Access to ex parte material from another case

Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Access to Confidential Materials - 21.02.2007 KRAJIŠNIK Momčilo
(IT-00-39-A)

P. 5: CONSIDERING, however, that “ex parte material, being of a higher degree of confidentiality, by nature contains information which has not been disclosed inter partes because of security interests of a State, other public interests, or privacy interests of a person or institution”[1] and that “[c]onsequently, the party on whose behalf ex parte status has been granted enjoys a protected degree of trust that the ex parte material will not be disclosed”;[2]

FINDING that the Applicant has not demonstrated a legitimate forensic purpose in relation to such ex parte material;

[1] Prosecutor v. Miroslav Bralo, Case No. IT-95-17-A, Decision on Motions For Access to Ex Parte Portions of the Record on Appeal and for Disclosure of Mitigating Material, 30 August 2006 (“Bralo Decision”), para. 17. See already Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić, Case No. IT-95-9-A, Decision on Defence Motion by Franko Simatović for Access to Transcripts, Exhibits, Documentary Evidence and Motions Filed by the Parties in the Simić et al. Case, 12 April 2005 (Simić Decision), p. 3.

[2] Bralo Decision, para. 17.

Download full document
Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Access to Confidential Materials - 21.02.2007 KRAJIŠNIK Momčilo
(IT-00-39-A)

P. 5: CONSIDERING, however, that “ex parte material, being of a higher degree of confidentiality, by nature contains information which has not been disclosed inter partes because of security interests of a State, other public interests, or privacy interests of a person or institution”[1] and that “[c]onsequently, the party on whose behalf ex parte status has been granted enjoys a protected degree of trust that the ex parte material will not be disclosed”;[2]

FINDING that the Applicant has not demonstrated a legitimate forensic purpose in relation to such ex parte material;

[1] Prosecutor v. Miroslav Bralo, Case No. IT-95-17-A, Decision on Motions For Access to Ex Parte Portions of the Record on Appeal and for Disclosure of Mitigating Material, 30 August 2006 (“Bralo Decision”), para. 17. See already Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić, Case No. IT-95-9-A, Decision on Defence Motion by Franko Simatović for Access to Transcripts, Exhibits, Documentary Evidence and Motions Filed by the Parties in the Simić et al. Case, 12 April 2005 (Simić Decision), p. 3.

[2] Bralo Decision, para. 17.

Download full document
Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Access to Ex Parte Filings - 10.05.2016 KARADŽIĆ Radovan
(MICT-13-55-A)

EMPHASIZING that, with regard to ex parte confidential material, the requesting party must meet a higher standard in order to establish a legitimate forensic purpose for accessing such material[1] as it by its nature contains information that has not been disclosed inter partes because of, inter alia, “privacy interests of a person” and that, therefore, “the party on whose behalf the ex parte status has been granted enjoys a protected degree of trust that the ex parte material will not be disclosed”;[2]

[1] Brđanin Decision of 24 January 2007 [Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-A, Decision on Mićo Stanišić’s Motion for Access to All Confidential Materials in the Brđanin Case, 24 January 2007], para. 14.  

[2] Šainović Decision of 16 February 2010 [Prosecutor v. Nikola Šainović et al., Case No. IT-05-87-A, Decision on Vlastimir Đorđević’s Motion for Access to Transcripts, Exhibits and Documents, 16 February 2010], para. 10 and references cited therein.

Download full document