Article 194 requires more than a suspicious transaction
The current Criminal Code addresses giving legal form to illicit and/or undocumented property in order to conceal its origin or assist another person in evading liability, together with concealment or disguising of its nature, source, location, movement or rights. Apply the exact article part to each defendant and transaction.
Identify the property and alleged origin
Start with the asset said to be illicit or undocumented and trace when and how it was acquired. Separate the alleged predicate conduct, later proceeds, income or shares, lawful funds mixed into an account and property belonging to third parties. A flow chart is useful only when supported by bank, ledger, wallet and ownership records.
Control, knowledge and purpose must be proved individually
Being a director, signatory, relative, customer or wallet user does not answer what the person knew or intended. Map who initiated, approved, benefited from and explained each transaction and what information was available at that time.
Banking, company and crypto evidence
- Account opening, KYC, source-of-funds and beneficial-ownership records
- Complete bank statements, payment messages, cash records and accounting entries
- Contracts, invoices, delivery evidence and economic purpose
- Corporate approvals, signing rights, device access and communication history
- Wallet addresses, exchange or VASP records, transaction hashes and custody evidence
- Foreign requests, restraint orders and expert tracing methodology
Do not confuse compliance concerns with proof of the offence
A bank report, enhanced-due-diligence request, account closure or regulatory breach may trigger investigation. It is not a judicial finding of criminal origin or laundering purpose. Obtain the underlying transaction data and distinguish missing documentation, tax treatment, licensing issues and intentional concealment.
Device and wallet attribution
Blockchain data can show transfers between addresses but not automatically the natural person controlling a key or the purpose of the transfer. Examine device acquisition, account credentials, exchange records, IP and login history, recovery phrases, custodial arrangements and whether multiple people had operational access.
Asset freezing and third-party interests
Laundering investigations often involve bank-account, real-estate, company-share or wallet restraint. Test the order, statutory ground, asset nexus, value, ownership and duration separately from the merits. A spouse, company, creditor or other third party may need to evidence an independent lawful interest.
Cross-border evidence
Foreign bank, company and exchange material should be obtained through a route that preserves authenticity and intended court use. Reconcile currencies, time zones, account identifiers and translated transaction descriptions. Keep a foreign allegation separate from what Georgian procedure permits and what Georgian evidence proves.
Defence response
Counsel can construct a source-and-use schedule, test the alleged predicate origin, separate each participant’s knowledge and authority, challenge digital attribution, coordinate accounting or blockchain expertise, protect interviews, seek disclosure, oppose disproportionate restraint and present lawful-origin or third-party evidence.
Money laundering and evidence powers
Article 194 is the starting point. Compare its current Georgian wording with the transactions, property and knowledge alleged in the case.
Criminal Code of Georgia — Article 194↗︎Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia↗︎