Règle correspondante
Hungary
Practice Relating to Rule 161. International Cooperation in Criminal Proceedings
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) states: “The judicial procedure [in case of breaches or violations of IHL] also comprises: assistance between belligerent parties”. 
Hungary, A Hadijog, Jegyzet a Katonai, Föiskolák Hallgatói Részére, Magyar Honvédség Szolnoki Repülötiszti Föiskola, 1992, p. 91
Hungary’s Law on Cooperation with the ICTY (1996) reads:
The Parliament creates the following Act on the fulfilment of obligations deriving from the Statute of the International Tribunal established by Resolution 827 (1993) of the United Nations Security Council for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991 (hereinafter referred to as “the International Tribunal”). 
Hungary, Law on Cooperation with the ICTY, 1996, preamble.
In 1997, during plenary discussions in the UN General Assembly on a report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), Hungary deplored “the absence of cooperation with the [ICTY] by certain countries and entities” and called upon all members of the international community and all international forums “to continue to support the Tribunal’s work and to facilitate the fulfilment of its mandate”. 
Hungary, Statement before the UN General Assembly, UN Doc. A/52/PV.44, 4 November 1997, p. 19.
Holding perpetrators to account [for] grave violations against children continues to be rare … and yet is a crucial element towards protecting children’s rights … In those cases where national authorities are unwilling or unable to hold perpetrators to account, due to lack of capacity or resources for instance, international justice mechanisms, including through the work of the International Criminal Court, and ad hoc and mixed tribunals, can and should play a complementary role. 
Hungary, Statement by the permanent representative of Canada before the UN Security Council during a debate on children and armed conflict, made on behalf of the Friends of Children and Armed Conflict, namely Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Benin, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Mali, Mexico, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Portugal, San Marino, Slovenia, Slovakia, South Africa, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania and Uruguay, 17 June 2013, p. 2.