Priority to the commitments to the Tribunal

Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Nathan Dershowitz Participation - 08.09.2008 KRAJIŠNIK Momčilo

10. With respect to the request for an extension of time, the Appellant argues that Mr. Alan M. Dershowitz has commenced teaching responsibilities at HarvardLawSchool on 2 September 2008.[1] The Appeals Chamber gathers from this submission that the Appellant is arguing that due to these teaching responsibilities, Mr. Alan M. Dershowitz will not be able to participate in the interview with Radovan Karadžić at a time that would allow the Appellant to file a motion pursuant to Rule 115 of the Rules by 15 September 2008. The Appeals Chamber recalls that a counsel in a case before the Tribunal is under an obligation to give absolute priority to his commitments to the Tribunal and to observe the time limits in the Rules[2] or in an order of a Chamber. Furthermore, the Appeals Chamber recalls that “other professional commitments of counsel should not have any bearing on the responsibilities of counsel towards their client and the International Tribunal”.[3] In these circumstances, the Appellant has not shown good cause for the extension of time sought.

[1] Motion, para. 3.

[2] Cf. Emmanuel Ndindabahizi v. The Prosecutor, ICTR-01-71-A, Decision on “Requête urgente aux fins de prorogation de délai pour le dépôt du mémoire en appel”, 1 April 2005, p. 3.

[3] Prosecutor v. Momir Nikolić, IT-02-60/1-A, Decision on Second Defence Motion to Enlarge Time for Filing of Replies, 1 April 2005, p. 4.

Download full document