Today’s economic process is characterized by many novelties, including the expanded list of evidence to establish the circumstances of a case. One of the innovations is the institute of witnesses, and it has been ambiguously assessed by scientists and legal practitioners and raised the question of its overall appropriateness and the rationality of its use particularly in the economic process. The above-said necessitates a systematic analysis of statutory regulation of witness’s participation in the economic process with a view to assessing whether it is expedient to introduce this institute into the process and what its shortcomings are in terms of standardization, and also for the purpose of identifying the specifics of this institute by its comparison with regulation of a similar institute used in civil and administrative processes. The purpose of the article is to make a systematic and comparative analysis of the institute of witnesses in the economic process, to identify and find the ways to overcome the shortcomings present in legislative regulation, to substantiate the appropriateness of introduction of the institute of witnesses into today’s economic process, and also to present the author’s own approaches to the procedure of a witness’s participation in the economic process. The study comprises a systematic analysis of the institute of witnesses in the economic process, identifies certain shortcomings of legislative regulation and formulates proposals for its improvement. The author determines the specifics pertaining to regulation of the institute of witnesses in situations when conflicts under economic law are resolved, on the basis of a comparative analysis of statutory regulation in the economic, civil and administrative processes. The author analyzes the appropriateness and provides rationale for the introduction of the institute of witnesses into today’s economic process of Ukraine. The study findings present the author’s conclusion that the novel of the economic process – introduction of the institute of witnesses has a favorable impact. Thus, this institute ensures completeness of evidence and expands the list of available means of proof in the economic process. However, the use of witness’s testimony as a secondary source of evidence is still decisive, since it allows, on the one part, using witness’s testimony in case other means of proof are insufficient, and on the other part, such testimony may not be taken into account as evidence in case there is other appropriate evidence to confirm certain circumstances relevant to the case.