Case No. IT-98-34-A


Judge Fausto Pocar, Pre-Appeal Judge

Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
18 February 2005







Counsel for the Prosecutor:

Mr. Norman Farrell

Counsel for the Defence:

Mr. Matt Hennessy and Mr. Christopher Y. Meek for Mladen Naletilic
Mr. Zelimir Par and Mr. Kurt Kerns for Vinko Martinovic


I, FAUSTO POCAR, Pre-Appeal Judge in this case,

BEING SEISED OF the "Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum Instanter", filed on 3 February 2005 ("Motion") by Vinko Martinovic ("Appellant"), wherein he seeks leave to file a supplemental memorandum to his previously-filed Appellant Brief,1 in order to address recent changes in the jurisprudence of the International Tribunal;

NOTING that, on the same day, the Appellant filed the "Supplemental Memorandum to Martinovic Appeal Brief" ("Supplemental Memorandum");

NOTING the "Prosecution’s Response to Appellant’s Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum Instanter of 03 February 2005", filed on 14 February 2005 ("Response") by the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution"), wherein the Prosecution states that it does not oppose the Motion, and requests, in the event that it is granted, 14 days within which to respond to the Supplemental Memorandum;

NOTING the "Addendum of References to Previously Filed Supplemental Memorandum of February 3, 2005", filed on 15 February 2005 by the Appellant with the Prosecution’s agreement,2 wherein the Appellant includes those references to the specific paragraphs of his Appellant Brief and of the Judgement in the Blagojevic & Jokic case3 which had been left out of the Supplemental Memorandum as a result of technical difficulties experienced by the Appellant;

NOTING that, in the Supplemental Memorandum, the Appellant argues that the sentences imposed by the Chambers in the Blaskic, Kordic & Cerkez and Blagojevic & Jokic cases,4 which were handed out after the date he filed his Appellant Brief, support the argument that the sentence imposed upon him was disproportionately high;5

CONSIDERING that the Appellant already raised this argument in his Notice of Appeal6 and Appellant Brief;7

CONSIDERING that, where a party alleges that the subsequent jurisprudence of the International Tribunal impacts upon the position that party took in its previous submissions, leave for it to supplement the said submissions may be granted;

NOTING that the "Practice Direction on Procedure for the Filing of Written Submissions in Appeal Proceedings before the International Tribunal" (IT/155 Rev.1), provides that a response shall be filed within ten days of the filing of the motion;8

NOTING that the Prosecution requires 14 days within which to respond to the Supplemental Memorandum because of its work obligations in other cases;9

CONSIDERING that the reason adduced by the Prosecution does not constitute good cause, but that, nevertheless, no prejudice to the parties would result from granting the Prosecution a four-day extension to the time-limit prescribed by the said Practice Direction;

GRANT the Motion and ORDER the Prosecution to file its response to Supplemental Memorandum, if any, within 14 days of the filing of this decision.


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

Done this 18th day of February 2005,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.

Fausto Pocar
Pre-Appeal Judge

[Seal of the Tribunal]

1. Appeal Brief of Mr. Vinko Martinovic, 29 August 2003 (filed confidentially) ("Appellant Brief").
2. Addendum of References to Previously Filed Supplemental Memorandum of February 3, 2005, 15 February 2005, para. 4.
3. Prosecutor v Blagojevic & Jokic, Case IT-02-60-T, Judgement, 17 January 2005 ("Blagojevic & Jokic Trial Judgement").
4. Blagojevic & Jokic Trial Judgement; Prosecutor v Blaskic, Case IT-95-14-A, Judgement, 29 July 2004 ("Blaskic Appeal Judgement"); Prosecutor v Kordic & Cerkez, Case IT-95-14/2-A, Judgement, 17 December 2004 ("Kordic & Cerkez.Appeal Judgement").
5. Supplemental Memorandum, p. 12.
6. Notice of Appeal against Judgement No. IT-98-34-T of 31 March 2003 in the Case: Prosecutor v Vinko Martinovic, 29 April 2003, p. 12.
7. Appellant Brief, para. 577.
8. Practice Direction on Procedure for the Filing of Written Submissions in Appeal Proceedings before the International Tribunal (IT/155 Rev. 1), 7 March 2002, para. 11.
9. Response, fn. 4.