Case No. IT-05-88-PT

IN TRIAL CHAMBER II

Before:
Judge Carmel Agius, Pre-trial Judge

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
27 January 2006

THE PROSECUTOR

v.

VUJADIN POPOVIC
LJUBISA BEARA
DRAGO NIKOLIC
LJUBOMIR BOROVCANIN
ZDRAVKO TOLIMIR
RADIVOJE MILETIC
MILAN GVERO
VINKO PANDUREVIC
MILORAD TRBIC

____________________________________________________

DECISION ON MILORAD TRBIC’S REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO REPLY TO THE PROSECUTION’S CONSOLIDATED RESPONSE TO DEFENCE MOTIONS UNDER RULE 72

____________________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr. Peter McCloskey

Counsel for the Accused:

Zoran Zivanovic for Vujadin Popovic
John Ostojic for Ljubisa Beara
Jelena Nikolic and Stephane Bourgon for Drago Nikolic
Aleksandar Lazarevic and Miodrag Stojanovic for Ljubomir Borovcanin
Natacha Fauveau Ivanovic for Radivoje Miletic
Dragan Krgovic for Milan Gvero
Djordje Sarapa for Vinko Pandurevic
Colleen Rohan and Vesna Janjic for Milorad Trbic

 

I, Carmel Agius, Judge 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 SEISED OF the "Defendant Milorad Trbic’s Request for Leave to Reply to the Prosecution’s Consolidated Response to Defence Motions under Rule 72" ("Request"), filed on 25 January 2006; and the Addendum to the Request, filed on 27 January 2006;

NOTING “Defendant Milorad Trbic’s Challenge to the Indictment pursuant to Rule 72” ("Challenge to the Indictment"), filed on 9 January 2006;

NOTING the "Consolidated Response to Defence Motions under Rule 72" ("Prosecution Response"), filed by the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") on 23 January 2006;

NOTING that the Defendant Milorad Trbic submits in his Request that one of the challenges specifically raised in his Challenge of the Indictment is the alleged Joint Criminal Enterprise based on a ‘direct and/or indirect co-perpetrator’ theory of liability; and that the "Prosecution Response is not correct, does not represent existing Tribunal jurisprudence on this subject, and [that he] request leave to file a reply to the Prosecution’s arguments, particularly since [his] liability for the crimes charged against him in the Indictment […] is predicated, in part, on this theory of liability";

NOTING that the Defendant Milorad Trbic also “requests leave to reply to the Prosecution argument that the Indictment is not vague, in relevant parts specified in [his Challenge to the Indictment], […]";

CONSIDERING the legal questions at issue and the concerns raised in the Challenge to the Indictment as to its alleged vagueness;

PURSUANT TO Rule 126 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence;

HEREBY GRANT the Request to file a Reply, if any, no later than Monday, 30 January 2006.

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

Dated this twenty-seventh day of January 2006
At The Hague
The Netherlands

_______________________
Judge Carmel Agius
Pre-trial Judge

[Seal of the Tribunal]