GYLA demands eight articles of the Code of Administrative Offences to be declared unconstitutional

Today GYLA have filed a claim with the Constitutional Court on behalf of Zurab Japaridze to demand that the following eight articles of the Code of Administrative Offences be recognized as unconstitutional:

• Art.32 – administrative imprisonment
• Art.33 – general rule for imposing penalties for administrative offences
• Art.233 – administrative proceedings conducted based on the principle of equality of citizens
• Art.236 – evidence
• Art.237 – evaluation of evidence
• Art.240 – content of a report of administrative offence
• Art.264 – circumstances to be ascertained during the hearing of administrative offence cases
• Art.266 – orders issued in administrative proceedings

GYLA believes that normative content of the articles challenged before the Court that imply with their nature/content consideration/adjudication of criminal offences without adequate procedural guarantees (without adequate distribution of burden of proof, credible evidence, presumption of innocence, the principle of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms) runs against paragraphs 1 and 5 of art.41 and paragraphs 2 and 3 of art.40 of the Constitution of Georgia.

The Code of Administrative Offences is the only normative act that remains since the Soviet times and is still effective. Rights of many people are unlawfully restricted on a daily basis by application of the Code. GYLA has been raising the issue of changing the Code since several years. The Constitutional Court’s decision to grant the claim will end the unconstitutional use of the Code of Administrative Resources and will trigger a comprehensive reform of the legislation.

Other claims of GYLA regarding the Code of Administrative Offences are available here.