Judge David Hunt, Presiding
Judge Fouad Riad
Judge Rafael Nieto-Navia
Judge Mohamed Bennouna
Judge Fausto Pocar

Mrs Dorothee de Sampayo Garrido-Nijgh

Order of:
14 April 2000



Zejnil DELALIC, Zdravko MUCIC (aka "PAVO"), Hazim DELIC
and Esad LANDZO (aka "ZENGA")




Counsel for the Office of the Prosecutor:

Mr Upawansa Yapa
Mr Christopher Staker
Mr Norman Farrell

Counsel for the Defence:

Mr John Ackerman for Zejnil Delalic
Mr Tomislav Kuzmanovic and Mr Howard Morrison for Zdravko Mucic
Mr Salih Karabdic and Mr Tom Moran for Hazim Delic
Ms Cynthia Sinatra and Mr Peter Murphy for Esad Landzo


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 ("International Tribunal");

NOTING the "Order on Motion of Appellants Hazim Delic and Zdravko Mucic for Leave to File Supplementary Brief and on Motion of Prosecution for Leave to File Supplementary Brief", issued by the Appeals Chamber on 31 March 2000 ("Order of 31 March") which granted leave to the appellants Hazim Delic and Zdravko Mucic to file a supplementary brief ("Supplementary Brief") and by order 6 granted leave to the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") to file a response to the Supplementary Brief ("Response") by 17 April 2000;

NOTING the Prosecution Motion for an Extension of Time ("Motion") filed by the Prosecution on 13 April 2000 in which the Prosecution observed that the Supplementary Brief raises an entirely new ground of appeal which requires "research into matters of the law of this Tribunal and national law" and requested an extension of time to 25 April 2000 zin which to file the Response;

CONSIDERING that the grant of an extension of time to the Prosecution to file the Response would require the grant of a similar extension of time to Mucic and Delic in which to file any reply;

NOTING paragraph 14 of the Practice Direction on Procedure for the Filing of Written Submissions In Appeal Proceedings Before the International Tribunal which permits the Appeals Chamber to vary any time-limit prescribed under the Practice Direction;

CONSIDERING that as the relevant time limit falls on the next working day, Monday 17 April, it is necessary to determine the Motion expeditiously if the issued raised by the Motion is to be addressed effectively;

CONSIDERING that the grant of the extension of time sought by the Prosecution and a corresponding extension of time to the Appellants will not delay the timetable determined by the Scheduling Order issued by the Appeals Chamber in these proceedings on 6 April 2000 and the grant of an extension of time in this instance will therefore cause no prejudice to any party;

PURSUANT TO Rule 127 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence,


  1. Order 6 of the Order of 31 March is varied to extend the time limit for the filing of a Response from 17 April 2000 to 25 April 2000;
  2. Order 7 of the Order of 31 March is varied to extend the time limit for the filing of any reply by Delic and Mucic to the Response to 4.30 pm on Friday 5 May 2000.

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


Judge Fouad Riad
At the request of the Presiding Judge

Done this 14 April 2000
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.

[Seal of the Tribunal]