IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Antonio Cassese, Presiding
Judge Richard May
Judge Florence Ndepele Mwachande Mumba

Registrar:
Mrs. Dorothee de Sampayo Garrido-Nijgh

Order of:
28 July 1999

 

PROSECUTOR

v.

Zoran KUPRESKIC, Mirjan KUPRESKIC, Vlatko KUPRESKIC,
Drago JOSIPOVIC, Dragan PAPIC, Vladimir SANTIC, also known as "VLADO"

___________________________________________________________

DECISION ON THE MOTION OF THE ACCUSED VLATKO KUPRESKIC OF 23 July 1999 FOR JUDGEMENT OF ACQUITTAL

___________________________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr. Franck Terrier
Mr. Michael Blaxill

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

 

1. The TRIAL CHAMBER has received a motion of defence counsel for Vlatko Kupreskic filed on 23 July 1999 in which counsel asks for a judgement of acquittal according to Rule 98 bis of the Tribunal’s Rules of Evidence and Procedure after the close of the accused’s defence case.

2. The Prosecution has filed a response on 27 July 1999 in which it submits that Rule 98 bis is not applicable to the present situation.

3. Rule 98 bis is only concerned with the situation that after the Prosecutor has closed her case the evidence so far is deemed to be insufficient to support a conviction regardless of any exculpatory evidence the Defence may adduce. The present case is not encompassed by Rule 98 bis, because at this point the Defence in effect is asking the Trial Chamber for a final part judgement with regard to one of the six accused without a formal severance of his trial.

4. Furthermore, the Prosecution has already indicated in its submission of rebuttal witnesses of 22 July 1999 that it reserves the right to call rebuttal witnesses with regard to this accused, so that there is not even a certainty that all the relevant evidence has been heard.

The motion has no basis in Rule 98 bis and is accordingly

DENIED.

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

 

___________________________
Judge Mumba

Dated this twenty-eighth day of July of 1999
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]