Being knowledgeable about the theoretical and ideological foundationsof any legal reform is a task that a jurist should never forget. With this purpose in mind, this paper examines Act 1564 of 2012, or General Process Code—CGP and the different reforms introduced to the witness and expert evidence procedures, not just from the legal and practical perspective, but, most importantly, in terms of the procedural dogmatic in general, as well as the probative lawin particular. Extrapolation of legal concepts from other latitudes, far from the local normative tradition, with no critical judgment of the potential benefits of these adoptions, as well as their coherence with the existent political and legal systems, can be described as one of the most frequent mistakes made by the Colombian Legislator. In this sense, while the initial proposal of the CGP, as well as its subsequent discussion and final enactment in Congress illustrate one of the most democratic legislative processes in the Colombian legal history, these legislative processes do not escape to the general pattern illustrated above. From this angle, this paper examines, among other issues, the adoption of methods of takingevidence, including cross-interrogation, especially the right to cross-examine witnesses and experts; the tacit adoption of guarantees such as the confrontation of evidence; and the credibility challenge and the Party Expert.