Case No.: IT-02-54-T

IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Patrick Robinson, Presiding
Judge O-Gon Kwon
Judge Iain Bonomy

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
16 February 2005

PROSECUTOR

v.

SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC

_________________________________________________

ORDER ON RENEWED APPLICATION BY THE ACCUSED TO ADD FOUR WITNESSES TO HIS WITNESS LIST

__________________________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor

Ms. Carla Del Ponte
Mr. Geoffrey Nice

The Accused

Mr. Slobodan Milosevic

Court Assigned Counsel

Mr. Steven Kay, QC
Ms. Gillian Higgins

Amici Curiae

Prof. 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 ("the International Tribunal"),

BEING SEISED OF a confidential memorandum from the Pro Se Legal Liaison Officer, Ms. Anoya, attaching a formal renewed application from one of the legal associates of the Accused, Mr. Ognjanovic, seeking to add four defence witnesses (named therein) to the defence witness list, who it is intended would testify before the end of February ("Application"), and submitting that

  1. The renewed application fulfils the "good cause" and "interests of justice" criteria;
  2. The Defence had only been able to establish contact with the four witnesses at the end of 2004; and
  3. The detail provided in the application describes with sufficient specificity the content of the evidence it is proposed the witnesses would give, and that their proposed evidence is relevant and probative and therefore in the interests of justice,

NOTING that the Trial Chamber rejected the application made by the Accused to add the same four witnesses in an Order issued on 3 December 2004, without prejudice to the Accused being allowed to make future written applications which address the deficiencies in that application, as explained in that Order,

NOTING the "Prosecution Response to ĎMilosevic Renewed Application for Additional Defence Witnessesí, Dated 2nd February 2005", filed on 11 February 2005 ("Response") in which the Prosecution states that it does not object to the addition of the four witnesses, but requests that the Trial Chamber order the Accused "to provide the Prosecution with greater detail as to the anticipated testimony of the four witnesses, in the form of a 65ter summary",

NOTING the Trial Chamberís "Order Concerning the Preparation and Presentation of the Defence Case", issued on 17 September 2003, in which the Trial Chamber stated that it "may refuse to hear a witness whose name does not appear on the Accusedís list of witnesses. If the Accused wishes to add any witnesses or exhibits to his witness list after the Pre-Defence Conference, he must apply to the Chamber for permission to do so showing good cause",1

CONSIDERING that the Accused has made a showing of good cause for the late addition of the four witnesses to the witness list,

CONSIDERING that, in respect of the request by the Prosecution for more detailed Rule 65 ter summaries for the witnesses, the Trial Chamber has already ruled, in its "Omnibus Order on Matters Dealt with at the Pre-Defence Conference", issued 18 June 2004, that it "does not require the Accused to produce more detailed witness summaries than those provided in his Rule 65 ter filing, but notes the inherent power of the Trial Chamber to make a further order to regulate procedure at any stage",

PURSUANT TO Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Tribunal

HEREBY GRANTS THE APPLICATION of the Accused to add the four witnesses identified in its Application and DENIES the relief sought by the Prosecution in its Response.

 

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

_______________________
Judge Robinson
Presiding

Dated this sixteenth day of February 2005
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]


1. Para. (6): The Chamber referred to Rule 90 (G), and to the fact that the "good cause" requirement is the same as that required by the Prosecution and set out in the Trial Chamberís "Decision on Prosecution Request for Agreement of Trial Chamber to Amended Schedule of Filings", 18 April 2003.