1. saqarTvelos saqarTvelos advokatTa
ganviTarebis kvleviTi asociaciis sisxlis
instituti samarTlis komiteti
GEORGIAN DEVELOPMENT GEORGIAN BAR ASSOCIATION
RESEARCH INSTITUTE CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE
mrgvali magida saqarTvelos
sisxlis samarTlis saproceso
kanonmdeblobis problemebze
saqarTvelos sisxlis samarTlis
saproceso kodeqsSi cvlilebebisa da
damatebebis proeqtis prezentacia
ROUND TABLE MEETING
ON THE PROBLEMS OF THE GEORGIAN
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW
PRESENTATION OF THE DRAFT LAW
ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRIMINAL
PROCEDURE CODE OF GEORGIA
Tbilisi, 2 Tebervali, 2012 w.
Tbilisi, February 2, 2012

2. sarCevi
ganmartebiTi baraTi ................................................................3
1. saqveynoobis principi ...........................................................3
2. SejibrebiTobis principi ......................................................5
3. advokatis uflebebi ..............................................................8
4. gamokiTxvis oqmi ....................................................................9
5. iribi Cvenebis problema ...................................................... 11
6. preiudicia ........................................................................... 12
7. sasamarTlo-fsiqiatriuli eqspertizis sakiTxi .............. 13
8. sasamarTlo sxdomis oqmi.................................................... 13
proeqti
saqarTvelos kanoni saqarTvelos sisxlis
samarTlis saproceso kodeqsSi cvlilebebisa
da damatebebis Setanis Sesaxeb ............................................... 14
EXPLANATORY NOTES................................................................... 21
1. Principle of trial in public .................................................... 21
2. Principle of Adversarial Trial............................................... 22
3. Rights of a Defense Counsel .............................................. 25
4. Records of Interviews ......................................................... 25
5. Problem of Indirect Testimony ............................................ 27
6. Judicial Notice ..................................................................... 29
7. Question of Forensic Psychiatric Expertise ...................... 29
8. Record of the Court Session .............................................. 29
Draft
LAW OF GEORGIA ON THE CHANGES AND ADDITIONS
TO THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE OF
GEORGIACODE OF GEORGIA .......................................................... 31

3. ganmartebiTi baraTi
warmodgenili cvlilebebi da damatebebi ramdenime
mniSvnelovan Temas exeba, romlebic, Cveni azriT, moqmed
sisxlis samarTlis saproceso kodeqsSi arasrulyofi-
lad aris daregulirebuli, an/da am TvalsazrisiT, sasa-
marTlo praqtika arasworad viTardeba.
am paketSi ar aris Setanili cvlilebebi, romle-
bic dazaralebulis, saproceso SeTanxmebisa da nafic
msajulTa sasamarTlos institutebs Seexeba. saerTo
aRiarebiT, samive institutSi bevri ram aris Sesacv-
leli. magram Cven migvaCnia, rom samive sakiTxi imdenad
mniSvnelovania, rom ufro Rrma da safuZvlian analizs
saWiroebs, razec muSaoba momavali wlidan unda daiwyos.
1. saqveynoobis principi
saqarTvelos dRes moqmedi kanonmdebloba araTana-
zomierad mkacr wesebs iTvaliswinebs saqmis ganxilvis sa-
qveynoobis principis SezRudvis mxriv. amgvari SezRudva
ewinaaRmdegeba saqarTvelos konstituciis 24-e muxls,
agreTve adamianis uflebaTa evropuli sasamarTlos me-6
muxlis pirveli punqtiTa da me-10 muxliT uzrunvelyo-
fil uflebebs.
adamianis uflebaTa evropuli sasamarTlos ganmar-
tebiT, konvenciis me-6 muxlis pirveli punqti adgens
prezumfcias imisas, rom nebismieri saqme ganixilebodes
sazogadoebis da, maT Soris, mediis TandaswrebiT. sazo-
gadoebis, maT Soris mediis daswreba procesze imisTvis
aris saWiro, raTa marTlmsajuleba ganxorcieldes ara
saidumlod, aramed saqveynod da sazogadoebas SeeZlos
qmediTi kontrolis ganxorcieleba rogorc marTlmsa-
julebis ganxorcielebis procesze, ise mTlianad sa-
samarTlo sistemaze. marTlmsajulebis gamWvirvaloba
aseve xels uwyobs saqmis samarTlianad ganxilvas, rac
-3-

4. demokratiuli sazogadoebis umniSvnelovanesi amocanaa
(ix. Axen v. Germany, 1983).
saqmis ganxilvis saqveyno xasiaTi aseve SesaZleblobas
aZlevs presas ganaxorcielos `sazogadoebrivi nagazis~
funqcia, rac konvenciis me-10 muxliT aris uzrunvelyo-
fili. presis mier aseTi funqciis ganxorcieleba ki Zalze
rTulia, rom ara vTqvaT SeuZlebeli, iseT SemTxvevaSi,
rodesac medias erTmeva ufleba ganaxorcielos procesis
audio an video Cawera, translireba da a.S.
cxadia, rom piris ufleba – misi saqmis ganxilva Ria
iyos sazogadoebis, maT Soris, mediisaTvis, ar aris ab-
soluturi ufleba da es ufleba SeiZleba SeizRudos.
amasTanave, adamianis uflebaTa evropuli sasamarTlos
ganmartebiT, saqmis ganxilvaze sazogadoebis, maT Soris,
mediis daswrebis ufleba SeiZleba SeizRudos mxolod im
SemTxvevaSi, rodesac amas mkacrad moiTxovs konkretuli
saqmis garemoebebi.
procesis daxurvis sakiTxis ganxilvisas mxedveloba-
Si unda iqnes miRebuli, Tu ramdenad Tanazomieria, anu
proporciulia es zoma im miznisa, romlis miRwevasac em-
saxureba igi procesis daxurvisas (ix. Campbell and Fell v.
The United Kingdom).
zemoTqmuli mosazrebebidan gamomdinare, aucileb-
lad miviCnieT, mniSvnelovani cvlilebebi Segvetana mo-
qmedi sisxlis samarTlis kodeqsis me-10 muxlis me-3 na-
wilSi. Cven gvesmis, rom aseTi cvlilebis ganxorcieleba
SeuZlebeli iqneboda im SemTxvevaSi, Tu analogiurad ar
Seicvleboda `saerTo sasamarTloebis Sesaxeb~ saqarTve-
los organuli kanonis me-13 muxlis me-4 punqti. amito-
mac, migvaCnia, rom saTanado cvlilebebi iqnes Setanili
aRniSnul sakanonmdeblo aqtSic.
-4-

5. 2. SejibrebiTobis principi
iTvleba, rom moqmedi sisxlis samarTlis saproceso
kodeqsis miRebiT kanonmdebelma saqarTveloSi Sejibre-
biTobis principis danergva ganizraxa. Tumca, rogorc
am kodeqsis amoqmedebis Semdgomi sasamarTlo praqtika
gviCvenebs, sasamarTloebSi arcTu mTlad kargad aqvT
gacnobierebuli kanonmdeblis es mizani.
aRniSnuli principi, mraval sxva faqtorTan erTad,
braldebis mxaris paralelurad, dacvis mxaris mier mt-
kicebulebebis mopovebasac gulisxmobs, rac Sejibre-
biTobis principze dafuZnebuli procesis efeqturobis
aucilebeli pirobaa. swored amitom kodeqsis 38-e mux-
lis me-7 nawilSi kanonmdebelma gaiTvaliswina dacvis
mxaris ufleba, Caataros gamoZieba, kanonierad moipovos
da waradginos mtkicebuleba am kodeqsiT dadgenili we-
siT; moiTxovos sagamoZiebo moqmedebis Catareba da ga-
moiTxovos mtkicebuleba, romelic saWiroa braldebis
uarsayofad an pasuxismgeblobis Sesamsubuqeblad; mona-
wileoba miiRos misi an/da misi advokatis Suamdgomlo-
biT Catarebul sagamoZiebo moqmedebaSi; moiTxovos ad-
vokatis daswreba misi monawileobiT Catarebuli sagamo-
Ziebo moqmedebis dros. kodeqsis 39-e muxlis pirveli
nawilis Tanaxmad, braldebuls ufleba aqvs, sakuTari
xarjiT, TviTon an/da advokatis daxmarebiT moipovos
mtkicebuleba. braldebulis mier mopovebul mtkicebu-
lebas braldebis mxaris mier mopovebuli mtkicebulebis
Tanabari iuridiuli Zala aqvs. ufro metic, imave 39-e
muxlis me-2 nawilis Tanaxmad, Tu mtkicebulebis mopo-
vebisaTvis saWiroa iseTi sagamoZiebo an sxva saproceso
moqmedebis Catareba, romelsac braldebuli an misi ad-
vokati damoukideblad ver atarebs, igi uflebamosilia
Sesabamisi ganCinebis gamotanis SuamdgomlobiT mimarTos
mosamarTles gamoZiebis adgilis mixedviT. mosamarTle
valdebulia miiRos yvela zoma, raTa braldebis mxari-
-5-

6. saTvis cnobili ar gaxdes dacvis mxaris mier mtkicebu-
lebis mopoveba.
aqve unda aRiniSnos, rom kodeqsis 111-e muxlis me-2
nawili arTmevs dacvis mxares iseTi sagamoZiebo moqme-
debis Catarebis uflebas, rogoricaa Cxreka da amoRe-
ba, rac, moqmedi kodeqsis Tanaxmad, mxolod braldebis
prerogativas warmoadgens. arsebobs sxva magaliTebic,
rodesac dacvis mxare aSkarad araTanabar mdgomareoba-
Sia braldebis mxaresTan SedarebiT. magaliTad, kodeqsis
33-e muxlis me-6 nawilis `n” qvepuntiT, prokurori uf-
lebamosilia moiTxovos da daubrkoleblad miiRos sa-
xelmwifo organoebidan dokumenti Tu sxva nivTieri mt-
kicebuleba. amgvari `daubrkoleblad miRebis~ ufleba-
mosileba dacvis mxarisTvis uzrunvelyofili ar aris.
aRniSnuli uTanasworobis aRmofxvra SeiZleba mxo-
lod mosamarTlis keTili nebis SemTxvevaSi, Tu igi, ze-
moT miTiTebuli 39-e muxlis me-2 nawiliT gaTvaliswine-
bul SemTxvevaSi, daakmayofilebs dacvis mxaris Suamd-
gomlobas garkveuli sagamoZiebo an sxva saproceso moq-
medebis Catarebis Taobaze. magram, rogorc sasamarTlo
praqtika gviCvenebs, winaswari gamoZiebis stadiaze mt-
kicebulebis mopovebisaTvis saWiro sagamoZiebo an sxva
saproceso moqmedebis Catarebis Sesaxeb dacvis mxaris
SuamdgomlobaTa didi umravlesoba sasamarTloebis mier
daukmayofilebeli rCeba im motiviT, rom sasamarTloebi
aseT Suamdgomlobas ganmartaven, rogorc Suamdgomlo-
bas amoRebis Catarebis Taobaze. Cxreka da amoReba ki,
rogorc ukve aRvniSneT, mxolod braldebis mxaris pre-
rogativaa.
aseTi aSkarad araswori praqtikis gamosasworeblad
saWirod migvaCnia, rom, erTi mxriv, kodeqss daematos
sagarantio normebi dacvis mxaris mier saxelmwifo an/da
kerZo dawesebulebebidan, aseve, kerZo pirebisgan mtki-
cebulebebis an/da dokumentebis gamoTxovisa da miRebis
-6-

7. uflebis Sesaxeb; xolo, meore mxriv, gauqmdes akrZalva
Cxrekisa da amoRebis Sesaxeb da dacvis mxares mieces uf-
leba mimarTos sasamarTlos Cxrekisa da amoRebis Cata-
rebis SuamdgomlobiT, im pirobiT, rom Suamdgomlobis
dakmayofilebis SemTxvevaSi Cxrekas da amoRebas saxelm-
wifo sagamoZiebo samsaxurebi ganaxorcieleben.
mxareTa Tanasworuflebianobis principi da dacvis
mxaris mier sakuTari gamoZiebis Catareba gulisxmobs si-
sxlis samarTlis saproceso kodeqsis 38-e muxliT bral-
debulisa da misi advokatisaTvis mtkicebulebebis xel-
misawvdomobis uflebas im SemTxvevaSic, roca braldebu-
li uqonelia da daniSnuli hyavs advokati saxelmwifos
xarjze.
saproceso kodeqsiT dauregulirebelia uqoneli
braldebulisa da saxelmwifos mier daniSnuli advoka-
tis mier gamoZiebis CatarebisaTvis saWiro xarjebis sa-
kiTxi, rac, faqtobrivad, am uflebis ganxorcielebas
gamoricxavs. erTi SexedviT, moqmedi kodeqsis 46-e mux-
lis me-4 nawilis debuleba - `dacvis saxelmwifos xarj-
ze ganxorcielebis SemTxvevaSi saxelmwifo saqarTvelos
kanonmdeblobiT dadgenili wesiT gaiRebs dacvisaTvis
saWiro sxva xarjebsac, Tu es xarjebi pirdapiraa dakav-
Sirebuli braldebulis mier sakuTari dacvis ganxor-
cielebasTan” – am sakiTxs aregulirebs. Tumca, igi Riad
tovebs kiTxvas, Tu ra igulisxmeba `dacvisaTvis saWiro
sxva xarjebSi” da moiazreba Tu ara masSi kodeqsis 38-e
muxlis me-7 nawilSi miTiTebuli uflebebi.
warmodgenili cvlilebis Tanaxmad, uqoneli bral-
debulisa da/an saxelmwifos mier daniSnuli advokatis
mier Catarebuli gamoZiebis xarjebs saxelmwifo faravs.
-7-

8. 3. advokatis uflebebi
cvlilebebi aseve exeba advokatis samarTlebrivi md-
gomareobis maregulirebel normebs (kodeqsis 44-e, 292-
e, 300-e, 312-e muxlebi), romelTa araswori interpreta-
cia praqtikaSi bevr siZneles uqmnis advokats drouli
da efeqturi dacviTi saqmianobis ganxorcielebis mxriv.
kerZod, sxadasxva teqnikuri problemebi da rigi uwy-
ebebis araoperatiuloba (gansakuTrebiT dasvenebisa da
uqme dReebSi patimrobaSi myofi braldebulebis dac-
viTi momsaxurebis ganxorcielebisas) SeuZlebels xdis
advokatisTvis, moipovos Tavisi dacvis qveS myofisagan
formaluri dasturi dacviTi saqmianobis gansaxorcie-
leblad. amis gamo, saWirod miviCnieT amogveRo kodeqsis
Sesabamisi normidan aseTi dasturis miRebis valdebule-
ba. paralelurad, gafarTovda saapelacio da sakasacio
instanciaSi saCivris Semtani subieqtebis wre: saCivris
Setanis ufleba, msjavrdebuliTan erTad, mieca mis ad-
vokatsac.
dabolos, kodeqsis 44-e muxlis me-3 nawilSi Setanili
cvlilebebiT navaraudevia advokatis uflebebis gazrda,
raTa mas SeeZlos maqsimalurad qmediTad da efeqtianad
ganaxorcielos Tavisi dacvis qveS myofi piris interese-
bis dacva.
saqarTvelos sisxlis samarTlis saproceso kanon-
mdebloba sisxlis samarTlis saqmeSi ucxoeli advokatis
monawileobis Sesaxeb specialur daTqmas ar Seicavs, rac
ukanonod da araTanazomierad zRudavs kodeqsis 41-e
muxliT gaTvaliswinebul braldebulis uflebas, pi-
radad an misi nebis gaTvaliswinebiT airCios da aiyvanos
advokati. warmodgenili cvlilebiT, ucxoeli advoka-
tis ayvanis SemTxvevaSi, saWiroa saqarTvelos advokatTa
asociaciis Tanxmoba.
-8-

9. 4. gamokiTxvis oqmi
kodeqsis 75-e muxlis me-3 nawili uzrunvelyofs mxa-
reTa uflebas, 83-e muxlis Sesabamisad, droulad mi-
iRon meore mxarisgan gamokiTxvis oqmebi. saxelmwifo
organoebSi moaruli azris Tanaxmad, gamokiTxvis oqmi
ar warmoadgens mtkicebulebas da igi ar unda gadaeces
meore mxares kodeqsis 83-e muxliT dadgenili wesebis
Sesabamisad. arsebobs iseTi mosazrebac, rom TiTqos
mxarem SeiZleba Caataros piris gamokiTxva, magram ar
Seadginos gamokiTxvis oqmi, radgan oqmis Sedgenis val-
debuleba TiTqos ar arsebobs. magram faqtia, rom gamo-
kiTxva aris sagamoZiebo moqmedeba. gamokiTxvas, rogorc
sagamoZiebo moqmedebis erT-erT saxeobas, iTvaliswinebs
113-e muxli, romelic Setanilia kodeqsis me-15 TavSi,
saTauriT „sagamoZiebo moqmedebebi“. ufro metic, 113-
e muxlis me-3 nawilis Tanaxmad: „gamokiTxvis win unda
dadgindes gamosakiTxi piris vinaoba da sxva aucilebeli
informacia. es informacia unda aRiniSnos gamokiTxvis
oqmSi”.
moqmedi kodeqsis 134-e muxli adgens zogad debu-
lebebs sagamoZiebo moqmedebis oqmebis Sesaxeb. am mux-
lis pirveli nawili imperatiulad adgens: “sagamoZiebo
moqmedebis oqmi dgeba uSualod sagamoZiebo moqmedebis
msvlelobisas an misi damTavrebisTanave.” es debuleba
yvela sagamoZiebo moqmedebas exeba, maT Soris, gamokiTx-
vasac, radgan igi ar Seicavs sagamonakliso debulebas,
rom gamokiTxvis oqmis Sedgena savaldebulo ar aris.
ufro metic, 135-e muxlis pirveli nawili gamokiTx-
vis oqmis rekvizitebs adgens: “gamokiTxvis oqmSi unda
aisaxos gamosakiTxi piris saxeli, gvari, asaki, moqala-
qeoba, ganaTleba, samuSao adgili, saqmianoba an/da Ta-
namdeboba, sacxovrebeli adgili, ojaxuri mdgomareoba,
misi urTierToba braldebulTan Tu dazaralebulTan,
mis mier micemuli informaciis Sinaarsi, misi damokide-
-9-

10. buleba sasamarTloSi gamocxadebisa da Cvenebis micemis-
admi”.
zemoT citirebuli da miTiTebuli normebi aRar to-
vebs kiTxvebs imis Taobaze, aris Tu ara gamokiTxvis oqmi
savaldebulo dokumenti, unda CaiTvalos Tu ara igi mt-
kicebulebad da, rogorc aseTi, eqvemdebareba Tu ara
igi meore mxarisaTvis gadacemas 83-e muxlis moTxovnebis
Sesabamisad. gamokiTxvis oqmi araTu aris mtkicebuleba,
garkveul SemTxvevebSi igi SeiZleba gadamwyveti mniSvne-
lobis mqone mtkicebuleba iyos nebismieri mxarisaTvis.
amgvaris uqonlobis SemTxvevaSi saidan unda gansazRvros
mowinaaRmdege mxarem, Tu ris Tqmas apirebs sasamarTlo-
Si esa Tu is mowme? an rogor unda moemzados mxare ase-
Ti mowmis jvaredini dakiTxvisaTvis? an rogor SeiZle-
ba srulfasovnad Semowmdes mowmis sandooba, Tu mxares
ar gaaCnia xelT dokumenti, romelic Seicavs gamoZiebis
procesSi mis mier gakeTebul gancxadebebs?
am konteqstSi unda gavixsenoT evropuli konvencia,
kerZod ki, misi me-6 muxlis me-3 punqtis “b” qvepunqti,
romlis Tanaxmadac braldebuls unda “hqondes sakmari-
si dro da saSualebebi sakuTari dacvis mosamzadeblad”.
Tu mas ar eqneba dro da saSualeba jerovnad Seiswavlos
nebismieri iseTi piris gamokiTxvis oqmi, romlis sasa-
marTloSi mowmis saxiT dakiTxvasac apirebs mowinaaRm-
dege mxare, cxadia, rom igi ver moaxerxebs aseT pirTan
mimarTebiT konvenciis me-6 muxlis me-3 punqtis “b” qve-
punqtiT uzrunvelyofili uflebiT sargeblobas.
- 10 -

11. 5. iribi Cvenebis problema
xifaTi, romelic aseT Cvenebas Tan axlavs, is aris, rom,
SesaZloa, sasamarTlom gamamtyunebeli ganaCeni, Tundac,
sxva mtkicebulebasTan an mtkicebulebebTan erToblioba-
Si, daafuZnos iseTi piris gancxadebaze, romelic sasamarT-
loSi SesaZloa Tavad ar gamocxaddes da ar iqnes dakiTxu-
li mowmis saxiT. es ki niSnavs, rom braldebuls ar eqneba
SesaZlebloba dakiTxos aseTi mowme jvaredini dakiTxvis
wesiT da am gziT Seamowmos misi gulwrfeloba, patiosneba,
misi gancxadebebis simarTlesTan Sesabamisoba da sxv.
aqedan gamomdinare, aSkaraa, rom iribi mtkicebule-
bis dasaSvebobasTan dakavSirebiT unda arsebobdes Zal-
ze myari saproceso garantiebi. sadavo ar unda iyos, rom
Secdomis albaToba ganaCenis gamotanisas bevrad ufro
maRalia im SemTxvevaSi, rodesac ganaCeni irib Cvenebas
eyrdnoba, vidre im SemTxvevaSi, rodesac misi safuZveli
Cveulebrivi Cveneba an/da sxva dasaSvebi mtkicebulebe-
bia. aqve unda gvaxsovdes adamianis uflebaTa evropuli
konvenciis me-6 muxlis pirveli punqtiT uzrunvelyo-
fili mxareTa SejibrebiTobis principi da imave muxlis
me-3 punqtis “d” qvepunqtiT gaTvaliswinebuli bralde-
bulis ufleba dakiTxos an daakiTxvinos misi braldebis
mowmeebi. bunebrivia, rom iseTi piris mimarT, romelic
sasamarTloSi Cvenebas ar iZleva, braldebuls aRniSnu-
li uflebebiT sargeblobis SesaZlebloba erTmeva.
Zalze bundovani sakiTxia, Tu ras niSnavs iribi Cve-
nebis dadastureba „sxva mtkicebulebiT“. upirveles
yovlisa, unda gavixsenoT, rom 2010 wlis 24 seqtembris
cvlilebebamde iribi Cveneba unda dadasturebuliyo
„mtkicebulebaTa erTobliobiT“. amJamad, moqmed redaq-
ciaSi gamoyenebuli mxolobiTi ricxvi imaze miuTiTebs,
rom Tundac erTi „sxva mtkicebulebis“ arseboba sakma-
risia. aseve did wuxils iwvevs ganumartebloba imisa, Tu
ra igulisxmeba am sxva mtkicebulebaSi. SeiZleba Tu ara
- 11 -

12. vigulisxmoT, magaliTad, sxva iribi Cveneba? Tu es asea,
maSin braldebuli dgas Zalze seriozuli safrTxis wina-
Se, rom mis mimarT SeiZleba gamotanili iqnes gamamtyune-
beli ganaCeni Tundac ori iribi Cvenebis safuZvelze. anu
igi SeiZleba damnaSaved iqnes cnobili X-isa da Y-is gan-
cxadebebis safuZvelze, romelTagan SeiZleba arcerTi
ar gamocxaddes sasamarTloSi da amitom braldebulma
vercerTis jvaredini dakiTxva ver moaxerxos. orma, Ta-
visTavad cudma da dauSvebelma, mtkicebulebam ar SeiZ-
leba Seqmnas ori kargi mtkicebuleba marto imitom, rom
isini erTmaneTTan kombinaciaSi arian.
amitomac Cveni winadadebaa, rom kodeqsis 76-e mux-
lis me-3 nawili Camoyalibdes Semdegi redaqciiT: `sasa-
marTloSi saqmis arsebiTi ganxilvis dros iribi Cveneba
dasaSvebi mtkicebulebaa, Tu igi dasturdeba sxva iseTi
mtkicebulebiT, romelic ar aris iribi Cveneba~.
6. preiudicia
aseve dazustebas moiTxovs moqmedi saproceso kode-
qsiT gaTvaliswinebuli preiudiciis sakiTxic. kerZod,
kodeqsis 73-e muxlis `g” qvepunqtis safuZvelze sasa-
marTlos kanonier ZalaSi Sesuli ganaCeniT dadgenili
faqtobrivi garemoebis gamokvlevis gareSe mtkicebule-
bad miReba bevr winaaRmdegobas warmoSobs. gansakuTre-
biT saxifaToa saqmis arsebiTi ganxilvis gareSe gamota-
nili gamamtyunebeli ganaCenebiT `dadgenili faqtebis~
preiudiciad miCneva, radgan aseT dros mtkicebulebebis
gamokvleva ar xdeba da, Sesabamisad, arc faqtebis dad-
genas aqvs adgili. amitomac, xarvezis aRmosafxvrelad,
saWirod miviCnieT miTiTebul normas daematos daTqma
procesis monawileTa mxridan ganaCenis kanonierebasTan
dakavSirebiT eWvis uqonlobis Taobaze. aseve, ufro de-
talurad unda ganisazRvros mxareTa an sasamarTlos
mier preiudiciis uaryofis pirobebi da wesi.
- 12 -

13. 7. sasamarTlo-fsiqiatriuli eqspertizis sakiTxi
aucileblad migvaCnia, rom kodeqsis 105-e muxlis me-2
nawilis “b” qvepunqtidan da 283-e muxlis pirveli nawi-
lidan amoRebul iqnas sityva `saxelmwifo~, raTa piris
Seuracxadobis dasadastureblad ara mxolod saxelmwifo
sasamarTlo-fsiqiatriuli eqspertizis daskvnis warmodge-
na iyo aucilebeli, aramed kerZo eqspertizisac. mxolod
amgvari midgoma iqneboda gamarTlebuli SejibrebiTobis
principiT, romelsac ganamtkicebs moqmedi kodeqsi.
8. sasamarTlo sxdomis oqmi
mniSvnelovani cvlilebebis Setanaa saWiro sasamarT-
lo sxdomis oqmis Sesaxeb debulebebSic. arsebuli pra-
qtikiT, sasamarTlo sxdomis oqmi mxareebs gadaecemaT
sxdomis dasrulebis Semdeg. rodesac sasamarTlos sxdo-
ma erT dReze met xans grZeldeba, mxares sxva araferi
darCenia, Tu ara daelodos sxdomis damTavrebas, rasac
SeiZleba Tveebi dasWirdes. adamianis mexsiereba ar aris
ukidegano. droTa ganmavlobaSi Cven gvaviwydeba bevri
ram, rasac SeiZleba didi mniSvneloba hqondes procesis
SedegisaTvis. amitom saWirod miviCnieT, rom sasamarT-
los daekisros valdebuleba sxdomis oqmi moamzados sx-
domis gadadebis SemTxvevaSic.
aseve aucileblad migvaCnia sasamarTlos davaldebu-
leba sxdomis audioCaweris ganxorcielebis da audioCa-
nawerebis mxareTaTvis gadacemis Taobaze. teqnikis gan-
viTarebis Tanamedrove etapze es sirTules ar warmoad-
gens, marTlmsajulebis jerovnad ganxorcielebisaTvis
ki Zalze mniSvnelovania.
nino gvenetaZe
aleqsandre baramiZe
- 13 -

14. proeqti
saqarTvelos kanoni saqarTvelos sisxlis
samarTlis saproceso kodeqsSi cvlilebebisa
da damatebebis Setanis Sesaxeb
saqarTvelos sisxlis samarTlis saproceso kodeqsSi
(saqarTvelos sakanonmdeblo macne, N31, 03.11.2009, mux.
190) Setanil iqnes Semdegi cvlilebebi da damatebebi:
1. kodeqsis me-10 muxlis me-3 nawili Camoyalibdes Sem-
degi redaqciiT:
`3. sasamarTloSi, aseve sasamarTlo sxdomis darba-
zSi sisxlis samarTlis saqmis ganxilvis foto-,
kino- da videogadaReba da translireba nebadar-
Tulia, garda im SemTxvevisa, rodesac amgvari mo-
qmedeba xels uSlis marTlmsajulebis procesis
normalurad ganxorcielebas. nebadarTulia sasa-
marTlo sxdomis stenografireba da audioCawera.
sasamarTlos mier am nawilSi dadgenili uflebebi
SeiZleba SeizRudos mxolod sasamarTlos moti-
virebuli gadawyvetilebiT, romelic SeiZleba ga-
saCivrdes mxareTa mier ganaCenTan erTad, xolo
mesame piris mier _ administraciuli saproceso
kodeqsiT dadgenili wesiT.~.
2. kodeqsis 38-e muxlis me-7 nawili Camoyalibdes Sem-
degi redaqciiT:
`7. braldebuls ufleba aqvs: damoukideblad an advo-
katis meSveobiT Caataros gamoZieba, moipovos da
waradginos mtkicebuleba am kodeqsiT dadgenili
wesiT; moiTxovos sagamoZiebo moqmedebis Catareba
da gamoiTxovos mtkicebuleba, romelic saWiroa
braldebis uarsayofad an pasuxismgeblobis Sesam-
subuqeblad; monawileoba miiRos misi an/da misi
- 14 -

15. advokatis SuamdgomlobiT Catarebul sagamoZiebo
moqmedebaSi; moiTxovos advokatis daswreba misi
monawileobiT Catarebuli sagamoZiebo moqmede-
bis dros. Tu braldebuli gadaxdisuunaroa da
daniSnuli hyavs advokati saxelmwifos xarjze,
am muxlSi miTiTebuli uflebebis gansaxorciele-
blad gaweul xarjebs anazRaurebs saxelmwifo.~.
3. kodeqsis 39-e muxlis pirveli nawili Camoyalibdes
Semdegi redaqciiT:
`1. braldebuls ufleba aqvs, sakuTari xarjiT, Tvi-
Ton an/da advokatis daxmarebiT moipovos mtkice-
buleba; gamoiTxovos cnoba, daxasiaTeba da sxva
dokumenti saxelmwifo an kerZo dawesebulebidan,
sawarmodan an organizaciidan, romelic valdebu-
lia Seasrulos aseTi moTxovna; isargeblos kerZo
deteqtivis momsaxurebiT mtkicebulebis mniS-
vnelobis mqone cnobebis misaRebad. braldebulis
mier mopovebul mtkicebulebas braldebis mxaris
mier mopovebuli mtkicebulebis Tanabari iuri-
diuli Zala aqvs.~.
4. kodeqsis 42-e muxlis me-3 da me-4 nawilebi Camoya-
libdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`3. Tu braldebulis (msjavrdebulis) advokati arasa-
patio mizeziT ar cxaddeba sasamarTloSi, rac sa-
samarTlos SefasebiT aWianurebs sasamarTlo gan-
xilvas, sasamarTlo uflebamosilia braldebuls
(msjavrdebuls) dauniSnos advokati savaldebulo
wesiT, rac ar zRudavs braldebulis (msjavrdebu-
lis) uflebas, moiwvios advokati sakuTari survi-
liT. braldebulis (msjavrdebulis) mier sakuTa-
ri surviliT mowveuli advokatis sasamarTloSi
gamocxadebisTanave, savaldebulo wesiT daniSnu-
li advokati unda Camoscildes sasamarTlo gan-
xilvas.
- 15 -

16. 4. Tu braldebulis (msjavrdebulis) advokati sa-
patio mizeziT ar cxaddeba sasamarTloSi, sasa-
marTlo sxdomas gadadebs araumetes 10 dRis va-
diT. Tu am vadis gasvlis Semdeg advokati kvlav
ar gamocxadda sasamarTloSi, moqmedebs am muxlis
me-3 nawiliT dadgenili wesi.“.
5. kodeqsis 44-e muxlis me-2 da me-3 nawilebi Camoya-
libdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`2. sisxlis samarTlis saqmeSi monawileobisaTvis da-
saSvebad advokati waradgens orders da Tavis
mowmobas. saqarTvelos advokatTa asociaciis
TanxmobiT damcvelad SeiZleba daSvebul iqnes
ucxoeli advokati.
3. advokats ufleba aqvs, am kodeqsiT dadgenil far-
glebSi da dadgenili wesiT gaecnos braldebis
mxaris mtkicebulebebs, miiRos mtkicebulebisa
da sisxlis samarTlis saqmis masalebis, maT Soris
gamokiTxvis oqmebis aslebi, agreTve isargeblos
braldebulis yvela uflebiT da am kodeqsiT ga-
Tvaliswinebuli sxva uflebebiT.~.
6. kodeqsis 72-e muxlis me-5 nawili Camoyalibdes Semdegi
redaqciiT:
`5. mtkicebulebad dauSveblad cnobis sakiTxs wyvets
sasamarTlo. sasamarTlo gadawyvetileba dasabu-
Tebuli unda iyos.“.
7. kodeqsis 73-e muxlis `g” qvepunqti Camoyalibdes Sem-
degi redaqciiT:
`g) sxva sisxlis samarTlis saqmeze saqmis arsebiTad
ganxilvis Sedegad gamotanili ganaCeniT dadge-
nili faqtobrivi garemoebebi da maTi samarTle-
brivi Sefaseba, Tu procesis arc erTi monawile
saeWvod ar xdis am ganaCenis kanonierebas;“.
8. kodeqsis 73-e muxls daematos me-2 nawili da Camoya-
- 16 -

17. libdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`2. mxaris iniciativiT, sasamarTlom SeiZleba uaryos
preiudiciulad dadgenili faqti, Tu es faqti
ewinaaRmdegeba sasamarTloSi mtkicebulebaTa ga-
mokvlevis Sedegebs.~.
9. kodeqsis 75-e muxls daematos me-3 nawili da Camoya-
libdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`3. mowmis Cveneba dauSvebeli mtkicebulebaa, Tu am
mowmis gamokiTxvis oqmi ar gadaeca meore mxares
am kodeqsis 83-e muxliT dadgenili wesis Sesaba-
misad.~.
10. kodeqsis 76-e muxlis me-2 da me-3 nawilebi Camoya-
libdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`2. iribi Cveneba dasaSvebi mtkicebulebaa mxolod im
SemTxvevaSi, Tu iribi Cvenebis mimcemi piri miu-
TiTebs informaciis wyaros, romlis identifici-
reba da realurad arsebobis Semowmeba SesaZlebe-
lia.
3. sasamarTloSi saqmis arsebiTi ganxilvis dros iribi
Cveneba dasaSvebi mtkicebulebaa, Tu igi dastur-
deba sxva iseTi mtkicebulebiT, romelic ar aris
iribi Cveneba.~.
11. kodeqsis 105-e muxlis me-2 nawilis `b~ qvepunqti Ca-
moyalibdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`b) piri danaSaulis Cadenisas Seuracxi iyo, rac da-
dasturebulia sasamarTlo-fsiqiatriuli eqsper-
tizis daskvniT;~.
12. kodeqsis 111-e muxlis pirveli da me-2 nawilebi Ca-
moyalibdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`1. mxareebs am kodeqsiT dadgenili wesiT sagamoZiebo
moqmedebis Catarebisas aqvT Tanabari ufleba-mo-
valeobebi. mxareebi sagamoZiebo moqmedebebs ata-
reben am kodeqsiT dadgenili wesiT da dadgenil
- 17 -

18. farglebSi. dacvis mxaris dasabuTebuli Suamd-
gomlobiT sasamarTlos ganCinebis safuZvelze
sagamoZiebo moqmedebas atarebs gamomZiebeli,
romelic ar SeiZleba iyos igive piri, vinc moce-
mul saqmeze awarmoebs saqmis gamoZiebas, garda im
SemTxvevisa, rodesac saamisod arsebobs dacvis
mxaris Tanxmoba. am SemTxvevaSi, sagamoZiebo moq-
medebis CatarebasTan dakavSirebuli xarjebi ekis-
reba braldebuls, garda im SemTxvevisa, rodesac
braldebuli sasamarTlos warudgens mtkicebule-
bebs, romlebiTac dadasturdeba mis mier aseTi
xarjebis gadaxdis SeuZlebloba.
2. dacvis mxaris ufleba, mimarTos SuamdgomlobiT
sasamarTlos sagamoZiebo moqmedebis Catarebis
moTxovniT, ar vrceldeba am kodeqsis 112-e muxlis
me-5 nawiliT gaTvaliswinebul garemoebebze.~.
13. kodeqsis 195-e muxlis:
a) pirveli nawilis Semdeg daematos Semdegi Sinaarsis 11
nawili:
`11. sasamarTlo valdebulia ganaxorcielos sxdomis
audio Cawera. mxaris moTxovnis SemTxvevaSi, kom-
paqtdiski sxdomis audioCanaweriT mxares unda ga-
daeces sasamarTlo sxdomis dasrulebisTanave an,
Tu sxdoma sxva dRisTvis gadaido, sxdomis gada-
debisTanave.~ ;
b) me-2 da me-5 nawilebi Camoyalibdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`2. sasamarTlo sxdomis Tavmjdomarem da mdivanma
sasamarTlo sxdomis damTavrebidan an, sxdomis
gadadebis SemTxvevaSi, sxdomis gadadebidan ara
ugvianes 5 dRisa xeli unda moaweron oqms, rac
dauyovnebliv unda acnobon mxareebs.
5. SeniSvnebis ganxilvis Semdeg sasamarTlos gamoa-
qvs ganCineba, romliTac adasturebs SeniSvnebis
siswores an uaryofs maT. oqmze SeniSvnebi da sa-
- 18 -

19. samarTlos ganCineba daerTvis saqmes. SeniSvnebis
warmdgen mxares SeuZlia gaasaCivros sasamarTlos
ganCineba sasamarTlos ganaCenTan erTad.~.
14. kodeqsis 207-e muxlis pirveli da me-2 nawilebi Ca-
moyalibdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`1. aRkveTis RonisZiebis gamoyenebis, Secvlis an gau-
qmebis Sesaxeb ganCineba SeiZleba erTjeradad,
misi gamotanidan 48 saaTSi saapelacio sasamarT-
los sagamoZiebo kolegiaSi gaasaCivros proku-
rorma, braldebulma da/an misma advokatma. saCi-
vari Seitaneba ganCinebis gamomtan sasamarTloSi,
romelic am saCivarsa da masalebs dauyovnebliv
ugzavnis Sesabamis sasamarTlos gansjadobis mixe-
dviT. gasaCivreba ar aCerebs ganCinebis aRsrule-
bas.
2. saCivarSi unda aRiniSnos, ra moTxovnebi iqna darR-
veuli gasaCivrebuli gadawyvetilebis miRebisas
da riT gamoixata gasaCivrebuli gadawyvetilebis
debulebaTa mcdaroba. aRkveTis RonisZiebasTan
dakavSirebul saCivarSi SesaZloa aseve mieTiTos,
ra arsebiTi mniSvnelobis mqone sakiTxebi da mtki-
cebulebebi ar gamoikvlia pirveli instanciis sa-
samarTlom, romlebsac SeeZlo zegavlena moexdi-
na pirisaTvis aRkveTis RonisZiebis Sefardebis
marTlzomierebaze.“.
15. kodeqsis 283-e muxlis pirveli nawili, `a~ qvepunq-
tamde, Camoyalibdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`1. im msjavrdebulis mimarT, romelsac sasjelad dae-
niSna Tavisuflebis aRkveTa, ganaCenis aRsruleba
SeiZleba gadaavados ganaCenis gamomtanma sasa-
marTlom sasamarTlo-samedicino eqspertizis
daskvnis safuZvelze, imave ganaCeniT, xolo misi
gamotanis Semdeg – zepiri mosmenis gareSe, ganCi-
nebiT, Semdegi safuZvlebis arsebobisas:“.
- 19 -

20. 16. kodeqsis 292-e muxlis me-2 da me-3 nawilebi Camoya-
libdes Semdegi redaqciiT:
`2. saapelacio saCivris Setanis ufleba aqvT bralm-
debels, zemdgom prokurors, msjavrdebuls da/an
mis advokats.
3. msjavrdebulis advokats da/an msjavrdebuls,
romlis mimarT gamamtyunebeli ganaCeni mis
dauswreblad iqna gamotanili, ufleba aqvT, gaa-
saCivron ganaCeni msjavrdebulis dapatimrebidan
an saTanado organoebSi gamocxadebidan erTi
Tvis vadaSi.”.
17. kodeqsis 300-e muxlis 2 da me-3 nawilebi Camoyalibdes
Semdegi redaqciiT:
`2. sakasacio saCivris Setanis ufleba aqvT bralmde-
bels, zemdgom prokurors, msjavrdebuls da/an
mis advokats.
3. msjavrdebulis advokats da/an msjavrdebuls,
romlis mimarT gamamtyunebeli ganaCeni mis
dauswreblad iqna gamotanili, ufleba aqvT, gaa-
saCivron ganaCeni msjavrdebulis dapatimrebidan
an saTanado organoebSi gamocxadebis momentidan
erTi Tvis vadaSi.”.
18. kodeqsis 312-e muxlis me-2 nawili Camoyalibdes Sem-
degi redaqciiT:
`2. axlad gamovlenil garemoebaTa gamo ganaCenis ga-
dasinjvis Suamdgomlobis dayenebis ufleba aqvT
prokurors, msjavrdebuls da/an mis advokats,
xolo msjavrdebulis gardacvalebis SemTxvevaSi
– mis kanonier memkvidres da/an mis advokats.~.
- 20 -

21. EXPLANATORY NOTES
The proposed amendments cover a number of important issues which,
in our opinion, are either improperly addressed in the current Criminal
Procedure Code (CCP), or in this respect the judicial practice has been
moving in a wrong direction.
This package does not include any amendments which may have
something to do with the institutes of victim, plea agreement and jury
trial. Many would agree that all the three institutes need some changes.
However, we believe that those institutes are rather sophisticated ones
and, therefore, require some more profound and thorough analysis.
We will start working on these topics early next year.
1. Principle of trial in public
The current law of Georgia provides some disproportionately strict
rules in terms of limiting the right to a public trial. Such constraints
are in conflict with Article 24 of the Constitution of Georgia, as well
as Article 6 § 1 and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human
Rights.
As the European Court of Human Rights has explained it, Article 6 § 1
sets a presumption that any case should be tried in the presence of pub-
lic, including media. The public character of proceedings before the
judicial bodies protects litigants against the administration of justice
in secret with no public scrutiny. By rendering the administration of
justice visible, publicity contributes to the achievement of a fair trial,
the guarantee of which is one of the fundamental principles of any
democratic society (see Axen v. Germany, 1983).
The public character of judicial proceedings also renders the press an
opportunity to perform its role of “public watchdog” guaranteed by
Article 10 of the Convention. It would be very difficult, if not impos-
- 21 -

22. sible, for the press to perform such a role, if media was deprived of a
right to make audio or video records of proceedings, broadcast trials
and the like.
Obviously, the right of an individual to have trial of his case open to the
public, including media, is not an absolute one and it may be subject to
some restrictions. However, as the European Court of Human Rights
has noted, the right of the public, including media, to attend the trial
may be restricted only in such cases when the particular circumstances
of the case strictly require so. When the closure of the proceedings is
being considered, it should be determined how proportionate such a
measure would be of the legitimate aim which is pursued by such clo-
sure (Campbell and Fell v. The United Kingdom, 1984).
In view of the above principles, we deemed it appropriate to suggest
some important changes to Article 10, Paragraph 3, of the current
CPC. We understand that such changes would be impossible to enact
if an analogous amendment was not made to Article 13, Paragraph 4,
of the Organic Law on General Courts. Therefore, we believe the said
legislative act should be similarly amended.
2. Principle of Adversarial Trial
It is broadly believed that by adopting the current CPC the legislator
aimed to introduce a principle of adversarial trial in Georgia. How-
ever, as the practice of Georgian courts has shown, this goal of the
legislator has not been realized quite well by the courts.
The said principle, in addition to many other factors, includes the
idea that the defense, just like the prosecution, has a right to collect
evidence. This is a condition sine qua non of an effective adversarial
trial. This is exactly why in Article 38, Paragraph 7, the legislator has
provided the defense’s right to carry out private investigation; to law-
fully obtain and present evidence in accordance with the rules set forth
in this Code; to request obligatory conduct of an investigative action
- 22 -

23. and to request submission of evidence necessary for negating charges
or alleviating criminal responsibility; to participate in the investiga-
tive action carried out on a motion of defendant and/or that of his/her
defense counsel; to request that a defense counsel attends investiga-
tive action where defendant is to participate. Article 39, Paragraph 1,
further provides that the evidence collected by a defendant has equal
legal force to that collected by the prosecution. Moreover, under Para-
graph 2 of Article 39, if the collection of evidence requires an inves-
tigative or other procedural action, which cannot be performed by the
defendant or his/her defense counsel, defense is authorized to file a
motion with a judge having jurisdiction over the investigation place
requesting the issuance of a relevant order. The judge should make
every effort not to disclose the fact of collection of evidence by the
defense to the prosecution.
In this context, it must be noted that Article 111, Paragraph 2, of the
CPC deprives the defense of the right to conduct such investigative
actions as search and seizure and declares those to be an exclusive
prerogative of the prosecution. There are some other provisions which
place the defense in an apparently disadvantageous situation vis-à-vis
the prosecution. For example, under Article 33, Paragraph 6, Subpara-
graph “m” (according to the Georgian numbering „n“) the prosecutor
is authorized to request the submission of documentation and receive
them without any obstacle from the state agencies. Such a right - to
“receive materials without any obstacles” - is not reserved for the de-
fense though.
Such disparity might only be overcome if judge had a good will to use
his or her authority under the above-referenced Article 39, Paragraph
2, and grant the defense’s motion for certain investigative or other
procedural actions. However, as the judicial practice has shown, at
the preliminary investigation stage, the most of defense’s motions for
investigative and other procedural actions aimed at the collection of
evidence have been rejected due to the fact that the courts have been
interpreting such motions as ones for conducting seizures. And as al-
- 23 -

24. ready noted above, both seizure and search fall within the exclusive
ambit of the prosecution.
We believe that such an improper practice may be remedied, on the
one hand, by adding to the existing CPC some more procedural guar-
antees for the defense which will secure for the defense a right to
request and obtain from the public and/or private institutions and in-
dividuals any evidence and/or documents; and, on the other hand, by
abolishing the search-and-seizure prohibition and entitling the defense
to appeal to the court with a search/seizure motion provided that if
the motion is granted the search and seizure will be conducted by the
public investigative officers.
The principle of procedural equality of the parties and the defense’s
right to conduct its own investigation secure the defendant’s and his/
her counsel’s right to obtain evidence under Article 38 of the CPC in
such cases too when the defendant is indigent and a counsel for him is
appointed at the State’s expense.
The current edition of the CPC does not provide any instructions about
investigation costs necessary for investigative actions to be taken by
the defendant and his counsel appointed at the State’s expense. This
shortcoming actually deprives the defendant of a chance to exercise
such a right. At the first glance it may seem that the provision of Ar-
ticle 46, Paragraph 4, which says that “If defense is conducted at the
expense of the state, the State shall also bear other expenses necessary
for the defense according rule set by Georgian legislation, if these
expenses are in direct connection with exercising the defendant’s right
to a defense”, deals with this issue. However, it leaves unanswered the
question what exactly is meant in the phrase “other expenses neces-
sary for the defense”, and whether or not it implies the rights provided
in Article 37, Paragraph 7.
The proposed amendments clearly prescribe that the costs of investi-
gative actions taken by the defendant and/or his counsel appointed at
the State’s expense should be covered by the State.
- 24 -

25. 3. Rights of a Defense Counsel
Some changes are proposed to the provisions governing the legal sta-
tus of a defense counsel (Articles 44, 292, 300 and 312). Incorrect
interpretation of those have raised lots of problems in practice and
prevented defense counsels from doing their job in a timely and ef-
fective manner. In particular, some different technical problems and
inefficiency of public authorities (especially when it is necessary to
provide legal aid to the detained defendants in days off) make it im-
possible for a defense counsel to obtain from his or her client a pro-
forma agreement to the counsel-drafted documents. We, therefore,
considered it necessary to remove from the CPC the counsel’s obliga-
tion to obtain such an agreement. At the same time, we extended the
circle of persons who have a right to file appeals in the appellate courts
and the cassation court: in addition to the defendant, this right should
be vested in his or her defense counsel as well.
Finally, with a proposed new edition of Article 44, Paragraph 4, we are
willing to broaden the defense counsel’s rights to enable him or her to
defend his or her client in a most effective and efficient way.
The present edition of the CPC does not provide any special guidance
regarding the participation of foreign defense counsels in criminal
proceedings which, in our view, unlawfully and disproportionately re-
stricts the defendant’s right to select and appoint a defense counsel in
accordance with his will. We propose to provide the defendant with a
right to invite a foreign counsel, in which case he or she should obtain
consent from the Georgian Bar Association.
4. Records of Interviews
The proposed edition of Article 75, Paragraph 3, secures for the parties
a right to request and obtain from the other party records of interviews
in a timely manner, in accordance with Article 83 of the CPC. It has
been a popular idea among the government officials that a record of
- 25 -

26. interview may not be regarded as evidence and, therefore, should not
be passed to the other party under Article 83 of the CPC. It has also
been believed that a party may interview an individual without devel-
oping a record of such an interview as if there was no duty to draw up
a record.
The fact is that interview is one of the investigative actions provided
by the CPC. The rules for conducting an interview, as one of the vari-
eties of investigative actions, are provided in Article 113 of the CPC
which is included in Chapter 15 titled “Investigative Actions”. Fur-
thermore, Article 113, Paragraph 3, expressly provides that “Prior to
the questioning/interview, the identity of a person to be interviewed
and other necessary information shall be established and reported in
the record of the interview”.
Article 134 of the CPC sets for some general provisions regarding the
records of investigative actions. Paragraph 1 of the said article impera-
tively requires: “The record of investigative action shall be drawn up
during the investigative action or upon its completion”. This require-
ment applies to all investigative actions, including interviews, and it
does not contain any exception whereby it would allow a party not to
draw up a record of interview.
Moreover, Article 135, Paragraph 1, sets for some particular require-
ments that should be met while drawing up a record of interview: “The
record of an interview/questioning shall indicate a name, surname,
age, citizenship, background, place of employment, occupation and/
or position, place of residence, family status of a person to be inter-
viewed, his/her relations with the defendant and/or victim, substance
of information provided, and his/her attitude towards appearing and
testifying in the court”.
The provisions referred to and quoted above leave no questions as
to whether a record of interview is or is not a mandatory document,
whether it should or should not be regarded as evidence and, as such,
whether it should or should not be passed to the other party under the
- 26 -

27. provisions of Article 83 of the CPC. A record of interview not only is
evidence, in some cases it may become one of crucial importance for
any party. Without such evidence how does a party know what a wit-
ness of the opposite party is going to say in the court? Or how could
that party prepare for the cross-examination of such a witness? Or how
could such a party examine and challenge the credibility of a witness
if that party has no record at hand which would document the state-
ments made by such a witness during the preliminary investigation?
In this context we must recall Article 6, Paragraph 3, Subparagraph (b)
of the European Convention on Human Rights which provides that ev-
eryone charged with a criminal offence must “have adequate time and
facilities for the preparation of his defence”. If the defense has no time
and opportunity to adequately review the record of interview of any
person who is going to be called and examined as a witness by the op-
posite party, it is clear that with respect to such a witness the defense
will not be availed of the opportunity to exercise its right under Article
6(3)(b) of the Convention.
5. Problem of Indirect Testimony
The threat which is associated with this kind of testimony is that it
renders possibility that a court may derive a guilty judgment, even in
conjunction with some other evidence, from the statement(s) of such
an individual who may not appear in person in the court and may not
be examined there as a witness. This, in turn, means that in that case
the defendant will not have an opportunity to cross-examine this wit-
ness and, thereby, verify his or her sincerity, honesty, truthfulness of
his or her statements, etc.
It is clear, therefore, that there should be some solid procedural guaran-
tees with respect to the admissibility of an indirect testimony. It should
not be disputed that while delivering a guilty judgment the likelihood
of error is much greater in cases when the judgment is based on the in-
- 27 -

28. direct testimony than in cases when it is based on a regular testimony
and/or any other otherwise admissible evidence. Here again we should
recall Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, whose
Paragraph 1 guarantees the right to adversarial process and Paragraph
3, Subparagraph (d) secures for the defendant the right “to examine or
have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and
examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as
witnesses against him”. Naturally, with respect to an individual who is
not called and examined in the court, the defendant will have no op-
portunity to exercise the above rights.
It is unclear what it means to have an indirect testimony supported by
“other evidence”. First of all, we should recall that before the amend-
ments of 24 September 2010, the indirect testimony should have been
supported “by the body of other evidence”. The singular case applied
in the current edition indicates that the existence of just one “other
evidence” may suffice. Another reason for concern is that there is no
indication to what one should understand by that “other evidence”.
Does it imply, for example, another indirect testimony? If yes, then
the defendant may be exposed to a very serious threat that he or she
may be found guilty based on, at least, two indirect testimonies. In
other words, he or she may be subject to a guilty judgment based on
the testimonies of X and Y of whom none may have been appeared in
the court and, therefore, the defendant may have been deprived of the
opportunity to cross-examine any of those two. Two, by itself, bad and
inadmissible testimonies should not make two good and admissible
testimonies just because they may support each other.
We, therefore, propose that Article 76, Paragraph 3, be amended to
read as follows: “During the substantial consideration of a case by the
court, indirect testimony shall be admissible evidence if supported by
any other evidence that is not an indirect testimony”.
- 28 -

29. 6. Judicial Notice
The question of judicial notice in the present edition of the CPC also
needs some corrections. In particular, the provision of Article 73, Para-
graph (c) – whereby any factual circumstance established by a res judi-
cata court judgment shall be accepted as evidence without examination
– may give rise to lots of problems. The biggest danger resides in a pos-
sibility to take as granted the “factual circumstances established” in a
court judgment which may have been delivered without any substantive
consideration of the case and, therefore, without proper examination of
evidence and establishing of facts, as such. To remove this shortcoming,
we found it necessary to add to the above provision a condition that
there should be no objection from the parties to the trial with respect to
the lawfulness of the court judgment in question. In addition, the condi-
tions and rules of the parties’ or the court’s disagreement with the judi-
cial notice should be defined in a greater detail.
7. Question of Forensic Psychiatric Expertise
We found it necessary to remove from both Article 105, Paragraph
2, Subparagraph (b), and Article 283 the identifier “state” to enable a
party to prove the defendant’s competence and mental state not only
based on a state forensic psychiatric expert report, but also on a pri-
vate expert report. Only such an approach would be in line with the
requirements of adversarial trial which is said to be a key underlying
principle of the present CPC.
8. Record of the Court Session
Some important changes should be made to the provisions regarding
the records of the court sessions. Under the existing practice, the re-
cords of the court sessions are passed to the parties after the comple-
tion of trial. When the trial lasts for longer than a day, all the parties
- 29 -

30. have to do is to wait until the trial is over, which may require waiting
for months. Human memory is not limitless. With the passing of time
we forget many things which might be important to remember if we
are looking forward to the positive outcomes of the process. We, there-
fore, found it reasonable to oblige the courts to prepare the record of
the session in such cases too when the session is adjourned.
It is also necessary to oblige the courts to make audio records of the
sessions and to pass the copies of those to the parties. This should not
be difficult to do at the present stage of technological development.
At the same time, it is very important for the proper administration of
justice.
Nino Gvenetadze
Alexander Baramidze
- 30 -

31. Draft
LAW OF GEORGIA ON THE CHANGES AND
ADDITIONS TO THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CODE OF GEORGIA
The following changes and additions shall be made to the Criminal
Procedure Code of Georgia (Sakartvelos Sakanonmdeblo Matsne, 31,
03.11.2009, Art. 190):
1. Paragraph 3 of Article 10 shall read as follows:
“3. Photo, film, and video recording and airing of the criminal
court hearing at the court building, as well as in the court room
shall be allowed, except where any such action may prevent the
normal administration of justice. Stenographic and audio record-
ing of the trial shall be allowed. The rights set forth in this para-
graph may be restricted by a court’s reasoned decision which
may be appealed by the parties together with the court’s judg-
ment and/or by any third person in accordance with the rules es-
tablished by the Administrative Procedure Code.”
2. Paragraph 7 of Article 38 shall read as follows:
“7. A defendant shall be authorized to carry out his/her private
investigation independently or with assistance of a defense coun-
sel, to lawfully obtain and present evidence in accordance with
the rules sets forth by this Code; to request obligatory conduct
of an investigative action and to request submission of evidence
necessary for negating charges or alleviating criminal responsi-
bility; to participate in the investigative action carried out on his/
her motion and/or a motion of his/her defense counsel. A defen-
dant shall also have the right to request that his/her defense coun-
sel attends investigative action where defendant is to participate.
If the defendant is indigent and he/she has a counsel appointed at
the State’s expense, all costs associated with the exercise of rights
set forth in this article shall be covered by the State.”
- 31 -

32. 3. Paragraph 1 of Article 39 shall read as follows:
“1. A defendant shall have the right to collect evidence person-
ally or through his/her defense counsel at his/her own expense; to
request any notice, characterization or any other document from
any public or private institution, company or organization which
shall have a duty to implement such a request; to enjoy services
from a private detective in order to obtain any information of
evidentiary importance. The evidence collected by a defendant
shall have equal legal force to that collected by the prosecution.”
4. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 42 shall read as follows:
“3. If defendant’s (convict’s) defense counsel fails to appear be-
fore the court without any valid reason, which is considered by
the court to be an unjustified delay in proceedings, the court shall
have the authority to appoint counsel to the defendant (convict)
on a mandatory basis, which shall not restrict defendant (con-
vict) right to choose defense counsel on his/her own. Once de-
fense council of defendant’s (convict’s) choosing appears before
the court, defense counsel appointed on a mandatory basis shall
withdraw from the proceedings.
4. If defense counsel for defendant (convict) fails to appear before
the court for a valid reason, the court shall adjourn the session for
not more than 10 days. If after the expiration of this period de-
fense counsel still fails to appear before the court, the provision
of Paragraph 3 above shall apply.”
5. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 44 shall read as follows:
“2. A defense counsel shall present his/her credentials and the
certificate of a defense attorney for his/her participation in crimi-
nal proceedings. With the consent of the Georgian Bar Associa-
tion a foreign attorney may be admitted as a defense counsel.
3. A defense counsel shall have right for discovery of the prose-
cution evidence within the limits and procedure envisaged by this
code, obtain copies of evidence and criminal case files, including
records of interviews, also enjoy all the rights of a defendant and
other rights provided for by this Code.”
- 32 -

33. 6. Paragraph 5 of Article 72 shall read as follows:
“5. The court shall decide the issue of inadmissibility of the evi-
dence. The court’s decision shall be reasoned.”
7. Subparagraph (c) of Article 73 shall read as follows:
“(c) Factual circumstances established by a court judgment in an-
other criminal case delivered after the substantive consideration
of the case, provided no party to the trial questions legitimacy of
such a judgment;”
8. A new Paragraph 2 shall be added to Article 73 to read as follows:
“2. On any party’s initiative, the court may reject any fact taken
as a judicial notice if this fact contradicts the results of the court’s
examination of evidence.”
9. A new Paragraph 3 shall be added to Article 75 to read as follows:
“3. A witness testimony shall be inadmissible evidence if the re-
cord of interview of this witness has not been passed to the other
party under the procedures set forth in Article 83 above.”
10. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 76 shall read as follows:
“2. An indirect testimony shall be admissible only if the testify-
ing person indicates information source which can be identified
and actual existence of which may be verified.
3. During the substantial consideration of a case by the court, in-
direct evidence shall be admissible evidence if supported by any
other evidence that is not an indirect testimony.”
11. Paragraph 2(b) of Article 105 shall read as follows:
“(b) the unlawful act was committed by a person in the mentally
incompetent state and it is proved by the result of a forensic psy-
chiatric examination;”
12. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 111 shall read as follows:
“The parties have equal rights and obligations during the conduct
of investigative actions. The parties shall conduct investigative
actions according to the rule established by this Code and within
its frames. Upon the defense’s reasoned motion and the court’s
- 33 -

34. decision an investigative action shall be conducted by investi-
gator who may not be the same person as one in charge of the
investigation in the given case, except when the defense agrees
thereto. In this case, any costs associated with the conduct of in-
vestigative action shall be covered by defendant, except when
defendant presents to the court some evidence whereby he/she
may prove his/her inability to cover such costs.
2. The defense’s right to file a motion with the court for the con-
duct of investigative action shall not apply to the circumstances
stipulated in Article 115, Paragraph 5, of this Code.”
13. A new Paragraph 11 shall be added to Article 195, after Paragraph
1, to read as follows:
“11. The court shall be obliged to conduct audio recording of the
court session. Upon a party’s request, a compact disk with the
audio record of the session shall be provided to such a party im-
mediately upon the completion of the session or, if the session is
adjourned to another day, immediately after the announcement of
adjournment.”
Paragraphs 2 and 5 of Article 195 shall read as follows:
“2. Within five days of the completion of the court session, or,
if the session is adjourned to another day, within five days after
the announcement of adjournment the presiding judge and the
secretary of the court session shall sign the record and notify the
parties thereof.”
“5. After considering the remarks the court shall render an order,
either approving the remarks or rejecting them. The remarks to
the record and the relevant court order shall be annexed to the
case file. The party that presented the remarks may appeal the
court order at the time of appealing the court’s judgment.”
14. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 207 shall read as follows:
“1. The order on applying replacing, or revoking a preventive
measure may be appealed once by the prosecutor, the defendant
and/or his/her defense counsel within 48 hours from the moment
- 34 -

35. it was issued, to the investigative panel of an appellate court. An
appeal shall be filed with the court whose order is appealed. Ap-
peal and case materials shall be immediately forwarded to the
court of relevant jurisdiction. The appeal shall not suspend en-
forcement of the order.
2. The appeal should specify what requirements were violated
when the appealed order was issued and outline the errors of the
appealed order. Appeal may also include what substantial issues
and evidence was not examined by the first instance court which
could have had impact on applying a legitimate preventive mea-
sure against the defendant.”
15. Paragraph 1 of Article 283, before Subparagraph (a), shall read
as follows:
“1. Based on the report of a forensic medical examination, execu-
tion of a judgment convicting a person to deprivation of liberty
may be postponed by the trial court, and such decision shall be
noted in the judgment itself. In case the judgment is already is-
sued, its execution may be postponed by a court order without an
oral hearing, if one of the following grounds exist:”
16. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 292 shall read as follows:
“2. Appeal may be filed by prosecutor, superior prosecutor, con-
vict and/or his/her defense counsel.”
“3. Defense counsel of a convict and/or convict, who was con-
victed in absentia, may appeal the judgment within one month
from the moment when s/he gets arrested or appears before the
relevant agencies.”
17. Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 300 shall read as follows:
“2. The cassation appeal may be filed by prosecutor, superior
prosecutor, convict and/or his/her defense counsel.”
“3. Defense counsel of a convict and/or convict who was con-
victed in absentia, may appeal the judgment within one month
from the moment s/he is arrested or when s/he appears before the
relevant agencies.”
- 35 -

36. 18. Paragraph 2 of Article 312 shall read as follows:
“2. The prosecutor, convict and/or his/her defense counsel, and if
the convicted person has died – his/her legal successor and/or his/
her counsel, shall have the right to file a motion to re-examine the
judgment due to newly discovered circumstances.”.
- 36 -