Case No. IT-03-73-PT

IN TRIAL CHAMBER II

Before:
Judge Carmel Agius, Presiding
Judge Jean Claude Antonetti
Judge Kevin Parker

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision:
12 May 2005

PROSECUTOR

v.

IVAN CERMAK
MLADEN MARKAC

___________________________________________

ORDER IN RELATION TO THE ACCUSED MLADEN MARKACíS OPPOSITION TO PROSECUTIONíS MOTION AND REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE PROCEDURAL STATUS

___________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr. Kenneth Scott
Ms. Laurie Sartorio

Counsel for the Accused:

Mr. Cedo Prodanovic and Ms. Jadranka Slokovic for Ivan Cermak
Mr. Miroslav Separovic and Mr. Goran Mikulicic for Mladen Markac

 

TRIAL CHAMBER II of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991;

NOTING the "Prosecution Motion To Amend the Indictment", filed on 6 May 2005, whereby the Prosecution requests leave from the Trial Chamber, pursuant to Rule 50 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence ("Rules"), to amend the Indictment in the present case ("Motion");

NOTING the "Accused Mladen Markacís Opposition to Prosecutionís Motion to Amend the Indictment and Request for Clarification of the Procedural Status" filed on 12 May 2005 ("Clarification Request"), whereby the Accused argues that by submitting simultaneously a motion to amend the Indictment and the amended Indictment, the Prosecution is in fact "seeking leave ex post facto", while, in the Accusedís submission, the "amended Indictment should be treated as a proposition to amend" the Indictment;

NOTING that in his Clarification Request, Mladen Markac requests an opportunity to be heard and directions as to the applicable time-limit within which to file a response on the proposed amendments;

NOTING that Rule 50 of the Rules provides that where a case has already been assigned to a Trial Chamber, the Prosecutor may only amend an indictment with the leave of that Trial Chamber or a Judge of that Chamber, after having heard the parties;

CONSIDERING that in the view of the Chamber, the Motion is to be considered as a request to obtain such leave and the amended Indictment attached to the Motion has no legal value unless and until the Trial Chamber or a Judge of the Trial Chamber authorises the proposed amendments pursuant to Rule 50 of the Rules;

NOTING Rule 126bis of the Rules which provides that unless otherwise ordered by a Chamber, a response, if any, to a motion shall be filed within fourteen days of the filing of the motion;

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS,

PURSUANT TO Rules 50 and 126bis of the Rules

ORDERS that any response to the Motion shall be filed by Friday 20 May 2005.

 

Done in English and French, the English text being authoritative.

Dated this twelfth day of May 2005
At The Hague
The Netherlands

____________________________
Carmel Agius
Presiding

[Seal of the Tribunal]