that the person interfered in some form in the activity of a prosecutor, investigator, advocate, court or juror. Second, that this interference was unlawful and motivated precisely by the aim named in the article. In the case of a court the law expressly requires the interference to be gross; in the case of a juror, unlawful; and in the case of investigation and defense, the aim of obstruction or influence.
The defense position is often built on exactly these elements: whether interference actually existed, whether it was unlawful, and whether the aim of the accused is provable. Exercising lawful rights – for instance, participating in the proceedings – does not count as interference; the boundary between lawful action and crime is drawn by the concrete facts of the case.
Sanctions – the Parts of the Article Separately
Article 364 provides for different penalties, and the sanction of each part must be read on its own:
- part 1 – unlawful interference in the activity of a prosecutor, investigator or advocate with the aim of obstructing the investigation or the defense – a fine, or community service for a term of one hundred and eighty to two hundred and forty hours, or imprisonment for a term of up to one year;
- part 2 – gross interference in the activity of a court with the aim of influencing the administration of justice – a fine, or imprisonment for a term of up to two years;
- the provision on unlawful interference in the activity of a juror (candidate juror) – a fine, or imprisonment for a term of up to two years;
- part 3 – the act provided for by part 2, committed by a person holding a state-political office – a fine, or imprisonment for a term of one to three years, with deprivation of the right to hold an office or to conduct activity for a term of up to three years or without it;
- part 4 – an act provided for by part 1, part 2 or the juror-related provision, committed by using an official position – a fine, or imprisonment for a term of two to four years, with deprivation of the right to hold an office or to conduct activity for a term of up to three years or without it.
Under the note to the article, a legal person is punished for these acts by a fine or deprivation of the right to conduct activity. The rules on individualization of punishment and on mitigating circumstances are defined by other norms of the Code.
Aggravating Forms
Part 3 aggravates liability where gross interference in the activity of a court is committed by a person holding a state-political office. Part 4 aggravates any of the forms of the article where the act was committed by using an official position. The very same act, committed with the resources of an office, thus acquires a significantly graver qualification.
It is noteworthy that part 4 encompasses all the preceding forms – interference connected with investigation, defense, court and jurors – and if any of them is committed by using an official position, the penalty reaches imprisonment from two to four years. This is why it is important for the defense to establish precisely in what form and in what capacity the accused acted.
Practical Aspects of the Defense
In Article 364 cases the interpretation of the fact of interference is often contested: an action may be treated as interference when it in fact constituted a lawful relationship. The advocate's task is to show, from the case materials, whether unlawful interference and its aim existed at all, or whether the charge rests on conjecture alone.
A separate question concerns evaluative judgments of a procedural character – for instance, the grossness of interference in a court's activity is an evaluative category that rests on the concrete circumstances of the case. The rules for applying such criteria are defined by other provisions, and an experienced lawyer uses these questions actively in the defense position.
How a Defense Lawyer Assists in Article 364 Cases
If a case for obstruction of justice has been opened against you, a lawyer will assess the correctness of the qualification – under which part the case proceeds and whether the aim of the interference is substantiated – examine the fact and unlawfulness of the interference, and represent your interests at every stage of the proceedings. The lawyers of Legal.ge work on obstruction-of-justice cases and will help you form an accurate assessment.