Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 39

 1                           Tuesday, 14 December 2010

 2                           [Status Conference]

 3                           [Open session]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 3.00 p.m.

 5                           [The accused entered court]

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Good afternoon to everyone.  Madam Registrar, please

 7     call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good afternoon, Your Honour.  This is case number

 9     IT-03-67-R77.3, the Prosecutor versus Vojislav Seselj.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

11             Mr. Seselj, would you confirm that the system is working and that

12     you can hear me in a language that you understand?

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I can hear you in the Serbian

14     language, but it seems that you have not heard me.  As far as I'm

15     concerned, the system is operational.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  I now have it.  I didn't have translation

17     immediately on my channel 4, but I have it now.  Thank you.

18             Do I confirm you still represent yourself in these proceedings?

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.  I told you at the initial

20     appearance and at the first Status Conference that I will continue

21     representing myself until the end.

22             JUDGE HALL:  I haven't forgotten that, but for the record, it's

23     something that I will ask on each occasion so that the record is clear on

24     this point.

25             And may we have the appearances for the Prosecution, please.

Page 40

 1             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I'm Bruce MacFarlane,

 2     the amicus curiae Prosecutor appointed in these proceedings, and to my

 3     right is Lori Ann Wanlin, who is with me this afternoon and throughout

 4     these proceedings, and is also a member of a Canadian Bar.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 6             Well, today is another Status Conference as mandated by the

 7     Rules.  The last Status Conference in this case was held on the

 8     3rd of September of this year, and the purpose of these Status

 9     Conferences, according to the Rules, are, and I am repeating what I would

10     have said on the last occasion, to organise exchanges between the parties

11     so that the path to the trial is expedited and to review the status of

12     the accused's case and to allow the accused to raise any issues which are

13     related thereto, and also to raise any matter related to his -- the

14     circumstances of his confinement or his -- his physical condition.

15             Now, there are a number of motions which were pending at the --

16     which were pending the motion for disqualification of Judges Kwon and

17     Parker which had been filed by the accused on the 27th of April, and a

18     specially appointed Chamber dismissed the motions on the

19     19th of November, 2010.  Since then the Chamber has issued decisions on

20     all pending motions save one, and could we go into private session for a

21     moment, please.

22                           [Private session]

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 41

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7                           [Open session]

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. MacFarlane, on the 10th of December, that's

10     Friday last, the Chamber issued a decision on the accused's requests for

11     access to additional documents.  Could you confirm that once the material

12     indicated therein is provided to the accused your disclosure obligations

13     pursuant to Rule 66(A) have been met?

14             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I can confirm that they

15     will be met upon the service of the material referred to in that order.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Do you have any further comments to make on --

17             MR. MacFARLANE:  Not on the question of disclosure.  Thank you.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  And again for the record, I would remind

19     the amicus Prosecutor that -- of the ongoing obligation pursuant to

20     Rule 66 to disclose to the accused any material which in his actual

21     knowledge, that is the Prosecutor's actual knowledge, may suggest

22     innocence or mitigate the guilt of the accused or affect the credibility

23     of the Prosecution's evidence.

24             Mr. MacFarlane, are there any other matters on -- you said you

25     have nothing further on disclosure.

Page 42

 1             Mr. Seselj, do you have anything further -- any further

 2     representations to make to the Chamber on this question of disclosure?

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm prepared to

 4     submit my motion under Rule 65 ter as early as tomorrow.  I would like to

 5     disclose to the opposing side the statements of ten witnesses I intend to

 6     call, and those are the preliminary statements based on which I will

 7     conduct the examination-in-chief, and in addition to that, I would also

 8     submit photocopies of various interviews given by these witnesses to the

 9     newspapers.

10             The Prosecution has that in principle, but in order to avoid

11     duplication of work, meaning the translation, the translation services of

12     the Tribunal should check whether any of those interviews and statements

13     had already been translated so as not to do it twice.  It is my intention

14     to speed up the proceedings, not to slow them down.

15             These ten witnesses would require one hour each in

16     examination-in-chief.  I could have disclosed that this morning, because

17     my wife brought it in with her today.  However, I received that quite

18     late, just before coming here to the Tribunal, so I didn't have the time

19     to do it today.  I propose to do it tomorrow or the day after tomorrow so

20     that all of these statements can be translated so that they can be used

21     in January.

22             So I'm quite ahead of the Prosecutor.  The Prosecutor hasn't

23     disclosed anything under Rule 65 ter.  I guess he doesn't have anything.

24     He still hasn't disclosed any of the material that according to your

25     order he was supposed to disclose pursuant to your order of

Page 43

 1     10th of December.

 2             Anyway, I'm prepared to start the proceedings in the early part

 3     of January.  I'm done as far as the disclosure is concerned.  I have some

 4     other matters to raise.  Would you like me to do it right away?

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Well, I'd hear whether Mr. MacFarlane has any

 6     further to say on this matter of disclosure and then we will come back to

 7     you on the other matters.

 8             Mr. MacFarlane.

 9             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  In terms of the

10     ten pages that are in issue and were the subject of the order of the

11     Chamber, on conferring with the Registry, it's my understanding that the

12     Registry will be arranging to have that provided to the accused, and that

13     will be done very shortly.

14             I have no further comments on -- on disclosure.

15             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have some other

17     matters.

18             JUDGE HALL: [Microphone not activated] May I have a moment,

19     please.

20                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

21             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  The Registry confirmed that those 11 pages

22     were provided to you yesterday and you signed as having received them.

23             Yes, Mr. Seselj, your other matters.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] These 11 pages mean nothing for my

25     defence, and it is clear to anybody who takes a look at them.  What is

Page 44

 1     important for my defence, however, has not been disclosed to me.

 2     Pursuant to your order of 10th December, it is not clear whether that

 3     needs to be disclosed to me.  It says in that order that you partially

 4     granted my motion, but it doesn't spell out what has been denied, and I

 5     think that it pertains to the documents that I enumerated at the last

 6     Status Conference and the one before that in which one can see why the

 7     Trial Chamber refused to initiate contempt proceedings against me

 8     two years ago.  The facts are the same as they are now.

 9             The reasoning of the Trial Chamber at that time is important for

10     me, for my defence, because the Trial Chamber then had the two Judges

11     that are in the current Trial Chamber as well, and two years ago they did

12     not want to initiate these proceedings and now they decided otherwise.

13             Without that material, my defence would not be complete.  I will,

14     nevertheless, proceed with my defence, but I will keep reiterating that I

15     did not receive the material I requested, and that will be the first

16     ground in the appeal against the judgement rendered in this case.

17             JUDGE HALL:  So noted.  What are the other matters you wish to

18     raise?

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Technical issues that need to be

20     resolved.  I think that you, Mr. Hall, as a Pre-Trial Judge, should raise

21     this with the Registry.  Since I will be calling ten witnesses in my

22     defence case, I need assistance of my legal assistant, Dejan Mirovic, and

23     Case Manager Nemanja Sarovic.  I need the two of them to be here in

24     The Hague the entire time.  I need them to have a hotel, per diem

25     allowance, transportation, and so on.  In addition to that, I need to see

Page 45

 1     each of the witnesses I intend to call.  I need to proof them, and I need

 2     to see them in the detention unit.  As you know, witnesses are proofed in

 3     this Tribunal.  Very few witnesses come to testify without being proofed.

 4     As a result, I would like to proof my witnesses, and all of this is aimed

 5     towards splintering into smithereens this order in lieu of indictment

 6     against me.

 7             In this main case against me, the Trial Chamber was just about to

 8     resolve the issue of funding my defence case.  They had a discussion with

 9     the Registry.  I'm not asking for any fees to be paid out in this

10     particular case.  I just ask that the costs be covered for my legal

11     assistants as well as for the witnesses who are about to come to testify

12     in this case.  And as is normal in other cases, all witnesses should be

13     entitled to have one person accompany them when they travel to The Hague,

14     and I will be ready to start calling these witnesses in early January.

15     There is no need for me to wait for Mr. MacFarlane's pre-trial brief.  I

16     also don't need to see his 65 ter list with documents he intends to

17     tender.  Those mostly boil down to photocopies of my books and material

18     from previous cases about protective measures for these witnesses.

19             I intend to call witnesses who will confirm in this courtroom

20     that it was them who disclosed their identity.  It wasn't me.  I

21     disclosed the statements they provided for my defence.  I did not

22     disclose the statements they provided earlier to the OTP when the OTP

23     intended to call them as witnesses.

24             These are two very different things.  Each of these witnesses

25     came out and publicly stated, "I was asked to come and testify.  The OTP

Page 46

 1     wanted to force me to testify for them.  They forced me to sign a false

 2     statement."  Those are the kind of things that they will say.  We will

 3     discuss these matters here in the courtroom, and this is what my defence

 4     is based upon.

 5             It is important for me to have a Legal Assistant and Case Manager

 6     here so that there are no hindrances in my defence preparations.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Well, the Registry would be aware of the request

 8     which you are now making, and I fully expect that there is or there are

 9     well-established procedures for dealing with the type of assistance which

10     you have indicated that you require.

11             Are there any other matters which you wish to raise?

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, that's all.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

14             The -- Mr. MacFarlane, the last comment that the accused has made

15     is a useful link to the question of -- I would ask of you, whether you

16     intend to call any witnesses in the course of the trial, and the context

17     in which that is being asked is with a view to plotting out the progress

18     of this matter.

19             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  At present, I do not

20     anticipate any -- calling any viva voce evidence through witnesses.  The

21     case for the Prosecution will consist of a paper trail, and as a result

22     of that, I expect that the case for the Prosecution can be presented with

23     dispatch.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  Well, the -- we now know that the

25     accused intends to call, he says, ten witnesses, and the Trial Chamber,

Page 47

 1     having this information, will inform the parties as to a projected trial

 2     date.

 3             Are there any other matters which either side wishes to raise at

 4     this point?

 5             MR. MacFARLANE:  I've few matters, if I might, at this stage,

 6     Your Honour.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please.

 8             MR. MacFARLANE:  In terms of the readiness for the case to

 9     proceed, I simply wish to advise the Chamber that the Prosecution is

10     prepared to proceed and is prepared to proceed very early in the new

11     year.  So dates that are set by the Chamber in the early new year will be

12     quite satisfactory from our standpoint.

13             A second point that I'd like to raise arises from a comment made

14     by Your Honour on the 6th of May at the initial appearance -- or the

15     further initial appearance where you indicated at page 20, line 20 to --

16     pardon me, 21 to 24, that the Chamber would be providing direction with

17     respect to when the ten-day period for preliminary motions would start,

18     and that was to take place after a decision had been -- or the decisions

19     had been issued by the Chamber.  Those decisions have now been issued, so

20     I thought it might be useful for me to raise this question at this stage

21     so that the Chamber might consider the matter further.  That was the

22     6th of May, page 20, line 21 to 24.  I have the extract which I can read

23     to the Chamber if you wish.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, please.

25             MR. MacFARLANE:  The relevant portion reads therefore -- this is

Page 48

 1     after having recounted the nature of the proceedings and timing and so

 2     on.  Your Honour said this:

 3             "Therefore, the Trial Chamber will determine the beginning of the

 4     ten-day period within which preliminary motions under Rule 72(A) are to

 5     be filed when it has decided upon the matters raised in the response of

 6     the Prosecutor."

 7             That has now been completed.

 8             There are a few further issues that I can outline unless the --

 9     unless Your Honour wishes to deal with that.

10             JUDGE HALL:  No, please proceed.  Let me think about that while

11     you proceed with the other matters.

12             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you.

13             JUDGE HALL:  Thanks.

14             MR. MacFARLANE:  As I mentioned, on the last Status Conference it

15     will be my intention to file a bar table motion.  That will be done in

16     the first week of January.  I simply wish to reiterate that as the plan.

17     The purpose of the motion will be to ensure that the proceedings can

18     proceed in a -- in an expeditious way.  It's a trial management motion

19     that will be made, hopefully, that will assist everyone in the courtroom.

20             As well, it is my plan to file unless -- unless I receive a

21     direction to the contrary, a pre-trial brief.  In my experience in

22     contempt cases, in some instances the Chamber has waived the necessity

23     for filing a pre-trial brief; in other cases it was felt desirable.  So

24     I'm in the Chamber's hand on that.  If I receive no direction one way or

25     the other, it would be my intention to file a short one.

Page 49

 1             JUDGE HALL:  I would think that that would be of assistance in

 2     this case, Mr. MacFarlane.

 3             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you very much, Your Honour.  I will.

 4             The next point is --

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to say something about

 6     this before Mr. MacFarlane passes on to the next topic.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. --

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With regard to the pre-trial brief,

 9     the practice of the Tribunal, as well as the Rules -- Rules on Procedure

10     and Evidence, show that a pre-trial brief is mandatory for the

11     Prosecution but optional for the Defence.  The Defence cannot be made to

12     file a pre-trial brief, whereas the Prosecution has to.

13             The last contempt trial launched against me was irregular, among

14     other things, because the OTP did not file a pre-trial brief, although

15     they were obliged to.

16             JUDGE HALL:  Well, in this case Mr. MacFarlane has said he plans

17     to file one, so any issue that you may have had in that regard has been

18     resolved.

19             Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

20             MR. MacFARLANE:  A brief matter which may or may not be relevant

21     but I thought I should put it on the record in the event that it does

22     become relevant in the future and that has to do with timing of the trial

23     and timing of any future Status Conferences that might be directed.  I

24     have assigned this matter my highest priority so that I will be

25     available, as I said before, at any stage in the early new year, which

Page 50

 1     would encompass the first several months, so that I will be available and

 2     ready to go.  I just wished the Chamber to note that from the

 3     4th of April until the 20th of May, I will be quite a distance from

 4     northern Europe and will not be able to return then.  So if either the

 5     trial is set during that period or there's a Status Conference that

 6     arises during that period, with the greatest of respect it would be very

 7     difficult for me to attend then.  I just wished -- it may well be moot.

 8     It might not arise at all, but I thought I should note that for the

 9     record so that the Chamber is aware of that reality for me.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. MacFarlane.  At the risk of going out

11     on a limb, which 30-plus years of experience around the courts has

12     cautioned me against, I would -- it seems to me unlikely that another

13     120 days would elapse, thereby necessitating a further Status Conference

14     before a trial date is set.  To be more definite than that it would be

15     imprudent for me to be, but I -- but we've noted the -- your period of

16     unavailability.

17             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  That was my only

18     purpose in raising it.

19             A further issue which is probably more in the nature of placing

20     matters on the record so that it's clear, and again this might be moot,

21     it might be unnecessary, but on reviewing the proceedings in this case

22     and in the previous contempt case that the accused just referred to, it's

23     become apparent to me that where motions are filed by the accused, they

24     are often perhaps invariably greatly oversized, and that creates a delay

25     in the proceedings.  It creates a delay when it comes to translation, and

Page 51

 1     it becomes very difficult for the other party to respond where no

 2     previous authority was sought, so to file an oversized motion or filing.

 3     So my request at this point is simply to ask the Chamber to remind the

 4     accused that where an oversized filing is anticipated, that brief

 5     authority from the Chamber is required from the Rules, and I would

 6     content myself with that should Your Honour think that that reminder or

 7     that direction is appropriate in the circumstances.

 8             I do that in the context of the desire to have this matter

 9     proceed expeditiously.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  Mr. Seselj, in terms of Mr. MacFarlane's

11     last comment, without repeating everything that he would have said, I

12     would draw what he has said to your attention and that you would conduct

13     yourself accordingly.

14             I don't know if you have any comments on that before I ask

15     Mr. MacFarlane to move on.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.  Mr. Hall, you did not take

17     part in the previous contempt proceedings against me, and therefore

18     you're not steeped in the matter, but Mr. MacFarlane, who did

19     participate, simply doesn't know what he's talking about today.  I didn't

20     file any motion then, especially not an extensive one, but this time I

21     will file a motion only under Rule 65 ter, which motion will encompass

22     five pages, but it will have over 100 pages of annexes.

23             You know that under Rule 65 ter there are no limitations.  In the

24     proceedings against me, the OTP has filed 6.000 documents with

25     several hundred thousand pages.  Even strategy textbooks of the

Page 52

 1     Command Staff Academy in Belgrade, then the brigade rules, corps rules,

 2     and so on.

 3             This time I will not file any other motion, and last year I

 4     didn't even file a motion under Rule 65 ter, because I thought I didn't

 5     need to call witnesses.  Now I changed my mind, and the material that I

 6     will submit nobody has the power to limit.  There are no limitations in

 7     the Rules nor in the instructions as to the length of the motions.  The

 8     motion itself will have five pages, whereas the annexes may have as many

 9     as 200 pages.  I didn't have time to count -- to count the pages.

10             That is why, for reasons of fairness, I put it out that the

11     Registry should check which portion of that material has already been

12     translated, and much has.  When it goes -- when it comes to newspaper

13     clips that show that protected witnesses made public appearances and made

14     public their name, their number, their code-name, and everything else,

15     that material is extremely relevant.  And if the Registry goes about its

16     job conscientiously, then much time and resources of the Tribunal will --

17     will be saved.  However, if they do translate everything again from

18     scratch, then I can't help it.  But obviously Mr. MacFarlane doesn't know

19     what he's talking about.

20             During the last proceedings, I find -- I filed no motions, except

21     for the initial one where I informed the Trial Chamber that I would

22     represent myself and who would be my assistant and my Case Manager.  As

23     far as I remember, there weren't any more motions at all.  And if

24     Mr. MacFarlane should be aware of any extensive motion of mine from the

25     last but one proceedings, then I dare him to put that to me, but I stay

Page 53

 1     by my words that he obviously doesn't know what's talking about.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

 3             Mr. MacFarlane, is there anything else?

 4             MR. MacFARLANE:  Might I respond to that issue, Your Honour,

 5     or --

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, if you wish.

 7             MR. MacFARLANE:  I suspect Mr. Seselj has quite a number of

 8     matters on his mind and perhaps his memory is failing him on this

 9     particular point.  On the 19th of March of this year, Mr. Seselj filed an

10     oversized brief before the Appeals Chamber in the previous contempt

11     proceedings, and on the 9th of April, the Appeals Chamber found that:

12             "Seselj's repeated filings of oversized submissions without prior

13     permission constitute unacceptable interference in the timely and

14     efficient functioning of the Tribunal."

15             And in that same decision the Appeals Chamber issued a warning to

16     the then accused of the consequences of oversized filings.  The Appeals

17     Chamber said this:

18             "It warns Seselj that should he persist in submitting oversized

19     filings without prior permission, the Appeals Chamber reserves the right

20     to disregard arguments set out in the excess portion of any oversized

21     submission without allowing him the opportunity to refile or otherwise

22     comment on the submission."

23             That's a matter of public record in the decisions from the

24     Appeals Chamber.

25             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. MacFarlane.

Page 54

 1             MR. MacFARLANE:  There is one further --

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have something more to say.

 3             You see, Mr. Hall, either Mr. MacFarlane is a man of very modest

 4     intellectual capacity, or he lacks elementary ethics.  In the previous

 5     contempt proceedings, he said that I filed oversized motions, and then I

 6     put the facts to him showing --

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Seselj, I am not going to pursue this particular

 8     issue any further.  I've heard what you have said.  I've heard

 9     Mr. MacFarlane in reply.  I'm moving on.  Thank you.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But mind you, I cannot leave this

11     unanswered.  As far as Mr. MacFarlane is concerned, my correspondence

12     with the Appeals Chamber, that is irrelevant for these proceedings.  Let

13     us wait for the appeals proceedings and there will be other rules in

14     force.  I'm not burdening the first instance proceedings, and I didn't do

15     so the first time around.  But Mr. MacFarlane is making up things, and

16     now he's run out of arguments, and now he's saying that I filed oversized

17     briefs to the Appeals Chamber.  But in the main proceedings, I had

18     motions that are longer than 1.000 pages.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Seselj, the -- Mr. MacFarlane had first merely,

20     as I understood it, reminded you through the Chamber of the Rules in

21     terms of filing oversized briefs, and in his reply to your response of

22     that, he cited the Appeals Chamber's decision in a matter involving

23     yourself.

24             We are not here today concerned with whether, as a fact in these

25     contempt proceedings, you have so far or that you intend to file

Page 55

 1     oversized brief.  It was merely a reminder as to what the Rules are and

 2     the limitations imposed by the Rules.  So there is no issue to be

 3     resolved and therefore there is no point in you pursuing this matter

 4     further.

 5             Yes, Mr. MacFarlane, your next point.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But, Mr. Hall, I informed you that

 7     it is my intention to file but one motion, which is a 65 ter motion with

 8     evidence.  The preliminary statements of witnesses and --

 9             JUDGE HALL:  With annexes.  Yes, we heard -- we heard that.  It's

10     on the record.  Yes.

11             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.

12             The next and I believe final issue I'd like to raise is a matter

13     of in part substance and in part procedure and does not directly involve

14     the accused but I thought I should raise it, and that involves my

15     colleague to the right, Ms. Lori Ann Wanlin.  I will be seeking a limited

16     right of audience from the Chamber at the forthcoming trial, and I would

17     like to lay the foundation for that request.

18             Ms. Wanlin was first appointed to assist me in early 2008 in

19     respect of another matter, and since then she has assisted me on a number

20     of matters and her role has continually increased as these matters have

21     progressed through this Tribunal.  Ms. Wanlin was called to the bar in

22     Canada in spring of this year, so that is a new development which I

23     believe is relevant, but there's five factors that I would ask the

24     Chamber to consider in assessing my request.  The first is the one I just

25     mentioned, that Ms. Wanlin is now called to the bar and is a member of a

Page 56

 1     Canadian Bar.

 2             Secondly, in terms of her ability to deal with matters arising in

 3     the Chamber, Ms. Wanlin is fluently bilingual in both of the working

 4     languages, and I can only say that I envy that, but she is able to -- she

 5     is perfectly fluent in both French and English.

 6             Thirdly, I can say that as a result of my observations of

 7     Ms. Wanlin over the past three years, her ethical standards are of the

 8     highest order and certainly meet the high expectations of the Office of

 9     the Prosecutor, although we are not a member of OTP, but her ethical

10     standards are extremely high.

11             Fourthly, Ms. Wanlin has been appointed by the Registrar on five

12     separate occasions, three as assistant to me as amicus curiae Prosecutor,

13     and two separate matters as assistant to me as amicus curiae

14     investigator.  Ms. Wanlin participated in all five of those appointments

15     actively and in an intensive way to the point where she is extremely

16     familiar with the practice and procedure on the Rules and the evidence in

17     the Tribunal and has made a point of understanding relevant portions of

18     international law to a level that I think is a model for a current legal

19     assistant.

20             Of interest as well, as a result of the decision of the Chamber

21     on the 2nd of December, 2010, one of the issues that may well and

22     probably will arise relates to the notion of publication through

23     electronic means, and in particular, through the internet.  Ms. Wanlin

24     worked for the better part of a year at the Canadian Internet Policy and

25     Public Interest Clinic housed at the University of Ottawa and has a very

Page 57

 1     good if not rare understanding of that very difficult intersection

 2     between the law and the internet so that it's my respectful submission

 3     that she will be able to provide assistance to the Chamber, which I can

 4     only, once again, envy.

 5             There are several previous precedents that I am aware of on my

 6     review of the judicial --

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Before I go on, I smiled at your last comment

 8     because I have just seen, and I emphasise "seen," not yet read, with

 9     interest two articles on the Ontario Bar Association web site about this

10     intersection between the law and the internet, which I have shared with

11     my colleagues back in the Bahamas, which I would have received as an

12     associate member of the OBA, and I'm glad that some of us understand what

13     it's about, because I confess that it may be an age thing that it's an

14     area which is terra incognito to me.

15             MR. MacFARLANE:  Well, I have to say that it's not an area of

16     expertise for me either and perhaps it is an age issue.  I understand

17     that the intersection between the internet and the law has recently been

18     argued before the Supreme Court of Canada as well, so it's a fast-moving

19     area, and with Ms. Wanlin's background and expertise, it struck me that

20     she could be of service to the Chamber on that issue.

21             As I mentioned on my review of the jurisprudence, there are

22     several previous precedents that would lay a further foundation for this

23     type of direction or order, and if Your Honour or if the Chamber thinks

24     it appropriate, it might be a wise avenue to arrange for consultation

25     with the Registrar on -- on those other precedents, although Your Honour

Page 58

 1     might conclude that that's not necessary, but that is an avenue that

 2     might be available.

 3             My proposal at the end of the day is that the Chamber grant

 4     Ms. Wanlin a limited right of audience in this particular case, it being

 5     confined to contempt of court -- contempt of the Tribunal matters and

 6     that she be allowed to actively participate in the presentation of

 7     evidence, cross-examination of evidence, and the presentation of

 8     argument, all of which would be under my direct supervision and

 9     direction.

10             Thank you, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Well, of course, I claim no expertise in the rules

12     relating to rights of audience before this Tribunal, but we have noted

13     your foundation application in the course of these proceedings, and the

14     appropriate ruling would be delivered in due course.  Thank you.

15             Yes, Mr. --

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have a reply to that.  I

17     absolutely disagree with the request just formulated by Mr. MacFarlane.

18             First of all, only he was appointed as amicus curiae, and only he

19     can appear in that role.  There were no two amicus curiae appointed with

20     a right of audience.

21             Mr. MacFarlane could bring in his wife, his son, his daughter,

22     his neighbour, and ask that they also be granted right of audience.  How

23     he's going to choose his associates is his own business.  The Registry

24     has certain rules about how that can be done and I have nothing against

25     that.  I ask that I be appointed assistants as well.  But not every clerk

Page 59

 1     from his technical team should be given the right of audience.

 2             I know Mr. MacFarlane, and I have experience in working with him,

 3     and I'm sure that no proper ethical standards can be applied in his work

 4     and that of his associate.

 5             I will ask people from my defence to check what personal

 6     relationship exists between Mr. MacFarlane and Ms. Wanlin.  How come he

 7     chose precisely her.  If there are going to be two amicus curiae in this

 8     courtroom, why should all of them -- both of them be Canadian.  Why

 9     wouldn't one of them be from Bangladesh?  Why should I be forced to

10     listen to Canadians.  In the main trial against me the OTP had

11     ten counsel.  Some of them left.  Some of them were about to depart, and

12     I'm still here.

13             So if this right of audience is granted, if this person is

14     appointed, I will keep reiterating that it is inappropriate and

15     inadmissible.  She cannot cross-examine witnesses because she is not

16     amicus curiae.

17             Secondly, the fact that she is an alleged expert for a new field

18     of law that is linked to internet is really a fascinating fact.  However,

19     in that case, Mr. MacFarlane should ask the Trial Chamber that she come

20     here as an expert witness so that she can come and testify about this

21     field if that is necessary, and then I should be able to cross-examine

22     her, including examining her past, her family ties, her ties to

23     Mr. MacFarlane, and things like that.  It will be -- it would be very

24     interesting to hear that in the courtroom.  And to have her appear as a

25     double of Mr. MacFarlane here in the courtroom, no, the conditions for

Page 60

 1     that have not been met.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Well, Mr. Seselj, there may be merit in some of what

 3     you have said, but I need only remind you of my initial response to

 4     Mr. MacFarlane's request, which was that I have -- I claim no expertise

 5     on the matter of rights of audience before the Tribunal, and that having

 6     heard the foundations of his submission, which -- foundation may not have

 7     been the precise word he used, but what I understood him to be saying is

 8     that what he has said today is the background to a formal application

 9     which will be made and a decision will be rendered in due course.  So

10     there is no disadvantage to you one way or another.

11             Is there anything else, Mr. MacFarlane?

12             MR. MacFARLANE:  Normally I wouldn't find it necessary to make

13     this comment, but some aspects of the accused's comments I found quite

14     offensive vis-a-vis Ms. Wanlin.  I simply wish to note for the record

15     that at the beginning, when Ms. Wanlin was first appointed, she was

16     specifically recommended to me by the Associate Dean of the Faculty of

17     Law at the University of Manitoba, and that is how I first met with

18     Ms. Wanlin.  I interviewed her, found her to be excellent, and that's

19     simply, quite simply, the background.  She was highly recommended to me.

20             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Thank you.  It's always unfortunate when

21     persons use the opportunity of being in a court to make personal

22     offensive comments of that nature.

23             Yes.  Is there anything else?

24             MR. MacFARLANE:  No, thank you --

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have something with respect to

Page 61

 1     that, Mr. Hall.  See here --

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Seselj, I will hear you when Mr. MacFarlane is

 3     finished.

 4             Yes, Mr. MacFarlane.

 5             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.  No, I appreciate the

 6     opportunity to make the preliminary comments.  I have no further comments

 7     at this point.  Thank you.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  What do you wish to add, Mr. Seselj?

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wish to add this:  International

10     criminal law is quite a young field of law.  It is not based on extensive

11     jurisprudence.  The jurisprudence produced by this Tribunal and by the

12     Rwanda Tribunal is criticised by some of the most eminent lawyers in the

13     world.  All serious law schools in the world.  The most influential ones

14     have excellent experts for international criminal law who produced a

15     large number of papers questioning the very existence of The Hague

16     Tribunal.  And imagine now here when you have an amicus curiae appearing

17     as a prosecutor telling you that he received a recommendation from the

18     Dean of the law school of -- from Manitoba.

19             It's been 34 years since I graduated from the school of law.

20     It's been 31 years since I acquired my Ph.D. in law, and I have never,

21     ever heard that the law school of Manitoba is known in the world because

22     of some of their eminent professors, and I didn't hear of anybody from

23     Europe travelling for --

24             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Seselj, there is no point in us going any

25     further down that road.

Page 62

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- further studies to Manitoba.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Before we conclude today's proceedings, are there

 3     any concerns about your health or the conditions of your incarceration

 4     which you wish to raise with the Chamber?

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. MacFarlane, I promised that I would return to

 7     this matter of the -- when the -- how the ten-day period would run before

 8     we adjourn.  It's something which I would prefer to give further thought

 9     to, and the Chamber will give the necessary direction having -- having

10     considered the matter that you would have reminded me is still a live

11     issue.

12             MR. MacFARLANE:  Thank you, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE HALL:  The -- I would remind the accused that in contempt

14     proceedings, the preliminary motions under Rule 72(A) are to be filed

15     within a 10-day period once he has received all the supporting material

16     in accordance with Rule 66.

17             And no party having any other matter to raise, we would adjourn

18     these proceedings, and I thank you.

19                           --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned

20                           at 3.49 p.m.