Case No.: IT-02-54-T
IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Richard May, Presiding

Judge Patrick Robinson
Judge O-Gon Kwon

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Order of:
25 September 2003

PROSECUTOR

v.

SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC

________________________________________________

DECISION GRANTING REQUEST BY THE AMICI CURIAE FOR CERTIFICATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE TRIAL CHAMBER

_________________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor

Ms. Carla Del Ponte
Mr. Geoffrey Nice
Mr. Dermot Groome

The Accused

Slobodan Milosevic

Amici Curiae

Mr. Steven Kay, QC
Mr. Branislav Tapuskovic
Mr. Timothy L.H. 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”),

BEING SEISED OF Amici Curiae Request for a Certificate Pursuant to Rule 73 (B) to Appeal Against the Trial Chamber Order Concerning the Presentation and Preparation of the Defence Case Dated 17 September 2003”, filed on 18 September 2003 (“Request”), in which the Amici Curiae request the Trial Chamber to certify the following rulings from its Decision of 17 September1 for appeal pursuant to Rule 73(B):

1. That the trial will be adjourned for three months between the close of the Prosecution case and the commencement of the Defence case; and

2. That the Accused is to file, within six weeks of the close of the Prosecution case , the list of witnesses he intends to call, and related orders; and that he file the list of exhibits he intends to offer in his case, and related orders,

HAVING CONSIDERED the arguments of the Amici Curiae set out in the request, which consist of a reiteration of the Accused’s arguments concerning the lack of time and facilities available to him to prepare his Defence adequately and that the cumulative requirements of Rule 73 (B) are satisfied (see below),

NOTING the “Prosecution Response to the Request by Amici Curiae Dated 18 September 2003 for a Certificate Pursuant to Rule 73 (B)”, filed on 24 September 2003, in which it is argued that the prerequisite for an interlocutory appeal has not been made out in the Request, and no argument is offered in the Request for how the Trial Chamber may have fallen into error such that certification for appeal is warranted,

NOTING that Rule 73 (B) requires two criteria to be satisfied before the Trial Chamber can exercise its discretion to certify a decision for interlocutory appeal: (1) that the issue would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or outcome of the trial, and (2) an immediate resolution of the issue may, in the opinion of the Trial Chamber, materially advance the proceedings,2

CONSIDERING that the Accused represents himself and reasonable allowance should be made by the Trial Chamber for him to make applications and raise orally issues concerning the preparation and conduct of his defence, as well as other matters relevant to the case against him,

CONSIDERING that the Amici Curiae are mandated by the Trial Chamber to, inter alia, act in any way which they consider appropriate in order to secure a fair trial,3 and that this Request falls within that mandate,

CONSIDERING that the Request may be properly construed as a request for certification of an interlocutory appeal from the application of the Accused for two years from the conclusion of the Prosecution case in which to prepare his case and the associated regime of disclosure imposed upon him for the presentation of his case,

CONSIDERING that the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the cumulative requirements under Rule 73 (B) have been satisfied,

PURSUANT TO Rule 73(B) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Tribunal

HEREBY GRANTS THE REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATION OF THE APPEAL.

 

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

_________________
Richard May
Presiding

Dated this twenty-fifth day of September 2003
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1 - “Order Concerning the Preparation and Presentation of the Defence Case” (hereafter “Order”).
2 - See Prosecutor v. Brdanin and Talic, “Decision on Radislav Brdanin’s Motion for the Issuance of Rule 73(B) Certification Regarding the Chamber’s Rule 70 Confidential Decision”, 23 May 2002, in which it is stated that these two conditions are cumulative and constitute an exception to the principle that decisions on all motions are without interlocutory appeal.
3 - See the Order of the Trial Chamber dated 30 August 2001.