Case: IT-01-42-AR72

IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Fausto Pocar, Presiding
Judge Mohamed Shahabuddeen
Judge David Hunt
Judge Asoka de Z. Gunawardana
Judge Theodor Meron

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Decision of:
12 September 2002

PROSECUTOR
v.
PAVLE STRUGAR
MIODRAG JOKIC
& OTHERS

_____________________________

DECISION ON "PROSECUTIONíS APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY TO THE DEFENCEíS REPLY TO THE PROSECUTIONíS RESPONSE TO THE DEFENCEíS BRIEF ON INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL ON JURISDICTION"

_____________________________

Counsel for the Prosecutor:

Ms. Susan L. Somers
Ms. Susan R. Lamb

Counsel for the Defence of Pavle Strugar:

Mr. Goran Rodic
Mr. Vladimir Petrovic

 

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"),

SEISED of the "Prosecutionís Application for Leave to File a Reply to the Defenceís Reply to the Prosecutionís Response to the Defenceís Brief on Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction" filed on 9 September 2002 (the "Application");

NOTING the "Decision on ĎDefence Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdictioní" issued by a bench of three judges of the Appeals Chamber on 24 July 2002, authorising Pavle Strugar (the "Appellant") to proceed with one ground of his appeal against the "Decision on the Defence Preliminary Motion Challenging Jurisdiction" rendered by Trial Chamber I on 7 June 2002, and informing the parties of their obligations to submit written briefs in accordance with the Practice Direction on Procedure for the Filing of Written Submissions in Appeal Proceedings before the International Tribunal (the "Practice Direction") and the Practice Direction on the Lengths of Briefs and Motions;

NOTING the subsequent "Defence Brief on Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction" filed on 12 August 2002; the "Prosecutionís Response to Defence Brief on Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction" filed on 22 August 2002, and the "Defence Reply to Prosecutionís Response to Defence Brief on Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction" filed on 30 August 2002 (the "Reply");

NOTING that, in the Application, the Prosecution seeks leave to address an issue related to its application to amend the indictment in the current matter which was raised by the Appellant for the first time in his Reply ("the Issue");

NOTING that the Practice Direction does not provide for further filing of briefs but that under Section VII, headed "Variation of Procedure", paragraph 16 explicitly states that the "provisions of this Practice Direction are without prejudice to any such orders or decisions that may be made by the Appeals Chamber Ö";

CONSIDERING that neither the existence nor the content of the Prosecutionís application to amend the indictment had been canvassed before the Appeals Chamber until the filing of the Reply, and that it may assist the Appeals Chamber to have further clarification of the Issue insofar as it relates to the current appeal;

PURSUANT to Rules 54 and 107 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal;

ORDERS as follows:

  1. the Prosecutor may file a brief document clarifying the Issue by Monday 16 September 2002 (the "Clarification");
  2. the Appellant may reply to the points raised in the Clarification by Friday 20 September 2002.

 

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

_________________________
Fausto Pocar
Presiding Judge

Dated this twelfth day of September 2002,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.

[Seal of the Tribunal]