Written witness testimonies in the context of the court’s desire to establish the truth and the requirement of speed in civil proceedings

Abstract

By the amendment act of 4 July 2019, the legislator introduced art. 2711 to the Code of Civil Procedure. This provision stipulates that it is possible for a witness to testify in writing if the court so decides. Previously, written testimonies had been permitted only for deaf or dumb witnesses and in the European small claims procedure, which was an exception to the principle of the directness of a marginal importance. The introduction of the new provision is justified by the need to ensure the speed of proceedings and improve the work of courts. Indeed, the content of the constitutional right to fair proceedings includes, inter alia, consideration of the case without undue delay. On the other hand, truth is mentioned among the axiological values of the process. Determining the truth is necessary for a fair decision on the matter at issue in the trial. Therefore, there is a kind of value competition between, on the one hand, the pursuit of truth as the basis for establishing the facts and, on the other, the speed of proceedings. A written testimony deprives the court of, among other things, tools enabling verification of its veracity, for example by observing the witness's behaviour and being able to interpret non-verbal messages. Although the determination of the truth in the proceedings is not absolute, because the code provides for institutions allowing at least partial departure from its full determination, these departures are always justified by the need to protect other values. In art. 2711 there is no specific reason for refraining from taking oral evidence. The abstract speed of proceedings cannot be such a value.