Case No. IT-98-30/1-A

_____________________________

Mr. Christopher Staker

I, THEODOR MERON, President 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 "Request for Granting Pardon to Miroslav Kvocka", dated 21 July 2003 ("Request");

NOTING the "Prosecution’s Response to the ‘Request for Granting Pardon to Miroslav Kvocka’", filed on 29 July 2003, which opposes the Request;

NOTING "Kvocka’s Reply to ‘Prosecution Response to the Request for Granting Pardon to Miroslav Kvocka’", filed on 31 July 2003, in which Miroslav Kvocka reiterates his request for pardon asserting, inter alia, that his sentence is de facto final;

NOTING that, on 2 November 2001, Trial Chamber I rendered its Judgement in The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Kvocka, Milojica Kos, Mladjo Radic, Zoran Zigic and Dragoljub Prcac, IT-98-30/1-T ("Judgement"), in which it sentenced Miroslav Kvocka ("Applicant") to seven (7) years’ imprisonment;

NOTING that Miroslav Kvocka filed a notice of appeal against the Judgement on 13 November 2001 and that appeal proceedings are currently pending before the Appeals Chamber;

NOTING former President Jorda’s "Decision of the President on the Early Release of Miroslav Kvocka", rendered on 13 December 2002 ("Decision on Early Release");

CONSIDERING that, pursuant to Article 28 of the Statute, Rule 124 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence ("Rules"), and Article 7 of the Practice Direction on the Procedure for the Determination of Applications for Pardon, Commutation of Sentence and Early Release of Persons Convicted by the International Tribunal (IT/146, 7 April 1999), the President of the International Tribunal determines, after consultation with the appropriate Judges, whether requests for pardon should be granted;

CONSIDERING that, according to Rule 102 (A) of the Rules as interpreted in the Decision on Early Release, the Applicant’s Request is not receivable because the enforcement of the judgement is stayed and not final because of the current appeal proceedings;

CONSIDERING FURTHER that the Applicant’s Request cannot be interpreted alternatively as a petition for provisional release and, even if it could be so interpreted, the President of the International Tribunal lacks the authority to rule on petitions for provisional release;

FOR THESE REASONS,

DISMISS the Request and NOTE that, to be properly considered, a petition for provisional release should be filed before the Appeals Chamber.

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

Done this 7^th day of August 2003,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.

___________________
Theodor Meron
President of the International Tribunal