Соответствующая норма
Hungary
Practice Relating to Rule 100. Fair Trial Guarantees
Under Hungary’s Criminal Code (1978), as amended in 1998, the person who deprives “the civilian population and prisoners of war of their right to be tried in a regular and impartial procedure” is guilty, upon conviction, of a war crime. 
Hungary, Criminal Code, 1978, as amended in 1998, Article 158(3)(b).
In 2004, in its second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Hungary stated that “the presumption of innocence” is “a guaranteed rule” pursuant to its Criminal Procedures Act. 
Hungary, Second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 24 May 2005, UN Doc. CRC/C/70/Add.25, submitted 17 February 2004, § 508.
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) provides that accused prisoners of war shall be granted rights and means of defence. 
Hungary, A Hadijog, Jegyzet a Katonai, Föiskolák Hallgatói Részére, Magyar Honvédség Szolnoki Repülötiszti Föiskola, 1992, p. 92.
In 2004, in its second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Hungary stated:
[T]he actual presence of a defence lawyer, the right to a defence, and the fundamental constitutional rights … must be guaranteed to all accused in practice at every stage of the procedure … Guaranteeing a defence does not only mean the obligation of the appointed lawyer to be present at the trial; it also includes the obligation to keep continuous contact with the accused, which is crucial for an effective defence. 
Hungary, Second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 24 May 2005, UN Doc. CRC/C/70/Add.25, submitted 17 February 2004, § 536; see also § 508.
In 2004, in its fourth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, Hungary stated:
According to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights everyone has full and equal rights to have adequate time and opportunity to provide for the preparation of his defence and to contact the defence lawyer of his choice. The term “adequate contact” in the Covenant comprises the conditions assuring effective and timely defence, which substantively includes free and uncontrolled contact with the defence lawyer, including the direct exchange of documents. The absence of this hinders timely and effective defence, thereby jeopardizing the right to defence. 
Hungary, Fourth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, 14 February 2005, UN Doc. CAT/C/55/Add.10, submitted 16 June 2004, § 101.
In 2004, in its second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Hungary stated:
Act XXXIV of 1994 on the police also stipulates the prohibition of torture, extorting testimonies, and cruel, inhuman or humiliating treatment in line with international requirements, and regulates the most important guarantee provisions applicable to the use of means of extortion at the level of laws. According to the law, police officers shall not use torture, extortion of testimonies, or cruel, inhuman or humiliating treatment and shall refuse instructions to this effect given by their superiors. In addition, police officers shall take measures against persons exhibiting such behaviour for the sake of prevention, and initiate legal proceedings and investigations. Pursuant to the Decree of the Minister of the Interior No. 19/1995 on the procedures in police jails, the detainee shall be treated with respect for his human dignity in the course of any action. 
Hungary, Second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 24 May 2005, UN Doc. CRC/C/70/Add.25, submitted 17 February 2004, § 226.
In 2004, in its fourth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, Hungary stated:
124. Torture within the meaning of the Convention violates section 226 (ill-treatment in official proceedings) or 227 (forced interrogation) of the Hungarian Criminal Code. If in addition to these offences bodily assault is also committed, the conduct is evaluated as constituting a cumulative crime.
125. The texts of the legal provisions governing the above-mentioned offences are as follows:
“Maltreatment in official proceedings:
“Section 226: The official person who commits assault upon another person during his proceedings, commits a misdemeanour, and shall be punishable with imprisonment of up to two years.”
“Forced interrogation:
“Section 227: The official person who – with the aim of forcing a confession or declaration – applies violence, menace, or other similar methods, commits a felony and shall be punishable with imprisonment of up to five years.”
126. In respect of such conduct, or the use of unauthorized bodily force, or orders calling for the commission of bodily assault, it has to be mentioned that official members of the armed forces and the police are supposed to know the legal provisions that govern their operation, rights and obligations. In the case of such offences, a subordinate member of the police or the armed forces shall not successfully allege that he acted upon an order. A knowledge of the above-cited legal provisions and regulations and of the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code is a prerequisite for admission into the service for official members. Therefore, in practice, official members of the police or the armed forces shall not use an excuse of non-familiarity with the relevant laws. 
Hungary, Fourth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, 16 June 2004, UN Doc. CAT/C/55/Add.10, 14 February 2005, §§ 124–126.
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) states, regarding the prosecution of prisoners of war, that there is a right of appeal. 
Hungary, A Hadijog, Jegyzet a Katonai, Föiskolák Hallgatói Részére, Magyar Honvédség Szolnoki Repülötiszti Föiskola, 1992, p. 92.
Hungary’s Constitution as amended (1994) provides:
In the Republic of Hungary everyone is entitled to legal redress or has the right to appeal against court or administrative decisions, or any other authority’s decisions that infringe his rights or lawful interests. 
Hungary, Constitution, 1994, as amended, Article 57(5).