Interpretation in light of international law
| Notion(s) | Filing | Case |
|---|---|---|
| Decision on Provisional Release - 31.10.2003 |
LIMAJ et al. (IT-03-66-AR65) |
|
|
11. The ICTY is entrusted with bringing justice to the former Yugoslavia. First and foremost, this means justice for the victims, their relatives and other innocent people. Justice, however, also means respect for the alleged perpetrators’ fundamental rights. Therefore, no distinction can be drawn between persons facing criminal procedures in their home country or on an international level. 12. Rules 65 (B) and (D) of the Rules must therefore be read in the light of the ICCPR and ECHR and the relevant jurisprudence. 13. Moreover, when interpreting Rule 65(B) and (D) of the Rules, the general principle of proportionality must be taken into account. A measure in public international law is proportional only when it is (1) suitable, (2) necessary and when (3) its degree and scope remain in a reasonable relationship to the envisaged target. Procedural measures should never be capricious or excessive. If it is sufficient to use a more lenient measure than mandatory detention, it must be applied.[1] [1]See, among others, Prosecutor v. Darko Mđra, Case No.: IT-02-59-PT, “Decision on Darko Mđra on Request for Provisional Release”, 15 April 2002, Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasonivić, Mehmed Alagić and Amir Kubura, “Decision granting Provisional Release to Enver Hadžihasonivić”, 19 December 2001.
|
ICTR Rule Rule 65 ICTY Rule Rule 65 | |
| Notion(s) | Filing | Case |
| Decision on Prosecution Appeal of Decision on Challenges to Jurisdiction - 28.06.2019 |
TURINABO, Maximilien (MICT-18-116-PT) |
|
|
15. The Appeals Chamber reiterates that the Mechanism is bound to interpret its Statute and Rules in a manner consistent with the jurisprudence of the ad hoc Tribunals[.][1] [1] Karadžić Appeal Judgement, para. 12 and references therein. |
||