Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation

Prosecutor v Ntabakuze (Aloys), Decision on Ntabakuze’s pro se motion for assignment of an investigator and counsel in anticipation of his request for review, Case No MICT-14-77-R, ICL 1095 (MICT 2015), 19th January 2015, United Nations [UN]; United Nations Security Council [UNSC]; Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals [MICT]; Appeals Chamber [MICT]

From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights Reserved.date: 30 March 2020

Under what circumstances an applicant could have benefited from the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals’ (‘MICT’) legal aid system to request review proceedings.

What were the controlling considerations in granting an applicant access to the MICT’s legal aid system that could have supported a finding of necessity with a view to ensuring the fairness of proceedings.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.