LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – Trial Procedure – Prosecution’s Duty to Call Material or Vital Witnesses
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The prosecution is only enjoined by law to call witnesses sufficient to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt but need not make a case for the defence; the prosecution has the discretion in a criminal case to call whichever witnesses it considers necessary to prove the offense charged but must call vital witnesses whose evidence may determine the case one way or the other.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"The prosecution is only enjoined by the law to call witnesses sufficient to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt but need not make a case for the defence. ... The prosecution has the discretion in a criminal case to call whichever witnesses it considers necessary to prove the offence charged but must call vital witnesses whose evidence may determine the case one way or the other."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
This reinforces Principle 360 while adding nuance. Prosecution has: (1) general discretion to select witnesses; (2) obligation to call sufficient witnesses to prove case; (3) duty to call vital witnesses. “Vital witnesses” (see Principle 360) are those whose evidence may determine the case either way—witnesses with unique knowledge of critical facts. Prosecution need not: call every potential witness, call witnesses who merely corroborate, or present defence evidence. However, failure to call vital witnesses is fatal because: adverse inference arises (testimony would be unfavorable), gaps in proof create reasonable doubt, and prosecution bears burden of proof. The balance: prosecution has witness selection discretion but cannot omit witnesses essential to proving the case or whose absence raises questions about evidence completeness. Courts assess: was the witness vital (decisive evidence)? was their evidence necessary to prove elements? does their absence create doubt? This prevents: prosecution from cherry-picking witnesses while omitting crucial ones, withholding evidence that may assist defence, and incomplete presentation of critical evidence.