The 2008 Georgia-Russia war created a new legal framework, including the "Law on Occupied Territories". The aim of the law is to determine the status and legal framework of the occupied territories. The main restrictions affected the rights of property, entrepreneurial activity, and free movement in these territories. Article 4 of the law defines freedom of movement as follows: for a citizen of a foreign country and a person without a citizenship entry in the territory of Abkhazia is allowed only from Zugdidi municipality and in Tskhinvali region - from Gori municipality. In addition, the norm provides for exceptions to which the prohibition does not apply. In addition to the mentioned law, a chapter on the violation of the legal regime of the occupied territories was added to the Criminal Code of Georgia, which imposes criminal liability for violating the rule of entering the occupied territories. Article 322¹ of the Criminal Code states that a violation of the rule of entry to the occupied territories is punishable, which means the entry of a citizen of a foreign country and a person without a citizenship into the occupied territories in violation of the rules established by the Law of Georgia on the Occupied Territories. The norm provides for a fine or imprisonment for a term of 2 to 4 years, and in case of aggravating circumstances, imprisonment for a term of 3 to 5 years. After the adoption of the mentioned entry in the Criminal Code in 2008, the length of the punishment was never revised.

Accordingly, a citizen of a foreign country or a person without a citizenship can enter the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia only from the Zugdidi Municipality, and in the Tskhinvali region - from the Gori Municipality; entering the occupied territories from any other directions for a citizen of a foreign country and a person without a citizenship is prohibited and punished by the Criminal Code of Georgia.

It is significant that the Venice Commission prepared several opinions regarding the law, stressing the need for liberalisation of the regime of entry into the occupied territories and criticising the existing legal arrangement. The Commission pointed out that the law was punitive in nature and unilaterally imposed wide-ranging restrictions, including on free movement. Also, according to the opinion, the criminal liability established for the violation of the rule of movement in the occupied territories was very strict, and transferring the action to the Administrative Code would be more suitable and would promote more involvement of the occupied territories. As an additional recommendation, the Venice Commission urged the government to define force majeure  as one of the exceptions to the restriction of freedom of movement.^[1] Despite critical comments, some of which the government tried to resolve in the following years, a number of recommendations remain unaddressed.

Considering the interest in the protection of human rights and peaceful transformation of conflicts, the purpose of this article is to analyse how the rules of entry of citizens of a foreign country and a persons without a citizenship to the occupied territory are regulated, what legal problems the criminalization of this action create, how the norm is interpreted in the practice by investigative bodies and general court, and what are the main criticisms of the legal arrangement of the issue.