1 Friday, 22 July 2005
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.12 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, may I ask you, for you the last
6 time in this case, call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number
8 IT-00-39-T, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very, very much, Madam Registrar.
10 Mr. Stewart, are you ready to continue the cross-examination of
11 Witness 682?
12 MR. STEWART: I am, Your Honour.
13 Just two things, Your Honour. The case was called with the usual
14 panache, may we observe. And secondly, Your Honour, I apologise if -- if
15 the Defence team and all four of us have been on an unguided tour of the
16 building this morning -- if the Defence team has contributed to the delay
17 in the start, then we do apologise, Your Honour, but that's what's
18 happened to us.
19 JUDGE ORIE: You were not. You were not. And if -- whenever you
20 need a special guide, I'm always available to the Defence team.
21 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So you --
23 MR. STEWART: Yes. With those two observations, Your Honour,
24 yes, we're ready.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then the witness may be brought into the courtroom.
1 [The witness entered court]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Witness 682. I would like to remind
3 you that you're still bound by the -- do you receive translation?
4 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please look at whether the
6 witness is at the right channel and whether his microphones are switched
8 Can you now hear me in a language you understand?
9 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Witness 682, I would like to remind you that you're
11 still bound by the solemn declaration that you have given at the beginning
12 of your testimony. You'll now be further cross-examined by Mr. Stewart.
13 WITNESS: WITNESS 682 [Resumed]
14 [Witness answered through interpreter]
15 Cross-examined by Mr. Stewart: [Continued]
16 MR. STEWART:
17 Q. Witness, may I address you in that rather impersonal way, you
18 described in your evidence yesterday, and for everybody else's reference,
19 you needn't worry about the transcript references, please, when I give
20 them, Witness, but in my transcript it's at page 5, and you said that --
21 JUDGE ORIE: We have to stop for a moment because the transcriber
22 doesn't receive the signal she needs to do her work.
23 [Technical difficulty]
24 MR. STEWART: I sometimes feel the same, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, could we invite you to ask
1 Mr. Karganovic to speak a few words in B/C/S to see whether the
2 translation is functioning.
3 MR. KARGANOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, everybody.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 It's functioning. Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
6 MR. STEWART: He's the most succinct member of our team,
7 Your Honour, as you can see.
8 Q. The -- Witness, I'm not quite sure whether you heard what I was
9 saying a moment ago. You did, did you?
10 A. Yes, I did.
11 Q. Yesterday you were asked about your reporting to Zuco. I just
12 wish to ask you: Before - it's right, isn't it - that before you reported
13 to Zuco, as it's convenient to call him, you had in the first place
14 reported to somebody nicknamed Bobe.
15 A. No. Bobe was the nickname of the brigade commander. He was
16 Slobodan Vasilic, nicknamed Bobe. That was the nickname by which
17 everybody knew him.
15 MR. STEWART: I'm just waiting for guidance as to when to
16 continue, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll turn into private session and I should
18 have said so.
19 [Private session]
11 Pages 16949-16981 redacted. Private session.
23 [Open session]
24 JUDGE ORIE: We are in open session. Please proceed.
25 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. Just one small -- well, it's a relatively small point, Witness.
2 The -- you said in your evidence yesterday at page 8 that you did not see
3 Mrs. Plavsic on the occasion when she came to Pale -- sorry, not came to
4 Pale -- came to Zvornik in April 1992. In the statement that you gave, at
5 paragraph 19 you said at the beginning of that paragraph: "I saw Biljana
6 Plavsic when she came to Zvornik around the end of April 1992." So I'm
7 just inviting you to clear it up. Which is correct? Did you see Biljana
8 Plavsic or did you not see Biljana Plavsic when she came to Zvornik in
9 April 1992?
10 A. I did not see Biljana Plavsic when she was in Zvornik, but I saw
11 her at Pale.
12 Q. You had also said in that statement, paragraph 8: "I cannot
13 remember who the commander of the TO unit was." In your evidence before
14 this Court, you've given - and I believe this is a fair summary - quite a
15 lot of detailed evidence about Marko Pavlovic, whose real name was
16 Branislav Pavlovic [sic]. Is it that his name had just temporarily
17 slipped your mind when you gave -- you were interviewed and made your
18 statement earlier this year?
19 MR. MARGETTS: Your Honour, there is a reference in the preceding
20 paragraph to the commander of the TO. I wonder if that assists my learned
22 MR. STEWART: Not much at the moment.
23 Does -- I'm sorry, I'm not clear what reference Mr. Margetts is
25 MR. MARGETTS: It -- at paragraph 6 --
1 MR. STEWART: Oh, I see, paragraph 6, the previous paragraph.
2 Q. Well, let me ask you this, Witness. You said in the statement
3 Marko Pavlovic was the commander of the TO headquarters at that time.
4 That's in April. That's paragraph 6.
5 Paragraph 8 you said: "I cannot remember who the commander of
6 the TO unit was."
7 Is there a distinction between the commander of the TO
8 headquarters and the commander of the TO unit?
9 A. I found out that he was the TO commander on the 27th of April.
10 Until that time, however, I didn't know that. I didn't even know whether
11 there was somebody else in that position. After that, I knew that Marko
12 Pavlovic or Branislav Popovic was the TO commander. Biljana Plavsic was
13 in Zvornik before the 27th of April, and on that occasion I did not see
14 her. (redacted)
7 [Private session]
11 Pages 16986-17014 redacted. Private session.
15 [Open session]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
17 MR. MARGETTS:
18 Re-examined by Mr. Margetts:
19 Q. Witness -- and I'll provide the page reference, page 62, lines 11
20 to 14 -- you said that whilst -- at the time you were detained in
21 Bijeljina you say that you had never seen Mr. Davidovic before in your
22 life. Is that correct?
23 A. I said that I had never seen Mr. Davidovic in my life and I
24 only --
25 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... sorry, is your microphone
1 on, Your Honour?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, mine is.
3 MR. MARGETTS: Apologies, Witness. If you could continue your
5 A. I said that I had never met Davidovic in my entire life, nor
6 anyone else from that group for that matter, but I saw Lizdek Zeljko,
7 Dragan Andan, and the then-assistant of the Minister for Traffic -- I
8 mean, I might have seen him but I didn't know it was him.
9 Q. So when you were present in Bijeljina, you did not know what
10 Mr. Davidovic looked like.
11 A. I did not know it at all.
12 Q. You also said that the -- when questioned about who would have
13 known, you were speculating in relation to who possibly would have known
14 that people were beaten -- that a basis for your conclusions and your
15 answers was that the detention centre is within the police station in the
16 basement. So it's in the same building that's visited or occupied by
17 everybody working for the Ministry of Interior of police in Bijeljina.
18 Do you know whether or not Mr. Davidovic was a member of MUP
19 Bijeljina or was he a member of another service?
20 A. As far as I know, at the time he was a member of the MUP in
21 Bijeljina. But for how long he stayed exactly, I wouldn't be able to say,
22 because he was -- he was there. He was a member there. So he could have
23 gone to his workplace basically and he could have seen those people who
24 were beaten up.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Margetts, it may be clear to you already that
1 most of this portion of the evidence comes down to speculation,
2 conclusions, rather than a clear observation of facts. So I would
3 certainly not encourage you to further pursue -- further go on this road.
4 MR. MARGETTS: Thank you, Your Honour. We have no further
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Margetts.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Has the re-examination -- no, there are no questions
9 from the Bench at this moment, so there's ...
10 MR. STEWART: No, Your Honour, thank you. I have no further --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, then they cannot have triggered --
12 MR. STEWART: I have no further questions that arise out of that,
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm aware of your position.
15 Witness, this concludes your testimony in this court. I'd like
16 to thank you very much. We'll have a break soon and then you'll be in the
17 position to leave the courtroom. I wish you a safe trip home again.
18 Could you please, before you leave the courtroom, when you are
19 waiting, take off your headphones, please.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll have a break until five minutes to 1.00,
22 and then I take it, Mr. Tieger, that you'd call your next and your last
23 witness in this case, unless there would have been any agreement on
24 further oral argument on the matter of Witness Davidovic and then
25 especially the issue of professional privilege invoked in not following
1 the invitation of the Chamber to -- the invitation to the Defence to
2 provide further -- further information on which basis strong language was
3 used against witness Davidovic.
4 Yes, Mr. Tieger.
5 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour, I believe we are up to our last
6 witness already, and we will call the witness after the break.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And there's no -- at this moment -- because
8 the parties were yesterday -- were yesterday invited to let us know
9 whether there would be any further argument on the issue I just mentioned.
10 And since I see Mr. Hannis being present and he was involved in the
11 matter, I think it -- but if you say we leave it --
12 MR. TIEGER: Oh, I'm sorry, Your Honour. I -- Mr. Hannis has
13 been here for that purpose. I think it would be useful for the parties to
14 discuss the matter during the break to see if any further discussion is
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. I understand. So we'll use the break
17 for that.
18 MR. TIEGER: And we also -- I think we also have to deal with the
19 admission of exhibits related to the most recent witness.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And your last witness is called for
21 cross-examination, because he has provided an expert report.
22 MR. TIEGER: That's correct.
23 JUDGE ORIE: So I take it, then, there -- that there are no
24 further questions for the witness, the Chamber having read the -- the
25 expert report.
1 MR. TIEGER: Correct, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, could I just mention.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. STEWART: I know that -- I don't know exactly what it is,
6 Your Honour. I know that Ms. Loukas has various bits of paper that she is
7 bringing into court immediately after the break. I -- I don't believe
8 that will take very long, but she does have one or two procedural loose
9 ends, as far as just one or two rather short --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. STEWART: -- matters to deal with, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll hear from her immediately after the
14 We adjourn until five minutes to 1.00.
15 [The witness withdrew]
16 --- Recess taken at 12.28 p.m.
17 --- On resuming at 1.06 p.m.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Tieger, are you ready to call your next witness,
19 Mr. Donia, but then mainly in order to hand him over to the Defence for
21 MR. TIEGER: That's precisely it, Your Honour. I notice
22 Ms. Loukas is here. I believe she has a 30-second matter --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. TIEGER: -- and I have no objection to her raising and
25 resolving that.
1 MS. LOUKAS: Yes. Your Honours, I believe I can confine myself
2 to 30 seconds.
3 I'll indicate -- Your Honours will recall that Mr. Harmon and I
4 reached an agreement in relation to the tender of the cross-examination
5 and re-examination from the Brdjanin trial in relation to Mr. Brown and
6 also the question of a -- a further document that relates to that
7 transcript, which is the Prosecution's submission relating to the
8 testimony of Ewan Brown.
9 So, Your Honours, I have five copies here of the relevant
10 documentation to tender to the Court, and I propose to do that now. And I
11 would also indicate, of course, that this will be my -- my last day in
12 court, as Mr. David Josse will hopefully be replacing me as of the weekend
13 as -- as co-counsel in the case. So I would also like to say good-bye to
14 the Court and indicate that it has been a -- an experience well worth
16 Thank you, Your Honours. And I tender the exhibits.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's first, then, deal with the exhibits.
18 I take it, since there is a basis -- there is an agreement about
19 them, that there's no objection, Mr. Tieger.
20 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour. I understand --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. TIEGER: -- that Mr. Harmon and Ms. Loukas reached an
23 agreement, and Ms. Loukas assures me that these documents reflect that
24 agreement, so there's no objection.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So then they will be admitted on the basis of
1 the agreement between the parties.
2 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, that's correct. It's the cross-examination and
3 re-examination in relation to Mr. Brown from the trial against
4 Mr. Brdjanin.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Brdjanin, yes.
6 MS. LOUKAS: And there's also the document that Mr. Harmon wanted
7 included as it relates to that particular portion of the evidence.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Madam Registrar, that would be ...
9 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Defence Exhibit D58.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much, Madam Registrar.
11 Ms. Loukas, does this mean that we will not see you again this
12 afternoon, if -- if there will be an afternoon session?
13 MS. LOUKAS: Yes, that is correct, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then already now, then, I would like to say
15 that it's a sad day for the Court because you are not the only woman who
16 leaves this courtroom today, since Ms. Philpott will also do so. It was a
17 pleasure for the Chamber to have you as Defence counsel in this case and,
18 of course, the Chamber is not in a position to comment on what you did;
19 whereas, the Chamber is in such a position to do that as far as
20 Ms. Philpott is concerned. We could no have wished anyone more accurate,
21 anyone more committed, anyone more serving the Court than Ms. Philpott did
22 over the three and a half years I've seen her in this courtroom and I've
23 worked with her, and I am quite convinced, Ms. Loukas, that the same kind
24 of words you receive from those who are in a position to judge upon your
25 commitment, on your accuracy, on your performance. I hope you understand
1 that the Chamber can't do that.
2 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honours. I appreciate that.
3 JUDGE ORIE: But the Chamber doesn't wish anything else than that
4 you'd receive those words from those who are in a position to do that.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour. And I would also like to,
6 if I may from a Defence perspective, also comment upon how magnificent
7 Ms. Philpott has been in her function.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's -- it's good to hear that it's not only
9 the Court which takes this position.
10 And, Mr. Tieger, you're silent, and usually -- at least a proverb
11 in my language says that "who remains silent, consents." This is not, as
12 you will understand, a legal procedure, because their remaining silent
13 doesn't mean you consent to anything at all. But in administrative terms
14 perhaps it would.
15 MR. TIEGER: It does indeed, Your Honour. And obviously on
16 behalf of the entire Prosecution team, I would -- if I were to speak on
17 the -- on the subject, I'd only amplify the words of the Court in both
18 cases. And we have appreciated the opportunity to work both with
19 Ms. Loukas and, as the Court noted, I couldn't say enough good words about
20 Ms. Philpott and -- and every aspect of her contribution to this court's
21 functioning, and we will all -- and I've said that to her myself -- miss
22 her a great deal.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we have to go back to what we have to do
24 here, that is, to hear the next witness.
25 Madam Registrar.
1 Madam Usher, could you please escort Mr. Donia into the
3 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, while that's being done, because
4 it doesn't take time, of course I would like on behalf of the whole
5 Defence team to associate myself very warmly. And I -- Ms. Loukas means
6 that, of course, very genuinely, and so it's not thought it that comes
7 from the sisterhood I want it to be understood it comes from the entire
8 Defence team.
9 JUDGE ORIE: From mankind as a whole.
10 MR. STEWART: From mankind as a whole. Our applaud and thanks to
11 Ms. Philpott. It has been a pleasure working with her.
12 [The witness entered court]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Donia. I don't have to assume
14 that. I know that you're Mr. Donia.
15 Mr. Donia, before you give evidence in this court, the Rules of
16 Procedure and Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that
17 you'll speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Could
18 I invite you to make that solemn declaration.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. I solemnly declare that I will speak the
20 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Donia, please be seated.
22 THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You have provided the Office of the Prosecution with
24 a report and with a corrigendum to your report. That has been tendered
25 into evidence under the condition that the Defence would be in a position
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 to cross-examine you on this material. Therefore, not as usual, you'll
2 not be examined first in chief but it will just be cross-examination on
3 the basis of the material we have received.
4 Mr. Stewart, you may proceed, unless there's any formalities
5 still to be -- I don't think there is any, Mr. Tieger, would there?
6 [Prosecution counsel confer]
7 WITNESS: ROBERT DONIA
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
10 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry, Your Honour. Well, with whatever
11 formalities are required to tender the report.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I think the report is admitted under 92 bis.
13 MR. TIEGER: That is my understanding as well.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think -- and then we decided that Mr. Donia
15 would be called for cross-examination.
16 MR. TIEGER: That's right. And I don't have any additional
18 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. No, perhaps -- the only thing that -- I take
19 it, then, that Mr. Stewart will deal with that, that the one formality
20 remaining would be to establish the identity of the witness that appears
21 before the Court.
22 May I take it that you are Dr. Robert J. Donia?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes, I am.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And could you give us your date of birth.
25 THE WITNESS: May 30th, 1945.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much.
2 Mr. Stewart, please proceed.
3 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. If he'd said he wasn't, we
4 might have had to cross-examine Your Honour in the light of the earlier
6 Cross-examined by Mr. Stewart:
7 Q. Mr. Donia, now, my understanding, Dr. Donia, Mr. Donia, is that
8 the -- the only material which we have now in evidence in relation to your
9 appearance here is your report, "The origins of Republika Srpska, 1990 to
10 1992." And just for your information, although you have given evidence on
11 a number of previous occasions, neither party has put in any of those
12 transcripts, so it is just this, and they have not been admitted therefore
13 into evidence. So we're simply working from your report.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
15 MR. TIEGER: Well, it appears I did overlook a formality, and I
16 apologise for interrupting counsel. And that's the submission of
17 Dr. Donia's CV.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the CV was not among the materials in 92 bis.
19 Yes. And I think Madam Registrar has to assign a number anyhow separately
20 for the report.
21 THE REGISTRAR: The report will be Prosecution Exhibit P934, and
22 the CV will be Prosecution Exhibit P935.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
24 MR. STEWART: [Microphone not activated]
25 Q. Mr. Donia -- I'm sorry, Mr. Donia, you are essentially a
1 historian, aren't you?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And a historian rather than a political analyst. Is that a fair
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. You -- just to get this out of the way, you accept so far as it
7 might come in your work as a historian, you claim no special expertise in
8 relation to military matters, do you?
9 A. That's correct, I do not.
10 Q. And you have no legal qualification?
11 A. That's correct.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Could we please have a break between question
13 and answer.
14 MR. STEWART: Of course. I'm -- it's my fault, Dr. Donia. I'm
15 pushing the -- compressing the questions and answers too speedily.
16 Q. You also in relation to this particular matter -- the sources
17 that you give on the very first page of your report, you say that the
18 study -- I don't know whether you've got your report in -- in front of
20 A. I do not.
21 Q. That might be -- it might be helpful to you.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be provided with a copy of the
23 document, of his report.
24 MR. STEWART:
25 Q. The second paragraph, you -- in the introduction. You're with me
1 there, Mr. Donia?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Yes. In that second sentence of that second paragraph you
4 say: "The study is based in part upon the transcripts and minutes of the
5 Bosnian Serb Assembly." Nothing arises on that. And --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I ask you to put your headphones on,
7 because there might be a message from the interpreters or anything else
8 that --
9 THE WITNESS: Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- you would need to hear.
11 Please proceed, Mr. Stewart.
12 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. And other documents in the possession of the Office of the
14 Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
15 Yugoslavia. Are you able just very broadly to give the Trial Chamber an
16 idea of the -- leave aside those transcripts -- the minutes with which the
17 transcript is really pretty familiar, but -- the scale of the other
18 documentation that you refer to there?
19 A. It is quite limited. I asked for and received some documents
20 which pertain to the specific issues that I wanted to address in the
21 report. Those are limit to -- limited to I think about six or eight
22 intercepts. And I also asked for and received some information on the --
23 the Assembly of the -- the Krajina, which I had actually used in a study
24 for a previous submission in another trial.
25 And then a few other items in the course of this which were in
1 the possession of the Tribunal. These were official proclamations
2 published in Official Gazettes and the -- a couple of similar legal
3 pronouncements or explanations, and also a few documents -- I note one,
4 for example, in footnote number 64 on page 14, which I was given to
5 examine in response to a specific inquiry about an issue that I was
6 writing about.
7 Q. The other -- I think you either mentioned another report or
8 another study. Your other report overlapped with this but was
9 specifically directed towards Bosanska Krupa; is that correct?
10 A. There are several prior reports that I've submitted in other
11 cases. One of them pertained to the Autonomous Region of Krajina in
12 total. One pertained to Prijedor. And one pertained to Sarajevo. And a
13 fourth pertained to Bosanski Samac.
14 Q. Bosanski Samac. Thank you.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Yes. The -- the totality of your work on those reports, could
17 you estimate that to -- would it be unfair to suggest to the nearest
18 hundred hours? Is that -- are we in the right ballpark?
19 A. It would be difficult to assess it, but it would be in the
20 several hundred hours of effort or commitment to research and writing.
21 Q. And was this -- apart from, well, simple administrative
22 assistance and finding documents -- was this for practical purposes, your
23 work, as opposed to a team?
24 A. Yes, it was.
25 Q. The -- you haven't -- in the course of this particular report and
1 study, "Origins of Republika Srpska," you haven't made any specific study
2 of Crisis Staffs.
3 A. No.
4 Q. And is it correct that you also haven't attempted any specific
5 analysis of the internal power structure within the SDS and Republika
7 A. That's correct. I have not.
8 Q. And in particular, you haven't conducted any specific study in
9 relation to the powers, duties, responsibilities of the speaker of the
10 Assembly of the Bosnian Serbs, subsequently what would later be called
11 Republika Srpska.
12 A. No, I have not.
13 Q. The -- you have dealt at page 29 of your report -- you refer to
14 the statement of principles which emerged with an agreement. We had the
15 Lisbon Agreement and the Sarajevo Agreement, didn't we, arising out of the
16 talks provided -- presided over by Mr. Cutileiro.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And you refer after -- after the citation of that passage you
19 say, four lines from the bottom "these principles involved more than one
20 transparent fiction" having cited the principles. Well, perhaps for
21 clarity and also for some degree of public understanding, what you cite
22 from the statement of principles agreed to on the 23rd of February, 1992,
23 you say: "... read in part: Bosnia-Herzegovina, BH, would be a state
24 composed of three constituent units based on national principles and
25 taking into account economic, geographic, and other criteria. BH would
1 continue to have its existing borders, and neither the government of BH
2 nor the governments of the constituent units will encourage or support
3 claims to any part of its territory by neighbouring states."
4 And then returning to your text: "These principles involved more
5 than one transparent fiction. And then you say"the constituent units
6 being foreseen were based not on economic or geographic criteria but on
7 ethnonational claims."
8 So you're saying, are you, that the phrase "based on national
9 principles" in the cited passage actually means ethnonational claims? Is
10 that --
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Yes. And from your study, is it correct that all the parties to
13 that agreement must necessarily have appreciated that that was a key
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And would inevitably also have appreciated that it was going to
17 be extraordinarily difficult to implement in practice.
18 A. Well, I haven't reached that conclusion here, I don't believe.
19 Q. No, I'm asking -- I'm not suggesting it's -- it's there enshrined
20 in the text. I'm asking if -- if you say not -- yes, no, or you don't
21 have an opinion, these are all legitimate answers. So I'm putting it to
22 you that -- for your comment that the parties to this agreement would
23 inevitably have appreciated that it was going to be extraordinarily
24 difficult to implement those principles in practice.
25 A. Yes. Yes, I would agree.
1 Q. Mr. Donia, do you -- did you conduct any sort of study or
2 investigation of a document -- well, first of all, let me ask you this:
3 Are you familiar with a document which calls itself "Instructions for the
4 organisation and operation of organs of the Serbian people in Bosnia and
5 Herzegovina in emergency conditions," commonly known as Variant A and B?
6 A. Yes, I am.
7 Q. Have you conducted any sort of study of that document or issues
8 specifically related to that document?
9 A. I -- I have not done so here, but I did so in a prior -- a
10 submission in a prior case, which was the -- the Prijedor case. So yes, I
11 have examined that document and performed an analysis of it previously.
12 Q. Have you -- did -- what I want to ask you about is this: Did you
13 conduct any sort of investigation into the documents relating to the
14 source of -- of the Variant A and B document?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Did you examine any documentation in relation to the issue of
17 whether, how, and to what extent that document came into the hands of
18 people around Bosnia and Herzegovina?
19 A. I have not made it, I would say, an extensive or thorough
20 investigation of that, no. I have traced or identified a number of
21 municipalities in which actions were subsequent -- were taken subsequent
22 to and evidently pursuant to those instructions. But I would say only
23 eight or ten municipalities.
24 Q. Have you ever in the course of your studies, either for this
25 report or your previous reports, been able to come across a reference,
1 apart from in the Variant A and B documents, to an organ or body called
2 the -- at the central or national level called the SDS Crisis Staff?
3 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, if I may.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. TIEGER: This witness has been called for cross-examination
6 of his report, and insofar as I can determine from the last several
7 questions, is being questioned about matters that are not raised in or
8 addressed by his report and -- and matters that I certainly didn't inquiry
9 further about when I didn't ask questions before he was submitted for
10 cross-examination. So I don't know if we're going into areas that are not
11 within the ambit of the report; and if so, I'm not quite sure why.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I'm -- I'm happy to accept that and
14 leave the matter there.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Although, I must add to that, Mr. Tieger, that
16 the question of whether Rule 89(H) would apply also if a witness is called
17 for cross-examination only is, as far as I know, not settled, but there's
18 no specific reason that, if there would be any specific knowledge with the
19 witness that could be elicited and would be material to the case of the
20 Defence, it's not to be said that this is not admissible. Yes.
21 MR. TIEGER: I do understand that, Your Honour. I --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Well, then --
23 MR. STEWART: Well --
24 JUDGE ORIE: With this proviso we'll take into consideration that
25 Mr. Stewart wasn't want to further pursue the matter and let's proceed.
1 MR. STEWART: Well, plus the fact that, Your Honour, the copy of
2 have Rules that we've just referred to hasn't got the new addition of (H),
3 so it's -- it's just as well it's -- it's academic for immediate purposes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. STEWART: I have non mind what Your Honour is referring to
6 anyway. But, Your Honour, I don't pursue it. I will go with Mr. Tieger's
7 point, and in those circumstances, Your Honour, I have no further
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That means that the cross-examination is ...
10 MR. STEWART: It does mean that, Your Honour, yes. Is completed.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, is completed, yes. Is completed. Well, you
12 might understand that it comes a bit as a surprise that it was that
13 quickly but --
14 MR. STEWART: A pleasant one, I hope, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes, certainly.
16 Dr. Donia, I would have one question for you -- at least,
17 Mr. Tieger, if there are no questions triggered by cross-examination.
18 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour, there are none.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 Questioned by the Court:
21 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to draw your attention also to that -- the
22 part of your report your attention has been drawn to by Mr. Stewart. He
23 talked about the Cutileiro Plan. In your report, you find out that the
24 quarrelling was more about maps than about principles, if I may put it
25 short that way. You also say in your report that -- that the constituent
1 units -- "each constituent unit was to be dominated by a single group,
2 Serb, Croat, and Muslim." Do you know what was in the minds of those who
3 were working on the Cutileiro Plan, as far as the residence is concerned
4 of those who would not have liked to be in a constituent unit which was
5 dominated by a ethnicity, a nationality, which was not theirs?
6 A. It's not possible for me to know what was in their minds
8 JUDGE ORIE: Of course. But to what extent they expressed
9 themselves on that or what you found on that.
10 A. It was clearly the intent of the European negotiators,
11 Mr. Cutileiro and others, to establish a basis for peaceful coexistence
12 of -- of peoples throughout Bosnia on this basis. That was the purpose of
13 it. And to avert the prospect of armed conflict. And the manner in which
14 they apparently allocated the municipalities on the map that was drawn up
15 by the -- the Cutileiro team was to take the majority or plurality
16 population in each municipality and then award that municipality to the
17 administrative division for that particular group. And that would suggest
18 to me that they had in mind very much leaving in place the existing local
19 administrative arrangements in those areas.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Would that also mean that they expected, well, let's
21 say, to -- that they would expect that the minority Serb population, for
22 example, in a Croat-dominated municipality would continue to live there,
23 or would they leave the municipality and go to a Serb-dominated
24 municipality? What can be said about that?
25 A. Well, I think it's quite fair to say that that latter option
1 would never have crossed their minds. Certainly they would have been --
2 found abhorrent the prospect of such a population movement. And they
3 clearly wanted people to remain where they were in the administrative
4 units that they then found themselves.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Was there any thought of relocation if the
6 minority would feel uncomfortable in a municipality dominated by others?
7 Was there anywhere in the plans that relocation or resettlement would be
8 part of the plan, apart from what the people themselves would decide to
9 do? But would there be any arrangement -- be prepared for such
10 resettlement or relocation?
11 A. I -- I can tell you that that was not a part of any -- any of the
12 written plans that were agreed to or -- or -- or discussed.
13 JUDGE ORIE: So --
14 A. I would doubt that it was a part of any discussions either, but I
15 don't know that for -- for sure.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that makes any question about forcible
17 resettlement unnecessary, because that would be automatically excluded as
19 A. That would be my opinion based on having looked at the -- the
20 documents and the reports on negotiations.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much for this answer.
22 Has the -- have the questions of the Bench raised any need to put
23 further questions to Dr. Donia?
24 MR. STEWART: No, Your Honour. Thank you.
25 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour. Thank you.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Dr. Donia, this has been a very short appearance
2 before this Chamber. Let's just take it that your report is so clear that
3 it did not raise any important further questions. Nevertheless, even if
4 it was short, I'd like to thank you very much for having come to The Hague
5 and having answered the questions put to you by the Defence and by the
6 Bench and I wish you a safe trip home again.
7 THE WITNESS: Thank you. My pleasure, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, would you please escort Mr. Donia out
9 of the courtroom.
10 [The witness withdrew]
11 JUDGE ORIE: It is 20 minutes to 2.00. I have a few matters on a
12 list of pending procedural matters. If we would work efficiently, we
13 might be able to finish the list in approximately 20 minutes. And if we
14 would be able to do so, I'm informed that technicians and interpreters
15 would be willing to stay for the 20 minutes to come, which would avoid
16 that we'd have to return this afternoon and have another session starting
17 at 3.00. Would the parties agree that we give it a chance, give it a try.
18 MR. TIEGER: We'd be grateful, Your Honour.
19 MR. STEWART: I'm in favour, Your Honour. But I would need two
20 or three minutes, please, at some point within that 20 minutes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's try to start as quickly -- I mean if we
22 can't make it, then we have to come back.
23 First of all, the first issue on my list is the admission or
24 non-admission of the exhibits introduced through witness Neskovic.
25 Madam Registrar.
1 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar will read the numbers assigned to
3 the exhibits and the exhibits used, and as far as I understand, has
4 returned - gentlemen, it might be of some importance, what I am saying -
5 and has returned from the binders those tabs that had not been used.
6 Madam Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P895, P897, P898, P899, P913, P914,
8 P914A, and P915.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
10 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you. I also indicated that
11 I would be submitting three contextual documents. Those are documents
12 that can be found at tabs 24, 25, and 26 of the presentation binder. I
13 can provide more particulars if necessary to identify those documents,
14 but --
15 JUDGE ORIE: If you could please read out shortly what -- what
16 they are, then ...
17 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
18 The first is a UPI press report dated 30 September 1992, and it
19 begins with the ERN number M0006983.
20 The second, found at tab 25, is a document dated September 30,
21 1992, a UNCIVPOL incident occurrence report, beginning with the ERN
23 And the third is found at tab 26 --
24 [Prosecution counsel confer]
25 MR. TIEGER: And the third is superfluous because it's already in
1 evidence, I'm advised.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So that saves at least one exhibit.
3 MR. TIEGER: Yes. And I spoke with Mr. Stewart about what was
4 once three and is now two documents and he indicated no objection.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Any objections as far as the Neskovic
6 documents concerned?
7 MR. STEWART: I can't remember that I didn't object to, but I
8 agree that I didn't object to it, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then these exhibits are all admitted into
11 THE REGISTRAR: The document located at tab 24 will be P936, and
12 the document located at tab 25 will be P937.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And under those numbers, they are -- they are
15 Next on my list is exhibits tendered through Witness 682.
16 Madam Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Prosecution Exhibits P918 to P925, P926 under
18 seal, P927, P928 under seal, P929, P930 under seal, P931, P932, and P933
19 under seal.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections? Mr. Tieger.
21 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour. The Court may recall there was
22 also the question about the documents located at tabs 22 and tabs 24 --
23 excuse me, 28 through 31, the statements.
24 JUDGE ORIE: The statements.
25 MR. TIEGER: The statements. Yes. That hasn't -- I don't think
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 that was resolved. There was some -- I made a preliminary point about
2 their admissibility. I'm certainly prepared to expand on that and we
3 would seek their admission.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 Mr. Stewart.
6 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, I do have to remind myself what --
7 JUDGE ORIE: It's about the statements. They were not all used.
8 Are they tendered as contextual exhibits, Mr. Tieger?
9 MR. TIEGER: Well, I think under these circumstances, I guess it
10 would be something of a hybrid, but I'm certainly prepared to do it that
11 way, of course.
12 MR. STEWART: Yes, Your Honour, I'm happy for them to be a
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And are there any objections?
15 MR. STEWART: On the other items -- sorry, on the other -- on the
16 other items, no, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: No. And on the hybrid items?
18 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, I said I was happy. There was
19 no objection on the hybrid items, to them being hybrid in the way is that
20 Mr. Tieger describes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then, Madam Registrar, would you please then
22 assign -- because I don't think that -- I don't know whether numbers have
23 already been assigned to the -- I don't think so. I'm not quite certain
24 about 22, but ...
25 I think we're talking -- Mr. Tieger, we're talking about tabs 22
1 and tabs 28 through 31, so another four, all together five.
2 MR. TIEGER: Correct, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. STEWART: I'm sorry, I thought -- I thought Mr. Tieger
5 referred to tab 24 as well.
6 JUDGE ORIE: No, I think he withdrew that.
7 MR. TIEGER: Correct. That's already in evidence.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. STEWART: Oh, I see. Yes, I'm -- I'm with you. Yes, I
10 realise. Okay.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Madam Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: The document located at tab 22 will be P938; at
13 tab 28, P939; at tab 29, P940; at tab 30, P941; at tab 31, P942. There
14 are also two additional exhibits, P916 and 917, both under seal.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Since there are no objections, these exhibits
16 are admitted into evidence.
17 Next on my list is Witness 280. There are four exhibits which
18 were still pending. The numbers have already been assigned, but they are
19 not yet on the transcript.
20 Madam Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: The memorandum on Prosecution's Rule 68 materials
22 will be Defence Exhibit D54. The translations of the Rule 68 excerpts,
23 D55. The e-mail dated 9 May 2005, D56. And the secondary e-mail dated 9
24 May 2005 will be D57.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any objection?
1 MR. TIEGER: No, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Then --
3 MS. LOUKAS: No, Your Honour. That was a matter that was --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Was agreed upon, yes.
5 MS. LOUKAS: Was an agreement between Mr. Gaynor and myself.
6 JUDGE ORIE: But they are now -- they are now admitted under
7 these numbers in evidence.
8 MS. LOUKAS: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Then we have the -- next on my agenda is that the
10 Defence would need a bit more time to respond to the newly submitted
11 statements of witnesses Zujo Mesic [phoen] and Dobraca, the reorganised --
12 and they indicated we could expect a response as soon as possible next
13 week. The Chamber sets a date 29th of July, which is next week, Friday.
14 MR. STEWART: That's fine. Thank you, Your Honour.
15 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'll move to the next point on my agenda is
17 that the parties would confer on any further submissions in relation to
18 the Davidovic cross-examination issue.
19 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. We did confer during the
20 break. I still feel that I -- I'm in a position I want to make some
21 further comments and leave it up to the Court after that.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I noted that you'd like to do that.
23 Is there a similar wish from the Defence side?
24 MR. STEWART: No, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I now move forward and see where we --
1 and we'll then later see whether orally or in writing you'd be given an
2 opportunity to further address the matter, Mr. Hannis.
3 Yes. As far as the Zvornik contextual exhibits are concerned, I
4 think it was up till today the Defence could make any objections. The
5 Chamber hasn't received anything until now. If it -- if the Defence would
6 not have the intention to raise any objections by today, we would admit
7 them into evidence.
8 MR. STEWART: There won't be anything coming in the course of
9 today, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. STEWART: No. So the time has expired --
12 JUDGE ORIE: At the same time -- yes, at the same time I think
13 there were still some technical problems with that, so admission might not
14 be the right decision to take immediately, because there were still some
15 technical matters, I think, in relation to translations, et cetera.
16 The Office of the Prosecutor will be informed about any concerns
17 of the Chamber in this respect before our final decision will be given on
19 Then the next matter. I go quickly through a couple of
20 documents. There was still an outstanding translation issue on document
21 P242. The Chamber has not been informed yet about the resolution by the
22 parties of this translation issue.
23 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, if I remember this one correctly - and
24 unfortunately, I don't have the exchange in front of me - but I think this
25 was a document about which a translation concern was raised. I think the
1 Prosecution then had it checked, confirmed that it was accurate, and spoke
2 with the Defence about that and was waiting to hear back from the Defence
3 if they had any -- had any reason to dispute that view of the document. I
4 believe that's 242, but I ...
5 [Prosecution counsel confer]
6 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If it would help you, it was about
8 Witness Egrlic.
9 MR. TIEGER: That -- that seems to be consistent with my
10 recollection of the discussion I had with -- I'm trying to remember -- I'm
11 trying to recall which -- no, no, no, I had -- I consulted with -- with
12 Mr. Margetts, who I believe led Mr. Egrlic, and this was my understanding
13 of the -- of the state of play, that we had had the translation checked,
14 confirmed that it was accurate.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. TIEGER: And advised the Defence accordingly and asked if
17 they had any reason to dispute that.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. TIEGER: And that exchange, as I understood it, you can see
20 from the -- obviously from the exhibit number this took place quite some
21 time ago, so I think that's just one of those matters that has been
22 pending for quite -- quite a while.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. A similar issue, by the way, also arises in
24 relation to Exhibit P252, also through the witness Egrlic. The latest
25 information we had is that upon review, that the Prosecution thought the
1 translation to be accurate. And we were informed on the 9th of May that
2 the Defence was considering -- would be working on it and see whether it
3 would agree or disagree.
4 Could we do it very practically. I've drawn now your attention
5 to P242 and P252. The Prosecution has -- has reviewed the translation,
6 being aware of the problems that might be there. If the Defence does not
7 within one week from now on - that's also the 29th of July - would
8 indicate that the -- that the translation is not accurate, the translation
9 as it was provided will be admitted into evidence.
10 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, that's very practical --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. STEWART: -- And entirely acceptable. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then we come to P729 in relation to Witness 012. I
14 think that the OTP should still file a redacted version of -- of a
15 chronology, a chronology contained in P729, a chronology which should
16 exclude any events after the 1st of April. The Prosecution is instructed
17 to do so within one week from now on.
18 Then I come to P782, which was a -- a video. Since the subtitles
19 were not read out when the video was shown, the subtitles do not appear in
20 the French version of the transcript; therefore, the OTP has to file a
21 translation of the exhibit as soon as possible.
22 MR. TIEGER: We have the translation, Your Honour. We can do so
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So the Chamber, then, notes that you do it
1 Then we have the issue of dates for the Thompson exhibits, if I
2 may call them so. The Trial Chamber has raised some issues in respect to
3 have dates or absence of dates for three exhibits. On the 12th of July,
4 the Office of the Prosecution proposed for the three exhibits dates in an
5 e-mail sent to the Defence, but the Chamber has not heard any response by
6 the Defence. One week, would that be a good idea, Mr. Stewart? If I look
7 at your face, it might be ...
8 MR. STEWART: It's going to be -- it's -- sometime, Your Honour,
9 the prospects of my increasing my knowledge from this point onwards are
10 100 per cent. So that would be a good idea, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: You've got a week.
12 Then since we now have heard all the evidence the Prosecution has
13 presented and since there are only a few loose ends of a rather technical
14 nature, the Chamber would like to know when the Defence will be in a
15 position to inform the Chamber whether a application under Rule 98 bis
16 will be made. The Chamber suggests that you'd inform the Chamber not
17 later than Friday, the 5th of August, whether or not.
18 MR. STEWART: Yes. It -- the Friday. If Friday is the 5th -- is
19 the 6th, yes, Your Honour. Yes, that's entirely --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Friday the 6th.
21 MR. STEWART: Yes. Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: At least, Friday two weeks from now on.
23 MR. STEWART: Yes. I'm sure it is the 6th, Your Honour. Yes.
24 Yes, that's entirely acceptable.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll hear -- and I don't have to add to that
1 that, of course, the scheduling order the Chamber has issued makes some
2 distinction as to whether or not such a -- an application will be made.
3 Then another practical matter: In a confidential annex to the
4 Prosecution's fifteenth motion for admission of evidence under Rule 92
5 bis - that is, a motion dated the 20th of May - the Prosecution deferred
6 the making of any application for protective measures relating to deceased
7 witnesses KRAJ 426 and KRAJ 010; the first one from Sokolac, the second
8 one from Bileca - the Chamber is informed that the Prosecution does not
9 intend to file any protective measures in respect of these witnesses,
10 which would mean that these two witnesses can therefore be referred to by
11 name in public proceedings and in public filings. If that is a correct
12 understanding, I can now easily say that it's about Sacir Avdic and Asim
14 Having dealt with that - let me see - yes. There's one decision
15 still to be given by the Chamber, that --
16 Mr. Krajisnik, you have applied to represent yourself and not
17 being represented by counsel any more. Your application is denied and the
18 Chamber will give a decision with full reasons most likely before the end
19 of the recess. The Chamber thought it, however, appropriate to already
20 inform you about the decision taken by the Chamber on the matter, even if
21 we have not yet ready the decision giving the full reasons for it.
22 Then finally, we have one issue left, and it is whether any
23 further submissions are allowed on the issue of the Davidovic
24 cross-examination. And the position of the Defence invoking professional
25 privilege for that matter.
1 Mr. Hannis, I'm looking at the clock. It's five minutes past
2 2.00, so we've taken our 15 minutes I suggested. I think it would take
3 you more than just one or two minutes to address the matter; is that
5 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I was going to estimate five minutes,
6 but, you know, lawyer's estimates of time usually need to be doubled.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then -- yes.
8 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, may I remind Your Honours that at the
9 beginning of this particular mini session since the witness finished I did
10 say that I would also need two or three minutes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. STEWART: And if we apply the same mathematical approach as
13 Mr. Hannis has very frankly applied his own estimate, then we're
14 running --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I would have to ask -- we would then
16 avoid any further hearing. But then I would be very strict. That would
17 mean eight minutes and not one minute more for Mr. Hannis. And you said
18 two to three. That would be six minutes for you, Mr. Stewart. If the
19 parties would agree that I just hammered off when the eight minutes are
20 there or when the six minutes are there, then I would be willing to ask
21 the technical and the interpreters booth whether they would be willing to
22 continue and thus avoid another session this afternoon.
23 MR. STEWART: Well, Your Honour, just two quick comments on that,
24 Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. STEWART: When I said I wished to say nothing in relation to
2 Mr. Davidovic, that was really on the footing that nobody else did.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. STEWART: Once Mr. Hannis has said something, then, of
5 course, I should be free to make observations.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then --
7 MR. STEWART: The second is this, Your Honour: That it's
8 perfectly possible that what I say in my allotted eight minutes will
9 trigger at least some response from the Trial Chamber or -- and the
10 Prosecution might have an opportunity. So, Your Honour, the idea that we
11 are going to be able to wrap it up in 20 minutes or so is -- possibly
12 optimistic. I just say that for the purpose of people's personal
13 schedules for the afternoon.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: We'll finish anyhow not later and only with the
17 consent of the technicians and the interpreters ten minutes from now. And
18 otherwise we really have to return and come back and everyone is now
19 responsible for the way he uses his own time.
20 Mr. Hannis, you're invited to make any submissions in relation to
21 Mr. Davidovic in writing.
22 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Ask -
24 JUDGE ORIE: And then, of course, a response could be received in
25 writing as well.
1 Mr. Stewart, you've got your three minutes -- your three lawyer
2 minutes now. Yes, Mr. Hannis.
3 MR. STEWART: He's -- I want to start with Mr. Hannis.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour. In this courtroom, all the
6 participants have a number of responsibilities and obligations.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Just -- Mr. Hannis, are you dealing now with
8 Davidovic? I invited you to make the submissions in writing.
9 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I -- I'm sorry. I misunderstood. I
10 thought you were inviting me to speak on it. I'll submit something in
11 writing. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Stewart, your three minutes.
13 MR. STEWART: Yes. Your Honour, it's -- it's just this: Of
14 course, it's -- it's helpful finally to have a clear position in relation
15 to Mr. Krajisnik and self-representation. Of course, Your Honour, when
16 the written decisions are -- when the written reasons are given, that's
17 when the time will begin for any question of an appeal, and that would --
18 well, we apprehend that would primarily be an appeal by Mr. Krajisnik
19 himself in relation to that matter. But, of course, then it becomes
20 complicated again.
21 But we wanted to say --
22 JUDGE ORIE: I remember that in other cases before this Tribunal
23 that those who were supposed not to represent the accused any more did
24 file the appeal on his behalf.
25 MR. STEWART: Indeed, Your Honour. That was really what I was
1 alluding to when I said it was not quite as simple as that. And -- but
2 the other point is this, Your Honour: That the -- the scheduling order
3 under which we -- we have been operating was made on the 26th of April,
4 2005. A great deal of water has flowed under the bridge since then, and
5 actually some of it in relation to the Prosecution case to have witnesses
6 has really flowed rather fast, as it happens, and voluminously.
7 Your Honour, we now at least know, subject to any appeal, we at
8 least know where we are as far as the handling of the Defence case is for
9 the immediate future. We are still the assigned team. There is going to
10 be, subject, we hope, to some formal confirmation in the next hour or so,
11 if it hasn't already been given, a -- a change there with Mr. Josse
12 replacing Ms. Loukas. So we know where we are. We are continuing work as
13 it happens immediately -- not this weekend, perhaps, for the next 48 hours
14 or so, but we are continuing work. However, Your Honour, I did right back
15 in April -- I did refer very specifically to what the Defence submitted
16 was lack of proper consultation in relation to that scheduling order. And
17 that has remained our position, Your Honour. We have simply got on with
18 completing the Prosecution case, as the Trial Chamber has clearly been
19 determined to do, by the 22nd of July.
20 But, Your Honour, I wish it to be absolutely clear now,
21 Your Honour, we will consider our position over the next three weeks, when
22 we are over most of that time continuing to work on the case. I have
23 said, Your Honour, that at some point a Defence team must be entitled to
24 some personal time off. It is not clear exactly when and how that can be
25 managed, but it has to be fitted in somehow for those that have been
1 working for an extended period.
2 But, Your Honour, the bottom line is this: There is simply no
3 prospect whatever of the Defence being able to begin the case on either of
4 the alternative dates specified in the scheduling order. But,
5 Your Honour, I say that today, but we owe it to the Trial Chamber now,
6 being relieved of the relentless week-in, week-out pressure of dealing
7 with the Prosecution case and the witnesses, we owe it to our client, we
8 owe it to the Tribunal, the Trial Chamber, we owe it to the Prosecution
9 and to everybody else at least to review how serious that problem is and
10 by what margin it is impossible to meet that scheduling order.
11 But, Your Honour, we inevitably are going to be applying for that
12 scheduling order to be varied, rescinded, and replaced after consultation,
13 whatever the precise procedure, Your Honour. But I do not wish us to
14 dissolve the immediate court proceedings for a few weeks without that
15 being absolutely crystal clear, Your Honour. It is impossible as it
16 stands, and that will be the Defence's position, whatever the refinement,
17 because we already know that it -- it must be impossible.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Stewart.
19 Any need to respond at this moment, Mr. Tieger?
20 MR. TIEGER: Not at this moment, Your Honour. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand that the Chamber can expect
22 therefore a motion for granting additional time before to start the
23 Defence case. Of course, I can't say anything at this moment where no
24 such motion has been filed, so I would not know the reasons; although, I
25 could guess some of them, and that is --
1 MR. STEWART: Your Honour may guess some of them. But may I also
2 say this, Your Honour: An alternative to a contentious motion has
3 frequently been adopted in the past by the Trial Chamber. In the first
4 place, Your Honour, some of the consultation, which in our submission
5 should have taken place before, could occur. Of course, Your Honour, I
6 don't shrink from the notion that -- that if the Defence is not in the end
7 satisfied, naturally it will be the Defence's duty to file a motion. But,
8 Your Honour, serious consultation about where we are in relation to this
9 case should responsibly, in our submission, be step number one.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let's, then, say the following: The scheduling
11 order stands as it is now. If the Defence would -- would like to change
12 that -- you may have noticed that the scheduling order gave a long-term
13 view on scheduling; rather, what are we going to do next week, when it
14 wasn't -- it covered the whole of the case. Whether or not the Chamber
15 will consider to change that scheduling order at all, it certainly will
16 not do so - that means even will certainly not consider to do so - if not
17 an alternative would be presented viewing in a similar long-term way to
18 scheduling issues.
19 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, that -- that is a tiny bit cryptic for
20 me, Your Honour, with respect.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Well, to say we want to delay for the start of the
22 Defence case with four weeks if not accompanied by -- if we would start in
23 four weeks, we think we would have -- need so much time, we would there be
24 in December. The Chamber is -- of course, matters always can change
25 underway, but the change is not inclined to view scheduling issues on a
1 short-term basis but will view them always on a long-term basis.
2 MR. STEWART: Your Honour, that's the Defence-preferred approach
3 as well.
4 But, Your Honour, may I ask very directly, then: Is Your Honour
5 saying, then, that whatever else happens, the final target date must, in
6 the Trial Chamber's current view, be fixed? And if so, Your Honour, may
7 we ask whether there is some specific technical reason why this technical
8 reason or procedural reason or any reason to do with Judges' terms of
9 offices or anything like that, which is related to the need to complete
10 this case by late April 2006?
11 JUDGE ORIE: I cannot give you an answer to this question now.
12 The final date on which a judgement will be given will not be dictated by
13 any administrative date. That's what I can say about it.
14 MR. STEWART: "Administrative" covers the whole range of matters
15 that I --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Including -- including it will not be dictated by
18 MR. STEWART: Including such matters as Judges' terms of office
19 or anything like that?
20 JUDGE ORIE: Including Judges' terms of office, yes.
21 MR. STEWART: Thank you, Your Honour. That's most helpful to
22 know and to hear. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: 1I there's no other issue, I'd like to -- or is
24 there, Mr. Stewart?
25 MR. STEWART: Excuse me one moment, Your Honour
1 [Defence counsel confer]
2 MR. STEWART: No, Your Honours, thank you. I'm grateful for that
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I'd like to thank very much the
5 interpreters and technicians for their patience. We will not sit -- we'll
6 deal with some loose ends. We'll hear from the Defence not later than the
7 5th of August whether there will be any 98 bis motion. And it depends on
8 that information whether or not we will hear such a motion on Tuesday, the
9 16th of August, 2005.
10 So with that uncertainty, we stand adjourned.
11 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 2.19 p.m.,
12 to be reconvened sine die.