1 Friday, 8 July 2005
2 [Closed session]
11 Pages 2-64 redacted. Closed session.
23 [Open session]
24 JUDGE LIU: Well, we finished the testimony of this witness much
25 earlier than we expected, and we have some housekeeping matters to deal
1 with. So we will have a break for 30 minutes, and we will resume at
2 quarter past 12.
3 --- Recess taken at 11.39 a.m.
4 --- On resuming at 12.17 p.m.
5 JUDGE LIU: The Trial Chamber is in the position to decide on
6 that -- on the admission of four more proposed 92 bis statements filed by
7 the Defence in its additional Defence Rule 92 bis motion on 1 July. The
8 Trial Chamber notes the Prosecution filed its response on the 6th of July
9 and the Defence filed a reply on the 7th of July.
10 The Trial Chamber has considered the arguments of both parties and
11 has applied the same legal standard as it did in its decision of the 5th
12 July 2005.
13 As for the witness A, the Trial Chamber found that the statement
14 of Witness A meets the requirements of Rule 92 bis of the rules, as the
15 statement does not go to the acts and conduct of the Accused, but, rather,
16 to acts and conduct of others, and is cumulative in nature. The
17 Prosecution requested cross-examination on two answers of the witness in
18 the statement dated 18th June 2005, because these answers would go to an
19 issue that is pivotal to Prosecution's case. The Trial Chamber does not
20 agree with the Prosecutor, as the resubordination of the Zulfikar Brigade
21 to the 4th Corps is not an issue so pivotal to the Prosecution's case that
22 cross-examination would be necessary.
23 The statement of Witness A are admitted without cross-examination.
24 Witness B. The Trial Chamber found that statements of Witness B
25 meet the requirements of Rule 92 bis of the Rules. The statements do not
1 go to the acts and conduct of the Accused. The statements are cumulative
2 in nature and parts of the statements relate to military background. The
3 Prosecution requests cross-examination on paragraph 24 to 26 of the
4 statement taken on the 13th June 2005. The Trial Chamber found that these
5 paragraphs do not go to an issue which is so pivotal to Prosecution's case
6 that cross-examination should be allowed. The statement is admitted
7 without cross-examination.
8 Witness C. The Trial Chamber found that statement of Witness C
9 meets the requirements of Rule 92 bis of the Rules. The statement does
10 not go to the acts and conduct of the Accused and is cumulative in nature.
11 The Prosecution requests cross-examination on paragraphs 7, 9, and 13 of
12 this statement. The Trial Chamber found that only the issue of the
13 investigation into the events is an issue which is so pivotal to the
14 Prosecution's case that a limited cross-examination of the witness in this
15 respect should be allowed. The cross-examination should not exceed 30
16 minutes. The statement is admitted, with cross-examination on the issue
17 of the investigation into the events in Grabovica.
18 Witness D. The Trial Chamber found the statement of Witness D
19 does not go to the acts and conduct of the Accused and relates to the
20 character of the Accused. Therefore, the statement meets the requirements
21 of Rule 92 bis of the rules. The Prosecution has not requested
22 cross-examination. The statement is admitted without cross-examination.
23 The Registrar is requested to ensure the certification of the
24 admitted statements pursuant to Rule 92 bis(B). It is so decided.
25 The next issue is about the witnesses for the next week. My
1 question is, is it possible for us to have two 92 bis witnesses in next
2 week? Yes?
3 MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honours, the answer is that we are going to
4 have a meeting after today's hearing to finally discuss our course of next
5 week. We don't believe there is any passport problems with those
6 witnesses and the answer to Your Honour's question is yes.
7 However, I have to say that although things have gone smoothly
8 this week, there is now another problem. That is that the witness -- the
9 last -- the last of the live witnesses in respect of whom there have been
10 passport problems is still deviled by passport problems. We have real
11 difficulties with this. We don't want to ask for any extensions of time
12 with respect to this and it's causing the Defence a great deal of angst.
13 We have spoken to the Prosecutors about this and we've apologised to them
14 about it. At the moment there is no passport. I am considering asking
15 that the witness be given the chance to draft a short statement and that
16 we submit that as a potential 92 bis statement.
17 The reason we do that - in some respects our hand is being forced
18 here - but rather than complain in advance I think we'll just go --
19 procure the statement. It may be that we get a passport in the meantime.
20 It may be that everything is okay. At the moment, I'm not inclined to ask
21 the Chamber to extend the Defence case in time any further. We are just
22 going to work hard today and tomorrow to see what we can bring about to
23 fix up that passport. But as a fallback position we are going to
24 endeavour to produce a short statement which we'll then submit as a 92 bis
25 statement. And when the Prosecution have been provided with that, they
1 can respond of course. It's very short notice for the Prosecutors. It's
2 a very difficult position for them. I don't expect them to agree to
3 anything right now and I'm sorry to the Tribunal, I express my apologies
4 to the Tribunal too. It's just a situation that's developed. For the
5 information of the Tribunal, I can say that our understanding is that the
6 passport has been approved and issued by certain centre in a northern
7 town. It's supposed to arrive at a particular police station. It has not
8 done so. We make constant inquiries about that. At the moment, we do not
9 have that document.
10 Therefore, I had in mind to continue to advise my learned friend,
11 Mr. Weiner, about it, as information comes to hand, and to advise the
12 Court Staff about it as best we can. I really am sorry about this. It's
13 not convenient, it doesn't suit our case, and it creates difficulties for
14 everybody. That's the currents way the Defence is proposing to proceed.
15 However, that doesn't stop us from making our decisions concerning
16 the other witnesses and we think it should be possible to arrange those
17 for next week. The only other matter which bears upon that, Your Honour,
18 is that we continually receive translated material which we've submitted,
19 and last week two documents came up which we would seek to put into the
20 evidence, and we'll deal with that later on but we believe that there are
21 some more that have been translated today. This has to stop somewhere,
22 and from the Tribunal he's point of view, I fully understand. I'm just
23 saying that when I've considered those matters I have more applications to
24 make. It's not satisfactory from the Defence point of view or the
25 Prosecutors'. We can say that CLSS work as hard as they can, they really
1 have, we think, given us full priority and have done everything they can
2 to help us. We're glad to get it now rather than in three weeks' time,
3 but we acknowledge it's potentially going to cause troubles. However,
4 Your Honours, that's the situation. We certainly believe we can wrap up
5 all witnesses by next week and maybe even early next week.
6 JUDGE LIU: So therefore definitely we will have a witness to be
7 heard next Monday?
8 MR. MORRISSEY: Well, what I wish to do, Your Honours, now that we
9 have confirmed those witnesses in respect of whom we are not allowed to
10 call them without cross-examination, we will make sure that they are able
11 to be there on that date. Things move very quickly this week of course,
12 but I hope to know within perhaps an hour or so and we will be working on
13 that this afternoon. That's the last priority we have, of course. So if
14 it's amenable for the Chamber's convenience, could we press ahead with
15 making our arrangements this afternoon and liaise with the Court and the
16 Court deputy, and the Prosecutors, of course, and indicate when those
17 witnesses are able to be accommodated? But it appears that it would be
18 very short evidence in each case so it's our intention to have them ready
19 for Monday.
20 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Please alert us as early as
21 possible when you got some information on the coming of those witnesses.
22 Thank you.
23 And now, are there any other matters that the parties would like
24 to raise at this stage? Yes, Mr. Morrissey?
25 MR. MORRISSEY: Sorry, it was just an inquiry, Your Honour, if the
1 Prosecution have sought to tender a statement from the Accused man in
2 1996, I think it's been communicated to us that that decision was soon to
3 come out, and it may be relevant with some discussions we have with
4 witnesses; it may also not be. But we would just like to know, if we can.
5 I don't know if there is -- if the Chamber is in a position to tell us
6 when that might come, but if you are in a position to tell us we would be
7 happy to know.
8 JUDGE LIU: I think we have already finished the elaborations and
9 the question is to put those conclusions on paper. I will check with the
10 legal team to see whether it's possible for us to file it before 4.00 but
11 I cannot guarantee that.
12 MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honours, it's not really for the Defence to
13 ask other people of this Tribunal to comply without time lines. We're
14 just grateful for any information that we receive about it, and thank you,
15 Your Honour, very much, for the indication that you gave. Yes, those are
16 the only matters that we have to raise at this point.
17 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
18 Well, if there is nothing from the parties, I believe the hearing
19 for today is adjourned.
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.30 p.m.,
21 to be reconvened on Monday, the 11th day of July,
22 2005, at 9.00 a.m.