Search for a command to run...
Abstract The right to control a witness’ testimony through cross-examination is a core component of criminal law, a cornerstone of the law on procedure, a constitutional guarantee for the accused, and a means to the ultimate end that is the judicial endeavour for truth. In this vein, the paper takes up the subject from a local perspective and evaluates the Maltese legal position, in view of the several facets that comprise it. Foremost, the paper engages with different meanings of the term ‘cross-examination’, identifying the basic components of most expositions thereof. The generally accepted objects of cross-examination are also elucidated. Building on the above, the paper looks at two specific rules of evidence, particularly the hearsay and the viva voce rules, revealing how they can be said to justify and explain the requirement of having a witness cross-examined. Additionally, the paper also references specific situations where the procedural entitlement to have a witness cross-examined seems to be qualified, examining the legal position in this regard. Local jurisprudence is cited throughout. In view of providing a comprehensive appraisal of cross-examination under Maltese criminal law, the rules governing the institute are laid down and engaged with. The individual provisions of both the Code of Organization and Civil Procedure and the Criminal Code are referenced and analysed. Parallels are also drawn with foreign legislation and authorities, particularly UK law, considering the latter’s influence on the Maltese Criminal Code. Moving on, the paper also undertakes an analysis of the rules on preventing secondary victimisation, and their interplay with an accused and his right to cross-examine a prosecution witness. Judicial output on the matter is cited, as well as foreign authorities. Cumulatively, the section offers an understanding of the balancing exercise any adjudicator must undertake, considering the importance of cross-examination. The constitutional principles underpinning the institute of cross-examination are also detailed, as subjected to local and ECtHR jurisprudence. This section seeks to examine the way the right to a fair hearing sanctions the right to have a witness brought up by the prosecution cross-examined. The paper also comments on the scenario where an accused is brought to testify, and where competing interests seem to arise. In fine , the paper reiterates the importance of cross-examination, emphasizing how sensitive its legal treatment ought to be.