the opinion of another expert. All of the foregoing must relate to the essential circumstances relevant to the expert's reasoning and to the illogicality and persuasiveness of the expert's arguments.72 But the interviewed judge mentioned that sometimes the defence will hire their own expert as an expert witness, which can then lead to several different expert opinions. The aim is to cast doubt on the opinion of the initially appointed expert and force the court to appoint another: “Criminal responsibility is determined by the court, but to summarise: One (expert) will say that the person is not criminally responsible, one will say that he is, and another that his mental capacity was substantially diminished… Then we (the court) appoint another expert, since we do not have the necessary expert knowledge. Then you have three different opinions, and you have to establish who is right and who is not. In the end, the court is the one that decides.”73 On the other hand, the interviewed lawyer commented that the Slovenian judicial system is overly reliant on the expert opinions: “Us lawyers, we call it trial by expert. By an expert that the judge chooses him/herself. The judge knows which expert is conviction-oriented and which expert is acquittal-oriented. And then based on his/her own opinion on the case, the judge chooses and appoints the expert accordingly.”74 In the lawyer’s opinion this practice is particularly unfair considering the financial element as some clients can afford to seek the opinion of several expert witnesses, while others cannot and therefore cannot counter the court appointed expert. 3.1.1.1. Proceedings for the application of security measures “What makes these cases perhaps a little bit special is that they have even more emphasis on the therapeutic aspect, that is to say, that there should not be any punitive elements in these procedures. Although de facto there are, because any restriction of liberty hurts as much as a punishment hurts. So, in a sense, this current dualism of punishment and security measures, which serve different purposes and are very different, is also a bit of a sham. The purposes may be different, but the effects are very similar, so that is something 72 The Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia, Judgement No. I Ips 32562/2013-330 of 28 May 2015. 73 Interview with a judge. 74 Interview with a lawyer. 29