9 (ii) The Trial Chamber erred by failing to take into account the general practice regarding prison sentences in the courts of the former Yugoslavia, as required by Article 24 of the Statute of the International Tribunal. Under this practice, a 20-year sentence is the longest sentence that can be imposed, but only as an alternative to the death penalty. 41 (iii) The Trial Chamber paid insufficient attention to the personal circumstances of Duško Tadi}.42 Ground (2): The Trial Chamber erred by recommending that the calculation of the minimum sentence should commence “from the date of this Sentencing Judgement or of the final determination of any appeal, whichever is the latter”. 43 Ground (3): The Trial Chamber erred in not giving the Appellant credit for the time spent in confinement in Germany before the International Tribunal requested deferral in this case. 44 C. Relief Requested 1. The Appeal against Judgement 24. In the Appeal against Judgement the Defence seeks the following relief: 45 (i) That the decision of the Trial Chamber that the Appellant is guilty of the crimes proved against him be set aside. (ii) That a re-trial of the Appellant be ordered. (iii) In the alternative to the relief sought under (i) and (ii) above, that the decision of the Trial Chamber at paragraph 397 of the Judgement that the Appellant is guilty of the murders of Osman Didovic and Edin Be{i} be reversed. 40 T. 303 (21 April 1999). Appellant’s Brief on Sentencing Judgement, pp. 4–6; T. 304 (21 April 1999). 42 Appellant’s Brief on Sentencing Judgement, pp. 9-10; T. 305 (21 April 1999). 43 Sentencing Judgement, para. 76. See Appellant’s Brief on Sentencing Judgement, p. 10. 44 Ibid., p. 14. 45 Appellant’s Amended Notice of Appeal against Judgement, p. 3. 41 Case No.: -94-1-A 15 July 1999