Case No.: IT-01-48-PT

IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Richard May, Presiding
Judge Patrick Robinson
Judge O-Gon Kwon

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
14 November 2003

PROSECUTOR

v.

SEFER HALILOVIC

_________________________________________________

DECISION ON DEFENCE MOTION REGARDING ORDER IN WHICH PROSECUTION WITNESSES WILL BE CALLED AT TRIAL

_________________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor

Mr. Ekkehard Withopf
Ms. Maria Tuma

Counsel for the Accused

Mr. Stefan Kirsch
Mr. Guénaël Mettraux

 

THIS TRIAL CHAMBER 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 ("International Tribunal"),

BEING SEISED of the "Defence Motion Regarding Order In Which Prosecution Witnesses Will Be Called At Trial" filed by the Defence of Sefer Halilović ("Accused") on 28 October 2003 ("Motion"), requesting that the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") provide to the Defence a document stating the order in which the Prosecution intends to call its proposed witnesses at trial,1

NOTING the "Prosecutionís Response To Defence Motion Regarding Order In Which Prosecution Witnesses Will Be Called At Trial" filed by the Prosecution on 3 November 2003 ("Response"), requesting the Trial Chamber to deny the Motion in its entirety because there is no basis in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence ("Rules") or the jurisprudence of the International Tribunal,2

NOTING the "Defence Reply Re Order Of Prosecution Witnesses To Be Called At Trial" filed by the Defence on 4 November 2003 ("Reply"), requesting leave to file the Reply, which responds to the various arguments raised by the Prosecution in the Response,

NOTING that the indictment against Sefer Halilović ("Accused")3 holds the Accused responsible for alleged murders in Grabovica and Uzdol, locations in two different municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina,4

CONSIDERING that neither the law nor the jurisprudence of the International Tribunal obligates the Prosecution to produce a document stating the order in which the Prosecution intends to call its proposed witnesses at trial during the pre-trial phase,

CONSIDERING HOWEVER the various circumstances of this case, including the scheduled date of 19 January 2003 for the commencement of trial,

CONSIDERING the obligation of the Trial Chamber under Article 20 of the Statute of the International Tribunal ("Statute"), requiring the Trial Chamber to ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and that proceedings are conducted in accordance with the Rules,

CONSIDERING that an order in the pre-trial proceedings that the Prosecution organise the presentation of its crime base evidence into two phases, so that evidence pertaining to different municipalities are adduced, separately and consecutively shall assist in the preparation of trial as envisaged by Rule 54 of the Rules,

PURSUANT TO Article 20 of the Statute and Rules 54 and 126 bis of the Rules,

HEREBY ORDERS, in parts proprio motu, as follows:

  1. the Defence is hereby granted leave to file the Reply;
  2. the Motion is hereby dismissed;
  3. the Prosecution shall:
    1. organise the presentation of evidence, in terms of the crime base evidence, into two phases so that, to the greatest extent possible, evidence pertaining to the two different locations (Grabovica and Uzdol) are adduced separately and consecutively; and
    2. file a written notice, within seven (7) days of this Decision, informing the Defence upon which of the two locations (Grabovica and Uzdol) the Prosecution will first present evidence.

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

_____________
O-Gon Kwon
Pre-Trial Judge

Dated this fourteenth day of November 2003
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1. Motion, para. 2.
2. Response, para. 3. The Response also addresses the practical difficulties of producing such an order. See Response para. 13
3. Indictment, Prosecutor v. Sefer Halilović, Case No: IT.01-48-PT, 10 September 2001.
4. Grabovica is located in the Konjic municipality, while Uzdol is located in the Prozor municipality.