Extradition from Georgia: How the Procedure Works and What an Extradition Lawyer Does

The applicable treaty, the person's citizenship and the point reached in the case all matter. A person arrested after an international alert may have an urgent custody hearing long before the requesting state submits its complete extradition file. These are separate legal stages, with different decision-makers and time limits.

Which Georgian bodies handle an extradition request?

The central authority identified in Georgia's official January 2025 submission to the Council of Europe is the Office of the Prosecutor General of Georgia. Article 30 of the Organic Law on the Prosecutor’s Office confirms the prosecution service’s international-cooperation functions, including participation in the admissibility phase of foreign extradition requests. Under Article 34 of the Law of Georgia on International Cooperation in Criminal Matters, the Ministry of Justice or prosecution service checks the foreign documentation; the prosecutor then places the admissibility question before a court.

The statutory text refers to the relevant district (city) court for the ordinary admissibility hearing, rather than giving the Minister power to determine that question alone. The Georgian national-procedures statement describes the Chamber of Criminal Cases of Tbilisi City Court as the court examining ordinary requests in the procedure it sets out. These descriptions should not be collapsed into a rule that every hearing following an arrest elsewhere in Georgia must be held in Tbilisi: Article 30 separately sends the initial custody motion to the magistrate judge for the place of arrest. A lawyer must confirm the court assigned to the actual file.

The district or city court's permissible-extradition ruling is subject to direct cassation review by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Georgia under Article 34(11). This is not the same as appealing an arrest or bail decision, which goes to the Investigative Chamber of the Court of Appeals under Article 30(5), (7) and (8). After the extradition ruling has become final, the Minister of Justice makes the executive surrender decision: a negative court finding requires refusal, while a positive finding still leaves the Minister able to refuse surrender under Article 34(13)–(15).

A documented example shows why the courts must be distinguished: in Supreme Court case no. 2k-121-I-25 (2 December 2025), Rustavi City Court ordered extradition detention on 11 August 2025, whereas Tbilisi City Court ruled on ordinary extradition admissibility on 18 November 2025. The Supreme Court reviewed the latter ruling in cassation; the two hearings were not interchangeable.

Which law and treaty actually govern the request?

Chapter III, Articles 14–36, of the Law of Georgia on International Cooperation in Criminal Matters supplies the national extradition structure. Article 2 makes international agreements the usual basis. An individual agreement can sometimes be used, but Article 2(3) excludes extradition from cooperation based merely on the general principle of reciprocity. It is therefore important to identify the actual instrument; the existence of an INTERPOL notice is not itself an extradition treaty.

Georgia is not an EU Member State. The EU European Arrest Warrant is not the route for surrender from Georgia even when the requesting state is an EU member. The EU–Georgia Eurojust cooperation arrangements do not create an EAW process. In Sumbayev v. Georgia (2025), the European Court recorded that Georgia had signed the Fourth Additional Protocol (CETS 212) on 17 June 2024 but had not ratified it at that time; the current treaty status must be confirmed before invoking its provisions.

Georgia's Council of Europe declarations also deserve attention. They address the extradition of nationals under Article 6 of the Convention, humanitarian considerations, special courts and offences punishable by death. Reservations change the parties' treaty obligations; they are not substitutes for checking Georgia's domestic statute. For the general mechanics of treaty interaction, see how extradition treaties change a case.

What happens after an arrest or international alert?

Article 30(1) recognises three potential bases for arrest within Georgia: a foreign extradition request, a foreign request for temporary detention pending extradition, or the person's international wanted status. Article 30(2) requires additional foreign information for an arrest arising from the international-wanted category. A Red Notice can therefore lead to the identification or detention of a person, but it is not a Georgian court order declaring extradition permissible. Counsel should obtain the arrest record, the foreign alert or request, the exact Georgian legal basis and the time recorded for actual arrest.

The relevant prosecutor must be informed immediately of the arrest and within 48 hours of arrest must file a motion with the magistrate judge for the place of arrest for a restraint measure: Article 30(3). The judge decides under the Georgian Criminal Procedure Code, Article 206, adapted to extradition. The lawyer can argue for bail or another authorised measure instead of extradition detention, and can contest identity, the documents submitted, the procedural grounds for custody and the conditions that make detention necessary.

A detention order is distinct from permission to extradite. The magistrate's restraint decision can be appealed within seven days from service to the Investigative Chamber of the Court of Appeals, which must review it within five days: Article 30(5). Different Code provisions govern appeals concerning extension or replacement of the measure. Court-controlled variation or cancellation of detention remains possible under Article 30(8)–(9). Keep copies of the written order and proof of its service; an appeal deadline must not be guessed from the date of a family phone call.

The ordinary starting period of extradition detention is three months. On reasoned prosecutorial application, a magistrate judge can extend it by three months, at most twice: the total ceiling is nine months under Article 30(6)–(7) and (12). That is a maximum period of extradition detention, not a promise that a decision will take nine months, not permission for automatic extensions, and not a rule that custody must continue for the entire period. The law also contains specific provisions for re-arrest when the Minister has authorised surrender but handover arrangements remain outstanding; those procedures remain subject to the nine-month aggregate detention cap.

A separate and urgent rule applies to a person whose Georgian citizenship is established: Article 30(13) requires immediate release from custody following arrest for extradition. The family should give counsel reliable Georgian citizenship records without delay. This is not merely a discretionary bail argument; it is a distinct statutory release obligation, and it must be checked alongside the Article 21 prohibition on extraditing Georgian citizens subject to a treaty exception.

How does the file move from arrest to the Minister's order?

The critical clocks have different starting events. The following table describes the ordinary route; any specific treaty, exceptional measure or simplified procedure must be read alongside it.

Where the 1957 Convention applies, the Georgian authorities' 2025 description uses 40 days from arrest for the full request during provisional arrest, reflecting the Convention's Article 16 scheme; it also says no separate request for continuation after the Convention's 18-day point is needed. The 40-day rule must not be substituted for the domestic nine-month total custody ceiling. If the request arrives, the defence must still examine whether further detention is independently justified.

Can Georgia extradite its own citizens or refuse a request for an ordinary offence?

Article 21 says a Georgian citizen may not be extradited unless an international agreement of Georgia provides otherwise. This is a conditional rule, not an unconditional promise that a second passport or Georgian origin prevents surrender. A lawyer should establish citizenship at the legally relevant time through official citizenship documents, check any dual nationality and review the treaty and Georgia's reservation under Article 6 of the European Convention. Article 30(13) also provides for immediate release from extradition arrest upon establishing Georgian citizenship. Citizenship arguments therefore can affect the custody stage as well as the ultimate decision.

Article 18 ordinarily requires the conduct to be punishable in both states by at least one year's imprisonment or a more serious punishment; for a convicted person, the sentence must be at least four months. Applicable agreements may provide otherwise, and Article 18(2) addresses multiple-offence requests. Legal correspondence between offences does not demand identically named sections of criminal codes. Lawyers compare the facts alleged with offences under Georgian law, rather than merely comparing foreign charge titles. More on the principle is available in the dual-criminality guide.

Other exclusions are addressed in Articles 19–29: for example the law refers to political or military offences, death penalty, absentia judgments, limitation, earlier Georgian decisions, protection status and serious mistreatment risks. Whether a restriction is mandatory or conditional and how it is proven belongs in the specialist guide on stopping extradition from Georgia. A court's conclusion on admissibility must be founded on the applicable statute and treaty, not on the fact that a foreign authority has asked for surrender.

Is simplified extradition faster—and what is surrendered by consenting?

Georgia has a simplified procedure under Articles 34¹–34². It is not simply waiving oral argument at an ordinary hearing. The person must express consent before a district or city court, the judge must check that consent is voluntary and informed, and defence counsel must attend; an interpreter attends where needed. The law states that consent recorded at this hearing is final and cannot be withdrawn. The Minister of Justice still has to decide on surrender, so consenting is not itself the physical handover order.

For certain arrests arising from a provisional request or international wanted status, the prosecutor seeks the consent hearing no earlier than five and no later than seven days under Article 34²(2), unless an applicable agreement changes the rule. The court schedules that hearing within 24 hours of the motion. The prosecutor subsequently asks for a simplified-permissibility decision within 15 days after consent, and the court decides that motion within 24 hours of receiving the material. The Minister communicates a decision within 20 days after consent; the statute ordinarily requires transfer within 10 days of notifying the requesting state of the ministerial authorisation. These are separate clocks, with express treaty exceptions and provisions suspending some simplified deadlines when additional information is requested.

The stakes are particularly high for the rule of speciality: the ordinary principle restricts prosecution after extradition for earlier offences other than those for which the person was surrendered. Article 34²(19), however, states that a receiving state is not so restricted following the Georgian simplified route; treaty rules must also be checked. The lawyer should compare the foreign charge list with potential other allegations before any consent hearing. The request to use simplification must not be confused with choosing not to contest detention or with an admission of guilt.

The national law's 2025 amendment also changed how pending international-protection procedures interact with simplified extradition, with provisions designated to take effect on 1 October 2025. A person with a protection application should not assume that filing it neutralises a later, irrevocable consent. That interaction needs individual examination before deciding whether to use the simplified route.

The separate Law of Georgia on International Protection, as amended on 25 June 2026, sets an urgent rule for people already subject to extradition: Article 26 requires information on the right to apply, and generally gives them 10 calendar days from receiving that information to request protection. A late application without a valid reason may be refused acceptance; Article 26(5) allows restoration for a substantiated valid reason. Under Articles 26(4), 26(8) and 32(6), an appeal against specified refusals or inadmissibility decisions does not automatically stop a ministerial extradition decision and handover. The expedited-refusal provision also removes the statutory asylum-seeker status on service, even if appealed. Those rules must not be mistaken for permission to expose someone to torture: counsel must separately raise substantiated non-refoulement objections under extradition law and the European Convention on Human Rights before transfer.

What if two states ask, a Georgian case is pending, or surrender is delayed?

Article 32 provides for each competing foreign request to be examined for admissibility and then for the Minister of Justice to choose the recipient state, taking into account the offence location, seriousness, request dates, nationality and other circumstances. An International Criminal Court request receives priority over competing foreign extradition requests under Article 32(5); this should not be confused with ordinary extradition under a bilateral agreement.

Under Article 33, a domestic Georgian prosecution or sentence can postpone transfer. The Minister may also defer extradition on humanitarian grounds; the law separately contemplates temporary surrender on conditions requiring return to Georgia. Under Article 36, transit through Georgian territory is subject to a decision by the Ministry of Justice, with the prosecutor's legal position taken into account. Transit is not an independent request to extradite someone resident in Georgia.

Once a court has found extradition permissible, ordinary cassation concerns that judicial finding, not the restraint order. Article 34(14) describes the Minister’s later surrender order as final and non-appealable under that extradition procedure. In Sumbayev v. Georgia (application no. 45240/22, decision of 24 June 2025, paragraphs 50–52), the European Court rejected an assumption that extradition-related matters generally belong to the administrative courts and found a feared future consent to further prosecution too speculative on that record. That was a post-extradition admissibility decision, not a general entitlement to a new appeal against every surrender order, and not a determination of a concrete pre-surrender torture risk. Any independent constitutional or Convention measure has a different test and must be assessed urgently before transfer with qualified local counsel; see the Georgia remedies guide.

Later Georgian Supreme Court extradition rulings narrow any assumption that general allegations alone will defeat surrender. In no. 2k-115-I-25 (10 November 2025), the Criminal Chamber rejected political-persecution and prison-risk assertions unsupported by evidence specific to the person. It distinguished the judicial admissibility decision from the Minister’s subsequent assessment of actual transfer, including Article 29(3) human-rights restrictions. Decision no. 2k-96-I-25 (24 July 2025) likewise emphasised substantiation of an individual risk. Counsel should present documents showing the person’s circumstances, threats and relevant country conditions in the correct procedure, without treating cassation as a separate appeal against the Minister’s order.

What should the detainee, family and extradition lawyer do next?

At the custody stage, a Georgian criminal-defence lawyer needs the exact arrest date and time, the detention ruling, the name of the holding authority, proof of citizenship and the requesting country. The family can securely send clear copies of travel documents, any Georgian citizenship certificate, residence records and a chronology; do not circulate unverified allegations as established facts. Ask the lawyer to confirm the responsible magistrate judge and whether the foreign request has actually arrived, rather than relying on reports of a Red Notice.

When the extradition papers are served, counsel should check the formal warrant or enforceable judgment, statement of the alleged conduct, time and place, legal provisions, sentence information, citizenship and identity data, and the treaty-specific language requirements. Georgia's official national procedure lists Georgian, English or Russian depending on the instrument, and says that long indictments may require a concise statement of facts. Confirm whether the court has set the admissibility date and when the five-day document-exchange period expires. If further information is needed from the requesting state, Article 31 permits requests through the Ministry or prosecution service, with a time frame set for the response.

• Record arrest, service and court-hearing dates separately; preserve notices and copies of submissions.
• Secure the foreign warrant, charge provisions, translated documents and any prior judgments concerning the same conduct.
• Gather documentary support for citizenship, medical needs and realistic alternatives to custody.
• Decide with counsel whether the request is ordinary or simplified; do not sign irrevocable consent without understanding speciality.
• If the family is abroad, identify one authorised contact to coordinate translations and instructions with counsel in Georgia.

Hypothetical example: a Turkish resident who is not a Georgian citizen is stopped in Batumi because a foreign authority has circulated an international wanted alert. The arrest triggers the local magistrate-and-prosecutor process under Article 30; it does not establish that extradition has been approved. Counsel first checks the alert's supporting information and bail, then the applicable treaty and the arrival of the formal request. If the foreign material reaches an ordinary admissibility hearing, the lawyer follows the competent court specified for that file; the Minister of Justice, not the airport police, ultimately determines surrender after a permissible-extradition ruling.

The detailed practical layer of court access and local procedures is addressed separately for Batumi and Tbilisi. For a person with limited time, the best first question is not whether a foreign warrant can be “cancelled,” but which Georgian stage is currently active and which decision is due next. The site team can coordinate cross-border defence with qualified local counsel through the confidential enquiry page.