400. Cumulative charging is to be allowed in light of the fact that, prior to the presentation of all of the evidence, it is not possible to determine to a certainty which of the charges brought against an accused will be proven. The Trial Chamber is better poised, after the parties’ presentation of the evidence, to evaluate which of the charges may be retained, based upon the sufficiency of the evidence.  In addition, cumulative charging constitutes the usual practice of both this Tribunal and the ICTR.  

56. The Appeals Chamber finds no error in the Trial Chamber’s determination that the Indictment sufficiently pleaded the crime of deportation and recalls that, in relation to the alleged forcible displacements of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats […] the Indictment stated that such displacements occurred “either across a de facto or de jure border or internally without the crossing of a de facto or de jure border”.[1] The Appeals Chamber further considers that the allegations were pleaded with sufficient specificity, particularly considering that the expulsions resulted from a number of attacks over a prolonged period of time and that Karadžić was not alleged to have directly participated in such expulsions.[2] The Appeals Chamber likewise considers, in view of the established practice allowing cumulative charging, that the Prosecution was not required to distinguish in the Indictment which events resulted in deportation as opposed to inhumane acts (forcible transfer).[3]