Death of an appellant

Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Termination of Appellate Proceedings for Gvero - 07.03.2013 POPOVIĆ et al.
(IT-05-88-A)

6.[…] Accordingly, the Appeals Chamber considers that, having found that the death of an appellant results in the termination of proceedings and given that no appeal judgement can be rendered with respect to Gvero, nothing can undermine the finality of the Trial Judgement as it concerns Gvero.[1] As a consequence, the Trial Judgement shall be considered final in relation to Gvero.

[1] See Delić Decision, para. 15.

Download full document
Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Termination of Appellate Proceedings for Gvero - 07.03.2013 POPOVIĆ et al.
(IT-05-88-A)

5.[…] The Appeals Chamber further recalls that appellate proceedings before this Tribunal should be terminated following the death of the appellant for lack of jurisdiction.[1] On the death of Gvero, the Appeals Chamber no longer has jurisdiction over his proceedings. The appellate proceedings in relation to Gvero must therefore be terminated, without prejudice to the appellate proceedings concerning the other appellants in the Popović et al. case.

[1] Delić Decision, [Prosecutor v. Rasim Delić, Case No. IT-04-83-A, Decision on the Outcome of the Proceedings, 29 June 2010] para. 8.

Download full document
Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Review - 17.12.2013 DELIĆ Rasim
(IT-04-83-R.1)

CONSIDERING further that Counsel have no standing in their own right in circumstances where the appellant has died and the appellate proceedings before the Tribunal have been terminated;

Download full document
Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on the Outcome of Proceedings - 29.06.2010 DELIĆ Rasim
(IT-04-83-A)

5. This is the first time in the history of both this Tribunal and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (“ICTR”) where an appellant has died before the rendering of the appeal judgement. The orders previously issued to terminate the proceedings following the death of an accused have so far only been rendered prior to the delivery of the trial judgement.[1] That said, the Appeals Chamber notes that while neither the Statute nor the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence (“Rules”) explicitly provide for the course of action to be taken following the death of an appellant, a number of their provisions clearly exclude the possibility of the continuation of the appellate proceedings in such circumstances.

8. […] the Appeals Chamber finds that, as a matter of principle, the appellate proceedings before this Tribunal should be terminated following the death of the appellant for lack of jurisdiction. […]

For an overview of considerations raised in other international criminal jurisdictions where proceedings have been terminated following the death of an accused prior to the rendering of the trial judgement, see para. 7.

[1] E.g., Prosecutor v. Djordje Djukić, Case No. IT-96-20-A, Order Terminating the Appeal Proceedings, 29 May 1996 (in which the Appeals Chamber terminated all proceedings, given that at the time of death, it was seised of the Prosecution’s appeal against the Trial Chamber’s decision rejecting the parties’ requests to withdraw the Indictment on humanitarian grounds); Prosecutor v. Mile Mrkšić et al., Case No. IT-95-13a-T, Order Terminating Proceedings Against Slavko Dokmanović, 15 July 1998; Prosecutor v. Enver Hadžihasanović et al., Case No. IT-01-47-PT, Order Terminating Proceedings Against Mehmed Alagić, 21 March 2003; Prosecutor v. Momir Talić, Case No. IT-99-36/1-T, Order Terminating Proceedings Against Momir Talić, 12 June 2003; Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milošević, Case No. IT-02-54-T, Order Terminating the Proceedings, 14 March 2006; see also The Prosecutor v. Samuel Musabyimana, Case No. ICTR-2001-62-I, Order Terminating the Proceedings Against Samuel Musabyimana, 20 February 2003.

Download full document