IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER
Before: Judge David Hunt, Pre-Appeal Judge
Registrar: Mrs Dorothee de Sampayo Garrido-Nijgh
Order of: 29 May 2000
Zejnil DELALIC, Zdravko MUCIC (aka "PAVO") Hazim
and Esad LANDZO (aka "ZENGA")
DECISION ON MOTION BY ESAD LANDZO
FOR CLARIFICATION OF ORDER OF 19 MAY 2000
Office of the Prosecutor:
Mr Upawansa Yapa
Mr Christopher Staker
Mr Norman Farrell
Counsel for the Defence:
Mr John Ackerman for Zejnil Delalic
Mr Tomislav Kuzmanovic and Mr Howard Morrison for Zdravko Mucic
Mr Salih Karabdic and Mr Tom Moran for Hazim Delic
Ms Cynthia Sinatra and Mr Peter Murphy for Esad Landzo
1. The appellant Esad Landzo (Landzo) seeks clarification of the Appeals Chambers Order in Relation to Witnesses on Appeal. The clarification sought relates to whether Cynthia McMurrey Sinatra will be permitted to give evidence upon the issue which has arisen in the appeal as to whether Landzo has waived his right to complain on appeal of the allegation in his Fourth Ground of Appeal, that the Presiding Judge of the Trial Chamber was "permitted to sleep through much of the proceedings".
2. It is abundantly clear from the terms of the Order of 19 May 2000 - which was made by the Appeals Chamber, not by me as Pre-Appeal Judge as the Motion suggests - was directed only to the "Designated Proposed Evidence", which relates to the conduct of the Presiding Judge and not to the issue of waiver. It does not concern the evidence which Mrs Sinatra proposes to give concerning the issue of waiver. That evidence concerning the issue of waiver remains the subject of the first order sought in a Motion by Landzo as to the admission of Mrs Sinatras evidence, which Motion has yet to be determined.
Done in English and French, the English text being authoritative.
Dated this 29th day of May 2000,
At The Hague,
Judge David Hunt
[Seal of the Tribunal]