Case No. IT-02-60-T

IN TRIAL CHAMBER I, SECTION A

Before:
Judge Liu Daqun, Presiding
Judge Volodymyr Vassylenko
Judge Carmen Maria Argibay

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
25 September 2003

PROSECUTOR

v.

VIDOJE BLAGOJEVIC
DRAGAN JOKIC

____________________________________

DECISION ON PROSECUTIONíS MOTION TO AMEND WITNESS LIST AND ADMIT EVIDENCE UNDER RULE 92 bis

____________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr. Peter McCloskey

Counsel for the Accused:

Mr. Michael Karnavas and Ms. Suzana Tomanovic for Vidoje Blagojevic
Mr. Miodrag Stojanovic and Ms. Cynthia Sinatra for Dragan Jokic

 

TRIAL CHAMBER I, SECTION A, ("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 ("Tribunal"),

BEING SEISED of the "Prosecutionís Motion to Amend Witness List and Incorporated Motion to Admit Evidence under Rule 92 bis," filed partly confidentially by the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") on 3 September 2003 ("Motion"),

NOTING that the Motion raises issues concerning four expert reports and proposes amendments which include inter alia the removal of two witnesses from the witness list,1 the inclusion of testimony of two witnesses2 under Rule 92 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal ("Rules"), and reinstating two witnesses as live witnesses,3 whose testimony was previously designated under Rule 92 bis of the Rules,

NOTING that no response has been filed by either of the accused to the Motion,

NOTING the "First Decision on Prosecutionís Motion for Admission of Witness Statements and Prior Testimony Pursuant to Rule 92 bis" rendered by the Trial Chamber on 12 June 2003, in which the Trial Chamber has considered the jurisprudence in relation to Rule 92 bis of the Rules in detail,

CONSIDERING that in relation to the issues dealing with the expert reports, the Trial Chamber will issue its decision at a later stage,

CONSIDERING that the testimony of witnesses W60 and W58 is cumulative in nature and as similar evidence has been given by other witnesses, their testimony is not necessary for the proceedings,

CONSIDERING that the prior testimony of witnesses W70 and W68 does not go to the acts and conduct of the accused and is relevant to the proceedings of this case and therefore it is appropriate to admit this evidence pursuant to Rule 92 bis (D), and the Trial Chamber does not find it is necessary for them to be cross-examined,

CONSIDERING that in relation to witnesses W108 and W88, the Trial Chamber accepts that their reinstatement as viva voce witnesses may be necessary,

PURSUANT TO Rule 54 and Rule 92 bis of the Rules,

HEREBY GRANTS the Motion, in part and ORDERS

  1. The removal of witnesses W60 and W58 from the witness list;
  2. the testimony of witnesses W70 and W68 be entered pursuant to Rule 92 bis (D) of the Rules, without calling either witness for cross-examination; and
  3. the reinstatement of witnesses W108 and W88 as viva voce witnesses.

 

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

___________
Judge Liu Daqun
Presiding

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

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1. W60 and W58.
2. W70 and W68.
3. W108 and W88.