Summary

On 1 September 2011, amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which rather tangibly served the interests of the prosecuting function, entered into force. The practical objective of the draft was seen to be in the rehabilitation of the evidentiary status of the testimonies given in the pre-trial procedure. However, legal and political reasons forced pursuit of this goal by supplementing and specifying the rules on the adversary principle of court procedure. It was noticeable already during the adoption of the Act that many amendments introduced to the Code of Criminal Procedure by Draft No. 599 were unclear, unsystematic and contradictory, as well as potentially problematic upon application. As expected, problems emerged. The article addresses mainly and primarily problems related to establishing evidence and the solutions attempted to be found for them, both in the judgements of the Supreme Court and during the training event, entitled “Establishment of evidence in adversary criminal court procedure”, organised on 7 March 2013 by the training department of the Supreme Court for justices, prosecutors and lawyers. The author also addresses Draft No. 295, currently in proceedings in the Riigikogu, which counter-effectively to Draft No. 599 serves the interests of the defence function. An overview of the genesis of the draft and related debates is given.