@misc{Pukarowska_Anna_Maria_Problemy_2022, author={Pukarowska, Anna Maria}, copyright={Copyright by Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego sp. z o.o., Wrocław 2022}, copyright={Copyright by CNS}, address={Wrocław}, howpublished={online}, year={2022}, publisher={Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego}, language={pol}, abstract={The purpose of this article is to analyze art. 168a of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the wording given by the March amendment, introducing the institution of admissibility of illegal evidence, while at the same time being a continuation of the evidentiary prohibitions. The analysis of interpretation discrepancies, which are particularly manifested in the application of a literal interpretation, was carried out by discussing individual parts of a multiple-complex sentence. The author also makes a historical reference to the September amendment of 2013, which initiated the existence of art. 168a of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with the aim of highlighting the features characteristic of this institution. The article expresses the position approving the introduction of contra legem evidence into the criminal trial, in order to implement the principle of material truth, not understood as superior to others. In the author’s opinion, reaching the truth understood in this way may enable the proposed interpretation of the conjunction, responsible for the occurrence of two norms on the basis of one provision. With the indicated procedure, it is necessary to use the achievements of the doctrine, which together will constitute the so-called safety valve against the most serious violations related to the risk of introducing illegal evidence to the criminal trial.}, title={Problemy interpretacyjne dualistycznego art. 168a k.p.k.}, type={text}, keywords={admissibility of illegally obtained evidence, evidence in criminal proceedings}, }