marTlmsajuleba kanoni

For Understanding
the Accessory Nature
of Accomplicity
GIORGI BARABADZE
Doctor of Law
In the article the author canvasses the problem related to the nature of
accomplicity and states that the actions of the accomplices are of accessory
nature. Various characters of their actions do not provide the basis
for initiating a separate case of criminal investigation. According to the
author, based on the similar lawfulness, a principal offender is a key figure
who defines the boundaries of liabilities of the accomplices in terms of
objective wrongfulness. Then the author weighs in with the argument that
that the accessory principle envisages the following:
a) Commission of crime by the principal offender, which means that the
accomplicity exists only when the action of the principal offender
reaches the punishable stage;
b) Proving that the accomplicity is of accessory nature does not mean at
all that the punishment of the accomplices only depends on the
punishment of the principal offender;
c) The accessory nature does not exclude the individualization of the
accomplice’s liability;
d) According to the accessory principle, releasing the principal offender
from sentence does not exclude the liability of the accomplice.
e) The accessory nature does not oppose the principle of individual liability
as it allows for qualifying the actions of the principal offender and
an accomplice by different articles taking into consideration the principal
offender’s or an accomplice’s attenuating and aggravating circumstances
of personal type.
63