Case No. IT-95-9-A

BEFORE THE PRE-APPEAL JUDGE

Before:
Judge Mehmet Güney

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision:
19 January 2004

PROSECUTOR

v.

BLAGOJE SIMIC
MIROSLAV TADIC
SIMO ZARIC

_____________________________________

DECISION ON MOTION OF BLAGOJE SIMIC FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLATE BRIEF AND REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED DECISION

_____________________________________

Counsel for the Prosecutor:

Mr. Norman Farrell

Counsel for the Appellants:

Mr. Igor Pantelic and Mr. Peter Murphy for Blagoje Simic

 

I, MEHMET GÜNEY Judge of 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 ("the International Tribunal"),

BEING SEISED OF the "Motion of Blagoje Simic for Extension of Time to File Appellate Brief and Request for Expedited Decision", filed on 13 January 2004 by Counsel for the Appellant Blagoje Simic ("Motion" and "Appellant" respectively);

NOTING that in the Motion the Appellant requests that "the time for filing his appellate brief may be extended to 30 days of the Judgement being made available to him in BCS" and that the Appellant relies on the following arguments to support his claim i) the magnitude of the materials and trial record and the complexity of the legal issues; ii) the fact that co-counsel was not involved in the trial; iii) the fact that the two co-accused are not appealing; and iv) that the Trial Judgement has not been made available to the accused in a language he understands;

NOTING the "Prosecution Response to ‘Motion of Blagoje Simic for Extension of Time to File Appellate Brief and Request for Expedited Decision’" filed on 14 January 2004 by the Prosecutor, in which it is submitted that the Prosecution does not oppose and "does not consider the requested extension of 30 days from receipt of the Judgement in B/C/S to be excessive in the circumstances of the case", however, the Prosecution submits comments as to the Appellant’s submissions on the grounds constituting "good cause" within the meaning of Rule 127 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence ("Rules");

NOTING that the Trial Judgement was rendered on 17 November 2003 and the Notice of Appeal was filed on 17 November 2003;

NOTING that Rules 127 and 107 of the Rules provide that "on good cause being shown by motion" the Appeals Chamber may "enlarge or reduce any time prescribed by or under these Rules";

CONSIDERING that it is in the interest of justice to allow the Appellant adequate time to read the Trial Judgement in a language he understands and consult with Counsel before filing his Appellant Brief pursuant to Rule 111 of the Rules and that this constitutes "good cause" within the meaning of Rule 127 of the Rules;

CONSIDERING HOWEVER that i) the magnitude of the materials and trial record and the complexity of the legal issues; ii) the fact that co-counsel was not involved in the trial; and iii) the fact that the two co-accused are not appealing are factors, which in the present case, does not constitute "good cause" within the meaning of Rule 127 of the Rules;

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS

HEREBY GRANT the Motion;

ORDER that the time limit for the filing of the Appellant Brief is extended until 30 days after the Trial Judgement is made available to the Appellant in BCS; and

REQUEST the Registry to inform the Appeals Chamber and the parties when the Trial Judgement is served on the Appellant in BCS.

 

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

Dated this 19th day of January 2004,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.

______________
Judge Mehmet Güney
Pre-Appeal Judge

[Seal of the Tribunal]