Case: IT-00-39-T
IN TRIAL CHAMBER I
Before:
Judge Alphons Orie, Presiding
Judge Joaquín Martín Canivell
Judge Claude Hanoteau
Registrar:
Mr Hans Holthuis
Date:
2 December 2005
PROSECUTOR
v.
MOMCILO KRAJISNIK
___________________________________________________________________________
DECISION ON DEFENCE APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATION
TO APPEAL THE DECISION ON SCHEDULING OF 18 NOVEMBER
2005
___________________________________________________________________________
Office of the Prosecutor
Mr Mark Harmon
Mr Alan Tieger
Counsel for the Defence
Mr Nicholas Stewart, QC
Mr David Josse
TRIAL CHAMBER I (the “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;
BEING SEIZED of the “Defence application for
certification pursuant to Rule 73(B) of the Rules
of Procedure and Evidence to appeal against decision
on scheduling made 18 November 2005”, filed
on 25 November 2005 (the “Application”);
RECALLING the Trial Chamber’s amendment, of
18 November 2005, to the 26 April 2005 Scheduling
Order, granting the Defence a seven-week extension
up till 28 April 2006 to prepare and present its
case and stating that no further extension will be
granted unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated
(the “Amendment”);
NOTING that, in accordance with Rule 73ter (E), “[a]fter
having heard the defence, the Trial Chamber shall
determine the time available to the defence for presenting
evidence”, and that the Trial Chamber has done
so by means of its Amendment;
NOTING that Rule 73(B) of the Rules of Procedure
and Evidence stipulates that certification may be
granted “if the decision involves an issue
that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious
conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the
trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Trial
Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber
may materially advance the proceedings”;
NOTING that the Defence has not requested any further
extension of time beyond 28 April 2006 for preparing
and presenting its case but has merely asserted that
the Trial Chamber’s standard for the grant
of any such request, as set out in the Amendment, “is
wrong in principle and should be set aside”;
CONSIDERING that the Defence has not argued, in its
Application, and the Trial Chamber does not find,
that the Amendment raises any issue that would significantly
affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings
or an immediate resolution of which would materially
advance the proceedings;
DENIES the application.
Done in English and French, the English version being authoritative.
___________________
Judge Alphons Orie
Presiding Judge
Dated this 2nd day of December 2005
At The Hague,
The Netherlands
[Seal of the Tribunal]
Home | Terms & Conditions | About
Copyright © 1999- WorldCourts. All rights reserved.