1 Wednesday, 5 December 2012
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The appellant entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.36 a.m.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, everybody. My apologies for starting
7 a little bit late, but we had a technical problem in one of the
8 interpretation booths which has now been fixed, and so we can proceed.
9 Madam Registrar, could you kindly call the case, please.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honour. This is case number
11 IT-05-87/1-A, the Prosecutor versus Vlastimir Djordjevic.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Appearances starting with the
13 Prosecution first.
14 MS. GOPALAN: Good morning, Your Honour. We have for the
15 Prosecution Priya Gopalan, together with Kyle Wood and our Case Manager,
16 Colin Nawrot.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you very much. And appearances for the
19 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour. The
20 Defence counsel consists this morning of
21 Dragoljub Djordjevic [as interpreted] and Veljko Djurdjic.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Before we proceed I want to make sure
23 that interpretation in a language that everyone can understand is being
24 received, particularly I'm concerned with you, Mr. Djordjevic. I want to
25 make sure that you are able to follow the proceedings in a language that
1 you understand.
2 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Everything is okay. I can follow
3 the proceedings.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
5 This Status Conference is called in accordance with Rule 65 bis
6 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of this Tribunal. Rule 65 bis(B)
7 requires a Status Conference to be convened within 120 days after the
8 filing of a notice of appeal and thereafter within 120 days after the
9 last Status Conference. The reason for this is to give an opportunity to
10 any person in custody pending appeal the opportunity to raise any issue
11 in relation thereto, including, of course, issues relating to the mental
12 and physical condition of that person.
13 In the present case, the parties filed their notices of appeal on
14 24th May 2011, and the first Status Conference was held on 30th May 2011.
15 The second, third, fourth, and fifth Status Conferences were held on
16 21st September 2011, 16th January 2012, 11th May 2012, and
17 23rd August 2012 respectively. Today's Status Conference being the sixth
18 in this case was scheduled by an order issued by me on the
19 2nd November 2012. The scheduling order was subsequently amended on
20 22nd November 2012.
21 I'll start with the first part of today's agenda dealing with
22 detention conditions and the health of Appellant Djordjevic, and I would
23 like, first of all, to inquire into the status of detention condition and
24 health situation.
25 Mr. Djordjevic, if you have any concerns in relation to the
1 conditions of your detention or your state of health I would invite you
2 to raise then now. Particularly in relation to health issues, if you
3 prefer, if you have any, if you prefer this discussion can take place in
4 private session.
5 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Thank you for your interest.
6 Everything is all right both with regard to the conditions and my health.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you very much.
8 Next item on the agenda deals with recent procedural history.
9 Before we turn to any issues that the parties may wish to raise, I would
10 like to briefly set out the procedural history of this case. This is
11 mainly done for the benefit of the public because, of course, the parties
12 know exactly what has been happening since the last Status Conference,
13 but the general public wouldn't know.
14 The parties will note that much of the procedural history I am
15 about to summarise will essentially be the same as that summarised during
16 the last Status Conference, and the parties will of course all be already
17 aware of all this information as I have just said. However, as I have
18 mentioned at previous Status Conference, it is important also that the
19 public also be made aware of the background of the case and for that
20 reason I will repeat all the information here.
21 On the 11th of March, 2011, the parties were granted an extension
22 of time of 60 days to file their notices of appeal. Both parties filed
23 their respective notices of appeal on 24th May 2011. The Prosecution
24 presented two grounds of appeal, while Appellant Djordjevic presented 19
25 grounds of appeal.
1 On the 27th of May, 2011, the Djordjevic Defence filed a motion
2 requesting an extension of time and word limit in respect of its appeal
3 brief. During the Status Conference held on 30th May, 2011, I extended
4 the deadline for the filing of the appeal briefs by seven days, up to
5 15th August 2011 for both parties. In addition, I granted the
6 Djordjevic Defence an extension of up to 15.000 words for its appeal
7 brief and granted the Prosecution the same extension in respect of its
8 brief in response. Both parties punctually filed their appeal briefs on
9 15th August 2011.
10 At the Status Conference held on the 21st of September 2011, the
11 Djordjevic Defence requested an extension of time of 15 days for the
12 filing of its reply brief as well as an extension of the word limit by
13 6.000 words. I granted both parties an extension of time up to the
14 26th of October, 2011, for the filing of their briefs in reply and also
15 granted the Djordjevic Defence an extension of up to 3.000 words. Both
16 parties filed their response briefs on the 26th of September, 2011, and
17 subsequently filed their reply briefs on the 26th of October, 2011.
18 The Prosecution filed a public redacted version of its appeal
19 brief on 17th August 2011. On the 30th of September of last year, the
20 Djordjevic Defence filed its public redacted version. This was later
21 withheld pending determination of a confidential motion filed on
22 24th September 2011 by the Prosecution in which it requested the
23 redaction of certain information from Djordjevic's appeal brief. The
24 Djordjevic Defence filed its confidential response to the motion on
25 7th December 2011, and the Prosecution filed a confidential reply on
1 9th December, 2011.
2 I issued a confidential decision on this matter in my capacity as
3 Pre-Appeal Judge on the 20th of January, 2012. In that decision, I
4 granted the Prosecution motion in part and ordered, inter alia,
5 Appellant Djordjevic to file a new public redacted version of his appeal
6 brief incorporating one additional redaction. Pursuant to that decision,
7 Appellant Djordjevic refiled the public redacted version of this appeal,
8 of his appeal brief, on the 23rd of January of this year.
9 Both parties filed public redacted versions of their response
10 briefs on the 30th of January, 2012. The Prosecution filed its public
11 redacted reply brief on the 8th of February, 2012, and
12 Appellant Djordjevic filed a notice of reclassification of his reply
13 brief on the 9th of February, 2012.
14 On the 7th of March of this year, President Theodor Meron issued
15 an order replacing a Judge in this case. Pursuant to that order,
16 Judge Khalida Rachid Khan was assigned to the Bench in place of
17 Judge Fausto Pocar. Another order replacing a Judge in this case was
18 issued by President Meron on the 27th September 2012. Pursuant that
19 order Judge Patrick Robinson was assigned to the Bench in place of
20 Judge Liu Daqun.
21 Finally, on 17th October 2012, the translation of the trial
22 judgement into the B/C/S language was filed. I issued an order on the
23 following day, that is 18th October 2012, setting the time limit to file
24 any motion seeking a variation of the grounds of appeal following
25 translation of the trial judgement. Pursuant to that order, any such
1 motions were to be filed by no later than the 29th November 2012.
2 Appellant Djordjevic filed a submission following translation of the
3 trial judgement recently, precisely on the 29th of November, 2012.
4 Having dealt with the procedural history, I would now deal with
5 the last item on the agenda for today's Status Conference, namely issues
6 that the parties may wish to raise. I will start with the Prosecution.
7 Are there any issues that you would like to raise?
8 MS. GOPALAN: Yes, Your Honour. We do have one matter to
9 address, and this is in relation to Mr. Djordjevic's submission following
10 the translation of his trial judgement which Your Honour mentioned was
11 filed on the 29th of November. The Prosecution understands from the
12 submission that Mr. Djordjevic does not seek to vary his grounds of
13 appeal. We do not consider that the submissions supplement the argument
14 that Mr. Djordjevic has already made in the previous appellate filings or
15 that these submissions provide any additional authorities, Your Honour.
16 Accordingly, we do not anticipate having to file any written
17 submission in response. Our position is that our written submissions are
18 already before the Chamber, and we consider from our viewpoint that the
19 case has been fully briefed.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you very much.
21 Defence counsel, do you have any submissions, in particular in
22 response to what you have just heard?
23 MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours, and we also
24 don't want to raise any other issues.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. That, I think, concludes today's
1 Status Conference. I thank the parties for their attendance and the
2 staff, technical, clerical, whatever, for their work, and particularly
3 the technicians who managed to solve the problem in a few minutes.
4 We stand adjourned. Thank you.
5 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned
6 at 9.51 a.m.