01185903 002/19-09-2007-ECCC/SC Doc No. F26/12 to this principle, only prior statements of the witnesses themselves may be used. 34 NUON Chea notes that many of the documents on the Co-Prosecutors' Document List stem from Case 002/02 and that the Co-Prosecutors have not requested their admission into evidence on appeal. 35 Accordingly, they should not be allowed to use those documents in the examination of the witnesses. 36 NUON Chea explains that there are four documents on NUON Chea's Document List stemming from Case 002/02, in relation to which no request for additional evidence has been submitted yet, but that the filing of such a request is imminent. 37 He also notes that there are three documents on the list that are not yet on the Case 002 case file at all; while he will submit an additional evidence request shortly, he is of the view that "in keeping with the usual practice in domestic courts, it should be unnecessary to make such a request for documents of this nature, i.e. those which are accessible in the public domain". 38 The three documents in question are articles published in periodicals in the 1970s. KHIEU Samphiin, for his part, objects to the use of documents stemming from Cases 002/02, 003 and 004 in the absence of any explanation from the Co-Prosecutors as to why these documents should be admitted. 39 There should, however, be an exception for prior witness statements of the three witnesses who have been called to testify.40 19. The Supreme Court Chamber recalls that under the legal framework of the ECCC, the Trial Chamber may base its decision "only on evidence that has been put before the Chamber and subjected to examination".41 Internal Rule 87(3) provides for the procedure as to how material that is on the case file of a given case is put before the Chamber, as well as for the criteria according to which the Chamber may reject requests for evidence. Internal Rule 87(4) sets out the procedure and criteria for the admission of "new evidence" during the trial. As to the appellate level, Internal Rule 108(7) provides for the procedure and criteria for requests by the parties for additional evidence on appeal. Importantly, Internal Rule 108(7) stipulates that such additional evidence must have been unavailable at trial and "could have been a decisive factor in reaching the decision at trial". Furthermore, the additional evidence must pertain to a specific finding of fact by the Trial Chamber. 42 In addition, the Supreme Court Co-Prosecutors' Objections, para. 3, fn. 7. NUON Chea's Objections, para. 4. 36 NUON Chea's Objections, para. 6. 37 NUON Chea's Objections, para. 7. 38 NUON Chea's Objections, para. 8. 39 KHIEU Samphlln's Objections, paras 20-21. 40 KHIEU Samphlln's Objections, para. 20. 41 Internal Rule 87(2). 42 Decision to Call Witnesses, para. 16. 34 35 DECISION ON OBJECTIONS TO DOCUMENT LISTS - FULL REASONS 8/40