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

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