Case No.: IT-01-48-PT
IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER
Before:
Judge Patrick Robinson, Presiding
Judge O-Gon Kwon
Judge Iain Bonomy
Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis
Order of:
3 December 2004
PROSECUTOR
v.
SEFER HALILOVIC
_________________________________________
ORDER ON DEFENCE RESPONSE CONCERNING PROSECUTION AMENDED PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
_________________________________________
Office of the Prosecutor:
Mr. Philip Weiner
Ms. Sureta Chana
Counsel for the Accused:
Mr. Peter Morrissey
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 "Response Concerning Prosecution Amended Pre-Trial Brief", filed by the Defence on 27 October 2004 ("Response"), in which the Defence:
NOTING the "Prosecution’s Reply to Defence Response Concerning Prosecution Amended Pre-Trial Brief", filed by the Prosecution on 3 November 2004, seeking leave to reply to the Response, requesting that the Chamber deny the Defence’s requests, and stating that the Prosecution will "in due course" be seeking leave from the Trial Chamber to add to its exhibit and witness lists,
RECALLING that on 29 September 2004, the Pre-Trial Judge in these proceedings ordered the Prosecution and Defence, pursuant to Rule 65 ter(E)(i) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Tribunal ("the Rules"), to file their final pre-trial briefs in this matter no later than 13 October 2004 and 1 November 2004, respectively, or to indicate by those dates that the pre-trial briefs, as previously filed, shall stand as their final pre-trial briefs,8
RECALLING FURTHER that on 21 October 2004, this Trial Chamber issued an order in which the Chamber:
NOTING that the Chamber had thus explicitly reaffirmed that Rule 65 ter provided the Defence with the opportunity to file a final pre-trial brief,
NOTING that on 27 October 2004, the Defence notified the Chamber that its initial pre-trial brief, filed on 22 March 2003, shall stand as its final pre-trial brief,
CONSIDERING that the Chamber is not seised of a Prosecution motion to amend its pre-trial brief, and that there is therefore no pending motion to which the Defence may respond,
CONSIDERING that although the Defence filing could be considered as an initiating motion in its own right raising objections to the Prosecution’s brief, the appropriate means for the Defence to respond to the Prosecution’s pre-trial brief would have been to file a final pre-trial brief of its own pursuant to Rule 65 ter,
NOTING that the appropriate forum for litigating disputes between the parties about the sufficiency of evidence to support the Prosecution’s allegations is at trial, not during the pre-trial stage of the proceedings,
PURSUANT TO Rule 54 of the Rules,
HEREBY DENIES the Defence leave to submit the Response; and DENIES the Prosecution leave to reply to the Response.
Done in English and French, the English text being authoritative.
___________________________
Patrick Robinson
Presiding
Dated this third day of December 2004
At The Hague
The Netherlands
[Seal of the Tribunal]