Decision on appeal against provisional detention order of Kaing Guek Eav alias Duch

a. the procedures ofthe Co-Investigating Judges prior to the Order being issued; 

b. the exercise of discretion by the Co-Investigating Judges to consider the application of Internal Rule 63(3); 

c. the sufficiency ofthe facts for reaching the conclusion under 63(3) ofthe Internal Rules; 

d.  whether the circumstances on which the Order was based still exist today; and 

e. any additional issues not otherwise dealt with which are the subject of specific grounds of appeal.

The Chamber found that prolonged detention of the charged person by the Cambodian Military Court prior to the transfer to the ECCC, do not bar the use of provisional detention in the ECCC proceedings.  The Chamber found that it had no jurisdiction to review previous actions of the Military Court. The Chamber also made findings on ECCC's special character within the Cambodian judiciary. The Chamber found that provisional detention was a necessary measure to prevent the charged person from exerting pressure on witnesses or destroying evidence, to prevent the charged person from absconding, to protect the security of the charged person and to preserve public order,