Article 191 – Termination of criminal prosecution during a hearing on the merits; Review of an issue of insanity
2. If it is established that at the moment of committing a crime the accused was insane, the court shall, upon motion of a party, terminate the criminal prosecution against the accused. In addition, the judge reviewing the case shall, if there are grounds provided for by Article 221(1) of the Law of Georgia on Mental Health, decide, with the same ruling and based on the report of a forensic psychiatric examination, to order a compulsory psychiatric treatment of that person. That ruling may be appealed in accordance with Article 207 of this Code.
Article 191 – Termination of criminal prosecution during a hearing on the merits; Review of an issue of insanity
3. If it is established that when committing the crime the accused was sane, but became insane after committing the crime, the court shall deliver a judgment of conviction ordering the convicted person to serve the sentence in the relevant medical (healthcare) facility until he/she recovers, after which the convicted person shall continue serving the sentence in accordance with the general procedures.
1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct:
(a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law;
(b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
(c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph;
(d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be:
(i) Made by other persons; or
(ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control.