Counsel as witness
|Decision on Admission of Transcript - 23.11.2007||
PRLIĆ et al.
28. Article 26 of the Code of Conduct further provides that, subject to three exceptions, “[c]ounsel shall not act as an advocate in a proceeding in which counsel is likely to be a necessary witness”.
29. […] At the time of the questioning, the investigators were only able to provide Prlić with a list of general questions reflecting the nature of subjects which were of interest to the Prosecution, and not specific questions they wished to have answered. Considering these circumstances, and even assuming that Salahović knew about the subject-matter interest of the Prosecution when the questioning began, the Appeals Chamber concludes that, on the basis of the facts before it, a trier of fact could reasonably conclude that there was, at that stage, no likelihood that Salahović would become a witness. Thus, this part of the Prlić Appeal is also rejected. As a consequence, the Appeals Chamber further dismisses Prlić’s arguments related to the fact that the alleged conflict of interest would have affected not just him, but the administration of justice as a whole.
 Code of Conduct, Article 26.
 Motion to Suppress Statement, para. 2.
 Cf. Gotovina Decision of 25 October 2006, paras 31-33.
 Prlić Appeal, para. 38; see also Prosecution Response, para. 37.
|Other instruments Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel Appearing Before the International Tribunal|