Military Law in Georgia — the Real Shape
Georgia has no separate military court system and no separate military code: crimes against military service are tried by ordinary courts under ordinary criminal procedure, and the norms sit in a dedicated chapter of the Criminal Code. A 'military law' page here therefore really consists of two things: the chapter on crimes against military service and the compositions of evading conscription. Below, five articles are explained — they form the legal backbone of this field, beginning with the concept, running through discipline, property and conscription, and ending with the anchor of international humanitarian law. The day-to-day service order — duty, leave, discharge — is regulated by separate legislation and lies outside this page.
Article 382 — the Concept: What a Military Crime Is
The backbone article is 382. Under its first part, a crime against military service is an act provided by this chapter, directed against the order of military service, committed by a servicemember or by a reservist during the performance of reserve military service. The concept thus defines two categories of subject — the servicemember and the reservist performing reserve service — and the whole chapter is tested through that circle. The second part assigns the liability in time of war or martial law to the framework of Georgian legislation — the peacetime sanctions do not automatically extend to wartime conditions.
Article 356 — Evasion of Service by the Person Called Up
Article 356 regulates the conscription side. Under the first part, evasion of military service by the person called up — including simulation of illness, self-injury, use of a forged document or other deception — is punishable by a fine or deprivation of liberty for a term of up to 3 years. The second part regulates evasion of non-military, alternative labour service with the same list of means — a fine, or community service for a term of 180 to 200 hours, and/or deprivation of liberty for a term of up to 1 year. The third part aggravates these acts committed in time of martial law or a state of emergency — deprivation of liberty for 2 to 5 years. This norm is contested around the evidence of unfitness, the validity of documents and the boundaries of intent, and the defence here often depends precisely on the quality of that evidence.