Case: IT-98-33-A


Judge David Hunt, Pre-Appeal Judge

Mr Hans Holthuis

Order of:
12 May 2003

Radislav KRSTIC




Counsel for the Prosecution:

Mr Norman Farrell
Mr Mathias Marcussen

Counsel for the Appellant:

Mr Nenad Petrusic
Mr Norman Sepenuk


I, Judge David Hunt, Pre-Appeal Judge in this appeal,

NOTING the "Defence Appeal Brief Concerning Rule 68 Violations", filed confidentially on 10 April 2003 ("Additional Defence Appeal Brief");

CONSIDERING that the Additional Defence Appeal Brief forms part of the Appellant’s Brief from the Trial Chamber’s final judgment;

CONSIDERING, therefore, that, pursuant to the Practice Direction on the Length of Briefs and Motions (IT/184 Rev 1) ("Practice Direction"), the Response of appeal from a final judgment of a Trial Chamber should not exceed 100 pages or 30,000 words, whichever is greater;

NOTING that the Prosecution’s original Response to the Defence Appeal Brief was 80 pages long and that its Response to the Additional Defence Appeal Brief should therefore in principle not exceed 20 pages;

BEING SEISED OF a Prosecution’s "Motion for Extension of Page Limits", dated 8 May 2003, whereby the Prosecution seeks leave to exceed the page limit provided for in the Practice Direction by 35 pages;

NOTING the reasons advanced by the Prosecution in support of its request:

  1. the Appellant has failed to make any legal argument and he made almost no reference to the trial record;
  2. the Appellant has not limited his filing to the issue of additional prejudice which he had not addressed in his Rule 115 motions, as he had been directed by the Appeals Chamber;
  3. it is necessary for the Prosecution to provide a thorough analysis of the trial record to properly address the submissions of the Appellant and the issues at hand;
  4. the Prosecution would have been in a better position to file a shorter Response had the Appellant filed his submissions all at once;

NOTING the "Prosecution Response to Defence Appeal Brief Concerning Rule 68 Violations", filed on 8 May 2003, which is 46 pages long, plus material to which reference is made in the Response;

CONSIDERING that the material annexed in support of a motion, a response or a reply is not to be treated as part of the Motion or Response for the purpose of the Practice Direction;

CONSIDERING that the fourth reason advanced by the Prosecution is purely speculative, but that the other reasons advanced by the Prosecution, in particular the need to address certain matters in depth and to do so with reference to the trial record, justify that such an extension of pages be granted;

CONSIDERING, furthermore, that the Defence orally informed the Appeals Chamber that it does not object to such an extension of pages being granted;

CONSIDERING that good cause has been shown;

HEREBY GRANTS LEAVE to the Prosecution to exceed the number of pages and REGARDS its Response as having been validly filed;


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

Done this 12th day of May 2003,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.

Judge David Hunt
Pre-Appeal Judge

[Seal of the Tribunal]