Measure Implementation

Is this measure possible in your Member State under International Judicial Cooperation?

Yes. If clarification of any facts essential for the criminal proceedings requires professional expertise, the law enforcement authority and, in proceedings before the court, the presiding judge, shall request a professional opinion besides an expert activity performed under a special Act. In simple cases, written confirmation, the accuracy of which is beyond doubt, may be sufficient (Section 141 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). If due to the complexity of the clarified facts the procedure under Section 141 is not sufficient, the law enforcement authority and, in the proceedings before the court, the presiding judge, shall take on an expert for the submission of an expert opinion. If it is in regards to the clarification of particularly complex facts, two experts shall be invited. Two experts must always be invited if it is an autopsy of a corpse. (Section 142 of the Code of Criminal Procedure The law enforcement authority or the court shall mainly take on an expert organisation specialised in the activity that is the subject of the expert opinion in the criminal proceeding for the submission of an expert opinion under Section 142. Such organisation shall state the name of an expert who may be interrogated with regard to the subject matter of the expert opinion. An expert opinion may also be procured by any of the parties to the criminal proceedings. In exceptional and particularly serious cases requiring special scientific assessments or to review an expert opinion, the law enforcement authority or the court may invite an expert institute to submit an expert opinion.

Legal Framework

International legal framework applicable for this measure in your Member State

Directive 2014/41/EU regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters in relation to the Member States which have implemented the EIO Directive. Otherwise, the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of April 20, 1959 and its first and second Additional Protocol, Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters between the Member States of the European Union of May 29, 2000 and its Protocol of 2001. In case of existence, bilateral or other multilateral treaty covering the specific subject matter may be applicable. In the absence of legal framework, the principle of reciprocity may be applicable.

Competent Authority

* receive the request/decision for judicial cooperation

Regional Prosecutor´s Office in the territorial circuit of which the requested investigative measure is to be carried out. If the subject of the EIO includes solely the investigative measure which is to be carried out by a court by reason of its applicability in the criminal proceedings in the issuing state, the competent authority is the District Court in the territorial circuit of which the investigative is to be carried out. In case the MLA request is submitted, the District Prosecutor´s Office in the territorial circuit of which the requested investigative measure is to be carried out. General Prosecutor´s Office and the Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic are the competent central authorities for the transmission of the request for the mutual assistance (if direct contact between the judicial authorities does not apply).

Accepted languages

Accepted languages for the request/decision

EIO – Slovak. The Czech Republic may send the EIO in Czech. MLA - when proceeding according to European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters of April 20, 1959 or its protocols one of the official languages of the Council of Europe may be used. Language regime may be modified according to the relevant bilateral treaty.

Execution deadline

Deadlines for the execution of the request/decision (where applicable)

-

Concise legal practical information

Special requirements

This measure of judicial assistance may be performed according to a foreign legal regulation. Assistance or participation of agents of the requesting State in the execution of the measure is admissible.

Last reviewed on 29 February 2024 by EJN Secretariat

NEXT MEASURE

  • Electronic evidence, interception and surveillance (A.50 - A.56)
  • A.50 Interception of telecommunications and other forms of electronic communications
next

Export this Judicial Cooperation Measure

File format