Case No. IT-03-68-T

IN TRIAL CHAMBER II

Before:
Judge Carmel Agius, Presiding
Judge Hans Henrik Brydensholt
Judge Albin Eser

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Order of:
9 March 2006

PROSECUTOR

v.

NASER ORIC

___________________________________________

ORDER ON DEFENCE MOTION FOR VARIATION OF THE WORD LIMIT FOR FINAL TRIAL BRIEF

___________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr. Jan Wubben
Ms. Patricia Sellers Viseur
Mr. Gramsci di Fazio
Ms. JoAnne Richardson
Mr. Jose Doria

Counsel for the Accused:

Ms. Vasvija Vidovic
Mr. John Jones

TRIAL CHAMBER II ("Trial 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 ("Tribunal"):

BEING SEIZED of "Defence Motion for Variation of the Word Limit for Final Trial Brief" ("Motion") filed by the Defence of Naser Oric ("Defence") on 2 March 2006 pursuant to Rule 73 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal ("Rules"), in which the Defence requests authorisation from the Trial Chamber to exceed the 60,000 word limit for closing briefs set forth in the Practice Direction on the Length of Briefs and Motions ("Practice Direction")1, and to instead allow a limit not to exceed 118,000 words, on the following grounds:

  1. an exceptionally large number of exhibits in the case;2

  2. the complicated nature of issues raised at trial, such as command and control, the identification of the Accused in places of detention and the identification of alleged perpetrators;3 and

  3. other complex issues concerning exhibits, such as non-disclosure, translation and questionable sources, which have been the subject of Defence motions;4

NOTING the "Prosecutionís Response to Defence Motion for Variation of the Word Limit for Final Trial Brief", filed by the Office of the Prosecution ("Prosecution") on 3 March 2006 ("Response"), whereby the Prosecution does not oppose the Motion and concurs with the Defence assessment as to the complexity of the issues raised in its Motion, necessitating the increased word limit sought;5

NOTING FURTHER the Prosecution submission that if the Trial Chamber grants the Motion, an order of such nature should apply to the both parties;6

NOTING that the Practice Direction stipulates that the final trial briefs shall not exceed 60,000 words and that a party must seek authorisation in advance from the Chamber to exceed the word limits providing an explanation of the exceptional circumstances that necessitate the oversized filling;7

NOTING the "Scheduling Order for Case Completion" issued by the Trial Chamber on 9 February 2006, according to which the parties are to file their closing briefs no later than 17 March 2006;

CONSIDERING the undisputed complexity of the issues in the case as set forth in the Motion, and agreed to in the Response, and that the Trial Chamber may be assisted by thorough briefs in relation to these issues by both parties;

PURSUANT TO Rule 73 (A) of the Rules

HEREBY GRANTS the Motion and ALLOWS an extension of the word limit, not to exceed 118,000 words, for the final briefs of both parties.

 

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

Dated this ninth day of March 2006,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands

________________________
Carmel Agius
Presiding Judge

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1. Practice Direction on the Length of Briefs and Motions, IT/184/Rev.2, 16 September 2005.
2. Motion, paras 6-7. The Defence submits that although it will make a separate filing concerning the authenticity of Prosecution exhibits, this does not remove the need to address the merits and substance of those exhibits, individually as well as comparatively.
3. Motion, para. 8.
4. Motion, para. 10.
5. Response, para. 2.
6. Ibid.
7. Practice Direction, (C) 4 and (C) 7.