In its Motion of 25 May 1998, Defence Counsel for all four accused contended that Judge Odio Benito had "(...) ceased to meet the qualifications for a Judge of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia by virtue of her having taken the oath of office of a Vice-President of the Republic of Costa Rica (...) and [had] acquired an association which may affect her impartiality." The Prosecutor filed no response.

Referring to Article 13(1) and Sub-rules 15(A) and 15(B), the Bureau considered that "[w]hat is being questioned is whether, having regard to the holding of the office of Second Vice-President of Costa Rica, the requirement of impartiality (...) [is] now being met." After considering the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the Bureau found that "(...) the mere fact that a person who exercises judicial functions is to some extent subject, in another capacity, to executive supervision, is not by itself enough to impair judicial independence."

The Bureau found, however, that "(...) Judge Odio Benito has been holding the position of Vice-President in name only from the date she took the oath of office. She has committed herself not to take up the duties of her post until she has completed her judicial duties (...) [and] not to assume the functions or duties of the President of Costa Rica in his temporary or permanent absence prior to the termination of her tenure as Judge. Furthermore, the President of the Republic of Costa Rica has agreed that she will not assume her duties as Second Vice-President until such time." The Bureau thus concluded that Judge Odio Benito "is not disqualified to sit in the trial of the four accused on the grounds referred to in Sub-rule 15(A) of the Rules."