01005695 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 their cases.136All individuals requested by the parties were kept under review over the course of the trial. 52. Ultimately, the Chamber heard 92 individuals, including 20 proposed by NUON Chea and 23 proposed by KHIEU Samphan (the latter including 5 character witnesses). The majority of the other individuals proposed by NUON Chea and KHIEU Samphan, including some identified as vital, were rejected as being irrelevant to Case 002/01 (and accordingly deferred to future trials); irrelevant to Case 002 generally (including many proposed regarding the course and conduct of the judicial investigation or in support of general allegations regarding the independence of the judiciary and political interference); repetitive; or inadequately identified.137 The Chamber also notes that some witnesses proposed by the Accused died prior to the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing in Case 002/01 (see e.g. TCW-482 and TCW699) or could not be located with the exercise of reasonable diligence. 138 Other mechanisms were nonetheless provided to enable the parties to introduce in written form relevant statements and other information concerning witnesses not called or the topics upon which they had been expected to testify.139 53. In order to show that fair trial rights have been violated as a result of the non- appearance of a witness, an accused must demonstrate that he exhausted all available measures to obtain that witness’s testimony or tender the evidence sought in another form, such as a witness statement.140 136 Final Decision on Witnesses and Civil Parties to be Heard in Case 002/01, E312, 7 August 2014. Annexes II and III of Final Decision on Witnesses and Civil Parties to be Heard in Case 002/01, E312.2, 7 August 2014. 138 Memorandum from the Witness and Expert Support Unit to the President of the Trial Chamber entitled “Potential Witnesses - Unable to Locate”, E292/1/2, 4 July 2013. 139 See e.g. Decision on Co-Prosecutors’ Rule 92 Submission Regarding the Admission of Witness Statements and Other Documents before the Trial Chamber,E96/7, 20 June 2012, paras 20-26; Scheduling of Trial Management Meeting to enable planning of the remaining trial phases in Case 002/01 and implementation of further measures designed to promote trial efficiency (TC), E218, 3 August 2012; Third Decision on Objections to Documents Proposed for Admission Before the Trial Chamber, E185/2, 12 August 2013, para. 24. 140 Renzaho Appeal Judgement, paras 169 (the accused’s “failure to seek a remedy at trial undermines his claim of prejudice”), 191, 196, 216, 217 (“Any party is, of course, free to refrain from applying for such measures. However, a party cannot circumvent its obligation to exhaust all available means to present its case by unilaterally determining that certain measures are unreasonable or futile”), 218; Lukić and Lukić, Appeal Judgement, paras 44-45, 58; Tadić Appeal Judgement, para. 55. 137 Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 28