Short answer. Direct examination, under Rule 132, Section 5, is the examination-in-chief of a witness by the party who presented that witness, covering the facts relevant to the issue. In practice, it is the questioning done by the lawyer who called you to the stand, meant to draw out the facts supporting that side's case before the opposing lawyer gets a turn.
What the law says
Direct examination is the examination-in-chief of a witness by the party presenting him or her on the facts relevant to the issue.
Rule 132, Section 5 — Direct examination. Read the full provision →
Who conducts it
Section 5 identifies direct examination as questioning by the party presenting him or her — meaning the side that called you as a witness in the first place. If your own lawyer put you on the stand, it is your lawyer who conducts your direct examination; the opposing counsel does not question you until later, once your side has finished drawing out your testimony.
What the questioning is supposed to cover
The definition limits direct examination to the facts relevant to the issue — the questioning is meant to develop the witness's knowledge of the matters actually in dispute in the case, not to wander into unrelated territory. This is also called the examination-in-chief, a term that signals it is the primary, structured presentation of that witness's evidence for the party who called them.
Because it is the party's own witness being questioned, courts generally expect the lawyer conducting direct examination to ask open, non-leading questions that let the witness state the facts in their own words, reserving the more pointed, suggestive style of questioning for cross-examination once the other side gets its turn.
Where it sits in the order of testimony
Direct examination is the starting point of a witness's testimony at trial — it comes before cross-examination by the adverse party, and, depending on what comes out, may be followed later by re-direct or re-cross. Understanding that direct examination is specifically the presenting party's own questioning helps explain why the tone, pace, and kind of questions asked of you can shift noticeably once the opposing lawyer takes over.
Why this definition matters for you as a witness
Knowing that direct examination is meant to cover the facts relevant to the issue, asked by the party who called you, can help you anticipate what to expect: questions from your own side's counsel aimed at building a clear, relevant account of what you know, rather than the more adversarial questioning that typically follows once cross-examination begins. It also helps you prepare — since the questioning is meant to stay on the facts relevant to the issue, a witness who focuses answers on what they actually observed, rather than speculation, tends to serve that purpose best.