Section IV
VERIFICATION OF COURT’S JUDGMENTS, RULINGS, AND DECISIONS
Chapter 32
REOPENING CASES BASED ON NEWLY DISCOVERED CIRCUMSTANCES
Article 400-5. Grounds for reconsideration of court’s decisions based on newly discovered facts
Court’s decisions that have taken legal effect may be reconsidered based on newly discovered facts.
The following shall be considered to be newly discovered facts:
1) falsified proofs, wrong translation, testimonies of a witness, victim, accused, defendant, opinion and explanations of a court expert underlying the judgment concerned;
2) abuses the prosecutor, inquirer, investigator, or judges commit during proceedings in the case;
3) any other facts of which the court had no knowledge when decreeing its decision and which themselves or together with previously established facts show that conviction or acquittal of the defendant was a mistake.
Falsifying proofs, knowingly wrong translation, knowingly misleading testimonies of a witness, victim, knowingly wrong court’s expert opinion and explanations, abuses of prosecutors, inquirers, investigators, and judges shall be grounds for reconsidering judicial decisions which have taken legal effect, by way of exceptional proceedings provided that they are established by a judgment which has taken legal effect and, if decreeing a judgment is impossible, - by records of the investigation.
1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that:
(a) New evidence has been discovered that:
(i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and
(ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict;
(b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified;
(c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46.
2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate:
(a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber;
(b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised.