The Canonical Norms on the Judicial Examination or Interrogations: Their Purpose, Implementation, and Non-Observance

Abstract

The judicial examination is the session at which questions are posed by the judge or another instructor to a summoned party, witness, or expert, and the responses are received and recorded by the notary. It is an essential element of the judge's exercise of judicial power and a central component to the orientation of the trial to the discovery of the truth. Observance of the norms governing it is necessary for a just and legitimate judicial process. Those norms stated in the Code of Canon Law and reiterated in the instruction Dignitas connubii require, in brief, the citation of the deponents to appear in person (usually at the tribunal), instruction of them about the obligation to state the truth, the swearing of an oath in most causes, identifying and questioning them individually by the judge with the assistance of the notary, the recording of the responses by the notary under the direction of the judge, and a review and signing of the record. While there are some legitimate exceptions to these norms, it is illegitimate for a tribunal to replace the ordinary method of interrogation with the prejudicial gathering of statements, the solicitation of written statements, the use of video conferencing or telephone interviews, and interrogation in the absence of a notary or by a non-judge or non-auditor. Observance of the correct procedure in this matter should weigh upon the conscience of the bishop moderator of the tribunal.