Witness testifying while standing is more than a symbol

A commentary in Rzeczpospolita argues against a potential judicial reform that would allow witnesses to testify while seated, asserting that such a change would not expedite court proceedings and could undermine the gravity of legal hearings.

The author suggests that the focus of judicial reform should be on improving basic conditions for detainees, such as hygiene in holding cells, providing paper and pens, and allowing participation in religious services. These, the commentary implies, are more pressing issues than the posture of witnesses during testimony.

Drawing on the opinions of experienced lawyers, the piece notes that judges have long permitted witnesses to sit if requested or if testimony is prolonged. However, it maintains that if a witness attempts to disrespect the court or the proceedings, the judge should instruct them to stand. The article references ancient wisdom, suggesting that a standing position strengthens an orator's arguments and makes them easier to observe.

The commentary concludes that allowing witnesses to testify while seated is not a significant improvement and could detract from the perceived seriousness and authority of the judicial system. The piece advocates for preserving the traditional practice of standing testimony, emphasizing its symbolic and practical benefits.