1 Thursday, 5 July 2007
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The appellant entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 10.00 a.m.
6 JUDGE MERON: Registrar, will you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honour. This is case number
8 IT-00-39-A, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.
9 JUDGE MERON: I will now call for the appearances of the parties
10 and of the amicus. The Prosecution?
11 MS. McCALL: Good morning, Your Honour. Shelagh McCall is my
12 name. The counsel beside me is Peter Kremer and with us our case manager,
13 Lourdes Galicia.
14 JUDGE MERON: Thank you, Ms. McCall.
15 MR. NICHOLLS: I am Colin Nicholls, acting as amicus curiae and I
16 am assisted by Ms. Michelle Butler.
17 JUDGE MERON: Thank you, Mr. Nicholls.
18 Mr. Krajisnik, can you hear the proceedings in a language that you
20 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Yes. I do understand, Your
21 Honour. Thank you very much. Yes.
22 JUDGE MERON: Thank you, Mr. Krajisnik. You may be seated.
23 This, as you know, is a Status Conference called in accordance
24 with Rule 65 bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Rule 65 bis(B)
25 requires a Status Conference to be convened within 120 days of the last
1 Status Conference to allow any person in custody, pending appeal, the
2 opportunity to raise issues in relation thereto, including the mental and
3 physical condition of this person. The last Status Conference in this
4 case was held on 5 April 2007.
5 I would like to begin this Status Conference by inquiring into
6 Mr. Krajisnik's health. Mr. Krajisnik, I would like you to respond on
7 this issue. Any problems with your health to which you would like to
8 alert me?
9 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] No problems, Your Honour. Thank
10 you very much.
11 JUDGE MERON: Thank you. I'm glad to hear that. In a moment, I
12 will give you a chance to address other issues, if you have any, but right
13 now I wanted to limit myself to this question of any concerns about your
14 mental or physical well being and I'm glad to hear that there are none.
15 Before I turn to other issues I want to say a few words to the
16 parties and to the amicus about scheduling. I'm sure you're all aware of
17 how the schedule works but I want to go through it again now.
18 First, on the Prosecution appeal. The briefing on this was
19 completed on the 22nd of February 2007 when the Prosecution filed its
20 reply brief and so I believe we are all set in regards to this.
21 Second, in relation to the appeal of Mr. Krajisnik, based on our
22 decision of 11 May, we have two sets of deadlines going on. With regard
23 to the amicus, the notice of appeal has been filed. The appeal brief is
24 due 75 days after 11 May, which, by my calculation, would be July 25.
25 After that, we follow our usual deadlines in accordance with Rules 112 and
1 113. With regard to Mr. Krajisnik, the notice of appeal has also been
2 filed and the appeal brief is due 75 days after the translation of the
3 judgement into B/C/S. The B/C/S translation of the judgement will
4 hopefully be ready shortly, and Mr. Krajisnik's appeal brief will be due
5 75 days after that.
6 The Prosecution's response will be due within the usual time frame
7 after that, and Mr. Krajisnik's reply will be due within 15 days of when
8 he receives the B/C/S translation of the Prosecution's response.
9 This case has progressed slowly so far, partly in light of the
10 Appeals Chamber consideration and the resolution of Mr. Krajisnik's
11 request to self-represent himself. In light of the slow pace, I will be
12 particularly reluctant to grant any motions that will have the effect of
13 delaying the proceedings further. And I trust and expect the parties to
14 meet all the deadlines.
15 Mr. Krajisnik, I would like to say to you in particular that the
16 Appeals Chamber has acceded to your argument that you have the right of
17 self-representation, and as you know, I myself was one of the Judges in
18 the majority who supported this conclusion, but, of course, we expect you
19 to conduct your appeal in a professional manner and to abide by the
20 requirements set out in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and in the
21 relevant practice directions, including with regard to word counts, to
22 precise arguments in support of your grounds of appeal, with specific
23 references to the judgement below and the relevant evidence and to other
25 We are undoubtedly on the same page, on the same wave length in
1 hoping that your exercise of your right to self-representation will lead
2 to no disruption of the appeal proceeding. Failure to abide by the rules,
3 in particular those pertaining to deadlines, may lead to substantial and
4 persistent disruption of the case and might have -- and might give cause
5 for the Appeals Chamber to revisit your self-representation. And I
6 wanted, Mr. Krajisnik, to be very clear in all fairness to you at this
7 stage about my approach to these issues.
8 In this regard, Mr. Krajisnik, I note that you recently filed a
9 request to provide conditions to work and to reverse the decision of the
10 Registry of 7 June 2007 with the Appeals Chamber. I will not make much
11 comment on this motion as it is pending before the Appeals Chamber, but I
12 will note that in my view, the Prosecution pointed out already some ways
13 in which this motion failed to comply with the practice directions such as
14 by filing -- failing to give -- by failing to give a word count and by
15 failing to provide precise citations to specific paragraphs and/or to
16 pages of the documents referenced.
17 Mr. Krajisnik, I trust that this was an oversight and that this
18 will not happen again. I hope very much that your self-representation
19 will not disrupt or obstruct an orderly appeal process.
20 At this point I would like to ask the parties and amicus whether
21 they have any other issues they would like to raise at this time.
22 Ms. McCall?
23 MS. McCALL: Thank you, Your Honour. One matter arises out of
24 what you have just said and it's this: This morning the Prosecution filed
25 a motion requesting clarification of one or two matters arising from the
1 11th May decision and one of those issues relates to the calculation of
2 time limits for filings. And the Prosecution is seeking a standing ruling
3 from the Appeals Chamber that the deadline for Prosecution filings in
4 response to those by Mr. Krajisnik will not start to run until the English
5 translation of his filing is received. So when Your Honour this morning
6 said that the Prosecution's response to his appeal brief would be due in
7 the usual time frame after filing of his brief, that causes us some
8 concern because his brief will of course be filed in B/C/S and we will
9 have to wait for the English translation. But that's a matter that can
10 perhaps be considered by the Chamber in discussing the motion.
11 JUDGE MERON: I will be -- if you trust my approach to this, I
12 would be prepared to clarify this matter now for the parties.
13 MS. McCALL: Thank you. Then that will deal with one aspect of
14 the motion we filed this morning. The rest doesn't arise today.
15 JUDGE MERON: I would like to clarify to both the Prosecution and
16 Mr. Krajisnik --
17 Mr. Krajisnik you may be seated. Did you want to say anything at
18 this stage or -- thank you.
19 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Thank you.
20 JUDGE MERON: The deadline for Mr. Krajisnik apply to the B/C/S
21 versions of his appeal brief and his reply brief. The Prosecution's clock
22 for its response will not start running until it receives the English
23 translation of Mr. Krajisnik's appeal brief. I hope that this clarifies
24 this matter.
25 And as regards Mr. Krajisnik, let me make it quite clear, that
1 when we say that Mr. Krajisnik's brief is due 75 days after the B/C/S
2 translation of the judgement, we mean, of course, that his B/C/S appeal
3 brief is due then, not the English translation. Otherwise, he would have
4 to work to a much tighter schedule to allow time for translation. The
5 same logic would apply to his reply brief subsequently.
6 Okay. Do you have any other questions or comments, Prosecution?
7 MS. McCALL: No, thank you, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE MERON: Thank you. So I'm glad we could clarify this and I
9 hope that both parties are pleased with this approach.
10 Now, I turn to Mr. Krajisnik. Now you may stand up. And ask you
11 whether you have any matters that you would like to raise with me as
12 Pre-Appeal Judge in this case.
13 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Judge, first of all, I would like
14 to thank you and the Appeals Chamber for making it possible for me to
15 represent myself. I assure you that I will do my very best, and I
16 certainly know I can, to abide by your deadlines and not to abuse in any
17 way your decision which is so important for me.
18 There is one thing I do have to ask you. Since my brief will not
19 be discussed today, could it please be made possible for me technically
20 and financially to be able to carry through that decision of yours? There
21 is nothing else I'm asking for. I am sorry and I'm trying to find an
22 excuse now for not having acted appropriately within the rules and not
23 having filed this brief.
24 I certainly would need a bit of help on that, and that has to do
25 with some of the points contained in this brief. I am sorry, Judge, that
1 I had to address you and the Appeals Chamber for assistance because
2 without certain assistance - I am in prison, after all - I cannot really
3 carry through this decision without some assistance. I am in prison,
4 after all, and it really only depends on technical matters, and thank you
5 once again for having found it expedient to allow me to represent myself.
6 Thank you.
7 JUDGE MERON: Mr. Krajisnik, I am confident in believing that the
8 Registry would assist you on some vital technical and financial matters,
9 but those requests that you are submitting to the Registry must fit into
10 the existing rules and requirements. For example, things are being
11 delayed because of problems pertaining to your legal associates, yet you
12 must understand that those legal associates that you would like to have
13 must fit into the existing rules. We have a rule regarding
14 qualifications, and I have been -- I understand that so far, you have not
15 suggested, for example, names of people who could start helping you, and I
16 understand you need this help, and who have met the requirements of the
17 Registry with regard to qualifications. So I would like this really to
18 start moving.
19 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Judge, not a single one of my
20 requests is unfounded. None of the things I ask for in my brief, that
21 is. Believe me, every time I made proposals that met the requirements of
22 Article 45, in one particular case it was necessary for the Registrar to
23 use his discretionary right but he did not accept that. In another case,
24 nothing else was needed but for them to accept a particular proposal. For
25 me to be able to engage someone, apart from these rules, I need
2 They said that they would grant resources automatically once the
3 Seselj case is resolved. The Seselj case was resolved yesterday and I
4 believe that there will be no problem whatsoever in engaging, how should I
5 put this, an adviser who would please them because nobody else met their
6 requirements. I also asked for a translator who would work with me on the
7 appeal. At first Mr. Nicholls was opposed to that as well and then the
8 Registry too because I did not have a decision stating that I can
9 represent myself. Later on there were some other difficulties too,
10 clarification was sought, so there has been a delay on this count as
12 I need a translator in order to be able to respond to briefs filed
13 by the Prosecution. I could not read any one of them because they are in
14 the English language. Therefore I understand your objection, but believe
15 me, if this were on our agenda today I would have explained it to you how
16 things developed but I did say so in my reply and I believe that this will
17 be resolved in the next few days, though. Because resources have been
18 granted to Mr. Seselj and they said we will automatically grant resources
19 to you for your legal advisers so that you can pay them because nobody is
20 willing to work without money. I found these people who would work at
21 cheap rates and I could finance them myself.
22 JUDGE MERON: Mr. Krajisnik, let me start from what is I think a
23 relatively simple matter and it is the question of the translator. You
24 have, if I understand correctly, asked the Registry to pay for and provide
25 privileged access to a particular named individual, and the registry is
1 not currently satisfied that this individual will abide by regulations in
2 place for the safety and security of the detention centre. I am not aware
3 of the Registry having declined in general to provide you with privileged
4 access to a paid interpreter as opposed to declining to accept this
5 specific interpreter you requested. I think that I would like to
6 emphasise at this stage that it is really in your interest to work
7 productively with the Registry to ensure the speedy and appropriate
8 progress of your appeal.
9 I do not wish to revisit the question of your right to
10 self-representation but you know that our precedents provide that this
11 right may be removed in the face of substantial and persistent obstruction
12 to the proper and expeditious course of the proceedings. So in this case,
13 in particular, the fact that there are problems with Mr. Karganovic on
14 whom you have insisted does not mean that the Registry is not willing to
15 accommodate your reasonable claim to a paid interpreter or translator. So
16 this is an example of the problems that have arisen.
17 Now, as regards funding in general, you are aware of paragraph 18
18 of our decision of 11 May 2007. The Appeals Chamber made it clear that as
19 part of the choice to self-represent, you, Mr. Krajisnik, must accept
20 responsibility for the disadvantages that this choice necessarily may
21 bring. If you choose to have counsel and you qualify for the indigency
22 status, then the Registry would have provided you with counsel and some
23 support for counsel.
24 If you choose to self-represent, however, then the Registry has
25 taken the position that you are not entitled to funding. I believe that
1 the Registry has made its position clear in its letters of 29 May and 7
2 June. I don't want to second-guess the Registry but I would like also to
3 note that in the absence of any appropriately designated legal associates,
4 the question of what resources might be available to such associates is
5 currently still a hypothetical question. You have still not named those
6 associates which meets the -- passes the muster of the Registry. Let's
7 just get on and not create unnecessary difficulties. I'm sure that you
8 can come up with suggestions regarding legal associates who would not
9 encounter these difficulties.
10 We have rules on these matters. We have Rule 44 of the Rules of
11 Procedure and Evidence. We must comply with them. I am telling -- saying
12 those things in a good spirit, Mr. Krajisnik. I would like this
13 experiment in self-representation on the appeal level to succeed. As you
14 know, this was a controversial question and I think that you understand
15 that rights -- and I've supported your right -- always involve
16 obligations. They involve difficulties. You wanted that route. You have
17 chosen it. We will try to make your task as reasonably easy as possible,
18 but, please, don't create difficulties that need not arise.
19 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Judge, by your leave, please,
20 since the brief was not on our agenda, I did not explain this. I am not
21 asking for anything that is outside the rules. I did not ask for money.
22 I have reconciled myself to the fact that according to the rules, I do not
23 have money. However, if there is an opportunity to obtain money, that
24 will be apart from the rules. And then I found some proposals made by
25 people who were prepared to work and be paid by me. I gave you an
1 example. That was Mr. Dejan Brashich. Then, they told me that there was
2 a difficulty involved because there were certain obstacles. Then I made
3 yet another proposal.
4 May I proceed, Judge?
5 JUDGE MERON: Well, I really would not like to, as I told you,
6 micromanage the discussions --
7 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] All right.
8 JUDGE MERON: -- with the Registry. I would like to leave those
9 things, as far as possible, in the sphere of discussions between you and
10 the registry. But please bear in mind the constraints explained to you
11 under the rules by the Registry with regard to your potential legal
12 associates. One should distinguish between the question of privileged
13 access and the question of funding.
14 You have decided to go the route of self-representation. There
15 would have been no difficulties in funding had you, as most people, most
16 defendants, have chosen the route of having a counsel. He would have been
17 assigned to you, he would have been paid, he would have been given some
18 legal assistance, but we cannot create new rules just for you,
19 Mr. Krajisnik.
20 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Judge, Judge, I will be very
21 brief. I'm just asking you for one thing and that's where I need your
22 assistance. For them not to prevent me from carrying through my decision,
23 not to hinder the implementation of my decision. If I cannot use a
24 telephone, a fax, a photocopier, if I make three proposals and none of
25 them are good, then there is a problem. It is very hard to find a legal
1 adviser who will -- well, there isn't much of a choice, is there? So I
2 asked that my brief, my submission, be looked at and I explained every one
3 of my proposals.
4 Mr. Karganovic is directly here in the audience. He was not
5 contested until two weeks ago. What was in dispute was the fact that
6 there was no decision for me to represent myself. So all the proposals I
7 make seem to be controversial. I said just resolve the problem. I don't
8 mind if you assign your own interpreter or translator, doesn't matter, but
9 I encounter problems all the time. I'm not asking for money. I'm not
10 asking for anything outside the rules.
11 I am just asking for it to be made possible for me to defend
12 myself even in this position. I am going to write an appeal and lodge it
13 in this Court, but, please, within everything that is allowed from the
14 point of view of safety, security, status and everything, I'm not asking
15 for anything else. I'm just asking for your assistance on that score.
16 I'm not asking for any privileges and I'm not asking for anything apart
17 from the rules, and I don't want to drag my feet on this. On the
18 contrary. I want this to be done and over with as soon as possible.
19 JUDGE MERON: Thank you, Mr. Krajisnik. I do not believe that the
20 Registry is trying to make your task more difficult than it is already.
21 You have a difficult task, and we will keep our eyes and ears open on what
22 is going on. As I told you, I don't want to get involved in that beyond
23 the point that I have already -- the points that I have already made. But
24 I have -- I understand that there is perhaps a different way of seeing the
25 problems with regard to your proposed interpreter. I am -- I must tell
1 you, rather impatient with regard to your naming legal associates. I
2 understand that the Registry agreed to three legal associates but they
3 must meet the qualifications. So let's not go around and around that.
4 You have an obligation to assist in the process and to -- not to
5 complicate the process by proposing individuals who create -- who are
6 difficult for the -- or impossible for the Registry to accept.
7 Thank you, Mr. Krajisnik, and I really wish that we would see fast
8 progress, and please remember especially what I said about the deadlines.
9 We are quite adamant that they should be adhered to.
10 Mr. Nicholls?
11 MR. NICHOLLS: Your Honour, may I correct one matter straight away
12 which was said by Mr. Krajisnik? I do not object to the appointment of a
13 translator, interpreter, or indeed to Mr. Karganovic. I have no standing
14 in the matter as amicus and so I don't object.
15 JUDGE MERON: Thank you very much.
16 MR. NICHOLLS: The second matter is one which I raise with some
17 reluctance because I appreciate very much the importance of the timetable
18 which the Chamber has determined. But we in our team are having some
19 difficulties in achieving the deadline which has been imposed for the
20 appeal brief. That is the date of the 25th of July. And I would
21 hesitatingly ask that the Chamber would grant us a further nine days.
22 That is comparatively not a long time, but the reason is this:
23 Your Honour will recall that on the 25th of May, the Chamber determined
24 that the amicus should not be granted an extension beyond the 25th of
25 July, which had been fixed in fact in the decision of the 11th of July,
1 and that refusal of extra time was of course communicated to me before I
2 accepted the assignment of amicus. So in accepting the assignment of
3 amicus, I appreciated the deadline that was being imposed and Your Honour
4 will appreciate that of course I was very reluctant to decline the
5 appointment of amicus because obviously of the disruption that it would
6 cause to the Chamber.
7 JUDGE MERON: And I appreciate your accepting it.
8 MR. NICHOLLS: I'm grateful to Your Honour for that. The
9 difficulty is this: That that decision not to give us the extra time was
10 made on the 25th of May and it might have been hoped that I could be
11 assigned immediately after that but, in fact, it wasn't a question of
12 negotiation or anything of that kind. It was not until the 8th of June
13 that I was in fact assigned as amicus and it was a week later, on the 15th
14 of June, that I was able to have my team assigned. That meant that I had
15 lost effectively another three weeks before either I or my team were able
16 to recommence work. So the situation had changed between the ruling of
17 the 25th of May and the date of the 15th of June, in that the period in
18 which my team was not able to work had been prolonged.
19 Now, in addition to that, as always happens, there are a lot of
20 administrative matters that have to be dealt with. One matter was that we
21 had to arrange for a large quantity of documents, held at the beach house,
22 to be transported to the prison for Mr. Krajisnik's benefit. That meant
23 that they had to be inspected, that we had to try to make some
24 arrangements for their removal and reception, and that inevitably in spite
25 of what assistance the Registry was able to give us and UNDU was able to
1 give us, it was a prolonged process. It has now been achieved to this
2 extent that those documents, I say 152 boxes, will in fact be transported,
3 as I understand it, to the prison today. But that took time and took time
4 on the part of my team, who could have been drafting the documents and
5 doing the necessary work on the reply.
6 In addition to that, there was material which we had in London
7 which had been part of the trial material, and that material had to be --
8 well, we initially put it on a hard drive and I don't want to go into
9 technicalities but the hard drive was not acceptable to the authorities
10 and we lost some four days burning DVDs in order that that material could
11 be made available to Mr. Krajisnik. That material is now here and we are
12 able to make it available to him today. So those documents are now due to
13 reach him, but actually having to administer that process has lost us
14 time, and time, as i say, in addition to the three weeks that we had lost
15 following the ruling refusing us extra time on the 25th of May. So we
16 having lost that time, I feel bound -- and I say with great reluctance I
17 feel bound to ask the Chamber to grant an extra nine days.
18 Now, the question of course that arises is what is the effect of
19 that upon the subsequent deadlines? Does everything shift on another nine
20 days? And I think that it may be that there is no real prejudice. If
21 there is any prejudice, and indeed if it's appropriate I invite and indeed
22 the Prosecution would respond in any event, but if there is any prejudice,
23 I think it will be a prejudice to Mr. Krajisnik, which of course is the
24 most important prejudice of all, in that he would get a copy of our appeal
25 brief nine days later than he otherwise would have done.
1 Now, in the current circumstances, and bearing in mind the
2 enormous burden which falls upon Mr. Krajisnik, and it is an enormous
3 burden, self-imposed as it may be, bearing in mind that, it may not really
4 be a real prejudice, having regard to the fact that he's got to get
5 acquainted with the papers, got to get acquainted with the case, beyond
6 his current acquaintance with it. So far as the Prosecution is concerned,
7 it may not affect possibly their deadlines, in that they would in fact be
8 responding probably, possibly, on a consolidated basis, I don't know.
9 As I say, I'm very, very reluctant to make this request but with
10 the greatest will in the world, we are facing this difficulty. We want to
11 make this an appeal brief which is understandable not only to the Chamber
12 and the lawyers but we want to make it understandable, as best we can, to
13 Mr. Krajisnik, and in order to do that, obviously we have to give extra
14 time in order to make it properly accessible to him. As I say, I say this
15 very reluctantly. I just have to make the request.
16 JUDGE MERON: Thank you, Mr. Nicholls. I would like to ask the
17 Prosecution whether they have comments on this request for a for a five --
18 for a nine-day delay.
19 MS. McCALL: Your Honour, the Prosecution has no objection to that
20 proposal because the Prosecution recognises, as Mr. Nicholls points out,
21 that it doesn't impact on the end date of the briefing schedule, the last
22 filing being that of Mr. Krajisnik rather than that of the amicus.
23 JUDGE MERON: So in your view, this should not affect the filing
24 schedule for Mr. Krajisnik should I grant the motion?
25 MS. McCALL: Our position is that we don't oppose Your Honour
1 granting the motion.
2 JUDGE MERON: No. But my question was: Do you suggest this would
3 have an impact on the filing dates established for Mr. Krajisnik?
4 MS. McCALL: As a proposal is set out, I don't understand what
5 that impact would be because Mr. Krajisnik will inevitably be filing his
6 brief after the amicus even with the extra nine days so he will be able to
7 see what is contained in that. As I understand the 11th May decision,
8 Mr. Krajisnik doesn't have a right of response to the amicus brief. The
9 amicus standing, as it were, also in his shoes, so Mr. Krajisnik's reply
10 will be the last filing in the briefing schedule and that would be
11 unaffected by an extension for the amicus.
12 JUDGE MERON: Thank you. Mr. Nicholls, what I would suggest we
13 do -- you do --
14 MR. NICHOLLS: Yes.
15 JUDGE MERON: -- is submit to me as a Pre-Appeal Judge a motion
16 requesting for the reasons you have indicated, the nine-day delay and I
17 will give it due consideration.
18 MR. NICHOLLS: Thank you very much. I'm very grateful.
19 JUDGE MERON: Is there anything else you would have wanted to
20 raise at this stage, Mr. Nicholls?
21 MR. NICHOLLS: No. There are no other matters at this stage,
22 thank you.
23 JUDGE MERON: Thank you very much. So I think that this Status
24 Conference can now come to its end. We have had a conversation with
25 Mr. Krajisnik and explained the situation to him, and he has had an
1 opportunity to make comments on the various aspects of the issues that we
2 have before us, and I thank you, Mr. Krajisnik, for your cooperation.
3 I thank you, Mr. Nicholls.
4 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Judge, if I may have a moment,
5 please, a new fact has been brought forward. I agree that Mr. Nicholls
6 should be given an extra nine days. I believe that this would be
7 beneficial, that would be of some use for me, and as far as the archives
8 are concerned, since I don't have any room to accommodate the archives in
9 the prison, I would kindly request for an authorised representative of
10 mine to be handed over the archives. I'm talking about vast materials
11 that would create a lot of problems in the Detention Unit. Let me explain
13 My associates that will be working with me will be able to use the
14 archives that will be outside the prison and I will be able to use the
15 archives that I have in -- on my premises and that would be useful. This
16 much for me, and I would like to thank you very much again for your
17 patience and assistance.
18 JUDGE MERON: For reasons which are nobody's fault, you don't have
19 a legal associate as yet so let's speed that aspect up. As regards the
20 space for you in the Detention Unit for those archives, I'm sure that you
21 are making this point to the representatives of the Registry, and I would
22 like to hope that on this point, reasonable accommodation can be -- could
23 be found. I see your point on that.
24 THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Thank you.
25 JUDGE MERON: Thank you. Any other comments?
1 If not, we have completed this Status Conference, and I am -- I
2 really would like to say I want this case to move on without any undue
3 delays and I am counting on everybody, including of course, you,
4 Mr. Krajisnik, to help us with that.
5 We will now rise.
6 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned at
7 10.43 a.m.