DECLARATION OF JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA

I wish to clarify my position with respect to the fourth dispositive paragraph. According to Rule 40bis, the Appellant "shall be released or, if appropriate, be delivered to the authorities of the State to which the request was initially made" (emphasis added). I am not convinced that it is appropriate to direct the Registrar to make the necessary arrangements to deliver the Appellant to the Cameroonian authorities. The Appeals Chamber found that the Appellant was detained by Cameroon since 21 February 1997 "solely at the behest of the Prosecutor". The Chamber further found that the "Appellant would have been released on 21 February 1997, when the Cameroon Court of Appeal denied the Rwandan extradition request and ordered the immediate release of the Appellant" but for the Tribunal’s "valid request pursuant to Rule 40 for provisional detention, and shortly thereafter, pursuant to Rule 40bis, for the transfer of the Appellant". Therefore, Cameroon is under no legal obligation to accept the Appellant unless they wish to proceed with his prosecution. Under these circumstances, the Registrar should obtain the views of the Cameroonian authorities, and deliver the Appellant to them only if appropriate.

___________________________

Rafael Nieto-Navia
Judge