Obtaining evidence in North Macedonia under the Hague Evidence Convention: practical guidance on Chapter II commissions and the new civil procedure framework

Veton Qoku, Bojana Paneva and Filip Acevski
Qoku & Partners, Skopje, North Macedonia

Introduction

North Macedonia ratified the Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters (the “Hague Evidence Convention”) in 2008,¹ designating the Ministry of Justice of North Macedonia (the “Ministry”) as the Central Authority and filing the required declarations. While Chapter I of the Hague Evidence Convention, which governs Letters of Request (“Chapter I”), addressed to the Central Authority for execution by local courts remains the Convention’s primary mechanism, Chapter II, which permits evidence-taking by commissioners (“Chapter II”), is increasingly utilized. Under Chapter II, a person duly appointed by the requesting court (a “Commissioner”) may take evidence voluntarily without compulsion from willing witnesses. This article focuses on the Chapter II pathway, the relevant mechanism where witnesses consent to give testimony abroad and clarifies how North Macedonian law interacts with that process.

The Hague Evidence Convention Framework in North Macedonia

Under Chapter I, the foreign court sends a formal written request (a “Letter of Request”) to the Ministry, which then arranges for a North Macedonian court to take the evidence. This is the traditional route and involves local court proceedings. North Macedonia requires that all requests and supporting documents be submitted in Macedonian and with a certified Macedonian translation. If judges or other court officials from the foreign country wish to attend the evidence-taking session in North Macedonia, they may do so with prior permission from the local court handling the matter.

Chapter II offers a simpler alternative that bypasses local court proceedings entirely. Under this route, a Commissioner appointed by the foreign court may take testimony directly from witnesses in North Macedonia, but only if the witness agrees to participate. The key distinction is that this process is entirely voluntary: the Commissioner has no power to force anyone to appear or answer questions. If a witness refuses to cooperate, there is no legal mechanism to compel them. This makes Chapter II ideal for cooperative witnesses (such as party employees or friendly experts) but unsuitable for reluctant or hostile witnesses. Before proceeding, the Commissioner must obtain permission from the Ministry and must follow any conditions the Ministry imposes. The Hague Evidence Convention also requires that certain safeguards be observed, including protections for privileged information.

Domestic Civil Procedure: Former and New Frameworks

Former Law on Civil Procedure

The Law on Civil Procedure² (the “Former Law on Civil Procedure”), governed foreign judicial assistance, requiring reciprocity or treaty obligations. Witnesses could be required to take an oath at the court’s discretion, and party testimony was permitted without oath.

New Law on Civil Procedure

The new Law on Civil Procedure³ (the “New Law on Civil Procedure”) introduces significant modernizations. The foreign-assistance framework and its public-policy safeguard continue under the New Law on Civil Procedure. Notably, the New Law on Civil Procedure expressly permits remote hearings or individual evidence-taking by two-way real-time audiovisual communication through a closed information and communications system where there is a danger of delay or legal or practical impediments to postponement. Evidence may also be taken abroad by electronic communication. The New Law on Civil Procedure addresses witnesses, interpreters, oaths, written statements, and party testimony.

Practice note: The New Law on Civil Procedure’s commencement and transitional provisions may need to be verified for each proceeding. It is important to confirm whether the New Law on Civil Procedure applies to a specific matter and whether transitional rules affect pending proceedings before relying on its remote-evidence provisions.

Intersection with the Hague Evidence Convention

The 2020 Guide to Good Practice  issued by the Hague Conference expressly contemplates video-link evidence-taking by Commissioners under Chapter II. Under this framework, the Hague Evidence Convention permits video-link testimony where the competent authority of the host state (here, the Ministry) approves. While the interplay between domestic procedural rules and the Convention framework may warrant further judicial or scholarly analysis, a reasonable interpretation is that the Ministry’s approval rather than the domestic civil procedure code serves as the primary governing mechanism for Chapter II commissions. Macedonian domestic procedure rules would ordinarily govern domestic court proceedings; however, they do not appear to directly govern Chapter II commissions, which are foreign-court proceedings executed locally with Ministry permission. This interpretation is consistent with the structure of the Convention and the guidance set forth in the 2020 Guide to Good Practice,⁴ though practitioners should be mindful that definitive judicial authority on this question in North Macedonia may be limited.

Practical walkthrough: obtaining evidence Under Chapter II

The first step is to determine whether Chapter I or Chapter II is appropriate. Chapter I involves a Letter of Request for compulsory evidence executed through the Central Authority, whereas Chapter II permits a commission for voluntary evidence. If the witness consents to testify, the Chapter II pathway provides an efficient route that avoids the Central Authority’s formal execution process entirely.

Once the appropriate mechanism is selected, a sufficiently detailed commission order from the requesting court is typically required. This order generally names the Commissioners, identifies the witnesses, and defines the scope of examination with precision.

The next stage involves preparing a formal request to the Ministry’s international legal assistance unit. This request typically specifies the witness and confirms the voluntary nature of their participation. It may also identify the proposed location and date window, the examination method (such as video link), arrangements for oath or affirmation, interpreter logistics, the video platform to be used, recording and transcription methods, exhibit procedures, applicable privileges, cost allocation, and any fallback arrangements in the event of technical difficulties.

All supporting documents, including the foreign order and any attachments, are typically accompanied by a certified Macedonian translation. Once the request is submitted, the Ministry reviews the materials and, if satisfied, issues written approval or a no-objection opinion.

Upon receiving Ministry approval, any conditions imposed by the competent authority are to be observed. Technology is generally tested in advance. On the day of the examination, a procedurally clean record is essential: identity verification, interpreter confirmation, proper administration of the oath, an uninterrupted encrypted connection, and stenographic or verbatim transcription are elements that may help ensure the resulting evidence is admissible in the requesting forum.

Conclusion

North Macedonia offers a workable framework for cross-border evidence gathering under the Hague Evidence Convention, particularly through Chapter II for voluntary testimony. The Ministry has demonstrated willingness to facilitate such requests. The New Law on Civil Procedure’s express provisions for audiovisual communication may further ease the process. Engaging local counsel early, allowing generous lead time for Ministry approval, and meticulously documenting each procedural step may help ensure the resulting evidence is admissible in the requesting forum.

---

Notes

1 Law on Ratification of the Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 140/08).
2 Law on Civil Procedure (Official Gazette of the Republic of Macedonia no. 79/05, as amended).
3 Law on Civil Procedure (Official Gazette of the Republic of North Macedonia no. 151/2026).
4 Hague Conference on Private International Law, Guide to Good Practice on the Use of Video-Link under the Evidence Convention (2020), available at www.hcch.net/en/publications-and-studies/details4/?pid=6740.