Case No.: IT-95-12-AR65.1
IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER
Judge Theodor Meron, Presiding
Judge Fausto Pocar
Judge Mehmet Güney
Judge Andrésia Vaz
Judge Wolfgang Schomburg
Mr. Hans Holthuis
17 October 2005
Ivica RAJIC aka Viktor ANDRIC
DECISION ON MOTION for RESTITUTIO IN INTEGRUM TO ENABLE FILING AN APPEAL
Office of the Prosecutor
Mr. Kenneth Scott
Counsel for the Accused:
Mr. Zeljko Olujic
Ms. Doris Kosta
- 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
("Appeals Chamber" and "Tribunal", respectively),
is seised of the "Motion for Restitutio in Integrum to
Enable Filing an Appeal Related to the Judgement
of 16 September 2005" filed on 23 September 2005
("Motion") by Ms. Doris Kosta ("Defence"), Counsel
for Ivica Rajic (“Appellant”) in this case.
- The Defence initially filed a confidential
application for leave to appeal1 the
decision of Trial Chamber I, issued on 8 July 2005,
denying the Appellant’s motion for provisional release.2 The
Defence sought leave to appeal the Impugned Decision
pursuant to Rule 65(D) of the Rules of Procedure
and Evidence of the Tribunal ("Rules"). Pursuant
to a recent amendment to the Rules3,
an application for leave to appeal any decision rendered
under Rule 65 of the Rules is no longer required,
and a bench of five judges was assigned to hear the
- The parties were instructed in the Order Assigning
Judges that the timing for parties to file an appeal
ran from the filing of that order.5 On
16 September 2005, the Appeals Chamber rendered a
decision in this case,6 in
which it found that the Defence had not briefed the
appeal and that the timing to do so had elapsed.
The Appeals Chamber considered that the Defence no
longer pursued its appeal and therefore dismissed
- On 23 September 2005, the Defence filed the
Motion at issue with the Appeals Chamber submitting
that she did not receive notice of the Order Assigning
Judges to her as co-Counsel. The Defence therefore
requests that the Appeals Chamber allow the Appellant
additional time for filing an
interlocutory appeal against the Impugned Decision.8 The
Office for Legal Aid and Detention Matters ("OLAD")
orally confirmed to the Appeals Chamber that Ivica
Rajic communicated to OLAD his request to "cancel
the power of attorney that he had granted
to Mr. Zeljko Olujic, which he had done in an official
manner, and on which the Tribunal has been notified",9 and
the Registrar has orally confirmed to the Appeals
Chamber that it failed to notify Ms. Kosta of Order
- For the foregoing reasons, the Appeals Chamber ALLOWS the
Appellant to file an interlocutory appeal against
the Impugned Decision denying provisional release,
and ORDERS that the time-limit for the Appellant
to file his appeal – if any – shall run from the
filing of this decision.
Done in English and French, the English version being authoritative.
Done this 17th day of October 2005,
At The Hague,
Judge Theodor Meron
[Seal of the Tribunal]
1. Application for Leave to Appeal
the Trial Chamber Decision of 8 July 2005, 15 July
Confidential Order on Motion for Provisional Release,
8 July 2005; Confidential Corrigendum to Decision
on Motion for Provisional Release, 15 July 2005 (collectively, "Impugned
See Rules, IT/32/Rev.36, 8 August 2005.
Assigning Judges to a Case Before the Appeals Chamber,
15 August 2005, p. 2 ("Order Assigning Judges") (considering
that the amended Rule 65 "no longer require[s an] application
for leave to appeal . . . but grant[s] leave as a right
to a bench of five Judges of the Appeals Chamber").
Assigning Judges, p. 2.
Decision on Appeal of Trial
Chamber Decision on Provisional Release, 16 September
2005 ("Appeals Decision").
Appeals Decision, paras.
Motion, para. 4.
See Motion, para. 3.