Case No.: IT-02-54-T

IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Patrick Robinson, Presiding
Judge O-Gon Kwon
Judge Iain Bonomy

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Order of:
2 June 2005

PROSECUTOR

v.

SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC

_____________________________________

ORDER ON DEFENCE RE-APPLICATION FOR RE-ADMISSION OF WITNESS HENNING HENSCH

_____________________________________

Office of the Prosecutor:

Ms. Carla Del Ponte
Mr. Geoffrey Nice

The Accused:

Mr. Slobodan Milosevic

Court Assigned Counsel:

Mr. Steven Kay
Ms. Gillian Higgins

Amicus Curiae:

Prof. Timothy McCormack

 

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"),

HAVING CONSIDERED an "Application for Re-Admission of Witness Henning Hensch", filed by the Defence through the Pro Se Legal Liaison Officer on 27 April 2005 ("First Application"), in which it requested that the Trial Chamber permit (1) the readmission of Mr. Henning Hensch to the Defence witness list, and (2) the Defence to call the additional witness "in due course",

HAVING NOTED that Mr. Hensch was removed from the witness list after Assigned Counsel informed the Chamber that the Accused no longer wished to call him as a Defence witness,1

HAVING DENIED the First Application without prejudice to the Defence making a future application with an improved summary of the proposed witness’ testimony

BEING NOW SEISED OF a "Milosevic Re-Application for Re-Admission of Witness Henning Hensch”, filed by the Defence through the Pro Se Legal Liaison Officer on
26 May 2005 ("Second Application"), in which it sets out reasons for the application for the re-admission of the witness being made at this stage, provides a more detailed explanation of the evidence it is proposed the witness would give, and re-states its request that the Trial Chamber permit (1) the readmission of Mr. Henning Hensch to the Defence witness list, and (2) the Defence to call the additional witness "in due course",

NOTING that, pursuant to this Chamber’s "Order Rescheduling and Setting the Time Available to Present the Defence Case" of 25 February 2004, the Defence filed its witness list on 13 April 2004, and a revised list on 18 June 2004;2 and that the revised list identified Mr. Henning Hensch as the witness assigned the Rule 65 ter number 662,

CONSIDERING that this Chamber has previously ordered that "[I]f the Accused wishes to add any witnesses or exhibits to his witness list after the Pre-Defence Conference, he must apply to the Chamber for permission to do so showing good cause",3

CONSIDERING that the good cause requirement is equally applicable to requests to restore witnesses after they have been withdrawn,

CONSIDERING that paragraphs 7 (a) to (c) of the Second Application sufficiently establish good cause for the Chamber to grant permission to readmit Mr. Hensch to the Defence witness list in respect of the Kosovo Indictment,

CONSIDERING HOWEVER that paragraph 7 (d) of the Second Application does not sufficiently establishes good cause for the Chamber to grant permission for Mr. Hensch to testify in respect of the Croatia and Bosnia Indictments, the relevance of the proposed evidence on these matters not having been established,

PURSUANT TO Rules 89 and 54 of the Rules,

HEREBY GRANTS IN PART THE SECOND APPLICATION and ORDERS that the witness Henning Hensch may be re-admitted to the witness list and that he may be called to testify in respect of matters arising out of the Kosovo indictment, but not in respect of the Bosnia and Croatia indictments.

 

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

______________________
Judge Robinson
Presiding

Dated this second day of June 2005
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1. Prosecutor v. Milosevic, Case No. IT-02-54-T, T. 33146–T. 33147 (19 October 2004).
2. In the original 13 April 2004 filing, only a small number of these witnesses were named, and the majority referred to solely by a pseudonym. The Trial Chamber’s "Order to the Accused on Protective Measures for Defence Witnesses" of 27 May 2004 required the Accused to produce to the Trial Chamber the identities of all witnesses on the Rule 65 ter (G) witness list, and to "disclose to the Prosecution and Amici Curiae the identities of all witnesses on the Rule 65 ter (G) witness list, except those identified by the Accused as witnesses for whom the extraordinary protective measure of delayed disclosure will be sought". In compliance with this Order, the Defence submitted a revised witness list on 15 June 2004, which was filed on 18 June 2004.
3. Milosevic, "Order Concerning the Preparation and Presentation of the Defence Case", 17 September 2003,
p. 5, para. 6.