(i) Trial Chamber 1

(ii) Trial Chamber 2

(b) Pre Trial Chamber II Uganda

On 19 September 2005, Trial Chamber I commenced the Mpambara trial.

66. The trial began on 9 January 1997 before Trial Chamber 1.

68. The trial began on 9 April 1997 before Trial Chamber 2.

8 The membership of the three Pre Trial Chambers is Pre Trial Chamber I Judges C. Jorda (presiding), A. Kuenyehia and S. Steiner Pre Trial Chamber II Judges T.

(c) Pre Trial Chamber III Central African Republic.

Through pre trial and pre defence status conferences, a Trial Chamber has the authority to streamline trial proceedings.

Following the Appeals Chamber's decision of 28 September 2004 and its reasons of 22 October 2004, the trial will start de novo before a different Trial Chamber Section in Trial Chamber III.

The Trial Chamber denied this motion on 10 November 2005.

The Chamber attended to pre trial matters in four cases.

The Chamber attended to pre trial matters in five cases.

On 15 July 2004, the Appeals Chamber rendered a decision on Mugiraneza's appeal against the decision of the Trial Chamber on exclusion of evidence by directing the Trial Chamber to reconsider Mugiraneza's request.3 The Appeals Chamber also dismissed the Prosecutor's counter appeal.

Trial Chamber III heard three trials contemporaneously during the second mandate.

Their cases will start as soon as trial chamber capacity allows.

(a) The Chambers, comprising three Trial Chambers and an Appeals Chamber

However, owing to the delay in establishing the second trial chamber, the third trial only commenced in March 2005.

New trials will start as soon as Trial Chamber capacity is available.

In January 2004, the Trial Chamber issued decisions ordering three joint trials.

On 2 April 2002, the Chamber also started the Military I trial and heard evidence over thirty two trial days.

Furthermore, it would enable all pre trial and Appeals Chamber proceedings to continue without interrupting the conduct of any trial.

Trial Chamber II was engaged in three trials concurrently during the second mandate.

(a) Pre Trial Chamber I Democratic Republic of the Congo Darfur, the Sudan

Kosovo Trial Chamber 3, posts authorized for 1 July 1 November. Annex IV

However, experience shows the usefulness of twin tracking one joint trial with a single accused trial, as well as the Trial Chamber Sections sitting in shifts.

In previous Completion Strategy submissions, projections were premised on an average of 150 trial days per year, per Trial Chamber Section.

30. A decision on witness protection, similar to the decision rendered by Trial Chamber 1 in the case against Kayishema, was made in respect of Ruzindana by Trial Chamber 2 on 12 March 1997.

This makes it difficult to maintain six Trial Chamber Sections on a permanent basis.

In February 2004, the President of the Special Court requested a second Trial Chamber.

They are assigned by the President to the Trial Chamber in which they serve.

The addition of one Trial Chamber would allow the Tribunal to conduct trials simultaneously.

Request for assistance by the Trial Chamber to all States issued, 2 August 1995.

Some Trial Chamber Sections sit in morning and afternoon shifts. These sessions are shorter than full trial days, by about two hours.

On 20 September 2004, a different Trial Chamber Section commenced the Military II trial, in which the Prosecution is presenting its case.

In order to address the foregoing requirements, President McDonald requests that a third Trial Chamber of the Tribunal, staffed by three additional judges, be established, and that a fourth judge be added, to be assigned as needed to either a Trial Chamber or to the Appeals Chamber.

The Akayesu judgement brought to a close a trial that had lasted more than a year. During the trial, the Trial Chamber heard 42 witnesses called by the parties testimony which generated more than 4,000 pages of transcripts. The Chamber also considered 125 exhibits entered in evidence. After holding a pre sentencing hearing in the Jean Paul Akayesu case, on 2 October the Trial Chamber sentenced him to life imprisonment.

Following an appeal filed by the defence, the Appeals Chamber, in its decision of 28 September 2004 and reasons on 22 October 2004, disqualified the judges engaged in the trial and ordered that the trial start de novo before a newly constituted Trial Chamber (see para.

On 3 December 2003, Trial Chamber I delivered judgement in the so called Media case .

That provision grants a Trial Chamber broad discretion in assessing the admissibility of evidence.8

Let me briefly recall the three Trial Chamber judgements rendered during the period under review.

11. The Pristina trial chamber consisted of a presiding judge sitting with two lay judges.

on the need for and additional Trial Chamber and the full utilization of its courtrooms

A third Trial Chamber, consisting of three additional judges and a rotating judge, is required.

Request for assistance by the Trial Chamber I to all States issued, 2 August 1995.