Evidence Act

This Act may be cited as the Evidence Act.

The Act applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any court except a Kadhi’s court and does not apply to proceedings before an arbitrator; it also applies to affidavits presented to any court, subject to other Acts and rules of court.

Defines terms including "admissible", "advocate", and "bank", and sets when a fact is proved, disproved, or not proved.

Section 4 instructs how courts are to treat presumptions of fact: courts may treat a presumed fact as proved (or call for proof), shall treat a presumed fact as proved when so directed, and treats one fact declared conclusive of another as proof of the other, disallowing evidence to disprove it.

Improperly admitting or rejecting evidence by itself is not a ground for a new trial or reversal if the court finds the decision justified without that evidence or that the missing evidence would not have changed the decision.

A copy of any entry in a banker’s book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of that entry and the matters, transaction and accounts recorded in it.

A copy of an entry in a banker’s book is only admissible if certain proofs (a–d) are shown; proof may be given by a bank officer or by the person who examined the copy, either orally or by affidavit.

Bank officers and bankers cannot be compelled to produce bankers' books or give witness testimony about their contents in proceedings where the bank is not a party, unless the court orders it for special cause.

A court may, on application by a party to proceedings, order that the party may inspect and copy entries in a banker’s book for purposes of those proceedings; proceedings include proceedings in Tanzania or Uganda.

A judge or magistrate may, on oath or reasonable suspicion, issue a warrant authorizing an officer to inspect and take copies from a specified person’s banker’s book; failure to produce the book or permit scrutiny is an offence punishable by up to one year imprisonment or a fine not exceeding two thousand shillings or both.

The court may order costs to be paid to any party by the bank where the costs were occasioned by any default or delay on the part of the bank; such an order may be enforced as if the bank were a party to the proceedings.

This section says that, except where this Act expressly provides otherwise, nothing in the Act should be taken to reduce or derogate from any other written law relating to matters of evidence.

From the commencement of this Act, the Evidence Act, 1872 (No. 1 of 1872) of India shall cease to extend or apply to Kenya.

Statements, actions or writings by one conspirator about their common intention (after the intention is first entertained) are admissible as relevant facts against each person believed to be conspiring, both to prove the conspiracy and to show participation.

Evidence that is inconsistent with any fact in issue or any relevant fact, or that affects the probability of other facts, is covered by this section.

In suits claiming damages, any fact that helps the court determine the amount of damages is relevant.

Describes transactions that affect whether a right or custom exists, including creation, claim, modification, recognition, assertion, denial, or inconsistency with its existence.

Evidence of a person's state of mind or bodily feeling is relevant when that state is in issue; it must be shown with reference to the particular matter, and a previous conviction is relevant when prior commission of an offence is in issue.

When it is in question whether an act was accidental or intentional (or done with particular knowledge or intention), evidence that the act formed part of a series of similar occurrences in which the person was involved is relevant.

When there is a question whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business according to which it naturally would have been done is relevant.

Evidence is admissible only if it is evidence of the existence or non-existence of a fact in issue, or of any other fact declared by this Act to be relevant.

Facts that are connected to a fact in issue are relevant as part of the same transaction even if they occurred at different times or places.

Facts that are the occasion, cause or effect (immediate or otherwise) of relevant facts, or that show the state of things under which they happened or afforded an opportunity for them, are relevant.

Sets relevance rules for facts: motive, preparation, and conduct are relevant to issues; statements are relevant when they affect conduct; "conduct" excludes standalone statements unless they accompany and explain other acts.

Facts that are necessary to explain, introduce, identify, fix time or place, or show relations for a fact in issue are relevant only to the extent they are necessary for that purpose.

Defines "admission" as a statement (oral or documentary) suggesting an inference about a fact in issue or relevant fact, made by specified persons in prescribed circumstances.

Statements made by a party to the proceeding, or by an agent authorized by that party, are treated as admissions; statements by parties in a representative character are not admissions unless made while they held that character; the provision also refers to persons with proprietary or pecuniary interest and persons from whom parties derived their interest.

Statements made by persons whose position or liability must be proved against a party to a suit are admissions if they would be admissible against those persons in relation to that position or liability and are made while the person occupies that position or is subject to that liability.

Statements made by persons whom a party has expressly referred for information about a disputed matter count as admissions.

If a person cannot read a written statement, an officer (of or above Chief Inspector) or a magistrate must read it to them before they sign and endorse that it was read; parties may object to admission; parties may call the maker to give oral evidence; the court must summon the maker on application and may summons of its own motion; making a false statement admitted under this section is treated as perjury.

Proof of admissions against the person who made them, and by or on their behalf, is allowed where the admission is of a kind that would be admissible between third persons if the person who made it were dead under section 33 of this Act.

Oral admissions as to the contents of a document may not be proved unless and until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of such document under the provisions of this Act or unless the genuineness of a document produced is in question.

In civil cases, admissions made on condition that they not be given in evidence (or made in circumstances showing an agreement not to give them in evidence) cannot be proved; however, advocates are not exempt from giving evidence when compelled under section 134.

Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted, but they may operate as estoppels under later provisions.

A confession is words or conduct (or both) from which an inference may reasonably be drawn that the person has committed an offence.

The Attorney-General must make rules (in consultation with specified bodies) for confessions not made in court.

A confession or admission is inadmissible in a criminal proceeding if it appears to the court that it was caused by any inducement, threat or promise from a person in authority that was sufficient to give the accused reasonable grounds to suppose making it would gain an advantage or avoid an evil of a temporal nature in relation to the proceedings.

A confession that was initially induced by an inducement, threat or promise is admissible if the court is of the opinion that the effect of that inducement, threat or promise has been fully removed before the confession was made.

Section 28 has been repealed by Act No. 5 of 2003, s. 100.

Confessions to police officers.

Section 30 has been repealed by ActNo. 5 of 2003, s. 101.

Section 31 has been repealed.

If multiple people are tried together and one makes a confession that affects others, the court may consider that confession against those other persons as well as the confessor.

Statements by a person about the cause of his death or surrounding circumstances are admissible when the cause of that person's death is in question.

Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding is admissible in a subsequent judicial proceeding or later stage in the same proceeding for proving the facts it states if specified circumstances apply.

The court may admit opinions from persons specially skilled (experts) on foreign law, science, art, or identity/genuineness questions when the court must form an opinion on those points.

Facts that are not otherwise admissible become admissible if they support or are inconsistent with an expert's opinion, when that expert opinion is itself admissible.

The opinion of any person acquainted with another's handwriting that a document was or was not written or signed by that person is admissible in court.

When the court must form an opinion about the existence of a general custom or right, it may admit opinions from persons likely to know whether that custom or right exists; "general custom or right" includes customs or rights common to a considerable class of persons.

Section title: "Opinions of persons with special knowledge." The text fragment references "the usages and tenets of any association, body of men or family."

When the court must form an opinion about the relationship between two people, an opinion expressed by conduct from someone with special knowledge is admissible, but such an opinion is not sufficient to prove a marriage in prosecutions for bigamy, divorce proceedings, or damages actions against an adulterer.

If the opinion of any living person is admissible, the grounds for that opinion are also admissible.

Documentary statements are admissible in civil proceedings when the maker had personal knowledge (or made a continuous record in duty of recording another person's supplied information) and the maker is called as a witness; the court may admit such statements in certain circumstances.

When assessing the weight of a statement admissible under section 35, regard must be had to all circumstances affecting its accuracy, including whether it was made contemporaneously with the events and whether the maker had any incentive to conceal or misrepresent.

Entries in books of account regularly kept in the course of business are admissible when they refer to a matter the court must inquire into, but such statements alone are not sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability.

An entry in a public or official record made by a public servant in the course of duty, or by someone performing a duty required by law, is admissible as evidence.

Statements and representations of facts in published maps, charts or government plans are admissible as evidence.

Section 40 addresses statements of fact contained in laws and official gazettes (and notices purporting to be printed by the Government Printer).

When a court must determine the law of a foreign country, statements of that law in books published under that country's government authority and reports of that country's court rulings are admissible.

When a statement forms part of a longer statement, conversation, document, book or series, only so much and no more of that material should be given in evidence as the court considers necessary in the particular case to understand the statement.

The existence of a judgment, order or decree that by law prevents a court from taking cognizance of a suit or holding a trial may be proved when the question is whether that court ought to take cognizance of the suit or hold the trial.

A final judgment, order or decree of a competent court that confers or takes away a legal character is admissible when the existence of that character or title is admissible; such a judgment is conclusive proof of the timing and existence of the conferred or taken-away legal character and of property ownership as declared.

Judgments, orders or decrees (other than those mentioned in section 44) are admissible as evidence when they relate to matters of a public nature relevant to the inquiry, but they are not conclusive proof of what they state.

Judgments, orders or decrees not mentioned in sections 43, 44 and 45 of this Act are inadmissible, unless their existence is a fact in issue or relevant under another provision of this Act.

Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that a judgment, order or decree admissible under this Act was delivered by a court not competent to deliver it or was obtained by fraud or collusion.

A final judgment of a competent court in criminal proceedings, after the time for appeal has expired or after any appeal decision (whichever is later), is to be treated as conclusive evidence that the person convicted was guilty as charged.

In civil cases, character evidence about a person is inadmissible to prove that person committed (or did not commit) the conduct imputed to them, except when that character is shown by facts that are otherwise admissible; separately, character evidence may be admitted when it affects the amount of damages.

In criminal proceedings, the fact that the person accused is of a good character is admissible.

Generally, evidence that the accused has committed, been convicted of, or been charged with other offences, or is of bad character, is inadmissible in criminal proceedings except in specified circumstances.

Defines "character" to include both reputation and disposition, and limits admissible evidence to general reputation and general disposition except as provided in section 57; excludes evidence of particular acts.

Facts that the court takes judicial notice of do not need to be proved.

Allows a prosecutor to notify an accused (and their advocate) that certain facts are not in issue; prescribes how and when the notice must be served; requires the accused to notify the court if they intend to place any such fact in issue; and gives the court procedures to record, investigate, deem proven, or require oral evidence about those facts.

Courts must take judicial notice of the listed facts in subsection (1).

Facts that the parties or their agents admit in a civil proceeding (either at the hearing, in writing before the hearing, or as deemed admitted by pleading rules) do not need to be proved; the court may nonetheless, in its discretion, require such facts to be proved otherwise than by the admissions.

All facts, except the contents of documents, may be proved by oral evidence.

Oral evidence must be direct.

Section 63A(1) permits a court to receive oral evidence by teleconferencing or video conferencing; Section 63A(2) permits the Chief Justice to develop regulations governing that use.

The contents of documents may be proved by primary or secondary evidence.

Defines when a document (including certain reproductions and computer print-outs) counts as primary evidence and sets conditions for admissibility of computer-produced print-outs.

Secondary evidence: certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained.

Documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the cases mentioned later.

Secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition or contents of a document in specified cases (e.g. when the original is with the person against whom it is sought to be proved, admitted in writing, destroyed or lost, not easily movable, a public document, a document with a permitted certified copy, or where numerous documents make a general result relevant).

Notice to produce a document when the document to be proved is itself a notice.

When a document is alleged to be signed or written (wholly or partly) by a person, the signature or the handwriting alleged to be that person’s must be proved to be in that person’s handwriting.

A document that the law requires to be attested cannot be used as evidence unless at least one attesting witness (if alive, subject to the court’s process and capable of giving evidence) has been called; but an attesting witness need not be called for a document that has been registered under any written law unless the execution is specifically denied.

When a document legally requires attestation but no attesting witness can be found, is incapable, or cannot be called without unreasonable delay or expense, it must be shown that at least one attesting witness’s attestation is in that witness’s handwriting and that the person’s signature is in their handwriting.

If a party admits that he executed an attested document, that admission is sufficient proof of execution against him even if the document was one required by law to be attested.

If an attesting witness denies or does not recollect executing a document, the document’s execution may be proved by other evidence.

An attested document that is not required by law to be attested may be proved as if it were unattested.

Witnesses and the court may compare signatures, writings or seals proved to the court's satisfaction; the court has power to direct persons in court to write words or figures to enable comparison; applies to finger impressions with necessary modifications.

Reports by government analysts, medical practitioners and specified experts may be used as evidence in criminal proceedings.

In criminal proceedings a certificate in the First Schedule, signed by an officer appointed by order of the Director of Public Prosecutions who prepared the photographic print or enlargement from film or electronic medium, is admissible and is evidence of the facts stated; the court may presume the signature genuine and may summon and examine the person who gave the certificate.

Electronic messages and digital material are admissible as evidence; the court must not refuse admissibility solely because the evidence is not in its original form; when weighing such evidence regard must be had to reliability, integrity, origin identification and other relevant factors; business records and certified copies are admissible on mere production and constitute rebuttable proof.

Specifies which documents are public documents and states that all other documents are private.

Public officers who have custody of public documents must give any person entitled to inspect them a copy on demand upon payment of legal fees and must certify that copy with a dated signature and official title; the certificate must be sealed when the officer is authorized to use a seal.

Certified copies of public documents may be produced to prove the contents of the documents or parts of them.

Section titled "Proof of certain public documents" was deleted by L.N. 22 of 1965.

The court must presume certain certified documents to be genuine when they meet specified criteria, and must presume the signer held the claimed official character.

Establishes that a document is to be treated as genuine evidence.

A produced copy of a written law or of the Gazette (or a notice purportedly printed by the Government Printer) is prima facie evidence of the making and tenor of that law or notice.

The court must presume that certain documents are genuine, including specified official gazettes, newspapers or journals, and documents kept as required by law if produced from proper custody.

In proceedings for an offence or for contempt of court, a publication that indicates a person, place or date is presumed to have been produced by that person, at that place or on that date unless the contrary is proved.

The court must presume seals, stamps or signatures are genuine and that the signer held the judicial or official character they claim at the time of signing.

The court must presume that maps or plans made or published by government authority (or a government department) of any Commonwealth country are accurate.

The court must presume that books presented as official law publications or judicial reports of any country are genuine.

The court must presume that documents purporting to be powers of attorney and appearing to be executed before and authenticated by specified officials were so executed and authenticated.

The court may presume that a certified copy of a foreign (non-Commonwealth) judgment or judicial record is genuine and was made by a court of competent jurisdiction when it is certified in a manner vouched for by a Kenya consular officer or diplomatic representative as the usual local method.

The court may presume that books and published maps or charts it consults were written and published by the persons and at the times and places they claim.

The court may presume that a telegraphic message forwarded to an addressee corresponds with the message sent from the sending office, but the court shall not presume who delivered the message for transmission.

The court must presume that any document called for and not produced after notice to produce was properly attested, stamped and executed as required by law.

If a document is produced from custody and is at least twenty years old, the court may presume its handwriting is that of the person it purports to be and may presume an executed or attested document was duly executed and attested.

When the words of a document plainly apply to the facts, evidence may not be given to show they were not meant to apply.

If plain language in a document is meaningless given the facts, evidence may be admitted to show the language was used in a peculiar sense.

Evidence may be given of facts showing which of several persons or things a document was intended to apply to.

If wording in a document partly fits two sets of facts but wholly fits neither, evidence may be given to show which of the two it was meant to apply to.

Evidence may be given to show the meaning of illegible or not commonly intelligible characters, foreign, obsolete, technical, local and provincial expressions, abbreviations, and words used in a peculiar sense.

People who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence to show a contemporaneous agreement that varies the document's terms.

This Part does not affect the law on the interpretation and construction of wills or other testamentary dispositions.

Contracts, grants or other dispositions and matters required by law to be in writing must be proved only by the document itself or by secondary evidence when admissible.

Section 98 states that any fact may be proved to invalidate a document or entitle a person to a decree or order, giving examples such as fraud, intimidation, illegality, want of due execution, lack of capacity, failure of consideration, or mistake in fact or law.

When the language of a document is on its face ambiguous or defective, evidence may not be given of facts that would show its meaning or supply its defects.

The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 106B.

Electronic records (including computer output) are treated as documents and may be admitted as evidence in proceedings without producing the original if specified conditions about the production, feeding, operation, and derivation of the record are satisfied.

If an electronic signature of a subscriber is alleged to have been affixed to an electronic record, the fact that it is that subscriber’s electronic signature must be proved, except where the signature is a secure signature.

Proof as to the verification of electronic signature — that person or the certification service provider to produce the electronic signature certificate; or

A court must accept (take recognizance of) an electronic record as the official Gazette, or as an electronic record required by law to be kept, when the record is kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from its proper custody.

A court must presume that an electronic record presented as an agreement containing the parties' electronic signatures was concluded by affixing the parties' digital signatures.

The court must presume that a secure electronic record was not altered after the secure electronic signature was affixed, and must presume that a secure electronic signature was affixed by the subscriber with intent to sign or approve, unless the contrary is proved.

A court must presume that the information listed in an electronic signature certificate is correct, unless disproved, except for unverified information, when the certificate was accepted by the subscriber.

A court may presume that an electronic message forwarded through an electronic mail server matches the message input for transmission, but the court must not presume who sent it.

A person who asks a court to decide a right or liability based on facts they assert must prove those facts.

The person who would lose if no evidence were presented must bear the burden of proof in a suit or proceeding.

The person who wants the court to accept a particular fact must bear the burden of proving that fact, unless a law assigns that burden to someone else.

A person who wants to give evidence must prove any fact necessary to make their evidence admissible.

An accused person must prove exceptions, exemptions or facts especially within their knowledge, but may be acquitted if reasonable doubt arises; the section does not place that burden on the prosecution.

If a fact in a civil case is especially within a party's knowledge, that party must bear the burden of proving or disproving it.

This section (Section 113) has been repealed.

Section 114 has been repealed.

If people have been acting as partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, the person who says they are not (or have ceased to be) in that relationship must prove it.

When a person is shown in possession of something, the person who says they are not the owner must prove that they are not the owner.

If there is doubt about a transaction's good faith and one party stands in a position of active confidence to the other, that party must prove the transaction was in good faith.

If a person is born during a valid marriage or within 280 days after its dissolution while the mother remains unmarried, that fact is conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of the husband, unless it is shown the spouses had no access to each other when he could have been begotten.

If a person has not been heard of for seven years by those who would be expected to hear of them if alive, there is a rebuttable presumption that the person is dead.

The court may presume that any fact likely to have happened is true based on ordinary events, human conduct and business relations to the case.

If a person intentionally causes or permits another to believe something and act on it, that person (and their representative) must not deny the truth of that thing in any suit or proceeding between them.

Tenants (and those claiming through them) may not deny their landlord's title at the start of the tenancy while the tenancy continues; likewise, persons who entered by licence may not deny the licensor's right to possession at the time the licence was given.

Acceptors of a bill of exchange are prohibited from denying that the drawer had authority to draw or endorse the bill, but may deny that the bill was actually drawn or endorsed by the person it purports to be from.

A bailee, agent or licensee must not deny that the bailor, principal or licensor was entitled to goods when they were entrusted; however the bailee, agent or licensee may show a defence that they were compelled to deliver the goods to a person who had a right against the bailor and who wrongfully and without notice obtained the goods from a third person.

Generally, a person may not be convicted solely on the victim's evidence unless there is other material corroboration; but in sexual offence cases where the complainant's evidence is the only evidence, the court must receive it and may convict if, for reasons recorded, the court is satisfied the complainant is telling the truth.

All persons must be competent to testify unless the court finds they cannot understand or answer questions because of age, disease, or similar causes; a person with mental illness is not automatically incompetent unless prevented by their condition from understanding and answering questions.

A witness who cannot speak may give evidence by other means (for example, writing or signs), but that writing or those signs must be made in open court; such evidence is treated as oral evidence.

Parties to a civil suit and their spouses are competent witnesses; in criminal cases a person charged and their spouse are competent witnesses for the defence with specified limits, and a spouse may be compelled to give evidence without consent in certain offences (bigamy, Sexual Offences Act offences, or acts affecting spouse/children).

A witness cannot refuse to answer questions relevant to a suit or proceeding on the ground that the answer may incriminate or expose them, but such compelled answers cannot be used to subject the witness to arrest or prosecution or be proved against them in criminal proceedings except for prosecution for giving false evidence.

Judges and magistrates are entitled not to be compelled to answer questions about their conduct or things they learned in court, except by special order of a superior court; they may be examined about other matters that occurred in their presence while acting.

Spouses' communications are protected: no person can be compelled to disclose communications made by one spouse to the other, and no one may disclose them without the maker's consent, except in suits between the spouses or the cases listed in section 127(3)(a)–(c).

If a Minister swears that he has examined an unpublished official document and believes its production would be prejudicial to the public service, the document is not admissible.

A public officer is entitled not to disclose communications made to him in the course of his duty if he considers disclosure would harm the public interest.

Certain officials (judges, magistrates, police officers, and revenue officers) cannot be compelled to disclose the source of information about the commission of offences.

Advocates are prohibited from disclosing client communications, documents or advice obtained in the course of employment unless the client expressly consents; two specific exceptions apply and the protection continues after the employment ends.

The provisions of section 134 of this Act shall apply to interpreters and to the clerks or servants of advocates.

A party who gives evidence is not taken to have consented to disclosure under section 134(1); but a party who calls and questions an advocate, interpreter, clerk or servant as a witness is deemed to have consented to that disclosure only if he questions the witness on matters the witness would otherwise not be free to disclose.

A person cannot be forced to disclose confidential communications with their advocate, except if they give themselves up as a witness; then the court may require disclosure of communications necessary to explain evidence they have given.

A witness who is not a party to the suit cannot be compelled to produce title deeds or documents that may incriminate him, unless he has agreed in writing to produce them.

No one can be forced to produce documents in their possession that another person could lawfully refuse to produce, unless that other person consents.

Banks and their officers cannot be forced to produce bankers’ books in legal proceedings to which the bank is not a party, and cannot be summoned to testify about matters in bankers’ books except by a judge or magistrate ordering it for special cause.

An accomplice is a competent witness against an accused person, and a conviction is not illegal solely because it is based on uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice.

A person who is entitled to refuse to produce a document is exempt from being compelled to give oral evidence of the document's contents.

No particular number of witnesses is required to prove any fact unless another law provides otherwise.

Section 144 gives the court discretion to ask how proposed evidence would be admissible; the court must admit evidence it thinks admissible; and it may permit or require the order of proving related facts.

Defines three types of witness examination: examination-in-chief (by the party who calls the witness), cross-examination (by the adverse party), and re-examination (by the calling party after cross-examination).

Sequence and permissions for examining witnesses: witnesses are to be examined-in-chief first; the adverse party may cross-examine; the calling party may re-examine; the court may permit recalls and new matter, and parties have rights to further examination after recall.

A person called only to produce a document does not become a witness merely by producing it and cannot be cross-examined unless and until they are called as a witness.

A witness to character may be cross-examined and re-examined.

A leading question is any question that suggests the answer the questioner wants or expects, or that suggests a disputed fact the witness is to testify to.

If the adverse party objects, leading questions must not be asked in examination-in-chief or re-examination, unless the court gives permission; the court may permit leading questions on introductory or undisputed matters or matters already sufficiently proved.

Leading questions may be asked in cross-examination.

A witness may be asked, while under examination, whether certain transactions were not in writing; if the witness refers to a document the adverse party may object to the evidence until the document is produced or secondary evidence is permitted.

A witness may be cross-examined about previous written statements made by him, even if those writings are not shown or proved.

Cross-examination to test accuracy, veracity or credibility.

If a question asked under section 154(c) to affect a witness's credit relates to a matter relevant to the suit or proceeding, the provisions of section 128 apply.

A person charged with an offence who is called as a defence witness may be asked any question in cross-examination even if the answer may tend to incriminate them regarding the offence charged.

The court must decide whether to compel a witness to answer questions affecting credit; if it does not compel, it may warn the witness that he is not obliged to answer; the court may draw an adverse inference from a refusal to answer.

A person must not ask the question described in section 157 unless they have reasonable grounds to believe the imputation is well founded.

The court may forbid questions or inquiries it regards as indecent or scandalous, except where they relate to facts in issue or to matters necessary to determine whether the facts in issue existed.

The court must forbid any question intended to insult or annoy, or needlessly offensive in form.

The court may, in its discretion, allow the person who called a witness to cross-examine that witness by putting questions which the adverse party could put in cross-examination.

When a witness is asked whether he has been previously convicted of any crime and denies it, evidence of his previous conviction may be given.

The adverse party, or with the court's consent the party who called the witness, may impeach a witness's credit by specified methods (a)–(d).

A witness whose truthfulness is to be confirmed may be questioned about other circumstances they observed near the time or place of the fact, when the court believes those circumstances, if proved, would confirm the witness's testimony.

A witness's former written or oral statements about the same fact may be proved to show that the witness's testimony is consistent.

When a statement admissible under section 33 or 34 is proved but the person who made it is not available as a witness, matters that could have been proved by cross-examining that person may be proved to contradict, support consistency, impeach or confirm the maker's credit.

Witnesses and experts may refresh their memory by referring to contemporaneous writings under specified conditions; a witness may use another person's writing if read and known to be correct, and may use a copy with the court's permission when the original cannot be produced.

A witness may testify to facts recorded in an earlier writing referred to in section 167 even if he does not specifically recall the facts, provided he is sure the record was accurate.

An adverse party may cross-examine the witness about any contemporaneous writing shown to them that was referred to in section 167 or section 168.

A summoned witness must bring any document in his possession or power to court despite objections; the court must determine the validity of objections and may inspect documents, take other evidence, or direct translators to keep contents secret with stated exceptions.

If a party called for a document and inspects it, that party must give the document as evidence when the producing party requires it and it is admissible.

If a party, after having notice to produce a document, refuses to produce it, that party cannot later use the document as evidence unless the other party consents or a court orders otherwise.

A judge or magistrate may ask any question and order production of documents to obtain evidence; parties and their agents may not object and may not cross-examine without leave; subsection (2) limits the judge's powers (e.g., cannot compel testimony or documents protected under Part II, cannot ask questions improper under sections 157 or 158, and cannot dispense with primary evidence except as the Act allows).

Section 174 has been deleted.