Overview of Court Documents regarding the Kvocka et al. "Omarska and Keraterm Camps" Case

Appeals Chamber – Judges Pocar (Presiding), Shahabuddeen, Güney, Daqun and Schomburg

On 25 August 2006, the Appeals Chamber dismissed a request by Z. Zigic for review of judgement under Rule 119, filed on 23 May 2006.

On 30 March 2005, the President of the Tribunal, granted Miroslav Kvocka’s Request for early release pursuant to Article 28 of the Statute of the Tribunal, and Rules 124 and 125 of the Rules of Evidence and Procedure (see Press Release No. 955).

ppeals Chamber – Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Pocar, Mumba, Güney and Weinberg de Roca

On 8 February 2005, the Appeals Chamber ordered that a public hearing on 28 February 2005 at 2.15 p.m. in Courtroom III be held to deliver the Judgement in this Appeal.

On 9 February 2005, the Appeals Chamber terminated the provisional release of Miroslav Kvocka with effect from 25 February 2005.

Appeals Chamber - Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Pocar, Mumba, Güney and Weinberg de Roca

On 14 July 2004, the Appeals Chamber set out the timetable for the appeals hearing that is scheduled to take place from Monday 19 July until Wednesday 21 July 2004.

Appeals Chamber – Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Pocar, Mumba, Güney and Weinberg de Roca

On 7 May 2004, the Appeals Chamber dismissed the 29 March 2004 confidential “Notice of Internal Memorandum about Behaviour of the Accused Zoran Zigic” in which Zoran Zigic wished the Appeals Chamber to take notice of his behaviour report produced by the chief of the UN Detention Unit.

Appeals Chamber - Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Pocar, Mumba, Güney and Weinberg de Roca

ORDER VARYING THE PROVISIONAL RELEASE OF MIROSLAV KVOCKA AND FOR HIS RETURN TO THE TRIBUNAL DURING THE APPEAL HEARING

On 11 March 2004, the Appeals Chamber varied the terms of provisional release of Miroslav Kvocka and ordered inter alia that he surrender to the custody of the Tribunal on 19 March 2004 and be placed in detention for the time of the hearing on appeal. The provisional release of Miroslav Kvocka shall resume on 29 March 2004.

Appeals Chamber - Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Pocar, Güney, Schomburg and Weinberg de Roca

Appeals Chamber – Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Pocar, Güney, Schomburg and Weinberg de Roca

On 17 December 2003, the Appeals Chamber granted Miroslav Kvocka’s Request for provisional release which he had filed on 8 December 2003 (see Press Release No. 813).

Appeals Chamber – Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Pocar, Güney, Schomburg and Weinberg de Roca

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR SEPARATION OF MIROSLAV KVOCKA’S APPEAL PROCEDURE AND KVOCKA’S REQUEST FOR PROVISIONAL RELEASE PENDING HEARING OF THE APPEAL

On 24 November 2003, the Appeals Chamber dismissed Miroslav Kvocka’s Request for the Separation of the Appeal Procedure filed on 17 October 2003. It further gave the Appellant 20 days to address the conditions set out in Rule 65(I) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence and it ordered that, in default, the 5 November Request for Provisional Release stands dismissed as at the expiry of that period.

ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT IN RESPONSE TO MIROSLAV KVOCKA’S REQUEST FOR PARDON

On 7 August 2003, the President of the Tribunal dismissed Miroslav Kvocka’s Request for Granting of Pardon filed on 31 July 2003. The President noted that a petition for provisional release should be filed before the Appeals Chamber.

Appeals Chamber – Judges Meron (Presiding), Shahabuddeen, Hunt, Güney and Gunawardana

On 10 March 2003, the Appeals Chamber rejected the Further Request for Review, filed by Zoran Zigic on 26 February 2002. Zoran Zigic filed his request for review of both the Registrar’s Decision of 8 July 2002 and the Appeals Chamber Review Decision of 7 February 2003.

Appeals Chamber – Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Hunt, Güney, Gunawardana and Meron

DECISION ON REVIEW OF REGISTRAR’S DECISION TO WITHDRAW LEGAL AID FROM ZORAN ZIGIC

On 7 February 2003, the Appeals Chamber confirmed the Registrar’s Decision withdrawing legal aid filed on 8 July 2002.

Appeals Chamber - Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Hunt, Güney, Gunawardana and Meron

DECISION ON MOMCILO GRUBAN'S MOTION FOR ACCESS TO MATERIAL

On 13 January 2002, the Appeals Chamber granted Momcilo Gruban's Motion of 6 June 2002 and ordered, inter alia, that the Prosecution and the Defence in Kvocka et al. seek the consent of the providers of the material before disclosing to Gruban the non-public material which falls under Rule 70 (C) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

DÉCISION DU PRÉSIDENT RELATIVE À LA LIBÉRATION ANTICIPÉE DE MIROSLAV KVOCKA

On 13 December 2002, the President of the Tribunal rejected Miroslav Kvocka's request for early release. Miroslav Kvocka filed his request on 25 November 2002.

Appeals Chamber - Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Hunt, Güney, Gunawardana and Meron

ORDER OF THE APPEALS CHAMBER ON THE MOTION FOR PROVISONAL RELEASE BY MIROSLAV KVOCKA

On 11 September 2002, the Appeals Chamber denied Kvocka's Motion for Provisional Release of 23 August 2002.

On 30 July 2002, the President granted Milojica Kos' request for release effective 31 July 2002 (see Press Release No. 692).

On 26 June 2002, the Pre-Appeal Judge granted an extension of time to Zoran Zigic until 5 July 2002 to comply with the Decision on Prosecution Motion Requesting Order to Zoran Zigic to File Grounds of Appeal (see Weekly Update No. 225).

Pre-Appeal Judge Hunt

DECISION ON PROSECUTION MOTION REQUESTING ORDER TO ZORAN ZIGIC TO FILE GROUNDS OF APPEAL

On 24 May 2002, the Prosecution filed a Motion requesting that Zoran Zigic set out precise grounds for his appeal. On 14 June 2002, the pre-appeal Judge ordered, inter alia, that Zoran Zigic file a new document within 14 days of this Decision which clearly and concisely lists each ground of appeal upon which he relies.

DECISION ON TIME-LIMIT FOR PROSECUTION RESPONSE BRIEF

On 14 June 2002, the pre-appeal Judge granted the Prosecution an extension to 15 July 2002 in which to file a Consolidated Respondent's Brief of 250 pages or 75,000 words.

Pre-Appeal Judge Hunt
DECISION ON FILING OF CONSOLIDATED RESPONDENT'S BRIEF

On 12 April 2002, the Appellants Mladjo Radic and Dragoljub Prcac sought an Order that the Prosecution respond within 40 days of the date on which they filed their Appellant's Brief. On 22 April 2002, the Trial Chamber denied the Order. The pre-appeal Judge directed the Prosecution to file a memorandum no later than 10 June 2002 indicating the time it needs to file a Consolidated Respondent's Brief. The Trial Chamber refused the Order sought by the Defence. But the Application of the two Appellants pursuant to Rule 127(A)(i) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence is deferred until the Prosecution has filed its memorandum.

Appeals Chamber - Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Hunt, Güney, Gunawardana and Meron
DECISION ON APPELLANT REQUESTS FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

On 1 February 2002, Pre-Appeal Judge Hunt granted each of the Appellants an extension until 15 April 2002 to file their Appellant's brief.

Trial Chamber I - Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald
NOTICE OF APPEAL

On 16 November 2001, pursuant to Rule 108 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Counsel for Milojica Kos filed a Notice of Appeal against the judgement of 2 November 2001 (see Weekly Update No. 196).

Trial Chamber I - Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald
NOTICES OF APPEAL

On 13 November 2001, pursuant to Rule 108 of the ICTY Rules of Procedure and Evidence Defence Counsel for Miroslav Kvocka filed a Notice of Appeal against the sentencing judgement of 2 November 2001 (see Weekly Update No. 196). On 14 November Defence Counsel for Dragoljub Prcac and Mladjo Radic also filed Notices of Appeal as did Defence Counsel for Zoran Zigic on 15 November.

Miroslav Kvocka: found guilty by virtue of his individual criminal responsibility on 1 count of crime against humanity and 2 counts of violations of the laws or customs of war and sentenced to 7 years' imprisonment.

Dragoljub Prcac: found guilty by virtue of his individual criminal responsibility on 1 count of crime against humanity and 2 counts of violations of the laws or customs of war and sentenced to 5 years' imprisonment.

Milojica Kos: found guilty by virtue of his individual criminal responsibility on 1 count of crime against humanity and 2 counts of violations of the laws or customs of war and sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment.

Mladjo Radic: found guilty by virtue of his individual criminal responsibility on 1 count of crime against humanity and 3 counts of violations of the laws or customs of war and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment.

Zoran Zigic: found guilty by virtue of his individual criminal responsibility on 1 count of crime against humanity and 3 counts of violations of the laws or customs of war and sentenced to 25 years' imprisonment.

The Trial Chamber Judgement (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) will be rendered on 2 November 2001 at 2.30 p.m.

On 31 July 2001, a Bench of the Appeals Chamber (Judges Vohrah (Presiding), Shahabudeen and Nieto-Navia) dismissed Kvocka's application for leave to appeal the decision of Trial Chamber I, dated 30 May 2001, on the defence request to order the prosecution to disclose relevant documents regarding Witness AW, filed on 5 June 2001.

In reaching its decision, the Bench found that "there has been no showing either that there is such prejudice or that the issue in the proposed appeal is or general importance to proceedings before the International Tribunal or in international law generally."

DECISION ON INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL BY THE ACCUSED ZORAN ZIGIC AGAINST THE DECISION OF TRIAL CHAMBER I DATED 5 DECEMBER 2000

On 5 December, Trial Chamber I dismissed the Motion regarding the concurrent procedures before the International Court of Justice and the Tribunal on the same question, filed by Zoran Zigic on 24 October 2000 (see Weekly Update No. 151).

The Interlocutory Appeal Against Trial Chamber I Decision was filed on 1 March 2001.

On 25 May 2001, the Appeals Chamber composed of Judges Vohrah (Presiding), Shahabuddeen, Nieto-Navia, Pocar and Liu, dismissed the Interlocutory Appeal. The Appeals Chamber emphasised that "there is no hierarchical relationship between the International Court of Justice" and the Tribunal. However, it pointed out that the "Tribunal would consider any decisions of the International Court of Justice, subject to its competence to make its own findings."

On 29 May 2001, Trial Chamber I issued a Scheduling Order in which it decided that (1) the Defence rejoinder shall take place from 18 to 20 June 2001, (2) the closing briefs shall be filed by 29 June 2001 and (3) the closing arguments shall be presented from 16 to 20 July 2001.

DECISION ON DRAGOLJUB PRCAC'S REQUEST TO INTRODUCE AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE (RULE 94 TER)

On 27 April 2001, the Defence of Dragoljub Prcac filed a Request, in Annex III of which he sought the admission into evidence of thirteen affidavits in corroboration of witness testimony heard by the Trial Chamber, pursuant to Rule 94 ter of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

On 17 May 2001, the Trial Chamber granted the Request, admitted the affidavits and decided that the affiants shall not be called for cross-examination, pursuant to Rule 89 and former Rule 94 ter of the Rules of Procedure (Rule 94 ter of the Rules was deleted at the 23d Plenary Session held on 19 January 2001 and replaced by Rule 92 bis).

On 17 April 2001, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued its decision on the motion filed by Kvocka on 26 January 2001, requesting the admission into evidence of certain documents.

In the order the Trial Chamber admitted into evidence the following documents: D51/1: Judgements rendered by the Military Court of Banja Luka for the offences of evading military service, failing to respond to a draft order, wilful abandonment and desertion of armed forces. The documents were admitted as being indicative of the practice followed by the national military judicial organs of the "Republika Srpska" regarding individuals who commit offences relating to failure to comply with government or military orders during the period of armed conflict in the territory of the "Republic" and of the resulting sentences. Further, the Trial Chamber held that such documents are relevant to the case and have probative value as to what may constitute mitigating circumstances for sentencing according to Article 7(4) of the Statute of the Tribunal;

D41/1: a request for an investigation to the Investigating Judge of the Military Court for the offence of failure to carry out a material obligation addressed by the Military Prosecutor's office in Banja Luka and the two consequent Military Court decisions respectively ordering and suspending the requested investigation. These documents were admitted on the same grounds of relevance and probative value as exhibits D51/1.

D53/1: a letter addressed to Defence Counsel Mr. Krstan Simic by the Ministry of Justice of Republika Srpska. This document was admitted on the basis of its relevance and probative value with regard to the alleged facts and the role of the accused insofar as it states that the accused Kvocka was never appointed to the position of warden in any penal and correctional facility or remand prison and also refers to the existence of an ad hoc investigation centre in Omarska.

D49/1: a fax addressed to the law office of Defence Counsel Mr. Krstan Simic by the Prijedor Public Security Centre. This document was admitted on the basis of its relevance and probative value with regard to witness testimony and credibility insofar as it contains information on prior convictions of witness Emir Beganovic who testified on 4 and 5 May 2000, and about which the witness was asked during the course of the trial (see Weekly Update No. 124).

D48/1 and D52/1: documents concerning the hospitalisation and medical status of Miroslav Nisic and Emir Zjakic respectively were admitted on the basis of their relevance and probative value with regard to the testimonies of witnesses Branko Rosic and Milenko Rosic, who testified before the Trial Chamber on 6 February 2001 (See Weekly Update No. 159).

D50/1: a document entitled "Report on the implementation of the conclusions of the Prijedor Municipal Crisis Staff" issued by the Municipal Assembly Administrative Services, dated 13 July 1992. This document was admitted on the basis of its relevance with regard to the temporal and territorial circumstances of the case as well as to previously admitted evidence such as Crisis Staff decision and orders of probative value in that respect.

D45/1: a document entitled "Certificate for the temporary confiscation of items", signed by Z. Mejakic, R. Bunic and the accused Kvocka was admitted on the basis of its relevance with regard to the testimony of the accused Kvocka given before this Trial Chamber on 15 February 2001 (see Weekly Update No. 160) and of probative value as to the persons and incidents related to the case.

The Trial Chamber further stated that "the weight to be attached to the documents hereby admitted will be the object of evaluation during the deliberations of the Chamber."

On 14 March 2001, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) ordered the defence of the accused Kos to file a report prepared by the Commander of the United Nations Detention Unit (UNDU), Mr. McFadden, on the character and demeanour of Kos during his detention at the UNDU.

Considering that the report satisfies the provisions of Rule 89(C) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in that it is relevant to the character of the accused Kos and has probative value, the Trial Chamber admitted the report into evidence.

On 11 January 2001, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) denied a motion filed by Kvocka on 1 December 2000 requesting the Trial Chamber to limit prosecution cross-examination of defence witnesses to questions relating to the accused who called the witness and to prohibit cross-examination of the witness by the co-accused.

In reaching its decision, the Trial Chamber considered that it may admit relevant evidence which it deems to have probative value pursuant to Rule 89(C) and that it goes against the plain wording of Rule 90(H) to limit the scope of prosecution cross-examination as requested in the motion, particularly in the context of this trial in which the case against each accused may affect the other accused since crimes of multiple participation, joint liability and superior responsibility are alleged. Further, a witness presented by an accused may give evidence against one of his co-accused so that the co-accused has a right to cross-examine that witness and that to prohibit all cross-examination by a co-accused as requested in the motion could exclude relevant evidence.

The Trial Chamber therefore set out the sequence for the questioning of witnesses and ordered that "when a witness presented by the defence of one accused mentions another accused, the defence of that co-accused shall be entitled to cross-examine the witness. In other circumstances, co-accused wishing to cross-examine the witness shall make an application to the bench explaining the relevance of the proposed questioning."

On 15 December 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued its decision on the motions for judgement of acquittal filed by the accused Kos, Radic, Zigic and Prcac on 6 November 2000.

In the motions, Kos, Zigic and Prcac requested a judgement of total acquittal pursuant to Rule 98 bis of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Radic requested a partial acquittal, not challenging allegations contained in counts 14-17. Kvocka, who is charged with the same offences as Prcac, did not file a motion for acquittal.

The Trial Chamber first found that, in line with prior decisions, it may enter a judgement of acquittal not only with regard to an entire count of the indictment, but also with regard to a factual incident or event cited in the indictment in support of the offence, if a reasonable trier of fact could not, "upon the evidence presented by the Prosecutor on that particular incident, taken together with all reasonable inferences and applicable legal presumption and theories that might be applied to it", convict the accused.

The Trial Chamber then, on the basis of this standard:
(1) entered a judgement of acquittal in favour of the accused Kvocka, Kos, Radic and Prcac on those parts of the indictment which concern the Keraterm and Trnopolje camps, noting that no evidence had been presented as to any role of the accused in these camps and that the list of victims of Kvocka, Kos, Radic and Prcac concern only prisonsers confined in the Omarska camp;
(2) entered a judgement of acquittal in favour of the accused Kvocka, Kos, Radic, Zigic and Prcac on those parts of the indictment which concerned nine individuals named in a confidential annex to the decision; and
(3) entered a judgement of acquittal in favour of Zigic on those parts of the indictment which concerned 10 individuals named in a confidential annex to the decision relating to counts 1-3 and 11-14 of the amended indictment, and regarding the allegation of forced fellatio as far as it concerns the other victims mentioned in counts 6-7 and 11-14 of the amended indictment.

DECISION ON DEFENCE ADDITIONAL MOTION FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF THE ACCUSED PRCAC

On 14 December 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) denied Prcac's additional motion for a psychological evaluation, dated 24 November 2000.

Noting its decision of 18 May 2000 (see Weekly Update No. 127) ordering that a psychological and medical-psychiatric examination of Prcac be conducted in conformity with the regulations of the profession, the Trial Chamber considered that the defence now submits that the psychological report cannot be accepted as it does not meet the required professional standards.

In reaching its decision, the Trial Chamber considered that the defence did not oppose the Registrar's original decision not to appoint Ms. Najman, the psychologist who the defence now propose to conduct an additional expert assesment, and that the psychological report was filed nearly five months ago and that the defence had "ample time to ask for a re-examination". Moreover, the Tribunal is only required to pay the expenses of legal representation that are "necessarily and reasonably incurred".

On 14 December 2000, Trial Chamber I rejected the prosecution's motion to re-file affidavits and formal statements pursuant to Rule 94ter of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence, dated 15 November 2000.

In the motion the prosecution proposed to file unredacted versions of six affidavits previously rejected by the Trial Chamber on 30 October 2000 (see Weekly Update No. 147). However, the Trial Chamber noted that it rejected the affidavits on the ground that the Trial Chamber and the defence were unable to determine whether they had been certified in accordance with the provisions of Rule 94ter before the witnesses whose testimony they corroborate were heard. Further, the witnesses have now been heard by the Trial Chamber and the prosecution's case has finished. In these circumstances, the filing of the unredacted versions of the six affidavits a posteriori did not cure their failings.

On 5 December 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) dismissed the motion regarding the concurrent procedures before the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia ("ICTY") and the International Court of Justice ("ICJ") on the same question, filed by Zigic on 24 October 2000.

In the motion Zigic requested the Trial Chamber to suspend its decision on questions pending before the ICJ or to rule that such questions will not be decided and to request an advisory opinion from the ICJ.

The accused's submission that questions such as the nature of the armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the identity of the parties to the conflict, and whether crimes were committed in the course of that conflict are subject to determination by both the ICTY in the current matter and by the ICJ in an application filed by Bosnia and Herzegovina on 20 March 1993, alleging violations of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and of several other international obligations by the FRY.

In reaching its decision, the Trial Chamber considered that the ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, deals with State responsibility, while the ICTY, established by the Security Council on the basis of Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, deals with individual criminal responsibility, and further that staying the proceedings in this case until the ICJ makes a final determination in the application of Bosnia and Herzegovina would run contrary to the purpose of the establishment of the ICTY and deprive the accused of his right to a fair and expeditious trial.

On 22 November 2000, a Bench of the Appeals Chamber (Judges Shahabuddeen (Presiding), Vohrah and Nieto-Navia) dismissed Zigic’s motion for leave to appeal the decision of Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald), dated 13 October 2000. In its decision, the Trial Chamber had authorised the prosecution to consolidate the two indictments for the accused Prcac (IT-95-4) and the accused Kvocka, Radic, Kos and Zigic (IT-98-30) (see Weekly Update No. 144).

In reaching its decision, the Bench found that the defence had not shown that the decision would cause such prejudice to its case as could not be cured by the final disposal of the trial including post-judgement appeal, or that the issue in the proposed appeal is of general importance to proceedings before the Tribunal or in international law generally.

Further to the completion of the prosecution case on 6 October 2000, and subsequent motions for judgement of acquittal filed by Kos, Radic, Zigic and Prcac dated 6 November 2000 (all except Radic filed their motions confidentially), on 23 November 2000, the Trial Chamber scheduled a hearing on the motions to be held on 28 November 2000 at 4.00 p.m.

The Trial Chamber also scheduled a status conference to be held on the same day in order to discuss issues detailed in their order. Further, the accused are to file their pre-trial briefs by 15 December 2000. The pre-defence conference has been scheduled to take place on 12 January 2001 at 4.00 p.m.

On 30 October 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued its decision on the prosecution notice of 10 affidavits filed on 15 September 2000.

Rejecting the notice, the Trial Chamber held that the proposed affidavits did not meet the requirements of Rule 94ter and, as such, were not admissible as affidavit evidence.

Further to the order of Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald), dated 13 October 2000 (see Weekly Update No. 144), on 26 October 2000 the prosecution filed an amended indictment consolidating the indictments for the accused Prcac (IT-95-4) and the accused Kvocka, Radic, Kos and Zigic (IT-98-30) in order to take into account the joinder of the cases against the five accused in a single case (IT-98-30/1).

On 13 October 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued its decision on the prosecution request for leave to file a consolidated indictment and to correct confidential schedules, dated 28 August 2000.

The Trial Chamber authorised the prosecution to consolidate the two indictments for the accused Prcac (IT-95-4) and the accused Kvocka, Radic, Kos and Zigic (IT-98-30) in order to take into account the joinder of the cases against the five accused in a single case (IT-98-30/1), and to correct various typographical errors in the confidential schedules submitted with the amended indictment.

On 3 October 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) ordered that the transcripts, exhibits and confidential materials filed to date in the Kvocka & others case be disclosed to Trial Chamber II for "any purposes that it will deem appropriate in accordance with its jurisprudence in practice, which might allow for disclosure to the Defence in the Brdjanin and Talic case" subject to:

1. measures being taken to guarantee the witnesses, documentary or other evidence the same degree of protection as they enjoyed previously and, if necessary,
2. additional measures being taken, such as the adoption of different pseudonyms and the prohibition of disclosing the fact that a witness may have already testified before the Tribunal.

The order follows decisions issued by Judge Hunt, the pre-trial Judge in the Brdjanin and Talic case, on 31 July and 22 August 2000, inviting the Registrar to forward motions, filed by Talic and Brdjanin on 12 July and 1 August 2000 respectively, to Trial Chamber I to rule on the requested modifications to the protective measures ordered in the Kvocka & others case (see Weekly Update No. 136). Similar motions have already been ruled upon by the President (with regard to the Tadic case and Kovacevic) and Trial Chamber III (for the Sikirica & others case) (see Weekly Updates Nos. 140 and 136).

In reaching its decision, Trial Chamber I held that the material required from the Kvocka & others case concerning offences in Omarska, Trnopolje and Keraterm camps in the so-called "Autonomous Region of Krajina", could be of "significant value" to the accused Brdjanin and Talic. However, the Trial Chamber also considered that "it belongs to the Prosecutor to determine which of the witnesses who have appeared in the case Kvocka she intends to call in the case Brdjanin and Talic; that once such a decision is made, the Prosecutor has to ensure full disclosure …; that the identifying materials and complete scope of the testimony of these witnesses, as well as the exhibits produced during their testimony, should be disclosed to the Defence counsel for the accused; that the Prosecutor is under a constant obligation to disclose to the Defence in the Brdjanin and Talic case."

On 21 July 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued its decision authorising Zigic to pursue a defence of alibi for the facts referred to in paragraph 34(d) of the indictment, dated 31 May 1999, and to call three potential alibi witness.

On 8 June 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued a decision taking judicial notice of certain facts contained in a motion filed by the Prosecution on 11 January 1999.

Trial Chamber III had previously issued a decision in this case on 19 March 1999, in which it took judicial notice of some of the facts included in the Prosecution’s motion, i.e., it accepted those facts as proven without the need to hear evidence.

Trial Chamber I issued the current decision in light of the Tadic appeal judgement of 15 July 1999. The Trial Chamber considered the parties’ agreement that it was in the interests of justice, and in particular of expediting the trial, that judicial notice should be taken of facts included in 444 out of 583 paragraphs listed by the Prosecutor.

The Trial Chamber also noted that the amended indictment, dated 31 May 1999, charged the accused with violations of international humanitarian law in the Omarska, Keraterm and Trnopolje camps between 26 May and 30 August 1992, and that Tadic, whose conviction had become final, was convicted of crimes committed in the same places between 23 May and 31 December 1992.

Considering that the decision does not in itself indicate that the accused are responsible for the commission of the alleged crimes and the Prosecution still has to prove the individual responsibility of the accused for the crimes of the indictment, the Trial Chamber took notice of the following facts:

(1) that there existed an armed conflict at the times and places alleged in the indictment; (2) that the conflict included a widespread and systematic attack against the Muslim and Croat population; and (3) that there was a nexus between this armed conflict and the widespread and systematic attack on the civilian population and the mistreatment of prisoners in the Omarska, Keraterm and Trnopolje camps.

On 18 May 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) ordered a psychiatric and medical-psychiatric examination of Prcac with the purpose, among other things, of:

The order follows a "Request for Medical Examination", filed by counsel for Prcac on 11 May 2000.

In reaching its decision, the Trial Chamber considered that a psychological and medical-psychiatric examination of the accused might provide relevant information regarding his mental state before, during and after the commission of acts attributed to him, which might be taken into consideration, if and where appropriate, for sentencing the accused.

The Trial Chamber also requested the Registry to assign this task to two experts. A joint written report of the evaluations, observations and recommendations formulated by the experts is to be transmitted to the Registry by 25 June 2000.

On 12 May 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) ordered a psychiatric examination of Kvocka with the purpose, among other things, of:

The order follows a "motion for a medical expert and police law expert hearing", filed by counsel for Kvocka on 21 April 2000.

In reaching its decision, the Trial Chamber considered that a psychiatric examination of the accused might reveal relevant indications regarding his mental state before, during and after the commission of acts attributed to him and this might disclose circumstances necessary to be taken into consideration for the sentencing.

The Trial Chamber also requested the Registry to assign this task to two experts. A joint written report of the evaluations and recommendations formulated is to be transmitted to the Registry by 19 June 2000.

On 14 April 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued its written decision joining Dragoljub Prcac to the trial of Miroslav Kvocka, Milojica Kos, Mladjo Radic and Zoran Zigic. The oral decision was rendered during the status conference held on 12 April 2000 (see Weekly Update No. 121).

Considering that "a joint trial would accelerate the trial of one of the accused without prejudice to his or the other accused’s rights of defence, avoid duplication of evidence, minimize hardship caused to witnesses, and is generally in the interest of judicial economy" the Trial Chamber held that "the interests of justice would be best served by a joint trial in this case".

The joined cases have been assigned to a new case number: IT-98-30/1. The trial of Kvocka, Kos, Radic and Zigic, which adjourned on 6 March 2000, and will now include Prcac, has been scheduled to resume on 2 May 2000.

On 19 April 2000, Trial Chamber I ordered that a psychological and medical-psychiatric examination of Radic be performed to provide, among other things:

The Trial Chamber also requested the Registrar to assign two experts, namely one psychiatrist and one psychologist.

The order follows the defence request for a medical examination filed by Radic on 9 March 2000. In reaching its decision, the Trial Chamber considered that a psychological and medical-psychiatric examination of the accused would provide relevant information about the mental condition of the accused before and after the alleged commission of the crimes with which he is charged, which may be a circumstance considered in determining any punishment of the accused. (see also Weekly Update No. 119)

On 24 March 2000, the Prosecution filed its pre-trial brief in the Dragoljub Prcac case. A pre-trial conference has been scheduled to take place on 12 April 2000 at 4 p.m. in Courtroom III.

On 29 March 2000, Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) issued its order on the Radic’s request for a medical examination, filed on 9 March 2000, and reference made orally by the defence during the status conference on 24 February 2000 to an injury sustained by the accused upon his arrest, as well as to the need to take this injury into account so as to assess its impact on the accused’s personality.

Considering that the defence listed the psychological tests which it required but did not demonstrate the relevance of these tests to the trial, nor did it provide sufficiently precise explanation of the need for these particular tests, the Trial Chamber ordered the defence to give information with regard to specific questions detailed in the order.

On 2 February 2000, Trial Chamber III (Judges May (Presiding), Bennouna and Robinson) denied the request for provisional release filed on behalf of Kvocka on 12 January 2000.

In reaching its decision the Trial Chamber considered that the accused is charged with the gravest offences under international humanitarian law and the legitimate concerns expressed by the Prosecution regarding the likelihood that the accused may pose a danger to victims, witnesses or other persons. In addition the Trial Chamber was not satisfied that the accused, if released, will appear for trial.

On 3 February 2000, Judge Mumba, the Vice-President, ordered that the Kvocka and others case be transferred from Trial Chamber III to Trial Chamber I (Judges Rodrigues (Presiding), Riad and Wald) with immediate effect.

On 15 November 1999, Trial Chamber III (Judges May (Presiding), Bennouna and Robinson) ordered that the evidence of certain witnesses would be taken by way of deposition and appointed the Senior Legal Officer as Presiding Officer in respect of the depositions. The deposition evidence will be taken in closed session in the absence of the accused. The Trial Chamber considered that exceptional circumstances existed for the taking of evidence by way of deposition, namely, the length of the pre-trial detention of the accused and the inability of the Trial Chamber to set a date for commencement of trial due to the complexity of cases currently assigned to this Trial Chamber.

On 8 November 1999, Trial Chamber III (Judges May (Presiding), Bennouna and Robinson) issued its decision dismissing submissions filed by Radic and Zigic on 17 June 1999 on the form of the amended indictment dated 31 May 1999.

The Trial Chamber considered that the level of detail of the information contained in the amended indictment provides the accused with sufficient material to enable them to prepare their defence adequately and thus complies with the decision issued by the Trial Chamber on 12 April 1999 in which the Prosecution was directed to add particulars to the indictment against the accused dated 12 June 1998.

On 19 October 1999, Trial Chamber III (Judges May (Presiding), Bennouna and Robinson) issued its decision on the Prosecution’s motion for joinder filed on 22 July 1999 (see Weekly Update No. 87). In the motion the Prosecution requested that Kolundzija be severed from the "Sikirica & others" indictment (IT-95-8) and joined to the "Kvocka & others" indictment (IT-98-30).

Considering that the joining of Kolundzija to the Kvocka & others indictment is not in the interests of justice as it would delay the proceedings against the other accused charged in that indictment, the Trial Chamber dismissed the motion.

Further to a request by Miroslav Kvocka for extension of time to file the pre-trial brief currently due on 3 September 1999, filed on 19 July 1999. On 22 July 1999, Judge Mohamed Bennouna, in his capacity as pre-trial Judge, granted the request and ordered that Counsel for each accused in the case shall have until 24 September 1999 to file a pre-trial brief.

Pursuant to Judge Lal Chand Vohrah's order denying the Prosecution Request for leave to amend the "Sikirica & others" and "Kvocka & others" indictments, and direction that the joinder of accused persons charged in separate indictments is a matter to be dealt with by way of motion before a Trial Chamber, dated 6 July 1999 (see Weekly Update No. 85).
On 22 July 1999, the Prosecution filed before Trial Chamber III (Judges May (Presiding), Bennouna and Robinson) a Motion for Joinder to add Dragan Kolundzija to the "Kvocka & others" indictment and Request for leave to amend the "Sikirica & others" indictment to remove Kolundzija.

Further to the Prosecution filing an amended indictment on 31 May 1999 (see Weekly Update No. 80) and the pre-trial conference on 3 June 1999. On 8 June 1999, Trial Chamber III (Judges May (Presiding), Bennouna and Robinson) ordered inter alia that the Defence shall file their submissions in light of the amended indictment by Thursday 17 June 1999, and the parties shall clarify outstanding issues as to the taking of deposition evidence and file a list of witnesses to give evidence by deposition together with the current whereabouts of those witnesses, no later than Thursday 1 July 1999.

On 31 May 1999, the Prosecution submitted an amended indictment pursuant to the Trial Chamber’s "Decision on Defence Preliminary Motions on the Form of the indictment" of 12 April 1999.

On 29 April 1999, Trial Chamber III (Judges May (Presiding), Bennouna and Robinson), requested Republika Srpska to provide assistance, pursuant to Article 29 of the Statute, to enable the Prosecution to obtain "Duty Rosters" maintained at the Omarska police station between 1 April 1992 and 31 December 1992.

On 1 April 1999, Trial Chamber III (consisting of Judge May, presiding, Judge Bennouna and Judge Robinson) dismissed two Motions filed by Mlado Radic and Miroslav Kvocka respectively (see Weekly Updates Nos. 62 and 63).

Both Motions challenged the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to try the accused for the crimes they are charged with under Articles 1 and 3 of the Statute. The Judges considered that "the alleged crimes fall within the ambit of Article 1 of the Statute" (…) and that "the Trial Chamber has jurisdiction to try the accused for alleged violations [of the laws or customs of war] under Article 3 of the Statute".

On 10 February 1999, Judge Bennouna granted the Defence for Mlado Radic leave to file, by Friday 19 February 1999, "a written response to the Prosecutor’s Reply to Defence’s Prelimiary Motion" (See Weekly Update No. 62).

On 8 February 1999, the Prosecution filed its reply to Miroslav Kvocka’s Preliminary Motion of 19 January 1999 (see Weekly Update No. 63).

On 29 January 1999, Trial Chamber III denied the motion for provisional release filed in October 1998 by Milojica Kos. The Decision states that the accused "has failed to establish that exceptional circumstances exist to left release in this case".

On 19 January, the Defence Counsel for Miroslav Kvocka filed "a preliminary appeal to the amended indictment", challenging "the jurisdiction" of the Tribunal and pointing out "the defects in the form of the indictment".

The Defence Counsel for Mladjo Radic filed on 14 January a preliminary motion "challenging the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and pointing to the defects in the form of the indictment".

Arrangements are being made for his transfer to the ICTY's Detention Unit. We will inform you about his Initial Appearance as soon as the date has been set.

Milojica Kos is one of the 8 accused named in the Indictment "Meakic & others" issued by the ICTY on 13 February 1995 with regard to atrocities allegedly committed between May and August 1992 against Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat civilians from the Prijedor district held at the Omarska camp. He allegedly was one of the shift commanders who each supervised the three shifts of guards that operated the Omarska Camp.

The Initial Appearance of the Accused Zoran Zigic, who surrendered himself voluntarily to the Tribunal's jurisdiction on 16 April 1998, has been scheduled for Monday 20 April 1998 at 14.30 pm. The initial appearance is public. The Blaskic trial will continue after this hearing.