Case No. IT-02-65-PT

IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER

Before:
Judge Patrick Robinson, Presiding
Judge O-Gon Kwon
Judge Bert Swart

Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis

Order of:
6 July 2004

PROSECUTOR

v.

ZELJKO MEJAKIC
MOMCILO GRUBAN
DUSAN FUSTAR
DUSKO KNEZEVIC

______________________________________

DECISION ON PROSECUTION’S REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATION OF THE TRIAL CHAMBER’S DECISION ON SECOND MOTION TO RESOLVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST REGARDING ATTORNEY JOVAN SIMIC

______________________________________

The Office of the Prosecutor:

Ms. Ann Sutherland

Counsel for the Accused:

Mr. Jovan Simic, for Zeljko Mejakic
Ms. Sanja Turlakov, for Momcilo Gruban
Mr. Theodore Scudder and Mr. Dragan Ivetic, for Dusan Fustar
Ms. Slobodanka Nedic, for Dusko Knezevic

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 "Prosecution’s Request for Certification", filed by the Prosecution on 24 June 2004 ("Request"), requesting the Trial Chamber to certify, pursuant to Rule 73(B) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence ("Rules"), an interlocutory appeal of the Trial Chamber’s "Decision on Prosecution’s Second Motion to Resolve Conflict of Interest Regarding Attorney Jovan Simic”, issued on 17 June 2004,

NOTING that the Prosecution sets forth several arguments in support of the Request, including that:

1. the Trial Chamber erred in concluding that no conflict existed because the Prosecution has no right to interview Mr. Prcac as a witness;¹
2. the Prosecution request to interview Mr. Prcac causes the conflict of interest to be actual, as Defence Counsel is put in a position whereby he has two conflicting interests;²
3. the Prosecution fully intends to secure Mr. Prcac’s evidence;³
4. it is in the interests of justice to have this matter resolved now, as opposed to when steps are taken to interview Mr. Prcac, or when the Prosecution seeks to call the witness;⁴ and

5. the issue of assignment of one counsel to two accused (who are alleged to have been in a superior-subordinate relationship) should be resolved before the trial in the current case commences,

NOTING that Counsel Jovan Simic has not responded to the Motion,

CONSIDERING that Rule 73(B) of the Rules requires that two criteria be satisfied before the Trial Chamber can exercise its discretion to certify a decision for interlocutory appeal: (1) the issue would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or outcome of the trial; and (2) an immediate resolution of the issue may, in the opinion of the Trial Chamber, materially advance the proceedings,

CONSIDERING that, in this matter, the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the cumulative requirements under Rule 73 (B) of the Rules have been met,

PURSUANT TO Rule 73(B) of the Rules,

HEREBY GRANTS THE REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATION ON APPEAL

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

_______________
Patrick Robinson
Presiding

Dated this sixth day of July 2004
At The Hague
The Netherlands

[Seal of the Tribunal]