Pending ancillary matters after delivery of the trial judgement
| Notion(s) | Filing | Case |
|---|---|---|
| Decision on Motion to Void Trial Chamber Decisions - 30.09.2011 |
NYIRAMASUHUKO et al. (Butare) (ICTR-98-42-A) |
|
|
NOTING that the Decision Varying Protective Measures was a ruling on an application filed before the Trial Chamber on 7 June 2011, prior to the pronouncement of the Trial Judgement; CONSIDERING that, when a Chamber pronounces its judgement on the merits of a case before it, it retains jurisdiction to dispose of pending ancillary matters of which it is properly seised; FINDING, therefore, that the Trial Chamber had jurisdiction over the matters it ruled upon in the Decision Varying Protective Measures; NOTING further that the proceedings subject of the Decision Concerning Witness QA and the Decision Concerning Witnesses QY and SJ were initiated in 2008 and 2009, respectively, prior to the pronouncement of the Trial Judgement, and that proceedings for contempt and false testimony “are independent of the proceedings out of which they arise”; FINDING, therefore, that the Trial Chamber had jurisdiction over the matters it ruled upon in the Decision Concerning Witness QA and the Decision Concerning Witnesses QY and SJ; [1] See Decision Varying Protective Measures [The Prosecutor v. Pauline Nyiramasuhuko et al., Case No. ICTR-98-42-T, Decision on the Re-Filing of Prosecutor’s Ex-Parte Motion to Vary Protective Measures for Witnesses, 1 September 2011], p. 2, referring to the Prosecutor v. Pauline Nyiramasuhuko et al., Case No. ICTR-98-42-T, Re-filing of Prosecutor’s Ex Parte Motion to Vary Protective Measures for Witnesses, Art. 28 and Rule 75, 7 June 2011. [2] See Decision Concerning Witness QA [The Prosecutor v. Pauline Nyiramasuhuko et al., Case No. ICTR-98-42-T, Confidential Decision Following Amicus Curiae Report Related to Allegations of Contempt of the Tribunal and False Testimony and Witness QA, 2 September 2011 (confidential)], para. 1; Decision Concerning Witnesses QY and SJ [The Prosecutor v. Pauline Nyiramasuhuko et al., Case No. ICTR-98-42-T, Confidential Decision Following Amicus Curiae Report Related to Allegations of Contempt of the Tribunal and False Testimony and Witnesses QY and SJ, 2 September 2011 (confidential)], para. 1. [3] Karemera et al. Decision [Édouard Karemera et al. v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-98-44-AR91.2, Decision on Joseph Nzirorera’s and the Prosecutor’s Appeals of Decision Not to Prosecute Witness BTH for False Testimony, 16 February 2010], para. 25 and references cited therein. Cf. The Prosecutor v. Hormisdas Nsengimana, Case Nos. ICTR-01-69-A and ICTR-10-92, Decision on Prosecution Appeal of Decision Concerning Improper Contact with Prosecution Witnesses, 16 December 2010, in which the Appeals Chamber considered an appeal against a decision related to contempt allegations issued by Trial Chamber I after the rendering of the trial judgement in Mr. Nsengimana’s case. |
||