THIS 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 ("International Tribunal"),

NOTING the "Order for Protective Measures" issued by the Trial Chamber on 19 October 1999 ("the Order"), ordering protective measures which are to apply to these proceedings,

BEING SEISED of the "Prosecution’s Request to Modify Order for Protective Measures" filed by the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") on 29 November 1999 ("the Request"), in which the Prosecution requests modifications to Order (1) of the Order in two respects:

1. when disclosing materials to the Defence, the Prosecution may make limited redactions to any written statement or testimony of information concerning the identity or whereabouts of the person making or providing such statement or testimony or any other potential witness; and

2. unredacted versions of these materials shall be provided by the Prosecution to the Defence not less than 21 days prior to the commencement of the trial,

and argues that the likely length of time until the trial commences constitutes exceptional circumstances warranting the modifications requested,

NOTING the “Defense Response in Opposition to the Prosecution’s Request to Modify Order for Protective Measures” filed on behalf of the accused Dragan Kolundzija (“the Kolundzija Response") on 14 December 1999, in which the Trial Chamber is requested to deny the Request and order the Prosecution to comply with the Order within three days on the basis that:

1. the Prosecution misunderstand the Order, which only applies to witness statements accompanying the Indictment and Amended Indictment, and not all Prosecution statements; and

2. the modification requested would deny the defence the opportunity of preparing its case; and

3. the issue of the case not going to trial for some time is not a valid basis for the modifications sought,

NOTING the "Defence Response to Prosecution’s Request to Modify Order for Protective Measures" filed on behalf of the accused Damir Došen on 13 December 1999 ("the first Došen Response"), in which it is argued that:

1. as the accused was not in custody at the time of making of the Order, if the Order applied to him this would compromise his right to a fair trial; and

2. until a successful joinder argument is brought by the Prosecution, Došen should not be affected by any orders made with regard to Kolundzija,

BEING SEISED ALSO of the "Prosecution’s Motion to Protect Victims and Witnesses" filed by the Prosecution on 14 December 1999 ("the Motion") dealing specifically with the accused Došen, in which the Prosecution seeks an Order for Protective Measures in substance as follows:

1. permission to make limited redactions to any written statement or testimony of information concerning the identity and whereabouts of that person or any other potential witness; and

2. non-disclosure by the Defence of identifying information and the contents except for the preparation of the case;

3. the return of all statements by the Defence at the conclusion of proceedings;

4. the Defence not to contact any witness or relative of a witness disclosed by the Prosecution without first informing the Prosecution;

5. maintenance of a log of each person receiving a copy of a witness statement, and requesting a procedure for the violation of an order of non-disclosure, including provision for the matter to be dealt with by the Trial Chamber or duty Judge;

6. full disclosure of material provided previously to the Defence in redacted form to be made 21 days prior to commencement of trial,

NOTING the "Defence Response to Prosecution’s Motion to Protect Victims and Witnesses filed on behalf of the accused Došen ("the second Došen Response") on 28 December 1999, in which he objects as follows:

1. a "catch-all" protective order for all witnesses without justification in each individual case is inappropriate;

2. the Defence for the accused Došen needs the names and basic data of each witness within a reasonable time of the commencement of the case so that he can prepare his case;

3. a full restriction on contact of Prosecution witnesses is inappropriate;

4. the Defence for the accused Došen could not be responsible for the conduct of other persons receiving copies of statements but would be willing to warn people with regard to this;

5. if the Trial Chamber accepts the Prosecution proposal for time-limited access to unredacted material prior to trial, the unredacted information should be provided at least 60 days prior to trial,

HAVING HEARD the arguments of the parties in open session on 24 January 2000,

CONSIDERING that, with regard to the Request, the Prosecution has failed to establish to the satisfaction of the Trial Chamber any reason for varying its Order of 19 October 1999, which Order required the immediate disclosure of unredacted copies of all statements that accompanied the Indictment or the Amended Indictment when confirmation was sought,

CONSIDERING that the relief sought in paragraphs 12 to 15 of the Motion in relation to the accused Dosen has already been granted with respect to the accused Kolundzija by the Order of 19 October 1999,

CONSIDERING that, in the absence of any showing to the contrary, the same protective measures should apply to both accused,

CONSIDERING that the time-frame for disclosure of statements of witnesses who are to be called at trial is a matter for the pre-trial Judge to determine pursuant to Rule 66 (A)(ii),

CONSIDERING that the Prosecution may at any time seek protective measures in respect of individual witnesses,

HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

1. The Order of 19 October 1999 is hereby affirmed and its provisions extended to the accused Damir Došen;

2. All witness statements relating to each individual accused that accompanied the Indictment or the Amended Indictment when confirmation was sought shall be disclosed to the Defence for that accused within three days of the date of this Order, unless the Prosecution within that time files a motion for specific protective measures for individual witnesses stating, in respect of each witness, the relief sought and the grounds for seeking such relief;

3. The Prosecution shall by Friday 17 March 2000 confirm to the Trial Chamber that all such statements relating to each individual accused have been disclosed to the Defence for that accused;

4. Until such time as the pre-trial Judge orders disclosure of statements of witnesses who will be called at trial, statements of those witnesses (other than statements that accompanied the Indictment or the Amended Indictment when confirmation was sought) may be redacted when provided to the Defence so as to protect the identity and whereabouts of the witness or of any other potential witness;

5. The pre-trial Judge, when ordering disclosure of the statements of witnesses who will be called at trial pursuant to Rule 66 (A) (ii) shall at the same time determine to what extent, if any, material may be redacted from those statements and the time-limit for disclosure of such redacted information prior to trial.

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

____________________________
Richard May
Presiding Judge

Dated this tenth day of March 2000
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]