1 Monday, 10 July 2006
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 12.35 p.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good afternoon, everybody.
7 May the registrar please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honour. This is case number
9 IT-98-29/1-PT, the Prosecutor versus Dragomir Milosevic.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
11 Is Mr. Milosevic in court?
12 Mr. Milosevic, can you understand and follow the proceedings in a
13 language that you understand?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I can hear you and I understand
15 you, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may remain seated, even when you're speaking.
17 Thank you very much. You may be seated.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: May we have the appearances for the Prosecution,
21 MR. AKERSON: Good afternoon, Your Honour, David Akerson on behalf
22 of the Office of the Prosecutor, and I'm here with Manoj Sachdeva, trial
23 attorney, and Biljana Blazevic, our case manager.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
25 Appearances for Mr. Milosevic?
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Good day, Your Honour. My name
2 is Branislav Tapuskovic and I represent Mr. Dragomir Milosevic. I'm
3 assisted by the lawyer Branislava Isailovic, who is a lawyer from Paris.
4 Thank you very much.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Tapuskovic.
6 Pursuant to Rule 65 bis of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and
7 Evidence, the Trial Chamber or the Trial Judge has to convene a Status
8 Conference within 120 days of the initial appearance of the accused in
9 order to organise exchanges between the parties as to the -- and to ensure
10 expeditious preparation for trial and to review the status of the
11 accused's case and to allow the accused the opportunity to raise issues in
12 relation thereto, including his mental and physical condition.
13 I hope everybody has a copy of the agenda before them. Do you
14 have it, Mr. Akerson?
15 MR. AKERSON: I do not, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: You do not?
17 MR. AKERSON: No.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: And Mr. Tapuskovic? Okay. Maybe then I'll just
19 keep calling the items as we go along and we'll deal with them as we go
21 Are there any outstanding motions? I'm made to understand that
22 there is a motion filed by -- on behalf of the accused for provisional
23 release. Obviously, I don't know when this was filed. I only heard of it
24 this morning. I would imagine that the Prosecution still has to respond
25 to if even before a decision can be made on it. Am I correct?
1 MR. AKERSON: Yes, Your Honour. We have a written response that
2 will be filed very shortly.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you very much.
4 And that's the only outstanding motion. Thank you very much.
5 Now, at the last Status Conference on the 28th of March 2006, the
6 Prosecution declared that 424 exhibits were awaiting translation. What is
7 the position at this stage?
8 MR. AKERSON: If I'm understanding that item correctly,
9 Your Honour, these are English exhibits that are to be translated into --
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Into Serbo-Croat?
11 MR. AKERSON: Yes. We've had a number of conversations with
12 Defence counsel regarding these exhibits and we have asked that the
13 Defence counsel actually make the request themselves in order to get those
14 translated for a couple of reasons. One, according to the Rules we are
15 not obligated to translate English exhibits into Croatian so we are not
16 doing it for the Office of the Prosecutor and we already have many
17 requests for translations that we do -- we are required to make.
18 Also, we are not doing this for the Court because this is -- they
19 are already in English so they are already in a language that you can
20 understand. These documents need to be translated, if at all, for Defence
21 counsel. So we have met with them, we've discussed it in a number of --
22 two meetings specifically, and I believe they've agreed to -- just to make
23 the request themselves so they can advance it because they can then
24 prioritise the request themselves because we don't know which of these
25 documents are most important that they need to prioritise. That being
1 said, Your Honour, any assistance we can provide to Defence counsel, we
2 are happy to do that. But we would prefer for these documents, since we
3 really have no vested interest in them, that the Defence counsel assume
4 responsibility for these and make the request themselves. So that's the
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Akerson.
7 Mr. Tapuskovic? Do you confirm?
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm very glad you
9 have raised this issue at the Pre-Trial Conference. This is a very
10 serious issue for us at this point in time, and it is making it impossible
11 for the Defence to adequately prepare for trial. The accused must have
12 access to documents that he can understand so that he can make certain
13 suggestions to us on the basis of these documents. At the previous
14 Pre-Trial Conference the Prosecution undertook the obligation to provide
15 those documents in translation. But given the trials that were in course
16 at the time they didn't -- it wasn't possible to deal with this issue.
17 The Prosecution undertook this obligation. But without these documents we
18 can't prepare for trial in an adequate way.
19 At that point in time I mentioned two very illustrative examples,
20 witnesses 56 and 124. These are witnesses that will be called by the
21 Prosecutor and I'm familiar with these cases. I know that all the
22 documents on those -- about those witnesses were translated in the case of
23 Slobodan Milosevic. So I still can't understand why those two witnesses,
24 who are extremely important for the Defence -- well, we haven't obtained
25 any of the documents in translation. Given the resources we have, it's
1 impossible for us to deal with things. We can only see our accused a
2 couple of times a month. It's impossible for us to work on various issues
3 if we don't have translations. These are documents in which one word is
4 of crucial importance; everything depends on one word. So my colleague
5 and myself understand French above all, so, on the basis of Rule 21, item
6 1(A), it's the Prosecution's obligation to enable us to obtain the
7 material that we need by the service that is competent at this. We will
8 request our evidence to be translated when the time comes, to present that
9 evidence. In spite of all our efforts, we are very handicapped when it
10 comes to preparing our defence. Thank you.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. Mr. Tapuskovic, as I understood the
12 Prosecutor's position is that the documents are there for the asking. All
13 you need to do is to ask because they are not able to know what it is out
14 of the 424 that you would need and they would like you to make a request.
15 And as soon as you make the request, they will provide you with the
16 documents. Or with the translation, rather.
17 MR. AKERSON: If I could.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Akerson?
19 MR. AKERSON: I think that's precisely the question, Your Honour,
20 is that Defence counsel have equal access to submit these documents for
21 translations themselves. We are happy to facilitate this, if the Court --
22 if you would like us to, we can submit them. But it's awkward because we
23 are not doing it for us, we are doing it for Defence counsel. And it
24 seems to make more sense that they just assume responsibility and submit
25 them themselves. But that being said we want to get these done and out of
1 the way so that we can all proceed to trial. So whatever Your Honour
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe it might be -- okay, you want to say
5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there are two
6 problems. With regard to the 424 documents, they've already requested
7 their translation and we were expecting this to be done by -- in two
8 months' time but I don't understand why we are not being provided with the
9 documents that have already been translated in the case of those two
10 witnesses that I mentioned, as an example. I don't understand why this
11 material wasn't immediately provided to us, why the translated material
12 wasn't provided to us because the Prosecution had such material. In the
13 case of Slobodan Milosevic these witnesses have already been examined and
14 all this material has already been translated so I don't understand why
15 the Prosecution cannot provide us with documents that have already been
16 translated, documents that refer to very important evidence. The
17 Prosecution has already requested that the 424 documents be translated.
18 But then there is the other issue why: Don't we have the material that
19 has already been translated? We haven't received translated statements,
20 translated evidence and I know this has been translated. It's not
21 necessary to request that material that has already been translated be
22 translated again. That would be absurd.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Two issues are raised here, Mr. Akerson. Anything
24 on the two witnesses?
25 MR. AKERSON: The only thing I can say is that any translation
1 that we have, we provide to the Defence counsel. No questions asked. If
2 he wants to alert us specifically to these two witnesses, we can check and
3 see if there is translations but every translation that I know of that's
4 in our possession we provide of course to Defence counsel. It is only the
5 matter of these other documents that need to be translated who is going to
6 be responsible for that, but as to these specific witnesses I can meet
7 with Defence counsel after the fact and see if we have them. I'm not
8 aware that we have any translations that have not been disclosed but I'll
9 be happy to check again.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: I would be grateful if you would do that. Maybe if
11 we could just make an order that the Prosecution will check, at least the
12 specifically for the two witnesses, witness statements, and if you find
13 any translated statements of those two witnesses, provide them to the
14 Defence. And also assist the Defence to get translations of the 424
16 MR. AKERSON: Would you like us to make the requests ourselves?
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: If you could. It looks like it will expedite
18 things if you could --
19 MR. AKERSON: That's fine. We will be happy to do that. And I
20 just would assure the Court that any translation we get at any time, we
21 always would give that to Defence counsel.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
23 Would that be okay? That will dispose of the matter that way,
24 then. Thank you very much.
25 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
2 On the question of disclosures, Rule 66(A)(i) disclosures, at the
3 Status Conference held on the 12th of October 2005, the Prosecution
4 submitted that disclosure under this rule had been completed which was
5 contested by the Defence. Have the parties resolved this difference in
6 the meantime?
7 MR. AKERSON: To my knowledge, 66(A)(i) is complete, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Tapuskovic?
9 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we had a couple of
10 meetings and at those meetings we managed to find the necessary solutions,
11 adequate solutions. I don't want to tie you with any other issues here.
12 We've had a -- we've prepared a letter that we'll provide the Prosecution
13 with. This concerns some of the issue that is you have raised. With
14 regard of four of the statements that we have received, I can say that we
15 still haven't received the translations of those statements into B/C/S.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Which statements are these now, Mr. Tapuskovic? I
17 thought we talked about them --
18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] In the letter that we have
19 written for the Prosecution, we mentioned these statements. I can mention
20 these statements now, if you like. Witness 98, 46, 125, Witness 61, and
21 there are two statements that we received with supporting material and I
22 wouldn't like to mention the names. This is confidential. So there are
23 six statements in total, the translations of which we have not received.
24 And there are some documents that the Prosecution states that they have
25 provided us with but we've managed to file or register all those documents
1 to examine them but there is significant number of documents that we
2 haven't received. We have a list which we'll provide the Prosecution with
3 after this conference and then I'll see which documents are concerned.
4 Out of 22 witnesses who were UN representatives and protective measures
5 were requested for them, only six of those witnesses have been identified
6 and 16 of them haven't yet been identified.
7 Your Honour, perhaps these statements were provided to us a long
8 time ago. We know about 60 witnesses or so but witnesses or 16 witnesses
9 who have been put forward and we still don't know what their identity is.
10 We still haven't received expert reports. We haven't got reports of the
11 experts who will be working for the Prosecution. This is very important
12 for the Defence so that we can prepare an adequate Defence.
13 And finally, I hope that these issues we will be able to resolve
14 in discussions with the Prosecution. We have a motion that we will
15 provide them with that there are these four or five items that in a
16 certain sense hadn't been dealt with, haven't been disclosed, and as a
17 result the Defence cannot examine such material. I think that's all I
18 have to say for the moment.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Tapuskovic.
20 This problem seems to be sort of running through from one Status
21 Conference to another. At the last Status Conference the Prosecution
22 indicated that this was complete, this disclosure was complete. The
23 Defence disputed that again. You are still disputing it today. May I
24 suggest, Mr. Tapuskovic, that you meet with the Prosecution after this and
25 sort out everything, just give the Prosecution every document that you say
1 you do not have, which you are entitled to, which I should have had under
2 Rule 66(A)(i), let it know what it is that's outstanding and hopefully
3 they will provide the documents.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that was precisely
5 our wish and we have it all in writing so that the Prosecution can see
6 exactly what it is that I was talking to you about.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Then can we resolve it on
8 that basis then and hopefully we can get it off the item of the next
9 Status Conference. Okay. Thank you very much.
10 The next disclosure issue was in terms of Rule 66(A)(ii), and then
11 in terms of this one, at the Status Conference of the 28th of March this
12 year, the Defence submitted that they had not received the statements of
13 eight victims whom the Prosecution intends to call. What is the position?
14 Mr. Tapuskovic?
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I said a while ago
16 these are mainly not victims. As for the statements of victims we have
17 mainly received those. This is some sort of a misunderstanding. These
18 are witnesses who are supposed to speak about the problems which existed
19 at the time so they are not victims. That is the number of witnesses
20 which I indicated a while ago.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you so much, then. Then that can also
22 be resolved similarly as the problems under 66(A)(i). Would that be okay
23 with you, Mr. Akerson?
24 MR. AKERSON: That's fine, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Are there any issues that the
1 parties would like to raise in terms of Rule 68? Mr. Akerson?
2 MR. AKERSON: Regarding Rule 68, we've met with Defence counsel.
3 He has provided us with a list of topics that he would like us to search
4 for in our collections. We've done that. That's ongoing. Hopefully, by
5 the end of next week, we can provide them with the bulk of the results of
6 those searches. There are some documents that need to be cleared under
7 Rule 70 still and there are some documents that are witness statements and
8 we need to search other cases to make sure witness protections aren't in
9 place but we will try to do that as quickly as possible. But hopefully
10 the bulk of that disclosure will be done by the end of not this week but
11 the following week.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
13 MR. AKERSON: I would just like to say about one thing that was
14 mentioned by Mr. Tapuskovic, there are UN witnesses that are on the 65 ter
15 list that are referenced as UN witness. They were all protected under
16 Rule 7340. We have pending requests to get those cleared. We've received
17 six of them so far and of course as soon as we get the clearance on the
18 others we will provide those names. But the attending statements with
19 them have already been provided, so it's only the -- literally the name
20 that remains outstanding.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. But all those things are being attended to.
22 MR. AKERSON: Yes. Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Okay. Do you have any
24 comments to make on that, Mr. Tapuskovic? Or are you happy with what the
25 Prosecution said?
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Regrettably, Your Honour, I do
2 have an objection which -- with reference to Rule 68. It is true the
3 Prosecution has submitted to us a number of statements relevant to that
4 issue but I have to quote 68, the brief, "the Prosecutor shall disclose to
5 the Defence any material which in the actual knowledge of the Prosecutor
6 may suggest the innocence or mitigate the guilt of the accused," and I'm
7 quite sure that the Prosecutor already has knowledge that these -- this is
8 evidence that can be used under Rule 68. However, everything which has
9 been submitted to us by the Prosecution so far has been submitted in a way
10 which states that they are being submitted both under Rule 68 and under
11 Rule 66, so that this is an enormous quantity of material. Namely, the
12 Prosecution has never submitted to us one single bit of evidence decidedly
13 saying that according to their knowledge it is in the spirit of Rule 68.
14 It is very confusing for us. It is so voluminous, it is such a huge
15 quantity of material, and such a bulk of evidence. So can I ask the
16 Prosecution when they do submit to us something under Rule 68 which they
17 are definitely sure of, that they should spell out that it is under Rule
18 68. Not 68/66, because it is really hard for us then to handle such
19 material and that is a problem for us, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you have any comment, Mr. Akerson?
21 MR. AKERSON: I think that the simple response, Your Honour, is
22 that under Rule 66 we have an obligation to provide that document in a
23 language to the accused. So it's in their advantage that we designate
24 them as both Rule 66 and 68, which they often are. I mean, we designate
25 them according to the rules that we think they apply to. But if we only
1 designate them as Rule 66 -- or 68, I'm sorry, there isn't an obligation
2 to translate it. And so I think it's to their advantage to actually have
3 them designated properly by both rules, if they apply, because then we
4 submit them for translation as well.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sure, but I guess the point that Mr. Tapuskovic is
6 making is that if material is designated Rule 66/68, then they are not
7 sure which of that material is specifically Rule 68 material. Of course,
8 the problem can be solved by them reading the documentation and that's
9 sort of asking you to do the reading for them and sorting it out for them.
10 MR. AKERSON: The only thing I can say is that if any document, if
11 we disclose it and we think it has some Rule 68 exculpatory value, we
12 designate it as such. It may also be being disclosed under --
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Under 66.
14 MR. AKERSON: Yeah, but -- so we flag it with both rules. But
15 that means it's Rule 68 in some respect, and I think we are obligated to
16 do that, to designate both rules.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Mr. Tapuskovic, if material
18 is disclosed to you, surely the idea is for you to read through that
19 material and you see the Prosecution says that some material does come
20 under both rules, both 66 and 68, and that's why they then put it 66/68
21 because it applies under both rules. It is anticipated that you're going
22 to read that and whatever is exculpatory in that material then you would
23 regard it as 68 material, and you would then use it at trial for that
24 purpose. And whatever is 66 material you will use it for that purpose.
25 Is it not -- isn't that what is -- what the case should be?
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I understand full
2 well what you're saying and that is only logical, of course, but Rule 68
3 is a very specific one. I am talking about when the Prosecutor has
4 ascertained that some material is indeed exculpatory and knows that for a
5 fact, so everything that has been submitted to us so far, absolutely, and
6 this refers to everything, it has never been specifically indicated it
7 goes under Rule 68. I simply don't see -- I'm quite sure that the
8 Prosecution knows nor a fact what evidently falls under 68 specifically,
9 it can be five or ten materials, I do not insist on the exact number but
10 to indicate every time that it comes under either 66 or 68 is something
11 which leads us into an absurd situation.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you done?
13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [In English] Yes.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: It looks like you're going to have again to talk to
15 your learned friend on the opposite side on this issue because what I
16 understand him to be saying is that simply some material falls under both
17 rules and that is why they flag it as 66/68 material. And he also says
18 that when they flag it as 66, then that's to your advantage because then
19 they are responsible for the translation. But if it is only 68 then
20 you've got to sort out your own translation. Maybe it may be helpful if
21 you can sit down, as you do with the other items that we have been
22 talking -- that we've talked, to sit down with your opposite number and
23 sort out your difficulties. It's going to be very difficult to sort them
24 out here in court. I can say read the material and check out which is 68
25 and which is 66. I could say this must be done by the Prosecution but
1 does it really solve the problem? If you sit together and sort these
2 things out I think it will be much easier that way. Wouldn't you agree
3 with that?
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, of course it is --
5 would be only normal that the two sides would have to sit down and agree
6 on all these matters. I don't mind being submitted a document in English.
7 I will have it translated at my own expense, but I cannot believe that in
8 this case there hasn't been a single document in respect of which they
9 could have said immediately and decidedly that it was a document of such
10 character, even if it be just one or a couple, ten documents. But the
11 fact that not a single piece of material has been flagged as under Rule
12 68, even if it is in English, that is something which I find hard to
14 If I have to go through -- weigh, every piece of evidence which I
15 get from the Prosecution to see which one falls under which category, then
16 I think that complicates matters.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are standing up, Mr. Akerson?
18 MR. AKERSON: And I guess it's important to note that if -- and I
19 think this may be one source of confusion which I'll be happy to meet with
20 Defence counsel and discuss further, but if we identify something as Rule
21 66/68, it is because they are both things not because it's one or the
22 other and I guess that may be a point of clarity. I'm also looking at our
23 disclosure list and there are a number of things that we have disclosed
24 that are designated as only 68. There's a number of things that are
25 designated as Rule 66. And there are some that are designated as both.
1 So we have disclosed under all rules -- in both -- under both rules,
2 individually and together. I guess it's also important to note that we
3 are talking -- I think we've used 66(A) and 66(B), and I think what
4 Defence counsel is referring to is 66(B). And just to be clear on that
5 particular point, we are not obligated to disclose under 66(B). Under
6 66(A), of course, we are.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Maybe, as I say, from what you are saying, it's
8 quite clear that only a meeting of the two groups will sort this -- these
9 things out, because now you're saying to me that there is material that is
10 disclosed that is under 68 only and he's saying not a single document has
11 been identified as 68.
12 MR. AKERSON: Right.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: So I think if you could sit down and sort these
14 things out.
15 MR. AKERSON: I would be happy to do that.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. So it's ordered.
17 Are there any other matters that -- before we go to any other
18 matters, let me raise the issue about the state of health of the accused.
19 Mr. Tapuskovic, anything that you would like to tell us about the
20 accused's state of health, either physically or mentally?
21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think that perhaps
22 it is best if that question was put to him but as far as I know he is in
23 excellent state of health both physically and mentally, and as far as I
24 know he has not had any objections in respect of the treatment being
25 accorded him in the Detention Unit or in respect of his health condition.
1 Thank you.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Okay then we'll go straight
3 to the accused himself.
4 Mr. Milosevic, do you have any complaints regarding your state of
5 health or -- both physically or mentally or the conditions at the UNDU?
6 THE ACCUSED: [Microphone not activated]
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honour, thank you. I'm very
9 pleased indeed to be asked questions of this kind which attests to the
10 kind of attitude being accorded to people in my situation. To your
11 question, I should like to respond that I have no objections whatsoever to
12 the work of the staff in the Detention Unit, nor do I have any objections
13 generally speaking in respect of my conditions. As regards my health
14 condition, as they say, thank God it is good. Perhaps sometimes it won't
15 do for one to boast of one's good health condition but it is good, both
16 physically, mentally and in every other respect. I don't have any
17 problems either with respect to communication with my family or any -- or
18 in any other respect. If you will allow me, I would have a couple of
19 other comments to make in this particular regard.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Please go ahead.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It seems to me today for the first
22 time at this Status Conference that there has been some headway made along
23 the lines the Prosecution, the Defence, namely that after a lot of time
24 has elapsed, there has been some sort of a rapprochement of their
25 positions. With that, I should like to express the hope that what
1 Mr. Tapuskovic has raised will be indeed resolved so that I would be able
2 to find my bearings in this entire situation more easily and to also give
3 my input to the Defence, preparation of the Defence, because the previous
4 Status Conferences, in my view, evolved a bit differently. There was not
5 as true, true insight into the actual situation and the problems attending
6 it. I of course appreciate the positions of both parties, also in view of
7 the voluminosity of the materials involved. I do hope that we can perhaps
8 reduce the material to the substantive issues, including to what I said
9 the last time. I don't have to have access to materials which refer to
10 the Serbian Krajina, et cetera, which have nothing to do with me. So I
11 should like to stress that as a contribution from my part, so as to
12 expedite matters.
13 Having said all this, Your Honour, I should also like to add that
14 I've been here for 19 months now and the question was initiated twice of
15 my conditional release pending the actual trial so far, but this was
16 refused. This provisional release was refused, but I wish to say that by
17 my general attitude and position, I actually have shown that it is
18 possible for me to be outside the Detention Unit pending the actual trial
19 so I would like to appeal on you -- to you that that be done if at all
20 possible. If not, then I really have nothing to add.
21 I should like to thank you, Your Honour, everything is all right,
22 everything is okay, I really have nothing to add to that. Thank you.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Mr. Milosevic. The Chamber
24 does appreciate your comments, and I thank you very much for your candid
25 expression of your views. And I'm also happy to hear that you are in very
1 good health. I think it's a very good point to make note of.
2 I am sympathetic to the fact that you have been in detention for
3 19 months. But you know these trials take time, and everything possible
4 will be done and I'm sure has been done also before to try to get your
5 case to trial, and I can assure you that everybody in court here is
6 working very hard to get your case to trial as soon as possible.
7 Regarding your application for conditional release, you will
8 remember that at the beginning of this conference this afternoon, we
9 started about that point. I did acknowledge that we have received your
10 new application. The Prosecution must get an opportunity to respond to
11 that, and then the Court will make its decision. So I'm not able to give
12 you a decision on that point right now and I'm sorry if that disappoints
13 you, but that's how the process works. Okay? So your application will be
14 considered and you'll hear in due course. Thank you very much. You may
15 be seated. Thank you.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. Are there any other issues
18 that the parties would like to raise which perhaps the Court may have
19 missed? Mr. Akerson?
20 MR. AKERSON: Only one small issue, Your Honour, that is that on
21 May 10th of this year we filed a proposal to the Defence which was a list
22 of facts for potential agreement, 40 pages of facts, and they range from
23 things that are likely to be at issue at trial to things that are likely
24 not to be at issue at trial. And we've had a meeting with both Defence
25 counsel individually and discussed this motion. It seems that we are not
1 advancing on this and I would just suggest that the Court contemplate that
2 maybe being more proactive in getting involved in this issue, because I
3 think there's a number of facts that we could probably agree on but it may
4 take maybe another Pre-Trial Conference dedicated or status -- Pre-Trial
5 Conference dedicated to this issue, to maybe try to push the parties to
6 come to agreement on some of the more mundane issues that aren't going to
7 be in agreement. I know that's not kind of the normal course of things
8 here, but I think a little more proactive effort might actually be able to
9 save some trial time in this case.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Tapuskovic? Any comments?
11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, naturally we've
12 worked on these issues with the accused, Dragomir Milosevic. We've dealt
13 with these issues. I must admit, and this is very important in this case,
14 I must admit the following. You know that the Accused Galic was put on
15 trial, that his trial concerned a different period of time with regard to
16 the period of time that concerns Mr. Dragomir Milosevic. And since his
17 trial has been -- or this case has been going for a while we thought we
18 would have the judgement, the valid judgement from that case. That would
19 provide us with certain guidelines and this has provided us with a -- or
20 caused us a certain problem because we cannot examine facts that are
21 undisputed. As far as I know but I'm not sure, I think that there are
22 very few facts that were considered to be undisputable. With regard to
23 facts that are well known, that don't have to be dealt with, with regard
24 to the facts that can facilitate the work of the court, it's also in our
25 interest not to deal with matters that are not in dispute. That we need
1 an adequate analysis of such material, material the Prosecution has
2 amounts to 40 pages, but for the moment I really can't tell you when we
3 could provide you with a precise answer. We only have a few days to go
4 and see the accused and speak to him. That's what the Registry allows us.
5 As soon as we are in a position to provide you with more precise
6 information about this matter, about reaching an agreement, on facts that
7 are not in dispute, well, as soon as it's possible we will inform you of
8 our agreement. But you should bear in mind everything that I have just
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Tapuskovic, but what I don't
11 understand in what you are saying is how your agreement on whether or not
12 the documents that have been submitted to you are agreed facts or not, how
13 that is dependent on the judgement in the Galic matter. I don't think, if
14 the Galic matter does come to finality and we get the judgement, so be it,
15 but I don't think we can wait until that judgement is -- comes out before
16 we resolve what is common cause between the parties. I would imagine that
17 the parties should be able to identify issues that are common cause. I
18 understand that you say you see the accused for very short periods of time
19 on three occasions. I cannot understand why that is so if you're supposed
20 to prepare for his trial. How often actually do you see the accused for
21 professional work, I mean?
22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, Your Honour, if we could
23 see him more frequently we could do so but the registry has its principles
24 that it adheres to, and as a result we can see the accused twice a month
25 for two days on each occasion. And that's not sufficient time for us to
1 be able to reach agreement with him. There are certainly facts that we
2 will consider to be indisputable, especially with regard to certain
3 general issues but at this point in time, we can't respond to that very
4 voluminous motion made by the Prosecution. We will attempt to do so
5 before the trial commences but at the moment, we really are not in a
6 position to respond so rapidly to the Prosecution's suggestion as to the
7 facts that could be considered to be indisputable. We'll do our best, of
8 course, to do whatever we can, to do whatever is possible, but at this
9 point in time, we cannot establish what our general position is with
10 regard to all those facts that the Prosecution believes are not in
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you able to give an estimate of time when you
13 think you may have got your instructions and be able to respond?
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this depends on when
15 we will receive the material that we have to be provided with. The
16 important documents that -- I don't know when the trial might start. We
17 haven't mentioned this, we haven't discussed this issue today; but it
18 would be very good if we had a vague idea. This is very important, as to
19 when the trial might commence. Does anyone have at least a vague idea of
20 when the trial might commence? I don't know how I can respond to the
21 Prosecution's suggestion at the moment since I don't even know when the
22 trial might commence but I'll do my best to act expeditiously.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Mr. Tapuskovic, I also don't know when the trial
24 might commence but the sooner these -- these issues are resolved, the
25 sooner will the trial commence. It doesn't help to say, "Tell me when the
1 trial will commence so that I can then expedite things." You've got to
2 expedite things so that we can know when we can schedule the trial date.
3 So I'm asking you to not hang what you are going -- what you have to do on
4 when you are going -- when the trial is going to start but rather to do
5 what you have to do so that we can see that the case is ready for trial.
6 The case will get to trial when it is ready for trial and we've got to get
7 it ready for trial, and getting it ready for trial includes, amongst other
8 things, your agreeing with your opposite number on what may be agreed
9 facts between the two of -- between the parties. And I understand that
10 you say you've got very limited time for consultation with your client but
11 within what is allowable, I'm asking to you please give priority to
12 looking at those agreed facts.
13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there is
14 misunderstanding, that's quite obvious. What you have said is correct but
15 we will certainly act in this way before we file a pre-trial brief. There
16 are a lot of facts that could be agreed on but we have to analyse
17 everything very carefully. We are attempting to analyse the documents
18 provided to us by the Prosecution very carefully. We are trying to gather
19 our own evidence, and only once we have examined all of this material will
20 it be possible for us to express our position with regard to the facts
21 that are not in dispute. We will do our best to deal with all these
22 issues and to reach agreement with the Prosecution as soon as possible.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: I hear what you say. I go back to my earlier
24 question. Are you able to give an estimate of time when you think you can
25 revert to your -- to the Prosecution on the agreed facts, proposed agreed
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] We will do our best to discuss
3 this issue whenever we meet the Prosecution. On all such occasions we
4 will deal with this issue and try to define our respective positions.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you, Mr. Tapuskovic. We -- I suppose we will
6 have to leave that point on the basis that you will also sort it out with
7 the Prosecution like you do the rest of the other issues.
8 Anything else, Mr. Akerson, on your side?
9 MR. AKERSON: Nothing further, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Any issue that you would like to raise,
11 Mr. Tapuskovic?
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No, thank you, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. In that event, then, that
14 will conclude the conference.
15 And the Court now stands adjourned. Court adjourned.
16 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned at
17 1.26 p.m.