18 41. In contrast to the view put forward by the Defence, the Prosecution denies that the Decision on Admissibility of Additional Evidence supports the position that the Appellant did not receive a fair trial. It notes that the majority of the proposed additional evidence was found by the Appeals Chamber to have been available to the Defence at trial. Furthermore, with respect to that portion of the proposed additional evidence which was found not to have been available at trial, it notes that the Appeals Chamber, after careful consideration, found that the interests of justice did not require it to be admitted on appeal. Thus, in the Prosecution’s view, rather than showing a denial of fair trial, this decision is consistent with the view that the rights of the Appellant in this respect were not violated by any lack of cooperation on the part of the authorities of the Republika Srpska. 69 42. The Prosecution further emphasises that Defence counsel failed to make a motion for dismissal of the case on the basis that a fair trial was impossible because of lack of cooperation of the authorities of the Republika Srpska. It notes that, by not doing so, the Defence failed to give the Trial Chamber the opportunity to take additional measures to overcome the difficulties faced by the Defence. It is submitted that this omission by the Defence further provides an indication that it did not believe that the Appellant’s right to a fair trial had been violated. 70 B. Discussion 1. Applicability of Articles 20(1) and 21(4)(b) of the Statute 43. Article 20(1) of the Statute provides that “[t]he Trial Chambers shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious […]”. This provision mirrors the corresponding guarantee provided for in international and regional human rights instruments: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) (“ICCPR”), 71 the European Convention on 69 T. 96 (20 April 1999). T. 100 (20 April 1999). 71 Article 14(1) of the ICCPR provides in part: “All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law. […].” 70 Case No.: -94-1-A 15 July 1999