Before: Judge Antonio Cassese, Presiding

Judge Richard May

Judge Florence Ndepele Mwachande Mumba

Registrar: Mrs. Dorothee de Sampayo Garrido-Nijgh

Decision of: 15 September 1998




Drago JOSIPOVIC, Dragan PAPIC, Vladimir SANTIC, also known as "VLADO"




The Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr. Franck Terrier
Mr. Albert Moskowitz

Counsel for the Accused:

Mr. Ranko Radovic, for Zoran Kupreskic
Ms. Jadranka Glumac, for Mirjan Kupreskic
Mr. Borislav Krajina, for Vlatko Kupreskic
Mr. Luko Susak, for Drago Josipovic
Mr. Petar Puliselic, for Dragan Papic
Mr. Petar Pavkovic, for Vladimir Santic


TRIAL CHAMBER 1 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 SEIZED OF the Prosecutor's Request to Delay Disclosure of Witness Statements filed with the Trial Chamber on 10 September 1998 ("the Motion"),

NOTING the Decisions of this Trial Chamber relating to the protection of victims and witnesses issued on the 22 January 1998, 21 May 1998, 16 June 1998, 9 July 1998, 29 July 1998 and 24 August 1998 pursuant to Rules 69 and 75 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Tribunal ("the Rules"),

CONSIDERING Article 22 of the Statute of the International Tribunal ("the Statute") which requires the International Tribunal to provide for the protection of victims and witnesses,

CONSIDERING Article 21 of the Statute and Rule 69 of the Rules, which safeguard the right of the accused to a fair trial, and in particular to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence,

CONSIDERING the obligation imposed upon the Trial Chamber by Article 20 of the Statute to ensure that full respect for the rights of the accused are balanced with due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses,

NOTING the following matters outlined in the Prosecutor's motion:

(1) the relevance of the evidence to assist the Trial Chamber in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused,

(2) the highly sensitive nature of the evidence and the consequent witness security concerns and ,

(3) the reluctance of the witness to testify in this matter to date and the fact that further enquiries need to be undertaken by the Prosecutor before she can make a decision regarding her intention to call him at trial.

NOTING that the Prosecutor in her Motion states that a decision with regard to this witness will in any event be made no later than 21 September 1998,

NOTING ALSO that the Prosecutor proposes a period of delay between disclosure of witness statements and the appearance of that witness at trial so as to allow for the defence to prepare for cross-examination,

NOTING FURTHER in this context that the measures requested concern only one witness in the Prosecutor's case,

CONSIDERING therefore that the measure requested does not prejudice the right of the accused to a fair trial but represents a correct balance of the interests of the accused with those of the victims and witnesses as required by Article 20 of the Statute,

PURSUANT TO Rules 69, 75 and 66 as well as Article 20, 21 and 22 of the Statute,


1) Should the Prosectuor decide to call this witness at trial, that decision should be made known to the Court and to defence counsel no later than 21 September 1998.

2) The Prosecutor's obligation to provide the statements of witnesses to the Defence 30 days in advance of their testimony pursuant to this Trial Chamber's oral Ruling of 17 August 1998 is waived in this instance.

3) However, in order that the defence have due time to prepare their cross-examination of this witness, the Prosecutor may not call this witness to testify until at least 10 days have elapsed following the disclosure of his statements to the defence.


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


Antonio Cassese

Presiding Judge

Dated this fifteenth day of September 1998

At The Hague

The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]