Case No. IT-04-84-PT

IN TRIAL CHAMBER II

Before:
Judge Carmel Agius, Presiding
Judge Hans Henrik Brydensholt
Judge Albin Eser

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
31 October 2005

PROSECUTOR

v.

RAMUSH HARADINAJ
IDRIZ BALAJ
LAHI BRAHIMAJ

_________________________________________

EXTENSION OF ORDER RELATING TO PROSECUTION MOTION TO STAY THE TRIAL CHAMBERíS DECISION OF 12 OCTOBER 2005 REGARDING CONDITIONS OF PROVISIONAL RELEASE OF RAMUSH HARADINAJ

_________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Ms. Carla del Ponte
Mr. Stephan Waespi
Mr. Gilles Dutertre
Mr. Philippe Vallieres-Roland

Accused / Counsel for the Accused:

Ramush Haradinaj
Mr. Ben Emmerson
Mr. Rodney Dixon
Mr. Conor Gearty
Mr. Michael OíReilly

Idriz Balaj
Mr. Gregor Guy-Smith

Lahi Brahimaj
Mr. Richard Harvey

 

TRIAL CHAMBER II ("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 ("Tribunal"):

NOTING the "Decision on Defence Motion of Ramush Haradinaj to Request Re-assessment of Conditions of Provisional Release Granted 6 June 2005" ("Variation Decision"), issued by this Trial Chamber on 12 October 2005, in which it ordered, by a majority,1 that

align

Notwithstanding any other condition in the Decision on Provisional Release, the Accused may appear in public and engage in public political activities to the extent which UNMIK finds would be important for a positive development of the political and security situation in Kosovo, subject to the prior approval by UNMIK of a request by the Accused regarding each individual activity concerned.

The Trial Chamber requires UNMIK to assume responsibility to authorise or deny the Accusedís above-referred activities on a case-by-case basis, and to include any such activity in the bi-weekly reports submitted to the Trial Chamber pursuant to the Decision on Provisional Release. UNMIK is also required to indicate any such future activity of the Accused in these reports, provided that there is a pending request by the Accused before UNMIK;

NOTING the "Prosecutionís Appeal Against ĎDecision on Defence Motion of Ramush Haradinaj to Request Re-assessment of Conditions of Provisional Release Granted 6 June 2005í" ("Appeal Motion"), filed by the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") on 19 October 2005;

NOTING the "Prosecution Motion to Stay the Decision on Defence Motion of Ramush Haradinaj to Request Re-assessment of Conditions of Provisional Release Granted 6 June 2005" ("Motion to Stay"), filed by the Prosecution on 13 October 2005, in which the Prosecution requested that the Trial Chamber stay the Variation Decision until the conclusion of the appeal proceedings on this issue;2

NOTING the Trial Chamberís "Order Relating to the Prosecution Motion to Stay the Decision on Defence Motion of Ramush Haradinaj to Request Re-Assessment of Conditions of Provisional Release Granted 6 June 2005" ("Order to Stay") of 14 October 2005, in which the Trial Chamber ordered a provisional stay of its Variation Decision until such time that the Defence has responded to the Motion to Stay, when the Trial Chamber will be in a position to take a decision on the issue;

NOTING the "Defence Response on Behalf of Ramush Haradinaj to Prosecution Motion to Stay the Decision on Defence Motion of Ramush Haradinaj to Request Re-Assessment of Conditions of Provisional Release Granted on 6 June 2005" ("Response"), filed by counsel for Ramush Haradinaj ("Defence") on 17 October 2005, in which the Defence submits that the Variation Decision should not be stayed, there being no procedural or substantive basis for such a stay;

NOTING the "Interim Decision on Prosecution Motion to Stay the Decision on Defence Motion of Ramush Haradinaj to Request Re-Assessment of Conditions of Provisional Release Granted on
6 June 2005" of 21 October 2005, in which this Trial Chamber decided to postpone its final decision on the Motion to Stay pending a determination by the Appeals Chamber whether to be seized of and to decide the matter of staying the Variation Decision;

NOTING that notwithstanding the Trial Chamberís indication of its assessment that the Appeals Chamber was better placed to decide on the question of staying the Variation Decision, the Prosecution did not seize the Appeals Chamber with the matter which therefore remained with the Trial Chamber;

NOTING the "Decision on Whether the Appeals Chamber is Seized of the Prosecution Motion to Stay" of 28 October 2005, in which the Appeals Chamber, not surprisingly, holds that it is not seized of the Motion to Stay and that it is for this Trial Chamber to dispose of it;

CONSIDERING that it appears justified extending the Order to Stay for a limited period of time, pending the forthcoming decision of the Appeals Chamber on the substance of the Motion to Stay;

PURSUANT TO Rule 54 of the Tribunalís Rules of Procedure and Evidence

ORDERS that the stay of the Trial Chamberís Decision on Defence Motion of Ramush Haradinaj to Request Re-assessment of Conditions of Provisional Release Granted 6 June 2005, which is currently in place, shall be extended until 21 November 2005, or until such date as the Appeals Chamber may render its decision, if this occurs prior to that date, and

DECIDES to remain seized of the matter.

 

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

Dated this thirty-first day of October 2005
At The Hague
The Netherlands

_________________________
Carmel Agius
Presiding Judge

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1. The Presiding Judge, Carmel Agius, appended a Dissenting Opinion to the Variation Decision.
2. Motion to Stay, paras 3, 9.