Case No. IT-95-13/1-AR73

BEFORE THE PRE-APPEAL JUDGE

Before:
Judge Inés Weinberg de Roca, Pre-Appeal Judge

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
30 June 2003

PROSECUTOR
v.
Mile MRKSIC

__________________________

DECISION ON MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A REPLY

__________________________

Counsel for the Prosecutor:

Mr. Jan Wubben

Counsel for the Defence:

Mr. Miroslav Vasic

 

I, INES WEINBERG DE ROCA, Judge of the Appeals 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 ("the International Tribunal"),

NOTING the "Order Appointing a Pre-Appeal Judge" issued by the Presiding Judge of the Appeals Chamber on 24 June 2003, which designated me to serve as Pre-Appeal judge in this case;

NOTING that on 29 May 2003, Trial Chamber II granted certification to appeal its interlocutory "Decision on Defence Motion Requesting the Determination of Rules for Communicating with Potential Witnesses of the Opposing Party" dated 7 May 2003;

NOTING that the "Defence Brief on an Interlocutory Appeal on Trial Chamberís Decision on Defence Motion Requesting the Determination of Rules for Communicating with Potential Witnesses of the Opposite Party" was filed on 4 June 2003;

NOTING that the Prosecutionís Response to the Defence Brief was filed on 16 June 2003;

BEING SEISED of the "Defence Request for Leave to Reply to the Prosecutionís Response to the Defence Brief on an Interlocutory Appeal on the Trial Chamberís Decision on Defence Motion Requesting the Determination of Rules for Communicating with Potential Witnesses of the Opposite Party" filed on 19 June 2003 (the "Defence Motion"), in which the Defence seeks leave pursuant to Rule 73 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal to file a reply to the Prosecutorís Response within no more than seven days from the day the leave is granted because "the Prosecution raised a number of important issues which require careful consideration on the part of the Defence due to the overall importance of the disputed matter";

CONSIDERING the Prosecutionís Response to the Defence Motion, filed 26 June 2003, in which the Prosecution asserts that the Defence failed to demonstrate good cause for extension of the time limit in which to file a reply and submits that such an extension would cause prejudice and unnecessary delay;

NOTING that the Practice Direction on Procedure for the Filing of Written Submissions in Appeal Proceedings before the International Tribunal (IT/155 Rev. 1) specifies that the appellant may file a reply within four days of the response and that the Appeals Chamber may thereafter decide the appeal without further submission from the parties (Para. III.9);

CONSIDERING that the appellant did not file a reply within the prescribed period of time;

CONSIDERING that the appellant does not show good cause and does not specify the issues which require careful consideration justifying the need for additional time beyond the four days established by the Practice Direction;

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS,

DISMISSES the Defence Motion in its entirety.

 

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

________________________
Inés Weinberg de Roca
Pre-Appeal Judge

Dated this 30th day of June 2003,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]