Case No.: IT-95-14-A


Before: Judge Fausto Pocar, Pre-Appeal Judge

Registrar: Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of: 5 December 2001





DeCISION ON Appellant’s Supplemental Motion to Suspend Briefing Schedule



Counsel for the Prosecutor:

Mr. Norman Farrell

Counsel for the Appellant:

Mr. Anto Nobilo

Mr. Russell Hayman

Mr. Andrew Payley

I, FAUSTO POCAR, Judge of 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 ("the International Tribunal"),

BEING SEISED of the "Appellant’s Supplemental Motion to Suspend Briefing Schedule" filed on 5 November 2001, in which the Appellant amends his previous request for an extension of 45 days for filing his Appellant’s Brief and requests a suspension of the briefing schedule, and submits a) that the Prosecution has disclosed 630 potentially exculpatory documents, the majority of which have not yet been translated into English; b) that this material could alter the complexion of the case and materially affect the scope and content of the Appellant’s Brief; and c) that since he could not properly estimate the time required to review this material a status conference could be scheduled 60 days after the receipt of the official translations of these documents to address the resumption of the briefing schedule;

NOTING the "Prosecution Response to the ‘Appellant’s Supplemental Motion to Suspend Briefing Schedule"’ filed on 15 November 2001, in which the Prosecution submits, inter alia, that waiting for all disclosure material - as it appears the Appellant intends to do - before filing the Appellant’s Brief would result in the indefinite postponement of the appeal, and reiterates its position that a better course of action would be to have the Appellant file his Brief based on the trial record so that the Prosecution would be in the position to respond to the substantive appeal based on the Trial Chamber’s Judgement;

NOTING the "Appellant’s Reply Brief Re Supplemental Motion to Suspend Briefing Schedule" filed on 19 November 2001, in which he submits, inter alia, that time is required to review the substantial new material under Rule 68 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Tribunal ("the Rules") since this new evidence could fundamentally alter the arguments presented in the Appellant’s Brief and that the suspension of the briefing schedule would allow the parties to submit more comprehensive briefs and reduce the need for supplemental filings;

NOTING Rule 111 of the Rules which provides: that "SaCn Appellant's brief of argument setting out the grounds of appeal and authorities shall be filed within ninety days of filing of the notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 108";

NOTING that the Appellant filed his notice of appeal on 17 March 2000, and that the Appeals Chamber issued an order suspending the briefing schedule sixty-three days later, on 19 May 2000;

NOTING the Order issued by the Appeals Chamber on 16 October 2001, instructing the Appellant to file his brief of argument by 30 November 2001, thus granting an extension of fourteen days beyond the deadline pursuant to Rule 111 of the Rules;

NOTING that during the Status Conference held on 18 October 2001, the Pre-Appeal Judge reiterated that the Appeals Chamber had decided to resume the briefing schedule because in light of the large volume of the additional evidence sought to be admitted it deemed it necessary to receive a full description of the grounds of appeal before deciding on the admissibility of such evidence;

NOTING the "Decision on Appellant’s Motion to Extend Deadline for Filing Appellant’s Brief and Request for Authorization to Exceed the Page Limit for Appellant’s Brief" issued by the Appeals Chamber on 7 November 2001, which grants an extension of time for the Appellant to file his Brief on 14 January 2002 and a page limit of 200 pages in total;

CONSIDERING that the Appellant is not required to refer in his Brief to the additional evidence sought to be admitted pursuant to Rule 115 of the Rules, and that he will be given an opportunity to file supplementary briefs on such additional evidence;

CONSIDERING FURTHER that notwithstanding the possibility that further material would continue to become available at this stage the Appellant should be familiar with the issues to be raised in the appeal, and that it is in the interests of justice that he submits his Brief setting out the grounds of appeal in order to assist the Appeals Chamber in considering the admissibility of the additional evidence;

HEREBY REJECT the "Appellant’s Supplemental Motion to Suspend Briefing Schedule."

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



Fausto Pocar

Pre-Appeal Judge

Dated this fifth day of December 2001

At The Hague,

The Netherlands.

SSeal of the TribunalC