Case No.: IT-02-54-T


Judge Richard May, Presiding

Judge Patrick Robinson
Judge O-Gon Kwon

Mr. Hans Holthuis

Order of:
27 March 2003





The Office of the Prosecutor

Mr. Geoffrey Nice

The Accused

Slobodan Milosevic

Amicus Curiae

Mr. Steven Kay
Mr. Branislav Tapuskovic
Mr. 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 ("the International Tribunal"),

BEING SEISED of the partly confidential Prosecution Motion for the Admission of Transcripts in Lieu of Viva Voce Testimony Pursuant to 92bis(D) ("Motion"), filed on 26 February 2003, in which the Prosecution requests that:

  1. the transcripts of evidence given by eight witnesses who previously testified in the Dokmanovic case, and who are identified at Annex A, be admitted in lieu of viva voce testimony,
  2. the cross-examination not be permitted in respect of any of the witnesses identified in Annex A,
  3. the exhibits identified in Annex A, which form part of the testimony of the witnesses referred to herein, and which were disclosed to the parties, be admitted into evidence,

NOTING the Amici Curiae Request to Extend the Time Period to Reply to the Prosecution Motion for the Admission of Transcripts in Lieu of Viva Voce Testimony Pursuant to Rule 92bis(D), filed 26 February 2003, filed on 7 March, and which was granted orally by the Trial Chamber on 10 March 2003,

NOTING the Amici Curiae Reply to Prosecution Motion for the Admission of Transcripts in Lieu of Viva Voce Testimony Pursuant to Rule 92bis(d), filed 26 February 2003 ("Reply"), which was filed on 13 March 2003, in which the Amici Curiae submit that:

  1. the transcripts and exhibits, all of which relate to Vukovar and Ovcara, cannot be said to go to the "acts and conduct of the accused", while they do relate to the underlying crimes,
  2. considering that the Accused objects to the evidence being adduced in the form of Rule 92bis(D), should the Trial Chamber grant the Motion, the issue which arises is the need for cross-examination by the Accused under Rule 92bis(E),

NOTING that Rule 92bis provides:

  1. A Chamber may admit a transcript of evidence given by a witness in proceedings before the Tribunal which goes to proof of a matter other than the acts and conducts of the accused,
  2. Subject to Rule 127 or any order to the contrary, a party seeking to adduce a written statement or transcript shall give fourteen days notice to the opposing party, who may within seven days object. The Trial Chamber shall decide, after hearing the parties, whether to admit the statement or transcript in whole or in part and whether to require the witness to appear for cross-examination.

NOTING Articles 20 and 21 of the Statute,

CONSIDERING that all eight witnesses were subjected to cross-examination by counsel for Slavko Dokmanovic,

CONSIDERING that the evidence does not go to proof of the acts and conduct of the Accused and is therefore admissible under Rule 92bis(D),

CONSIDERING that the evidence does go to matters which may be of critical importance to his defence and that the earlier cross-examination did not adequately cover those matters,

CONSIDERING, therefore, under Rule 92bis(E), that the witnesses should be required to appear for cross-examination,

PURSUANT TO Rules 54, 75(F) and 92bis(D) and (E) of the Rules,

HEREBY ORDERS that the transcripts and the accompanying exhibits shall be admitted under Rule 92bis(D), subject to the witnesses being made available for cross-examination by the Accused on all aspects of the testimonies contained in the transcripts and the accompanying exhibits.


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

Richard May

Dated this twenty-seventh day of March 2003
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]