1 Wednesday, 1 July 2009
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 10.00 a.m.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honour. This is case number
7 IT-95-5/18-PT, the Prosecutor versus Radovan Karadzic.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Good morning, everyone.
9 Mr. Karadzic, you again appear on your own behalf. Can you just
10 confirm to me at the outset that you can hear interpretation into your
11 own language.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Lordship.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. And now I would take appearances from
14 the Prosecution, please.
15 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour. Good morning. Alan Tieger,
16 Hildegard Uertz-Retzlaff, and case manager Iain Reid for the Prosecution.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. And I turn my attention to you
18 straight away, Mr. Tieger. As a result of decision of the
19 Appeals Chamber issued at the end of last week, it seems to me
20 inappropriate now for you to seek any further action on your proposed
21 fourth amended indictment in view of the success of your appeal. What
22 action do you propose in relation to that?
23 MR. TIEGER: We agree, Your Honour. Thank you. We would move to
24 withdraw the proposed fourth amended indictment. We can do so orally.
25 We can follow up with a written submission, if the Court would prefer.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: No, your oral application here is sufficient for
2 that purpose, and I note the withdrawal, therefore, of the proposed
3 fourth amended indictment.
4 The principal business for this Status Conference is reviewing
5 certain aspects of certain motions which are currently before the
6 Chamber. The first of these is a motion at the instance of the
7 Prosecution requesting the Chamber to invite Lord Owen to testify as a
8 Chamber witness.
9 You Mr. Tieger -- or Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, the accused,
10 Dr. Karadzic, has responded to that motion. Is there anything else to be
11 said on the matter before the Trial Chamber deals with it?
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: In relation to the motion response, I can
13 actually only say that Rule 85 provides for the Trial Chamber to change
14 the order of the presentation of evidence in the interests of justice,
15 and Rule 98 allows the Trial Chamber to call witnesses. That's all I
16 would like to add. Thank you.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: And in the event that he is a witness in the case,
18 when would you propose that his evidence should be presented? At what
20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: At the very end, actually. Our planning is
21 that he will be heard in a -- as one of the last witnesses. I mean,
22 after -- at the end of the Prosecution case he would be called.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: I suppose one incidental benefit of his being a
24 Chamber witness is that you would be entitled to cross-examine him.
25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, the reason why we asked for --
1 for this way of procedure is actually Mr. -- sorry, Lord Owen's wish, and
2 that's --
3 JUDGE BONOMY: It's now his wish, but in the Milosevic -- in the
4 Milosevic case, it was the suggestion of the Prosecution, I think.
5 That's what triggered this.
6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yeah, but it was, at the same time, also a
7 request of Lord Owen, and that's why we actually put it forward, and it
8 went actually well for both sides, I would say.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Karadzic, is there anything you want to add to
10 what you've said so far?
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With all due respect to Lord Owen
12 with whom I cooperated for a long time, the issue in hand is the way in
13 which the Prosecution will cross-examine, and that is going to be
14 determined whether he is going to be summoned as a Chamber witness or a
15 Prosecution witness. It's not a matter of principle. It's a practical
16 issue, and I stick by my response to the motion.
17 I think that he should not be awarded any special status, because
18 in such a case a cross-examination by the Prosecution would not serve the
19 purposes of the Defence, would be to the benefit of the Defence.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Let's assume for the sake of argument that the
21 Prosecution were not to call him and the Trial Chamber were to decide not
22 to invite him as a Chamber witness. What would your position be then?
23 Would you be calling him?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's highly possible that the
25 Defence would seek to summon him. He was main actors in coming the
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, thank you to both parties for these further
3 submissions. The Trial Chamber will have to make a decision on this, and
4 that decision will be made fairly soon.
5 The second motion I want to deal with, Dr. Karadzic, is the
6 motion for request for cooperation by the United Nations in support of
7 your efforts to obtain material that's relevant to your
8 Holbrooke Agreement motion.
9 As you know, there was a 65 ter meeting, a meeting under
10 Rule 65 ter, at which I secured your agreement to speak directly to the
11 director of legal affairs of the United Nations, and following that I did
12 so. And following that, as you know, there was an exchange of
13 communication between her office and one your associates, and understand
14 that that matter is now in hand.
15 It seems to me there's nothing more that the Chamber can do in
16 terms of this motion. That doesn't mean to say you can't invoke our
17 assistance in other circumstances, of course you can, but I suggest to
18 you that this particular motion has served its purpose and the
19 appropriate course would be for you to withdraw it.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Lordship, I received a
21 response from the UN. Communication has been established, and we've is
22 accepted the conditions offered therein. Now we're only waiting for
23 notification of a date when my legal advisor can visit the New York and
25 they notify us, we will be there. I believe that things are going well,
1 and I believe that important results will ensue.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: That does not really address the point I'm making
3 to you, which is that the motion appears to have served its purpose and
4 that the appropriate course is for you to withdraw it. And if you don't,
5 then there doesn't seem to be any alternative but for the Trial Chamber
6 to deny the motion as unnecessary now. I was just hoping to avoid
7 unnecessary paperwork.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I understood you correctly, you
9 mean the motion where I request communication with UN to be established.
10 Is that right? Yes, we can withdraw it since it has served its purpose.
11 Your intervention most probably has helped it to serve its purpose, so
12 thank you.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. I note, therefore, the withdrawal of
14 that motion.
15 The next matter's a lot more complicated, and that is the motion
16 for an order relating to protected Prosecution witnesses. This, again,
17 was the subject of discussion at the 65 ter meeting, and at the end of
18 that meeting, it was left in the hands of the Prosecution to consider how
19 the issues surrounding the volume and the number of witnesses in respect
20 of whom there are protective measures might be dealt with to ensure that
21 this trial is as public as possible.
22 Now, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, can you update me on any developments
23 since that meeting?
24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour. What -- what we did
25 during the period, we have actually reviewed the witness situation, and
1 we have, in fact, 159 witnesses that have some form of protective
2 measures. Of those we have contacted 119, and meanwhile we have three
3 witnesses who have expressed willingness that their protective measures
4 be rescinded or changed; and we will file a motion to this effect
5 shortly. However, 88 of these witnesses have specifically asked that
6 their protective measures be continued, and we think they have a valid
7 reason for that.
8 Of those we have not contacted yet, that's -- we -- rather, of
9 those who have not been spoken to about the protective measures within
10 that 119, 23 have protective measures in ongoing cases; and, therefore,
11 we did not address this issue with them, particularly, because we don't
12 see a valid reason to ask them to reconsider it when they have these
13 protective measures ongoing in other cases. However, we have eight
14 witnesses among these 119 for which we did not address this question,
15 particularly, and we will call these witnesses again and speak about
16 protective measures and the need for that.
17 In relation to the 40 witnesses that we have not contacted yet,
18 13 of those enjoy protective measures in ongoing cases, and we really
19 don't see a reason to call these people. However, the remaining 27,
20 among those are also witnesses whose protective measures date from long
21 time ago, and we will call these witness -- witnesses as a priority to
22 find out whether their situation has changed and whether they would be
23 willing to appear without protective measures or different protective
25 JUDGE BONOMY: The one category there I don't think I followed
1 was the eight that you referred to.
2 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. These were witnesses -- these eight
3 witnesses have been contacted, but when we were talking to them, we did
4 not address, specifically, the need for protective measures, and we will
5 do that now.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: So does that mean that there are 48 in total who
7 have not been asked the question?
8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour, that's correct. No, not
9 exactly. I mentioned also the 23, the 23 among the 119, which have in
10 -- in parallel cases.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, I understand, but --
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, but for -- otherwise, the figure was
14 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Our own calculation of the number of witnesses for
16 whom there are protective measures is a bit higher than yours. It's 182,
17 which illustrates just how complex this whole area is, and I will come
18 shortly to a suggestion on how to deal with its complexity, which is one
19 thing, but there's a separate issue from complexity; and that is
20 determining whether the measures should continue, because Dr. Karadzic
21 has raised the point, as a general one, about reviewing the situation
22 where, first of all, there are so many, and secondly, the events that
23 they're speaking about are many years ago now.
24 So one of the things that I raised with you before and which
25 continues to concern me a little is how he can be put in a position of
1 judging -- of trying to judge whether it's appropriate for any request to
2 be made to alter the protective measures; or do you think that that's
3 just something that is not really feasible and on which the assessment of
4 the Prosecution and the information that they have been able to gather is
5 all that will be available?
6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, there is always also the
7 Victims and Witnesses Unit who can take a position. What we just find is
8 when the protective measures were granted in the first place, there was a
9 certain reason for this, and if the conditions haven't changed, and, for
10 instance, if victim witnesses are still living in the municipalities
11 where they were victimised and when perpetrators are still at large, I
12 can't really see how they could now be told now, Although the
13 circumstances are the same, you shouldn't have protective measures.
14 And when it comes to other witnesses like, in particular, insider
15 witnesses who may incriminate, in particular, Dr. Karadzic, I can't
16 really -- I think they even -- when they live in areas where they are
17 easily accessible for followers of Dr. Karadzic, I can't really see how
18 they can be now told there 's no need for this any longer. So I think we
19 really have to see whether the circumstances the witnesses find
20 themselves in have changed from what it was before, and if so, then it is
21 a matter of reconsidering; but if it is the same, I just don't see it.
22 JUDGE BONOMY: It may be argued that they have inevitably changed
23 because of the passage of time alone. And if you bear in mind domestic
24 circumstances, the vast majority of witnesses involved in the most
25 serious of criminal cases and domestic circumstances are known to the
1 accused or associates of the accused. It's much less frequent that there
2 are protective measures for witnesses that are capable of concealing
3 their identity from accused people and their associates, because
4 everyone's living in the one community so often in these cases.
5 So there may be, there may be, that's all I say, circumstances in
6 which this institution may be seen as -- as going too far when these
7 measures continue automatically many years after the events themselves
8 and have such a -- or have the capacity to have a major impact on the
9 public nature of the trial. So I'm really looking for guidance on how
10 the accused can be put in a position of making a reasonable assessment of
11 which witnesses he might responsibly make an application to vary the
12 protective measures in relation to.
13 Now, is there anything more you can give me to assist on that?
14 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, sitting here, one thing occurred to me
15 in terms of the issues the Court raised. It is not a direct response
16 necessarily to the question of the accused's participation or direct
17 participation in the evaluation of the factors, but in comparing the
18 circumstances faced by the Tribunal with domestic circumstances, I would
19 note the differing meaning of "public" in that context. I, for example,
20 come from a jurisdiction, at least in the federal courts, where the
21 broadcasting, televised broadcasting of proceedings is an anathema for a
22 variety of reasons, including the risk to witnesses.
23 So the public nature of the trial is maintained, but it's not
24 amplified in the manner it is in the Tribunal. The Court mentioned that
25 in domestic jurisdictions, the identity of witnesses are, in fact, known
1 to the accused and his associates, by which I assume you mean legal
2 associates and that's the case here as well.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: No, I didn't mean legal associates. I meant those
4 that might have a criminal connections with an accused in a domestic
5 situation. In other words, a circle that might be able to do something
6 in a situation where the accused, himself, is in custody.
7 MR. TIEGER: Well, I wouldn't consider that to be a positive
8 aspect of the domestic jurisdictions.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: No, but it's a facts of life is all I was
10 suggesting to you.
11 MR. TIEGER: I do understand. I'm just suggesting that where
12 that fact of life need not be exacerbated, for example, through televised
13 broadcasting in many jurisdictions that is not done for that reason.
14 Here we do that. That adds another factor that, I think, plays a role in
15 our assessment.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: I think it's a very valid comment to point to
18 Just on one other matter that you raised, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff,
19 you mentioned that the -- the one positive suggestion you made was that
20 the Victims and Witnesses Section might assist, but in your response to
21 this motion, you've set your face against that as a method of dealing
22 with it. You've indicated they have a part to play but at an appropriate
23 stage, which is after an application has been made and at a late stage in
24 the proceedings.
25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That's correct, Your Honour, but one can all
1 rely -- as you were looking for ways how to deal with the issue, I was
2 just thinking about -- that maybe a possibility to involve them in that
3 early stage. In particular, they have quite an overview of witnesses
4 from various areas in the -- in the former Yugoslavia, and they may have
5 valid points to make in overall assessment.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Mr. Karadzic, this motion is yours.
7 Is there anything further you wish to say in relation to that motion?
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Lordship, I hope that you
9 won't allow the Prosecution to convert this Chamber into a camera
10 obscura. I absolutely oppose that somebody who is not a victim be
11 protected 15, 17, or 20 years after the event. There's no reason for
12 that. And in the erstwhile practice, it has not transpired that any
13 witnesses experienced any inconvenience. Everything is known, and there
14 is no justification for them to be protected. I do not seek any delicate
15 victim to be stripped of their protective measures, but the witnesses,
16 well, can you imagine 200 witnesses using protective measures?
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Now, in relation to the more complex
18 aspect of this, which we discussed at the beginning; that is identifying
19 which witnesses, precisely, protective measures apply to and what exactly
20 these measures are in each case. The Chamber has in mind to produce a
21 table of its understanding of the existing protective measures. We are
22 concerned that there have been errors in submissions made to us, and in
23 the latest one, which we received recently - that's the Prosecution
24 notification, the fourth notification of protective measures - there are
25 also errors.
1 Now, that simply underlines just how difficult this whole
2 exercise is.
3 Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I'm also concerned when you said, in the
5 beginning on that topic, that you have actually estimated and checked it
6 was more than 180. I was surprised, because we have double-checked it,
7 because of these various figures that we had discussed in the
8 65 ter Conference, and our -- our finding is it's 159. So there must be
9 some error somewhere or some different views. So it would be definitely
10 very helpful to have a table. We do have a table as well, so we could
11 then basically double-check.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: What is proposed is that a table is compiled
13 showing the Chamber's understanding of the situation, and time is allowed
14 to the parties to make submissions in relation to that with a view to
15 agreement being reached that we have a definitive list of the measures
16 that exist.
17 Now, to make this a worthwhile exercise, we need to know that
18 you've exhausted your intimations to us of the existing measures. Have
19 you done so?
20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: To my knowledge, yes, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: So it's -- we've reached the stage where it would
22 be appropriate for us to -- to issue that, I think, for the comments of
23 parties and a final determination of the situation. Apart from anything
24 else, I think it's in everybody's interest be able to refer to one
25 definitive document, which tells us the measures that exist at this
1 stage; and in the absence of any variation between now and the time the
2 witnesses give evidence will apply to the evidence of these witnesses.
3 Mr. Karadzic, that table will give you a complete picture of what
4 exists in the way of protective measures. It may be difficult for you, I
5 understand, to make any detailed comments about the measures and about
6 the table and to assist in correcting it because you're not really in a
7 position to -- to improve on the information available to the
8 Trial Chamber and the Prosecution.
9 The overall picture will assist the Chamber to make a final
10 decision on your motion, but your motion, when it was submitted, related
11 to, I think, 68 witnesses. We now have far more. So what might emerge
12 from all of this for you is a starting point if you wish to apply to the
13 Chamber for variation of the measures which exist.
14 Your point at the moment is a very broad one, that there's no
15 reason to provide protective measures for witnesses who are not victims
16 and that there are obvious categories of victims for whom protective
17 measures exist and should continue, very broad proposition; but you might
18 also want to look at in more detail at the list and the table to see
19 whether, in fact, you feel it appropriate to make more detailed
20 submissions about alterations that might be made to these protective
22 Now, I intend to move on to another subject. On this one is
23 there anything else you wish to say?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, thank you. I shall wait for
25 the opportunity once I have a better insight into the whole situation
1 regarding protective measures.
2 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, perhaps I can also add one
3 point. We have looked at the categories and type of witnesses, and we
4 have actually 91 victim witnesses with protective measures. That may be
5 of assistance. We have 40 insiders with protective measures, 9 Rule 70
6 witnesses, and 19 others, like, for instance, intercept operators and the
7 like where the protective measures are -- basically also come from their
8 institutions and where they work.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. That's helpful.
10 The next matter I want to deal with is really a formality. The
11 Prosecution have made a motion for reconsideration of the Trial Chamber
12 decision dealing with contact by the Defence with Prosecution witnesses.
13 Now, Dr. Karadzic, this is holding up whatever contact with
14 Defence -- with the Prosecution witnesses is ultimately allowed, and,
15 therefore, it would, I think, be of assistance to your own position if
16 you were able to respond to this fairly quickly. Are you in a position
17 to respond to that this week? The normal deadline would be the 10th of
18 July, but I think it's in everyone's interest that we try to deal with it
19 more quickly.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Lordship, if it is necessary
21 for me to file a written motion, I can do that on Monday, the
22 6th of July. That is the earliest for me. If an oral explanation does
23 not suffice, it would be careless of the Defence to allow the Prosecution
24 to inform us whether anyone agrees to contacts with the Defence or not.
25 This should either be done by the Registry or in some other way, but if
1 necessary, I can promise to file this response on Monday, the
2 6th of July.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: I think we would benefit from a written response,
4 so what I will do is order an expedited response by you on the
5 6th of July.
6 The next matter, Mr. Karadzic, is the Prosecution motion to
7 extend the time again for disclosure of audio files in B/C/S. I think
8 when this arose before and there was an extension granted, you did not
9 object to that. And the Prosecution seek an extension until the
10 10th of July because of difficulties in translating these -- or, rather,
11 in transferring them.
12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, I can update you.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: We actually were very lucky with the
15 reminder of the tapes. Only a few were causing problems. We could
16 disclose yesterday 136 audio files. The only ones that are outstanding
17 now are 40 to 50, and we think we can do it in this week, but they are --
18 this includes the corrupted ones. So what we did is we asked for ten
19 days to make sure we don't have to come to you, but we are quite
20 confident that we can actually make it faster, but we can't be absolutely
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Do you have any objection to that,
23 Dr. Karadzic?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In view of the fact that I haven't
25 reviewed even those that I have received, I have no objection. So you
1 can give them as much time as they need, because I have so much to do.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Very well. The time will be extended until the
3 10th of July.
4 Now, Dr. Karadzic, one of the things you've been doing is -- is
5 obtaining from other cases as much of the confidential material as you
6 can. And in relation to one of them, that's the case against
7 Dragan Obrenovic, the order made by the Chamber is inconsistent with a
8 similar order made by the Chamber in the Popovic case. And the
9 Prosecution have now drawn that to our attention and submitted that there
10 are two categories of material which our order covers, which if we were
11 to be consistent with the Popovic decision, would not be included in our
13 And the two categories are -- one is personal to Obrenovic's
14 family, and the other relates to character witnesses in his case.
15 Neither would appear to have any relationship with your case, and if you
16 accept that, then I can order -- or, yes, I think we'll probably have to
17 confirm it in writing with the Trial Chamber, but I can deal with this or
18 at least indicate how it will be dealt with. Do you see any problem with
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Basically, no. I think that the
21 Defence can respond positively. On the other hand, I already have a lot
22 of material that I have permission to have access to. As for the things
23 that are not significant for the case, I have absolutely no objections.
24 Namely, questions such as family, et cetera. These are matters that are
25 not of significance to me.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, the Trial Chamber will vary
2 the previous decision, but because it was a Trial Chamber decision, it's
3 probably necessary to do it in writing.
4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: That deals with the motions that I have on the
6 agenda. One thing I did omit - and I'm sorry I did, but it may be that
7 we can make some progress on it - was the issue of expert witnesses. It
8 was discussed at the Rule 65 ter meeting, and, subsequently, I did a
9 little more to try to find out exactly what was going on, and there have
10 been exchanges of correspondence between your associates and the
11 Office of Legal Aid in the Tribunal. However, the position is still that
12 only one expert has been approved. There are still exchanges of
13 communications about the forensic science and pathology experts.
14 Now, are you up-to-date on what's going on there, Dr. Karadzic,
15 or is that something that's entirely in the hands of a legal associate at
16 this stage?
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My legal associates are working in
18 accordance with my instructions fully, and I have filed the curriculum
19 vitae for several experts. And a particularly sensitive issue is the
20 issue of forensic experts, and I intend to conduct a thorough
21 investigation and expertise in view of the sensitivity and the haziness
22 that prevails over certain details.
23 One of my associates has addressed a letter to the Prosecution,
24 actually this morning, in connection with the forensic experts. I have
25 that letter here with me. It goes into some detail, and I expect then it
1 will be much easier to discuss the issue.
2 So I believe that we are making process in this area, too, but
3 this is an enormous amount of material and to be able to respond as to
4 whether we accept or challenge any of this, my legal associates and
5 experts have a great deal of work ahead of them.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: I understand that, but usually that work at the
7 start of the exercise is time-consuming. It's administrative work
8 necessary to set up the exercise. But once the expert is engaged, then
9 it's over to him, and the legal associate can get on with something else.
10 I'm particularly anxious here not to get bogged down in too much
11 communication about the detail, and I am quite happy to get personally
12 involved in dealing with the Tribunal office which manages this matter
13 and your legal associate with a view to speeding this whole exercise up.
14 Please bear that in mind.
15 I know you feel under pressure with the dead-lines that have been
16 set and the volume of material that must be dealt with within these
17 dead-lines, but your associates may feel free to contact the
18 Trial Chamber through Ms. Davidson in front of me if it is felt that
19 direct intervention will assist in cutting through any red tape that
20 might be involved. So I do not want you to feel that you have to deal
21 with this entirely by exchanging correspondence. There may be quicker
22 ways if there are difficulties which need to be resolved.
23 Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, I think the same applies. The document to
24 which Mr. Karadzic was referring is a letter, actually, it's probably an
25 e-mail from yesterday.
1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That's correct, Your Honour, and we are
2 already working on this. We have disclosed some of the material, in
3 particular exhumation reports and the like, but most of the materials
4 that is actually referred to in this letter we do not have in house, and
5 we are actually contacting ICMP today what their position is on this
7 JUDGE BONOMY: That's very helpful, and you'll appreciate the
8 urgency of it, because we've tried to programme a scheme of dealing with
9 various issues including this one, and there is a date for a response.
10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. We are dealing with this
12 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Now, does either party -- well, let me
13 deal with you first of all, Dr. Karadzic. Do you have any other matter
14 in relation to any of the motions that you wish to raise?
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think that I have nothing in
16 particular at this point in time. However, as you well know, the motion,
17 in connection with the agreement with Holbrooke, is awaiting additional
18 information from the UN. As you know, the American government has
19 challenged this, and we have filed a submission asking for contact with
20 two officials. The Swedish government -- or, rather, the minister,
21 Mr. Bildt, is willing to communicate with the Defence, but just now
22 they're busy with the fact that they have taken over the chairmanship of
23 the European Union, so I believe that this contact will be made by the
24 middle of this month. So this is something that we're working on very
25 expeditiously, and we hope that the Chamber will soon give thought to a
1 procedure whereby it would be possible to establish, once and for all,
2 whether such an agreement existed or not.
3 Then there's a question of the Judge, but I don't think I have
4 anything in particular at this point in time.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: As you rightly point out, both of these matters
6 are in hand. The Chamber, or at least I have certainly indicated to you
7 that your Holbrooke motion does require to be dealt with it, and the
8 Chamber is actively considering how to deal with that, and you may find
9 that a decision on that is made fairly soon.
10 The other point is out with my control and in the hands of
12 Sorry, is there any matter in relation to any motion,
13 Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, that you wish to raise?
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: I want to of move, then, on to a quite separate
16 subject, and that is a very preliminary consideration of the scope that
17 there might be to apply rules within Rule 73 bis in relation to this
19 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
20 JUDGE BONOMY: As parties are aware, a Pre-Trial Conference has
21 been set for the 20th of July. It's now clear to the Trial Chamber that
22 that date is not realistic and that this trial will not start as soon as
23 that, but -- and is unlikely to start prior to September. So even the
24 Pre-Trial Conference, I anticipate, will not be before September. So you
25 can score out the plan for the 20th of July. However, that's no reason
1 for not, at least, looking at the issue of -- of how the trial might be
2 made more manageable by application of these rules. And what I'm really
3 seeking is your assistance, that's both parties' assistance, in
4 identifying the areas in which there might be scope for reducing the size
5 of the trial.
6 The matter has arisen before. It's some time ago, I think, since
7 any submission was made about it. Dr. Karadzic made submissions many
8 months ago about this, but they were not followed up in writing, in spite
9 of an indication being given that in dealing with the preliminary motions
10 they might have been. That doesn't necessarily mean that you've departed
11 from thoughts that you had before about how the scope of the trial might
12 be more concentrated. Do you have any initial thoughts on that,
13 Dr. Karadzic?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I should, first of all, like to
15 express gratitude for the patience the Chamber has shown in connection
16 with the agreement with Holbrooke, and I hope that no decision will be
17 made until we have provided the information we're expecting and that
18 there will be an occasion for us to have an evidentiary hearing in
19 connection with that agreement.
20 As for September, I don't know whether you had in mind September
21 this year as the date for the beginning of trial, because the material I
22 have requires months and months of time just to look through it, to
23 classify it, to give instructions to Defence teams in the field to do
24 their investigation. So I'd like to know September which year you're
25 planning for the beginning of trial.
1 As for the scope of the indictment, I'm really surprised why the
2 Prosecution has engaged in such a voluminous undertaking. Because from
3 the standpoint of proving the truth and forming a puzzle of the truth, I
4 have no objections, but this is such a vast trial, that it will last for
5 years, and it will require enormous funds. And would I not object at all
6 if the Prosecution were to shorten or eliminate certain things and make
7 the process more effective and more focussed rather than amassing 200 or
8 300 witnesses under Rule 92 bis, which is making the whole trial more
9 problematic. It would be less so if the Prosecution were to focus on
10 certain fundamental issues if they did have such issues, but I am quite
11 confident that they don't have a case against me. So they're trying to
12 hit me with an air rifle. I don't want to be unpleasant. I think that I
13 would be far more successful if I were to accused them of more minor
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
16 Mr. Tieger.
17 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I'm -- the Prosecution is happy to talk
18 with the Court concreting about any aspect of case it sees fit, but since
19 the matter was raised broadly by the accused in terms of making the
20 presentation more effectively, identifying the fundamental issues, and so
21 on, I think it's incumbent upon me to note that, as expressed in the
22 previous Status Conference, I believe, there was some expectation about
23 the impact of the accused's anticipated compliance with Rule 65 ter and
24 the provision of a pre-trial brief which would, indeed, narrow those
1 Notwithstanding the assurances made at that Status Conference and
2 an order by the Court that tracked those assurances, that has not been
3 done. And any objective of Rule 65 ter toward narrowing the issues, and
4 I think that is a large part of 65 ter (G), are not available to us for
5 that reason.
6 More broadly, I'd say in terms of fundamental issues in the case,
7 I don't think it's necessary for the Prosecution to say that the
8 components of the case that we've identified, the alleged ethnic
9 cleansing of 1992 through 1995, the siege of Sarajevo, the events in
10 Srebrenica, are rather fundamental issues, and we certainly intend to
11 pursue those in the most effective and expeditious way. But the
12 suggestion that those can be dispensed with by focusing on something that
13 might be characterised as more fundamental issues I don't think is
14 helpful. I think the provision of a pre-trial brief that comply with
15 Rule 65 ter would have been vastly more -- of vastly more assistance.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: The pre-trial brief is only now in my hands. I
17 note your remarks, which I think relate to the lack of concentration on
18 factual issues in it, in any detail at all. And the consequences of that
19 will have to be considered and, if appropriate, then steps will be taken,
20 but that may or may not be possible. I'm not in a position to comment.
21 However, what I understand by more fundamental issues from
22 Mr. Karadzic is a reference to evidence of his individual criminal
23 responsibility, and I think the suggestion from his point of view that it
24 would be helpful to everyone to identify clearly the evidence that points
25 to that.
1 Have you given thought at all to -- to the time that's likely to
2 be necessary to present the Prosecution case?
3 MR. TIEGER: Well, I guess, I don't want to say of course because
4 I don't know that it was necessarily a rhetorical question, but we
5 certainly considered in a variety of ways as we were producing, for
6 example, the witness list. We continue to look at the time required to
7 present the case.
8 If, and I don't want to re-interpret the Court's questions
9 because I'm sure the Court can do that much more effectively for me, but
10 if the Court is asking us to reconsider, for example, individual time
11 assessments for witnesses, whether or not there are witnesses whose
12 evidence overlaps, and whether or not some more economical approach can
13 be used, I can assure the Court that we certainly do that on an ongoing
14 basis and will continue to do that.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: But from my use of, I think, an American
16 expression, do you not have in your preparations a ballpark figure for
17 the time that you expect the case to take, from the Prosecution point of
18 view? In other words, how many hours you think presenting your case will
20 MR. TIEGER: We do, Your Honour, and I think that's -- that's
21 encapsulated in the summary of -- or in the aggregation of the times for
22 the witness presentation.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: And what does that come to?
24 MR. TIEGER: That's approximately 490 hours.
25 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Is that calculation based on the assumption that
2 the various 92 bis, et cetera, motions will be granted?
3 MR. TIEGER: Yes. It incorporates those figures based on that.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: You appreciate that taking, just for the broad
5 purposes of a very rough calculation, 60 per cent of that time for
6 cross-examination and maybe 10 per cent of the total for all the
7 administration that goes on in the course of the presentation of the
8 evidence, we're talking about a period, I think, significantly in excess
9 of a year for the presentation of the Prosecution case. Is that
10 consistent with your understanding?
11 MR. TIEGER: Well, I --
12 JUDGE BONOMY: I mean sitting five days a week, four hours a day,
13 it would take 43 weeks, I think.
14 MR. TIEGER: I think that would be for the -- for the total case
15 incorporating the cross-examination and the administrative matters, yes,
16 I think that's about right.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: But being realistic, things never work that way,
18 do they. You don't manage to pack it into 43 weeks, 5 days a week. So
19 it's going to be -- and 43 weeks is probably longer than a year itself
20 when you take interruptions for leave and other reasons.
21 MR. TIEGER: That is a reality, of course, that we face, but it
22 can be narrowed as we've seen in comparison with different court
24 JUDGE BONOMY: And, indeed, it can be expanded, depending on the
25 decisions made in relation to your motions. So we may have to be
1 talking -- we may have to be talking about other ways of looking at this.
2 I mean, I understand your point that Srebrenica might be seen as the
3 discrete element, Sarajevo, and the ethic cleansing; but if you take the
4 ethnic cleansing on its own, it's not immediately obvious why there must
5 be 27 municipalities dealt with individually. It may be that the fourth
6 element which you haven't mentioned in the indictment, that of the
7 hostage taking, perhaps is an element that we just don't have the luxury
8 of the necessary time to deal with it. It may be we don't have time to
9 do both Srebrenica and Sarajevo. I don't know. I think this is going to
10 have to be a much more intensive debate, but probably in September.
11 My purpose in putting this on the agenda today was so that we
12 don't leave here unaware of each other's perception of this issue and the
13 need to be creative, I think, in our thinking if we want to ensure that
14 the largest possible volume of material in relation to all these issues
15 can, in fact, be presented in the course of a trial.
16 Now, that exhausts the agenda I have. Dr. Karadzic, is there any
17 other matter that we have not so far discussed that you wish to raise?
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Lordship. I would like
19 to revisit the issue of protective measures for one witness - I will not
20 mention that witness's name - from an important (redacted). I seek that
21 protective measures be removed or for him to be removed from the witness
22 list. I would like him to be a witness but without those measures,
23 because that agency, unfortunately, perform activities which are
24 unacceptable in our territory, and I would like to look into this.
25 Another thing I'd like to say is that I was a bit relieved,
1 because I see that the Prosecution does not want us to work in two
2 shifts, eight or ten hours a day, or four- or five-day working week.
3 Maybe we should consider working in three shifts.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: That may not be their decision. You haven't seen
5 the 24-hour-a-day sitting schedule, have you?
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, given the volume and the
7 planning involved, maybe it would be a useful precedent, who knows?
8 So far as issues that I'm supposed to raise are concerned, may I
9 remind you that I requested from 24 countries and two international
10 organisations to provide certain information. We are waiting for their
11 replies. Eighteen out of them have not responded, five of them responded
12 to the fact that they are going to consider my motion, and three of them
13 rejected to furnish voluntarily such information, and, unfortunately, I
14 will have to seek redress from the Chamber.
15 Unfortunately, this is the first wave of information that I'm
16 seeking from international organisations and countries. I foresee more
17 problems when I seek to be furnished with sensitive information and data.
18 I believe that all countries supporting the work of this Tribunal have to
19 furnish everything that will help us get to the truth. Of course I
20 observe Rule 70 and their concerns about protection of their confidential
21 information, but they should have no secret before this Trial Chamber.
22 This is my opinion.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. I note what you say. The matter you
24 raise in relation to protective measures will require a motion in
25 writing. It doesn't need to be too complex, but it does need to reflect
1 the -- some detail of the reasons for seeking that variation.
2 Mr. Tieger, is there any other matter that you wish to raise?
3 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour. Thank you.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: There is a courtroom booked at present for the
5 morning of the 22nd of July for a further Status Conference. It's not
6 clear at this stage if that will be necessary. If it is, then a
7 Scheduling Order will be issued at least a week beforehand. Failing
8 that, there will be a Status Conference in the course of August, the
9 details of which would -- will be intimated, but exactly when that one
10 takes place will depend on necessity: What work is there that requires
11 the attention of the Pre-Trial Judge in the course of a
12 Status Conference. Meanwhile, we will continue to deal as expeditiously
13 as possible with the various matters which are currently before us, and
14 we will give it further consideration to the briefs submitted by the
15 Prosecution and by the accused and decide if any further action is
16 required on these.
17 You have something else, Mr. Karadzic?
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Lordship, I do have, to
19 wit I was supposed to receive by the 16th of June translation into
20 Serbian of the motion concerning adjudicated facts. I have not received
21 it yet, so I'm not sure whether I will be able to stick to the dead-line
22 of the 14th of July, which I could theoretically observe since I have to
23 respond to the second motion concerning adjudicate the facts.
24 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
25 JUDGE BONOMY: I'm concerned to learn of this, and I will make
1 inquiries immediately after this sitting to find out what the position
2 is. I would certainly not expect you to respond by the 14th of July, if
3 you have not yet received it. So in the light of the information I get,
4 I will give you an alternative date for responding, which will allow you
5 at least the same time as you would have had, which is what, four weeks
6 from the time that you have the translated version. So an adjustment
7 will be made to accommodate that. Thank you.
8 So that completes the work of the Status Conference, which is now
10 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned
11 at 11.08 a.m.