What the Article on False Testimony Covers
Article 370 of the Criminal Code of Georgia protects the administration of justice from false information. Its first part covers obstruction of justice expressed in: the provision of false information or the giving of false testimony by a person to be interrogated, a witness or a victim; the giving of a false conclusion or testimony by an expert; the deliberate or negligent failure of an expert to safeguard the object of expert research; and/or the deliberate incorrect translation by an interpreter — during the investigation or in court.
This article unites the acts of several different subjects — a witness, a victim, an expert, an interpreter — and the central question of every case is always one: whether the information stated was false and whether the person knew it. In practice, such a charge often arises against the backdrop of contradictions between a witness’s successive testimonies, which is why the case rests on a detailed analysis of the evidence.
The Basic Composition: Up to Four Years
Under the first part, the acts listed above are punished by imprisonment for a term of up to four years. Note that no fine is provided — the case is from the beginning within the frame of imprisonment, though bounded by four years.
Commission for Remuneration: Two to Six Years
Under the second part, the same act is punished more severely when committed for remuneration or another personal motive: imprisonment for a term of two to six years. Proving the motive is a separate question — remuneration must be established by the prosecution with evidence, not by conjecture.
False Testimony in a Grave Case: Three to Seven Years
Under the third part, an act under the first part, carried out in a criminal case where the accused is charged with committing a grave or especially grave crime, is punished by imprisonment for a term of three to seven years. The category of the crime is determined under other provisions, and this circumstance is reflected in the charge as well.
Repeated Commission: Four to Eight Years
Under the fourth part, an act provided for by the first or third part, committed more than once, is punished by imprisonment for a term of four to eight years. The sign of repetition must be established separately: the time, place and content of each episode are fixed by evidence.
How the Defense Approaches Such a Case
The defense’s first question is the fact of falsity: information is false where the person knew of its groundlessness and stated it anyway. A mistake and a false statement are different things: if the person described what they actually perceived or remembered, the imprecision of their testimony does not mean perjury — natural flaws of memory and errors of perception accompany every human testimony. The second is intent: false testimony must be given deliberately; for the expert, the law separately treats deliberate and negligent failure to safeguard, and this difference changes the qualification. The third is the motive and the category: establishing remuneration, personal motive and the category of the case are each separate contested points. The fourth is the procedural form: the manner of testifying, the warning and the recording proceed under the established procedure, and their violation is an instrument of the defense.
The anatomy of such a case consists of three layers: who stated what, when and in what context; how far the person understood the content and significance of the statement; and what connection the statement had to the real facts. The prosecution’s version binds these layers into a single event, and that is exactly where the defense’s work begins: each layer is opened separately at the level of evidence — recordings, protocols, earlier and later testimonies are compared, and it becomes clear where there is a real contradiction and where merely details forgotten and redistributed over time.
A separate question is the form of the warning: under the procedural norms, a witness must be warned about liability before testifying, and an expert must understand the significance of a false conclusion. These rules are established by other provisions, but their violation — an incomplete recording of the warning or an incorrect formulation — directly affects the legality of the charge, and the defense always checks this circumstance.
A typical mistake defendants make in such cases is yielding to misunderstanding while testifying: the person omits a detail they no longer remember, or repeats what another person told them — and this is later assessed as a “false” fabrication. Therefore the lawyer’s first advice is always the same: reflect in the testimony only what was personally perceived and remembered, and mark uncertain details openly as such. This rule neither aggravates the case nor creates evidence against the defense.
How Legal.ge Can Help
On the Legal.ge platform you can select a criminal defense lawyer working on cases against the administration of justice. The lawyer will re-verify the sequence of the testimonies, assess the boundary between perjury and mistake, and protect your rights at every stage of the investigation and the trial. Fill in a request on the site — a lawyer will contact you and assess your case.