PhD candidate in law , Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Senior Investigator of the Investigation Department of the Investigation Service of the Ministry of Finance of Georgia
Keywords:
Seizure, Reasonable Time limit, Principle of Proportionality.Abstract
On September 23, 2022, the Law of Georgia N1854-IXms-Xmp on Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia was adopted, at which time the seizure mechanism in the criminal procedure legislation was fundamentally changed, however, various issues still remain unclear and are not regulated at the legislative level, including the burden of proof in the justification part. For the purposes of criminal proceedings, a coercive measure of seizure may be used, which hypothetically may lead to a violation of fundamental human rights and freedoms. The right to property is one of the foundations of a democratic state. Since Georgia is a democratic country, the issue is relevant and it is advisable to discuss the issue at a scientific level in order to identify the shortcomings in Georgian legislation, the degree of its effectiveness in relation to contemporary challenges, on the example of foreign legislation and in relation to international standards, and finally to evaluate both exemplary and positive trends in legislation and practice, as well as to identify existing problematic issues, on which ways to solve the problems will be presented.
References
1. Constitution of Georgia 24/08/1995.
2. Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia 03/11/2009.
3. Tskhvedia T., Kvachantiradze D., Noselidze A., Guarantees of Protection of Property Rights in Criminal Proceedings, 2019, 8, 15, 30. (in Georgian)
4. Parulava G., The Duration of Seizure of Property in the Context of the Constitutionality of the Right to Property, “Georgian-German Journal of Comparative Law”, 2021, N4, 25. (in Georgian)
5. Report of the Public Defender of Georgia, 2018, 281. (in Georgian)
6. Decision of the Supreme Court of Georgia of December 23, 2022 in case No. 38AG-22. (in Georgian)
7. Decision of the Constitutional Court of Georgia of February 25, 2022 on claims N2/1/1434,1466, in the case of Otar Marshava and Mikheil Nozadze against the Parliament of Georgia. (in Georgian)
8. Decision No. 2/3/1279 of the Constitutional Court of Georgia of July 5, 2019 in the case of Levan Alafishvili and “KS Alafishvili and Kavlashvili - Georgian Lawyers Group” against the Government of Georgia. (in Georgian)
9. Decision of the Constitutional Court of Georgia of April 18, 2016 on the lawsuit No. 2/1/631, in the case of Teimuraz Janashia and Giuli Alasania against the Parliament of Georgia. (in Georgian)
10. Universal Declaration of Human Rights 10/12/1948
11. Reichsstrafprozessordnung 01/02/1887
12. Codice di Procedura Penale 22/09/199
13. Proceeds of Crime Act POCA 2002 (UK)
14. The United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, 15/11/2000
15. International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferations Updated 2023, 76.
16. Sarkki P.A.H., Van 't Hoff-de Goede M.S., Van Leuken M.A.G., Van de Weijer S.G.A., Leukfeldt E.R., Fear of Cybercrime Victimisation: Examining the Relationship Between Fear and Victimisation, Journal of Criminal Justice, Article 102531, 2025, 1.
17. McClean D., Transnational Organized Crime: A Commentary on the UN Convention and its Protocols, Oxford University Press, 1 st 2007,144.
18. E. Lagidze, Seizure and Confiscation as an Effective Means of Combating Transnational Organized crime, law and world, 2023, 148.
19. Khaliq M. N., Fatimah S., The Legal Politics of Establishing the Asset Seizure Law: A New Strategic Paradigm for Combating Corruption and Economic Crimes in Indonesia, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kyadiren, vol. 6, No.2, 2025, 106.
20. Golay Dr. C., Ms. Cismas I., Legal Opinion:The Right to Property from a Human Rights Perspective, 2010, 28.
21. Allen D. W E, Lane A. M., Crypto Crime as Technology Entrepreneurship, 2024, 3, 6.
22. Grgic A., Mataga Z., Longar M. and Vilfan A., The Right to Property Under the European Convention on Human Rights, A Guide to the Implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights and its Protocols, Human Rights Handbooks, No. 10, Council of Europe, 2007, 10-11.
23. Hryniewicz-Lach E., Improving Asset Confiscation: in the Quest for Effective and Just Solutions, ERA Forum, 2024, 238.
24. Giudici G., Milne A., Vinogradov D., Cryptocurrencies: Market Analysis and Perspectives, Journal of Industrial and Business Economics. Springer International Publishing, 2019, 14.
25. Taylor S., Ho-yong Kim S., Ariffin K. A. Z., Abdullah S. N. H. S., A comprehensive forensic preservation methodology for crypto wallets, Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation, 2022, 1.
26. Veits v. Estonia [2015] ECHR, App. No. 12951/11.
27. Ünsped Paket Servisi San. VE TİC. A.Ş. v. Bulgaria [2015] ECHR, App. No. 3503/08.
28. Silickiene v. Lithuania [2012] ECHR, App. No. 20496/02.
29. Denisova AND Moiseyeva v. RUSSIA, [2010] ECHR, App. No. 16903/03.
30. Cocchioarella v. Italy [2006] ECHR, App. No. 64886/01.
31. Yildirim v. Italy [2003] ECHR, App. No. 38602/02.
32. Iatridis v. Greece [1999], ECHR, App. No. 31107/96.
33. Sscollo v. Italy [1995] ECHR, App. No. 19133/91.
34. Agosi v. The United Kingdom [1986] ECHR, App. No. 9118/80.
35. Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, [1982] ECHR, App. Nos. 7151/25, 7152/75.
36. https://help.coinbase.com/en/coinbase/other-topics/other/does-coinbase-freeze-accounts?contactusbanner=false#buying-and-selling-restrictions [02.09.2025]
37. https://www.binance.com/en/square/post/18420338108202 [02.09.2025]
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
