Viktor Bérces: Evidence in Criminal Proceedings
›
Chapter VIII. The basic features of the Hungarian evidence system • The means of evidence in general
›
8.8. Prohibitions on evidence

8.8. Prohibitions on evidence

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

A fundamental characteristic of the regulatory method of the CPC is that it does not list the specific infringements that lead to the exclusion of the evidence, but only the reasons – broadly interpreted – on the basis of which the infringement leads to the inadmissibility of the evidence. On this basis, this category includes facts derived from an evidentiary instrument or obtained by a court, a prosecutor’s office, an investigating authority or any other authority entitled to

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

  • by means of a criminal offence,
  • by other prohibited means or
  • with substantial prejudice to the participants’ rights in criminal proceedings.1
 

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

According to Tremmel, “the system of evidence excluded by law can be one of the most convincing indicators of the extent to which the rule of law has been fulfilled in a given country.”2 That is, the institution of excluded evidence can ultimately be defined as a criterion of the rule of law. Nevertheless, the exclusionary rules – whether of the Anglo-Saxon or Continental type – are also emphatically designed to avoid and prevent judicial murder. The success of criminal proceedings can be measured not only in terms of whether the perpetrator has been prosecuted, but also in terms of whether innocent people have not been prosecuted (wrongly convicted). The system of prohibitions on evidence is intrinsically linked to this success index.

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Another interesting question is what the correct procedure looks like if the evidence in favour of the accused is derived from evidence that cannot otherwise be used in the trial, according to the rules of law. Since the legislator of the day created the system of prohibitions on evidence primarily for the benefit of the accused and the use of such evidence does not cause prejudice to the accused, the admissibility of such evidence in court does not seem to be a matter of concern.3

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Hungarian legislation regulates the prohibitions on evidence in criminal proceedings exclusively in the Criminal Procedure Act. This seems to be the right solution, as it (1) clarifies the governing provisions and (2) declares that the prohibitions on evidence require statutory regulation, so that they cannot be judged on the basis of current judicial practice. On the other hand, it would have been more rational from a taxonomic point of view to devote a separate chapter to this normative material, since the law presents these rules of prohibition – for example, rules on the disqualification of judges, absolute and relative obstacles to the hearing of witnesses, or rules on the warning of the accused by the authorities – in different units

8.8.1. Rules on the exclusion of judges

8.8.2. Prohibitions on giving evidence

8.8.3. Prohibitions on evidence relating to the testimony of the accused

8.8.4. Prohibitions on expert evidence

8.8.5. Other prohibitions provided by law

8.8.6. Prohibitions on evidence in case-by-case decisions

1 § 167 (5) para.
2 Tremmel (2006) ibid. 154.
3 Somogyi (2017) ibid. 74.
chevron_left
chevron_right
Tartalomjegyzék navigate_next
Keresés a kiadványban navigate_next
A kereséshez, kérjük, lépj be!
Könyvjelzőim navigate_next
A könyvjelzők használatához
be kell jelentkezned.
Jegyzeteim navigate_next
Jegyzetek létrehozásához
be kell jelentkezned.
    Kiemeléseim navigate_next
    Mutasd a szövegben:
    Szűrés:
    Kiemelések létrehozásához
    MeRSZ+ előfizetés szükséges.
      Útmutató elindítása
      delete
      Kivonat
      fullscreenclose
      printsave