Case: IT-96-21-Abis

IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Mohamed Shahabuddeen, Presiding
Judge David Hunt
Judge Fausto Pocar
Judge Asoka de Zoysa Gunawardana
Judge Theodor Meron

Registrar:
Mr Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
14 December 2001

PROSECUTOR

v

Zdravko MUCIC (aka "PAVO"), Hazim DELIC
and Esad LANDZO (aka "ZENGA")

__________________________________________

DECISION ON MOTION BY APPELLANT ZDRAVKO MUCIC FOR PROVISIONAL AND TEMPORARY RELEASE

__________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr Norman Farrell

Counsel for Accused:

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

 

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");

BEING SEISED of the "Motion of Appellant Zdravko Mucic for Provisional and Temporary Release", filed by Counsel for Zdravko Mucic ("the Appellant") on 7 December 2001 ("the Request"), in which the Appellant seeks provisional and temporary release for ten days during the Christmas holidays (from 23 December 2001 until 2 January 2002) so that he may take care of his father;

NOTING that, on 9 October 2001, the Appellant was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 9 years for the willful killing of nine detainees and willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to another under Article 7(3) of the Statute, for the torture of six detainees under Article 7(3) of the Statute, for willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to three detainees and inhumane treatment of another under Article 7(3) of the Statute, for inhumane treatment of six detainees, for willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health by virtue of the inhumane conditions in the camp under both Article 7(1) and 7(3) of the Statute, and for the unlawful confinement of civilians under Article 7(1) of the Statute1;

NOTING that, on 15 October 2001, the Appellant filed his notice of appeal against the sentence imposed on him by the Trial Chamber;

NOTING that sub-Rule 65(I) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence provides that the Appeals Chamber may grant provisional release to a convicted person pending an appeal or for a fixed period if it is satisfied that: (i) the appellant, if released, will either appear at the hearing of the appeal or will surrender into detention at the conclusion of the fixed period, as the case may be; (ii) the appellant, if released, will not pose a danger to any victim, witness or other person, and (iii) special circumstances exist warranting such release;

CONSIDERING that, since the Tribunal has no power to execute its own arrest warrants, Rule 65(I) places a substantial burden of proof on the applicant for provisional release to prove that the three requirements laid out in this Rule have been met;

CONSIDERING that the Appellant did not surrender voluntarily, but that he was arrested in Austria on 18 March 1996 and that he was transferred to the UN Detention Unit in the Hague on 9 April 1996;

CONSIDERING that the Appellant has failed to submit to the Appeals Chamber any guarantee or assurances from competent authorities that, if released, he will appear at the hearing or will surrender into detention at the conclusion of the fixed period;

CONSIDERING that the Appellant merely refers to the fact that he has sought a report from Mr McFadden, Commander of the UN Detention Unit, regarding his conduct during his detention, but that no such report has been provided to the Appeals Chamber;

CONSIDERING that the Appellant has failed to establish any "special circumstances" which would justify his provisional or temporary release;

FINDING that no guarantees or assurances that he will appear for the hearing have been provided to the Appeals Chamber, and that the Appellant has failed to establish special circumstances which would warrant his release;

FINDING that the Appellant has not satisfied the Appeals Chamber that the criteria of sub-Rule 65(I) have been met;

HEREBY DENIES the Request for provisional and temporary release.

 

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

Dated this 14th day of December 2001,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.

________________________
Mohamed Shahabuddeen
Presiding Judge

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1 - Prosecutor v. Zdravko Mucic, Hazim Delic and Esad Landzo, "Sentencing Judgement", 9 October 2001