<<previous | index | next>> VI) DEFENSESa) Alibi and special defensesi) excerpts from Rule 67, ICTR Rules of Procedure and Evidence: reciprocal disclosure of evidence
ii) burden of proof for alibi defenseKayishema and Ruzindana, (Trial Chamber), May 21, 1999, para. 234: “[T]he burden of proof rests upon the Prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt in all aspects notwithstanding that the Defence raised alibi. After all, the accused is presumed innocent until the Prosecution has proved his guilt under Article 20(3) of the Statute. The accused is only required to raise the defence of alibi and fulfil the specific requirements of Rule 67(A)(ii) of the Rules.” iii) notice for alibi defenseKayishema and Ruzindana, (Trial Chamber), May 21, 1999, para. 235-239: Rule 67 required the Defense “to notify the Prosecution about their intent to rely upon the defence of alibi.” In the case at hand, the defense did not inform the prosecutor prior to the commencement of trial and the prosecutor filed a motion requesting compliance with Rule 67(A)(ii). The Chamber held that “where good cause is not shown, for the application of Rule 67(B), the Trial Chamber is entitled to take into account this failure when weighing the credibility of the defence of alibi and/or any special defences presented.” In the case at hand, the Chamber held that “despite the non-compliance with its order” it would “consider the defence of alibi.”
iv) rebuttal for alibi defenseKayishema and Ruzindana, (Trial Chamber), May 21, 1999, para. 239-240: Rule 85 permits the Prosecution to bring evidence to rebut the alibi. The Chamber noted that they “will accord no extra weight to the accused's defence of alibi merely because the Prosecution did not call witnesses in rebuttal.”
|