01005688 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 2.4. Fair Trial Rights 2.4.1. Introduction 40. Over the course of the proceedings in Case 002/01, NUON Chea and KHIEU Samphan alleged violations of their rights to a fair and impartial investigation and trial. The Chamber addressed these allegations on a case-by-case basis, providing relief where it was in the interests of justice. Although both Accused had initially signalled their intent to answer the parties’ and the Chamber’s questions at the conclusion of the hearing of evidence, they ultimately refused to do so, citing as a basis for this refusal the Chamber’s alleged violation of their fair trial rights throughout the proceedings.107 The Accused further developed these submissions in their Closing Briefs and Closing Statements requesting the Chamber to dismiss all or part of the charges, stay the proceedings and/or consider alleged violations of their rights in the final assessment of the evidence.108 41. The Chamber addresses these submissions below, taking decisions as required to supplement those already taken during the course of the trial. The Chamber will also examine whether procedural errors, if any, have a cumulative effect on the overall fairness of the trial.109 107 T. 9 July 2013, pp. 41, 42-43; T. 17 July 2013, pp. 67-68; Withdrawal of Notice of Intent pursuant to Internal Rule 90, E287/2, 30 July 2013, paras 3-4, 18. 108 NUON Chea’s Closing Submissions in Case 002/01, E295/6/3, paras 16-115; T. 22 October 2013 (NUON Chea Defence Closing Statement), pp. 2, 5-8, 21-25, 28-44, 51-52, 55-60; T. 31 October 2013 (NUON Chea), pp. 3, 29-31; T. 31 October 2013 (NUON Chea Defence Rebuttal), pp. 35-38, 41-44; [KHIEU Samphan’s] Conclusions finales, E295/6/4, 26 September 2013, paras 4-8, 94-101, 109; T. 25 October 2013 (KHIEU Samphan Defence Closing Statements), pp. 2-23, 26-27, 32-40, 54; T. 31 October 2013 (KHIEU Samphan Defence Rebuttal), pp. 63-65. Allegations concerning the fairness of the proceedings also formed the basis of an interlocutory appeal by the KHIEU Samphan Defence (Urgent Request by the Defence Team of Mr. KHIEU Samphan for an Immediate Stay or Proceedings, E275/2/1/1, 1 August 2013). The Supreme Court Chamber considered that KHIEU Samphan failed to demonstrate that appellate intervention was warranted at the time the appeal was lodged, considered that the Defence could still raise the matter before the Trial or Supreme Court Chambers on appeal from the trial judgement, and declared the appeal inadmissible (Decision on Request by Defence for KHIEU Samphan for Immediate Stay of Proceedings, E275/2/1/4, 18 October 2013, paras 7-8). 109 Even if no individual error results in prejudice to the Accused, the Chamber must still assess the overall effect of harmless error to determine whether the Accused received a fair trial (Ntagerura et al., Appeal Judgement, para. 114). Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 21