Position of trust

Notion(s) Filing Case
Contempt Appeal Judgement - 16.11.2012 RAŠIĆ Jelena
(IT-98-32/1-R77.2-A)

65. The Appeals Chamber finds that Rašić has failed to show that the Trial Chamber erroneously relied on her position as an “officer of justice” as an aggravating circumstance. […]

66. Similarly, the Appeals Chamber finds that Rašić has failed to show that the Trial Chamber’s finding that she was an “officer of justice” is not supported by the evidence. Again, the Appeals Chamber finds that this argument effectively turns on semantics as opposed to substance. The Trial Chamber used this term to describe the obligations of “any professional involved in the proceedings before the Tribunal”, including members of defence teams.[1] It took into account that, as a member of Milan Lukić’s defence team, Rašić held a “position of trust”, and that she was “obligated to act conscientiously with full respect of the law and applicable rules”.[2]

67. The specific obligation to fully respect the applicable law is contained in the disciplinary regime applicable to members of a defence team. Pursuant to Article 35 (i) and (v) of the Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel, members of a defence team display professional misconduct if they: (i) violate the Rules; or (ii) engage in conduct which is prejudicial to the proper administration of justice before the Tribunal.[3]

[1] Sentencing Judgement, para. 18.

[2] Sentencing Judgement, para. 18.

[3] Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel Appearing Before the International Tribunal, IT/125 Rev. 3, 22 July 2009 (“Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel”). See also Articles 34 and 40 of the Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel.

Download full document