Dark Legacy of Zero Tolerance in Georgia (Criminal Punishment and Sentencing)
Law and World · Vol. 11, No. 34, pp. 7-16 · 2025
Abstract
Following much-praised promises to reduce crime to zero Georgian Government in 2004 imposed a “zero tolerance” policy embodied in both criminal legislation and legal practice. The fateful phrase “No probation! Everybody to the prison!” explicitly indicated the way of thinking of government officials at that time. This, of course, primarily affected regulations on criminal punishment and sentencing. Unfortunately, the principle of proportionality was largely disregarded, and the goals of punishment were narrowed. In 2012, the new government faced all the consequences of such a one-sided approach – overcrowded prisons, massive human rights violations, etc. As expected, the policy was largely revised. Some radical regulations were repealed. For example, a judge was allowed to use absorption or partial addition of punishment when imposing a sentence in the case of cumulative crimes and cumulative sentences. Sadly, many instances of punishment, such as conditional sentence, imposing more lenient sentences than provided for by law, etc., remain unchanged, presenting the dark legacy of zero tolerance policy.
Details
- Publication type
- Journal article
- Author
- Papuna Guruli - Ph.D. in Law, Dean of the School of Humanities and Law, St. Andrew Georgian University, Georgia
- Journal
- Law and World
- Publication
- June 30, 2025
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 34
- Pages
- 7-16
- Language
- English
- DOI
- 10.36475/11.2.1
- ISSN
- 2346-7916
- Institutions
- St. Andrew the First-Called Georgian University
- Access
- Open access
- Licence
- CC BY-SA 4.0
- Added to catalogue
- Metadata source
- Supplied by the publisher
Areas of law
Keywords
Cite this record
Guruli, P. (2025). Dark Legacy of Zero Tolerance in Georgia (Criminal Punishment and Sentencing). Law and World, 11(34), 7-16. https://doi.org/10.36475/11.2.1
Guruli, Papuna. "Dark Legacy of Zero Tolerance in Georgia (Criminal Punishment and Sentencing)." Law and World 11, no. 34 (2025): 7-16. https://doi.org/10.36475/11.2.1.
@article{guruli2025_8999zk,
title = {Dark Legacy of Zero Tolerance in Georgia (Criminal Punishment and Sentencing)},
author = {Guruli, Papuna},
year = {2025},
journal = {Law and World},
volume = {11},
number = {34},
pages = {7--16},
doi = {10.36475/11.2.1},
issn = {2346-7916},
language = {en},
url = {https://lawandworld.ge/index.php/law/article/view/781},
note = {Open access}
}
TY - JOUR AU - Guruli, Papuna TI - Dark Legacy of Zero Tolerance in Georgia (Criminal Punishment and Sentencing) PY - 2025 JO - Law and World VL - 11 IS - 34 SN - 2346-7916 DO - 10.36475/11.2.1 LA - en UR - https://lawandworld.ge/index.php/law/article/view/781 AB - Following much-praised promises to reduce crime to zero Georgian Government in 2004 imposed a “zero tolerance” policy embodied in both criminal legislation and legal practice. The fateful phrase “No probation! Everybody to the prison!” explicitly indicated the way of thinking of government officials at that time. This, of course, primarily affected regulations on criminal punishment and sentencing. Unfortunately, the principle of proportionality was largely disregarded, and the goals of punishment were narrowed. In 2012, the new government faced all the consequences of such a one-sided approach – overcrowded prisons, massive human rights violations, etc. As expected, the policy was largely revised. Some radical regulations were repealed. For example, a judge was allowed to use absorption or partial addition of punishment when imposing a sentence in the case of cumulative crimes and cumulative sentences. Sadly, many instances of punishment, such as conditional sentence, imposing more lenient sentences than provided for by law, etc., remain unchanged, presenting the dark legacy of zero tolerance policy. KW - punishment KW - sentencing KW - proportionality KW - zero tolerance KW - სასჯელი KW - სასჯელის დანიშვნა KW - პროპორციულობა KW - ნულოვანი ტოლერანტობა SP - 7 EP - 16 ER -
Related research
The Electronic Administrative Decision between : The Requirements of Effectiveness and the Guarantees of Legal Security
The electronic administrative decision represents a central manifestation of digital transformation in public administration, reshaping how decisions…
The Specificities of Seabed Disputes in Light of the Law of the Sea
Certainly, the proclamation by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of a new maritime area, which is the Seabed Area, applying…
Legal Governance of Disaster Risks under NEPAD: Establishing Contractual Responsibility for Resilience and Sustainable Development in Africa
Khedidja Ziani, Hichem Makhlouf, Mohammed Halim Limam
This paper examines the strategy of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) for disaster risk reduction and aims to analyze the initiativ…
Guarantees for the Protection of Constitutional Justice in Algeria: From the Constitutional Council to the Constitutional Court in a Comparative Perspective
Constitutional justice in many countries faces multiple challenges that affect the effectiveness of constitutional oversight institutions and the exte…
The Dual Nature of Interim Measures in European Antitrust Enforcement: Administrative Implementation and Judicial Oversight
The European legislature established interim measures as a crucial protective mechanism to avert the impending harm. These measures are applied by var…
Features of the Implementation of the American “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” Doctrine in Georgian Criminal Procedural Legislation, Comparative Analysis, and Assessment of International Relevance
Article 72 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia, in comparison with the previous Criminal Procedure Code, provides a limited list of items that m…
Discussion
No comments yet · Comments are discussion only. They do not change the bibliographic record.
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Start the discussion.