724. The Appeals Chamber reiterates that “[t]he appeal process of the International Tribunal is not designed for the purpose of allowing parties to remedy their own failings or oversights during trial or sentencing.”[1]  Appeal proceedings are rather of a “corrective nature” and, contrary to Land‘o’s submissions, they do not amount to a trial de novo.[2]  Therefore, to the extent that the parties simply resubmit arguments presented at trial without pointing to a particular error, this misconceives the purpose of appellate review on sentence. 

725. The test to be applied in relation to the issue as to whether a sentence should be revised is that most recently confirmed in the Furund‘ija Appeal Judgement.[3]  Accordingly, as a general rule, the Appeals Chamber will not substitute its sentence for that of a Trial Chamber unless “it believes that the Trial Chamber has committed an error in exercising its discretion, or has failed to follow applicable law.”[4]  The Appeals Chamber will only intervene if it finds that the error was “discernible”.[5]  As long as a Trial Chamber does not venture outside its “discretionary framework” in imposing sentence,[6] the Appeals Chamber will not intervene. […]