Case No.: IT-98-33-A
IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER
Before:
Judge Theodor Meron, Presiding
Judge Fausto Pocar
Judge Wolfgang Schomburg
Judge Mohamed Shahabuddeen
Judge Mehmet Güney
Registrar:
Mr. Hans Holthuis
PROSECUTOR
v.
RADISLAV KRSTIC
_______________________________________________________
SCHEDULING ORDER
_______________________________________________________
Counsel for the Prosecutor:
Mr. Norman Farrell
Counsel for the Defence:
Mr. Nenad Petrusic
Mr. N. Sepenuk
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,
BEING SEISED of the "Written Notice of Appeal" filed by Radislav Krstic on 15 August 2001 and the "Prosecution’s Notice of Appeal" filed on 16 August 2001;
NOTING the "Decision on Applications for Admission of Additional Evidence on Appeal", issued on 5 August 2003 ("Decision of 5 August 2003"), in which the Defence’s motion pursuant to Rule 115 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence ("Rules") was granted in part insofar as one witness statement (tab 5) and three police reports (tabs 1, 2 and 3) were admitted into the appeal proceedings without prejudice to the determination of the weight to be afforded to the evidence;
NOTING the "Decision on Application for Admission of Further Additional Evidence on Appeal" issued on 15 September 2003, dismissing the Defence’s motion for the admission of further additional evidence;
NOTING the "Defence Reply to the Prosecution’s Response to Defence Motions for Admission of Additional Evidence under Rule 115" which was filed confidentially on 12 February 2003, in which the Defence seeks, inter alia, to call the witness whose statement constitutes tab 5;
NOTING that Rule 114 provides that after "the expiry of the time-limits for filing the briefs provided for in Rules 111, 112 and 113, the Appeals Chamber shall set the date for the hearing and the Registrar shall notify the parties";
HEREBY ORDERS that:
(a) attach the evidence in rebuttal;
(b) state how that evidence rebuts the additional evidence admitted by the Decision of 5 August 2003;
(c) state whether it seeks the admission of any of its rebuttal evidence through oral testimony or pursuant to Rule 92bis.
A scheduling order shall be issued in due course providing further details of the hearings.
Done in both English and French, the English text being authoritative.
______________
Judge Theodor Meron
Presiding
Dated this 24th day of September 2003,
At The Hague,
The Netherlands.
Follow on X | Database Scope | Terms & Conditions | About
Copyright © 1999- WorldCourts. All rights reserved.