At para. 27, the Appeals Chamber confirmed the Trial Chamber’s finding that “[a] State cannot arrogate to itself the right to limit the request of an applicant to material that it considers to be favourable to the Applicant’s case”[1] but that, rather, it is “for the Applicant to determine which documents, if any, of those produced should be used in his case.”[2] The Appeals Chamber held that this is so as “it is the requesting party under Rule 54bis who is best placed to determine whether certain material, even seemingly inculpatory material, may be useful for its case.”[3]