1 Thursday, 14
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 --- Upon commencing at 4.12 p.m.
5 JUDGE WALD: Good afternoon, counsel. Good afternoon, deputies.
6 Good afternoon, everyone in the translation booths. As soon as the
7 accused come in, we'll begin our Status Conference.
8 [The accused entered court]
9 JUDGE WALD: Good afternoon to the accused, and you may take your
11 As you all know, we're here for another Status Conference, and we
12 last had one on the 20th of July and we hope we'll make progress toward
13 moving the case ready for trial.
14 Registrar, would you call the case.
15 THE REGISTRAR: This is case IT-98-34-PT, the Prosecutor versus
16 Naletilic and Vinko Martinovic.
17 JUDGE WALD: Let me ask the parties now, the counsel for the
18 parties, if they'll announce their appearances.
19 The Prosecution.
20 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Your Honour, good afternoon. My
21 name is Franck Terrier. Today is the last time where I will appear in
22 this courtroom, because later on I will be replaced by Kenneth Scott, who
23 is sitting on my right. He is a senior trial attorney. I would like to
24 inform you of that fact; I also would like to inform counsel for the
25 Defence and the accused. This afternoon, the Prosecution is also
1 represented by Douglas Stringer, Vassily Poriouvaev, Roeland Bos, and
2 Manuel Bouwknecht.
3 JUDGE WALD: We regret this is your last appearance, Mr. Terrier,
4 we will miss you. We welcome Mr. Scott to your ranks.
5 If Defence counsel would announce their appearances, please.
6 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour. My name
7 is Kresimir Krsnik, a member of the bar association of Croatia, and
8 Ms. Visnja Drenski Lasan is my assistant today. She is also a member of
9 the bar association of Croatia. Thank you.
10 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour. I'm
11 Branko Seric, Defence counsel for Mr. Naletilic. I'm also a member of the
12 bar association of Croatia, and Mr. Zelimir Par will assist me in this
14 JUDGE WALD: All right. I think we will pick up where we left off
15 last time and see if we can make further some progress toward going to
17 Now, the Scheduling Order that I gave you contained a proposed set
18 of dates that would govern the 65 ter filings, along with any other
19 motions for judicial notice, depositions, et cetera. I recognise that
20 Mr. Terrier's departure from the Prosecution may provide -- perhaps not,
21 but it may provide some justification for some movement on that. I would
22 be interested to know initially, whether or not the Prosecution feels that
23 it could meet its responsibilities by that proposed date or would need
24 some extra time.
25 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my departure will
1 change nothing in the preparation of this case. It will go on as it has
2 started, and I don't believe that the Prosecution in this case will ask
3 any change in the schedule or any postponement. We are not going to be
4 responsible for any delay in the pre-trial management of this case.
5 Therefore, the Prosecution is in a position, and will be in a
6 position to meet all its obligations as defined in the document sent to
7 us. We will not ask for any delay.
8 JUDGE WALD: That's good news, Mr. Terrier. Thank you.
9 The second point I would like to make is that I have been
10 disappointed by the filings of Mr. Naletilic's counsel in the sense that
11 he was not up to the point that I know about presently, able to make any
12 virtually any concession in terms of facts that would not be disputed.
13 I think in that regard that you should be aware, Mr. Krsnik, that
14 regardless of whether or not you are willing to concede any point, no
15 matter how peripheral or no matter how well-established, that we do intend
16 to go right ahead with our preparations for the trial. And in that
17 regard, I assume that the Prosecution will avail itself of whatever tools
18 are in the Rules, such as motions for judicial notice, 95 ter affidavits,
19 depositions, to move the proceedings along.
20 And I also hope that Mr. Krsnik, you will perhaps reconsider your
21 inability to admit any of the facts that the Prosecution has laid out in
22 the document that they filed with us.
23 I might also say in this regard that reading over all the material
24 that we have so far, it strikes me, based upon the experience I have had
25 with would other trials, at least one and perhaps two of which I think
1 Mr. Stringer here is familiar with, that this particular trial insofar as
2 the Prosecution has told us, at least it told us last time that it thought
3 it would have somewhere in the vicinity, could not be held bound, I
4 understand that, but would have in the vicinity of 60 -- I think it was
5 something like that, 60 to 70 witnesses.
6 And the fact that two of the trials that I'm familiar with, the
7 Srebrenica trial and the Kvocka trial, have had respectively in the
8 vicinity of 50 and 65 witnesses and the Prosecution has been held to
9 approximately 12 trial weeks, meaning five trial days. 12 weeks in one
10 case, I think 13 in the other. I see no reason, looking at the indictment
11 here and looking at the list of facts that the Prosecution intends to
12 prove, why this trial should be more prolonged than that.
13 So I would -- I am estimating, in my own mind, that the trial
14 would be capable of being performed in, and I think this is even being
15 somewhat generous, approximately 12 weeks' time for the Prosecution and a
16 proportionate time for the Defence, which would bring us within the
17 Tribunal's aim of completing trials somewhere in the vicinity of six
18 months. At least that's the aim that I'm looking forward to, and I hope
19 that both sides will do their best to come within that.
20 Now, having made those preliminary statements, let me go over and
21 find out where we are with regard to some of the matters that I laid down
22 in the Scheduling Order.
23 In the first case, I'd like to find out whether we're done now
24 with the disclosure of witness statements, insofar as the Prosecution
25 knows who the witnesses -- accepting the fact that in every case there may
1 be later revelations of new witnesses. As of the last Status Conference,
2 the Prosecutor said all but 34 of the statements had been translated into
3 B/C/S and disclosed to both of the defendants' counsel, and the rest would
4 be disclosed by mid-August. Now, has that been done?
5 MR. PORIOUVAEV: Your Honour, by the 14th of September, which is
6 today, we have disclosed, in total, 319 witness statements in B/C/S to
7 both Defence councils. These statements were taken from 125 witnesses by
8 the OTP investigators. We also disclosed the witness statements taken by
9 the local authorities in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Germany, and Denmark. 123
10 witnesses were interviewed more than once, and all these witness
11 statements were also disclosed to the Defence. We also disclosed to the
12 Defence all names of the witnesses we intend to call to the trial. We
13 also disclosed the full statement of the autopsy expert, Mr. Dobraca, whom
14 the Prosecutor tends to call to the court. And also we disclose to the
15 Defence Professor Pajic, the witness statement, who will be called to the
16 court as an expert witness on international law matters which may arise
17 during the trial.
18 Colin Kaiser reports of testimony in the Blaskic case were also
19 disclosed to the Defence because the Prosecutors plan to call him as an
20 expert witness on cultural and religious heritage, and crimes aimed
21 against these issues.
22 Eleven witness statements, six from English and five from German,
23 are still to be translated into B/C/S. Unfortunately, the Translation
24 Unit has not met our deadline for the translation of all 29 witness
25 statements we had at our previous Status Conference. From five witness
1 statements in German, we had expected to be translated by the middle of
2 August. Five only were translated into English, and now five, these
3 witness statements, are awaiting translation into B/C/S. I suppose that
4 all this work should be done by the end of September, and then we will
5 disclose all the witness statements to the Defence. That will be all the
6 witness statements we have so far at our disposal.
7 JUDGE WALD: So let me make sure I have your bottom line. Your
8 bottom line is that there are how many yet to be disclosed which you fully
9 expect to be disclosed to the defendants, in B/C/S, by the end of
10 September? How many are outstanding that haven't been disclosed yet?
11 MR. PORIOUVAEV: Eleven in total.
12 JUDGE WALD: Okay. You fully expect those to be done by the end
13 of September; is that right?
14 MR. BOUWKNECHT: I do hope that this job will be done by the
15 Translation Unit. At least now the Translation Unit is here -- I mean,
16 all the staff is almost available. And so, there are reasons to expect
17 that all these jobs will be done by the deadline.
18 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Mr. Krsnik, is that in accord with your
19 experience? Do you have all the statements except for the ones which he's
20 talked about?
21 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, on the 26th July we
22 received 204 witness statements. On the 5th September, we received an
23 additional 120 statements, and we also received three expert statements
24 from the Kupreskic, Kovacevic, Kordic trials which we had requested, at
25 that meeting, they were given to us. So in total, we received 424 witness
1 statements and an additional three have been announced by our learned
2 friends in a meeting which we held on the 5th of September, as still
3 forthcoming. In fact, my apologies, I believe that we have just received
4 them. I'm referring to the three witnesses. But we need to verify this.
5 JUDGE WALD: Mr. Seric.
6 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can confirm -- I'll be
7 very brief -- everything that my learned friend from the Prosecution has
8 said is correct.
9 JUDGE WALD: That sounds pretty good. Now, let me ask you this:
10 If it turns out that you cannot -- that there are more delays, that you
11 cannot finish by the end of September with those statements, will you let
12 me know as the Pre-Trial Judge so that I'm aware of that.
13 MR. PORIOUVAEV: All right, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE WALD: If their not disclosed by the end of September.
15 Thank you.
16 The second item is just a pro forma one. It is just reminding the
17 Prosecutor of their continuing duties under Rule 68 to disclose
18 exculpatory evidence. I'm sure that that reminder is unnecessary, but I
19 make it nonetheless.
20 Now, you alluded very briefly to the expert reports too, and I
21 just want to confirm that. At the last Status Conference, you said that
22 you'd informally disclosed the autopsy expert report to the Defence and
23 was waiting for the translation of the relevant portions on destruction of
24 religious and cultural institutions. Now, do I understand from what you
25 just said a few minutes ago that that translation has been completed now?
1 MR. PORIOUVAEV: Exactly.
2 JUDGE WALD: Okay. And the Prosecution, you mentioned another
3 one, another expert report; namely, was it the international law expert
4 report. Now, those reports, do you have a time when you think they'll be
5 formally filed with the Chamber so that the time begins to run for the
6 Defence to decide whether or not they want to cross-examine the experts?
7 MR. PORIOUVAEV: As soon as we have the date of the trial, we'll
8 file all these reports to the Judge or the Trial Chamber, so we'll comply
9 with our obligation under Rule 94 bis.
10 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Thank you.
11 MR. PORIOUVAEV: Thank you.
12 JUDGE WALD: Now, at the last Status Conference, the Prosecution
13 indicated that it was considering, and I've invited additionally today
14 your consideration, of possible notice of -- to take judicial notice of
15 documentary evidence in other cases and, where appropriate, adjudicated
16 facts on that. I want to elaborate on that a little bit.
17 At our last Status Conference -- before the last Status
18 Conference, we did receive what I then said I found to be a very helpful
19 submission of the Prosecution as to the facts that it intended to prove at
20 trial, along with the summaries of all potential witnesses known at that
21 time and what they would testify about.
22 Now, I asked you at that time, Mr. Krsnik, to go through the facts
23 and to see if there were some that you could admit. Mr. Seric did that in
24 the case of Mr. Martinovic. I understand from the Prosecution's
25 subsequent filing that you were not able to or did not find that there
1 were any of those facts that you could admit; is that true? In other
2 words, can I understand from you that you've reached a point where you are
3 not going to say that you will not dispute any of those 186 facts that
4 were listed by the Prosecution? Go ahead.
5 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence of
6 Mr. Naletilic maintains the position which it submitted at all other
7 Status Conferences, and that reflects the position of our client. I will
8 repeat what I have stated in the last Status Conference. Unfortunately,
9 this was supported by the events of the last two days in Croatia. I don't
10 know if I can mention the name of a person which was mentioned before
11 then; it was redacted from the transcript. I believe that we all know who
12 it is. He was just arrested in Zagreb, and there are some very
13 controversial facts that have come out in relation to that.
14 The Prosecutor is saying that it was not on orders of the Tribunal
15 in The Hague, and then there are those who claim otherwise. We still
16 don't know whether this was done after some statements of Mr. Naletilic,
17 and because of all this -- sorry.
18 JUDGE WALD: I simply wanted to say, Mr. Krsnik, that I don't want
19 to get into the merits of any of these fact-findings. I was asking you
20 because I was somewhat surprised. There are many facts in there, and I
21 actually stated in the Scheduling Order the numberings of many of them,
22 which I don't think -- it's very difficult to relate them to anything
23 specifically going on in Croatia now, or even in the recent past. I gave
24 you an example at the last Status Conference, things like when particular
25 countries were officially recognised, et cetera.
1 I'm just trying to ascertain your position now. You say you're
2 not willing to concede any of those, and so if that's true - as I said
3 before, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink - we
4 can simply invite the Prosecution to see if some of those facts are
5 amenable to judicial notice, to use of transcripts from other proceedings,
6 to affidavits, to other ways in which we can go ahead with the trial. But
7 that is your present position; is that right?
8 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] This is my present position, Your
9 Honour. We had very comprehensive discussions with our learned friends
10 from the Prosecution, and indeed we did negotiate on everything. But the
11 position of the Defence is that so long as we don't see that the
12 indictment is the final one, and this is the indictment that is going to
13 be used at trial, anything that can be detrimental to my client, my client
14 has stated that he is -- did not plead guilty on any of the charges. He
15 does not feel guilty on any count, so --
16 JUDGE WALD: We seem to be talking about two different things,
17 Mr. Krsnik. I understand your client has not pleaded guilty to anything,
18 and I'm not even talking so much about any allegations in the indictment
19 now. We're just talking about the many subsidiaries levels of facts that
20 will come out at trial one way or another. If you don't admit any of
21 those facts, then they will be proven by expedited means where
22 appropriate. Otherwise, I think one thing that we're determined here, I'm
23 sure the Prosecution, and I'm sure it's in your client's interest as well,
24 is that we get to trial, one, as quickly as we can; two, that we have a
25 fair but an expeditious trial. And we will do that.
1 So I don't know whether at a certain point, when the Prosecution
2 puts in its pre-trial briefs under 65 ter, the Rules require that you, a
3 few weeks later, put in your brief in which you pinpoint everything that
4 you dispute and give the reasons why. So I assume that you're willing to
5 follow the Rules and will do that in due course.
6 We also discussed last time the possibility of depositions, and
7 both sides seemed willing to have some depositions at which there would be
8 a Presiding Officer and your clients could be present if they wished to be
9 present. Have you made any progress on those?
10 Let me ask Mr. Terrier first.
11 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] My apologies. With your permission,
12 Your Honour.
13 JUDGE WALD: What is it?
14 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Just a brief reply. I absolutely
15 agree with you that the only fair trial is an expeditious one and an
16 effective one. We're not here to obstruct the work of the Court. The
17 Defence is only mindful of the fact that if it did not dispute the facts
18 that were raised by the Prosecution this trial would not be necessary.
19 Let me just give you a very quick example in reply to the
20 recognition of the Republic of Croatia. When we are absolutely certain
21 that the Prosecution has completed their part of work - because as you
22 know conflicts were there even before the recognition of the Croatian
23 sovereignty, and this is why the Defence is abundantly cautious - I
24 believe that later on we will be able to stipulate certain facts. So this
25 is not my final position.
1 JUDGE WALD: I'm glad to hear it's not your final position, but
2 meanwhile our preparations must go on. So I'm simply advising you that
3 when we do get the Prosecution's submission, either as a pre-trial brief
4 you will be required under the Rules to give us some reasons for disputing
5 anything. And should they make motions for judicial notice, again you'll
6 have an opportunity to, but also a responsibility to tell us why you don't
7 think some of those should go ahead and be granted. I have your position,
8 Mr. Krsnik.
9 Go ahead, Mr. Terrier.
10 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] The Defence will be prepared for
11 that. Thank you.
12 JUDGE WALD: Mr. Terrier, on depositions.
13 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes, about the
14 depositions. During the working meeting we had with Defence counsel, and
15 as Mr. Krsnik said earlier on it was a very fruitful meeting, during that
16 meeting, Defence counsel admitted the principle of Rule 71 depositions
17 with a Presiding Officer. I think that's a very positive step for the
18 rest of this trial, because we indeed believe that for a number of
19 witnesses we can use that procedure with cross-examination by the Defence
20 and with both accused being present, as was the wish of Defence counsel.
21 Now we are going to prepare a list of witnesses for whom we think
22 we could use that procedure, and we will submit that list to yourself,
23 Your Honour, as well as to Defence counsel, and we will ask for your
24 approval of this list of witnesses. That's the state of affairs. And we
25 believe that this list will be completed very shortly, as quickly as
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
13 and English transcripts.
2 If you allow me, Your Honour, I would just like to add one thing
3 following what Mr. Krsnik said about a number of events that took place
4 outside of this Tribunal.
5 Mr. Krsnik was worried about a number of modifications that the
6 Office of the Prosecutor could put in the indictments. Based on the
7 information we have at the moment, we do not contemplate any modification
8 of charges against Mladen Naletilic; we are not contemplating adding or
9 removing charges against Mladen Naletilic. What I am saying is related to
10 Mladen Naletilic and no one else. It also has nothing to do with the
11 evidence the Prosecutor will offer during the rest of the trial.
12 JUDGE WALD: All right. Thank you for that elaboration.
13 Let me ask both Mr. Krsnik and Mr. Seric if they have anything to
14 add to what Mr. Terrier has said about depositions. Are you in accord
15 with what he said? First Mr. Krsnik and then Mr. Seric. Go ahead.
16 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in principle I agree.
17 We exhaustively discussed this, those witnesses which the Prosecutor -- of
18 course, it's their witnesses -- are not deemed very important, will not be
19 important to the Defence, and we will be able to hear them in the
20 contemplated manner. The Defence will only -- perhaps we will organise
21 another meeting for that. But the witnesses which gave depositions before
22 the Presiding Officer in Bosnia-Herzegovina, without the signature of the
23 investigator, will probably be questioned, their authenticity will be
24 questioned by the Defence. But I believe we will be able to resolve this
1 JUDGE WALD: Mr. Seric.
2 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at one of the previous
3 Status Conferences I stated the view of the Defence of Mr. Vinko
4 Martinovic to the effect that we wish every witness to appear here in the
5 courtroom and testify before the entire Trial Chamber, because it is far
6 more important for them to give their testimony here and in such a way so
7 that the Trial Chamber be, indeed, sure of the authenticity and
8 credibility of each such person. But we have also envisaged the
9 possibility, in view of the list of such witnesses, to abandon this
10 position in respect of each of these testimonies, according to the Rules.
11 JUDGE WALD: All right. Thank you, Mr. Seric.
12 At the last Status Conference the Prosecution talked about its
13 progress in talking to the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina about the
14 possible procedure for 94 ter affidavits. I don't know whether you have
15 any progress to report on this, whether you intend to use any of these.
16 If you do, I'm sure that you will read with great interest a forthcoming
17 decision of the Court of Appeal of what is required for that. I can't
18 tell you when it's forthcoming but it is forthcoming. Go ahead.
19 MR. STRINGER: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Douglas Stringer for
20 the Prosecutor.
21 On the issue of 94 ter affidavits, there are a couple of points
22 I'd like to make. We have had some discussions with the Bosnian
23 government about how to find ways to enable us to take statements, formal
24 statements, or affidavits in a way that are in greater conformity with the
25 practice in that country, greater conformity than the procedure that we
1 had proposed to the Trial Chamber in our motion. We have had a
2 preliminary discussion with the representative of the Bosnian government
3 about that. I think it is going to be necessary to have at least one or
4 two more formal discussions so that arrangements and potential procedures
5 could be formalised. I think that that can be made to take place fairly
6 soon, although we're not able to control all of the timing on that.
7 It's our intention to file a motion with the Trial Chamber that
8 would embody the procedure that we hope to be proposing, and it's our
9 intention to do that, obviously, before we actually try to take any formal
10 statements so that we know that we have something the Trial Chamber
11 approves of before we actually put the resources into doing that. So it
12 is your intention to do that.
13 Your Honour, whether that motion and another motion that we intend
14 to file can be filed by the 29th of September is a question that I can
15 answer for you. On that issue, as Mr. Terrier informed you, there really
16 is no cause for delay of the schedule that's been proposed by virtue of
17 the fact that now we've got a transition taking place within the trial
18 team. However, in respect of motions, it may be that there is some
19 justification to consider a short-term delay of, say, two weeks or so to
20 enable us to finalise motions, which is frankly, Your Honour, something
21 that we hadn't anticipated having that particular deadline on. We have
22 been working toward a deadline along these lines for other 65 ter
23 documents, but the motions are something that we hadn't fully
24 anticipated. It would be useful if we could consider even just a modest
25 two-week delay in that schedule as to enable us to get those documents
2 But, yes, there's going to be a motion on 94 ter and it's going to
3 propose a new procedure which we'll be asking the Trial Chamber to
5 JUDGE WALD: Mr. Stringer, what about -- because I recognise the
6 need for some flexibility on the schedule, but we have to start some
7 place. What about a delay of two weeks until -- that would take us, I
8 think, until up to October 13th by my calculations. Would you request
9 that for just the 94 ter and one other motion, or for all of the motions?
10 MR. STRINGER: Well, certainly it would be for the motions. But I
11 think it would be most useful --
12 JUDGE WALD: To have the whole --
13 MR. STRINGER: -- to get the entire thing pushed back two weeks.
14 JUDGE WALD: That would be good. I think that would be more
15 useful to the Defence to have all of the Prosecution's submissions come in
16 together so that you can get an overall -- even though we have to
17 anticipate that you may send the motion in but you may not get -- some of
18 these motions may have to be decided by the whole Trial Chamber, so you
19 may have an additional -- although I'll try to hurry them along, you may
20 have an additional couple of weeks before you actually get a decision
21 through them. So I actually had that marked in as a tentative. Why don't
22 we now consider that October 13th is your -- I think that's a Friday,
23 isn't it? Okay. That's your deadline for the whole works.
24 Having said that, that would up the Defence's time for their
25 responsive filing, which we had down as the 13th of October, and according
1 two weeks would take us up to October 27th, I think. So you would be
2 asked to give your responsive filing on October 27th rather than the date
3 which is in the Scheduling Order. So we'll take those two dates as now
4 our definitive dates: October 13th for the Prosecution; October 27th for
5 the Defence.
6 I also want to make a note whether or not -- I noted in looking --
7 this is for the Prosecution. I noted in looking through your witness
8 summaries that you do have, I counted, five, there may be more, witnesses
9 for whom you're going to offer transcripts of their testimony in other
10 proceedings. My question to you at this point is, since you know there
11 have been varying responses and different Tribunal decisions, whether or
12 not you intend to file a motion along with the other motions about the use
13 of those transcripts in order to get a preliminary ruling on that so you
14 know where you stand, and the Defence has a chance to raise whatever
15 objections they have.
16 MR. STRINGER: Yes, Your Honour. That is one of the motions which
17 we intend to file as part of this group, then, on the 13th of October.
18 JUDGE WALD: Okay.
19 MR. STRINGER: Yes.
20 JUDGE WALD: Now, I have one last, very mercifully short lecture
21 to deliver, and that is of course that given the status of this case right
22 now, at least, there will be many live witnesses. You have suggested that
23 you have an approximation, just an approximation, of around -- whether it
24 was 60 or 70. My sincere hope, however, is to ask you when you are doing
25 your 65 ter briefing where you're asked for the first time to put down the
1 approximate times for the witnesses, that you will try to avoid cumulative
2 testimony, and whenever possible pear down the witness' testimony to the
3 critical elements instead of their entire experience.
4 Mr. Stringer, who's been with us in the Kvocka trial, knows that
5 this issue has come up time and time again. Just as an exercise, this is
6 not a formal submission, but I wanted to make a few general comments about
7 your witness list. I actually have a little chart here which is just a
8 work chart, which my assistant at the end of the hearing today will give
9 copies of to all of the counsel. It's simply, as I say, an exercise
11 But your witness list contains 105 witnesses, and I know that you
12 have done right to err on the side of caution in including witnesses who
13 might be called, even if you only plan to call 60 or 70 - I commend that -
14 and it may be that you've erred on the side of caution in stating what
15 paragraphs in the indictment each witness might testify about. But as a
16 result of caution, in reading through, there are many paragraphs in the
17 indictment for which there are an extremely large number of witnesses.
18 Without mentioning them, because it was a sealed document, I will
19 just give the numbers. For example, by my rough count, there are 51
20 witnesses who might testify about paragraph 7 of the indictment; 22
21 witnesses for paragraph 9; 46 for paragraph 10 - I have all this down on
22 paper, which I'll give both sides at the end of the hearing - and 73 for
23 paragraph 11. It was very rare that there was a paragraph for which there
24 were fewer than 20 witnesses.
25 So I do think that in preparing for the filing you might think
1 about how you can cut down the trial time not even by calling fewer
2 witnesses but by calling witnesses who can testify about the largest
3 number of things, so that we don't lose a lot of time on the preliminaries
4 with each new witness; and that it isn't necessary that each witness
5 testify about everything they saw and experienced. For instance, going
6 back to Kvocka and using a very obvious example, every witness we have
7 could testify about how bad the food was in the Omarska camp. But after
8 you've heard from the first 10 or 15 witnesses about that, I think the
9 next 40 are somewhat cumulative. It may be that the same thing might
10 happen here.
11 If you take paragraph 30, I think this is a paragraph I can allude
12 to without divulging any confidences, which alleges that there was a KB
13 base on Kalemova Street under the command of Martinovic which Naletilic
14 visited, at which Bosnian Muslim detainees were held, there are 42
15 witnesses listed to testify about that. I'm not sure we have to hear from
16 all 42 about the existence of that.
17 There is no fixed numerical limit on how many witnesses can
18 testify about a particular fact. Especially with the critical facts like
19 the involvement of the accused, I wouldn't dream of trying to limit you.
20 But I would point out that in many other matters, it's rare that after the
21 twenty-eighth witness we get anything that others didn't.
22 As I say, Ms. Martinez, who is in the back row, will be glad to
23 give you this working chart. It's only for your own benefit. The Defence
24 counsel will also receive copies of it. That's the end of my lecture.
25 I'm sure you get the point on that.
1 The final thing here, I just want to go over again, is the
2 pre-trial filings. So we now have October 13th where the Prosecutor will
3 file the pre-trial brief under 65 ter, and the Defence will be working
4 with the Prosecutor in preparation of their filing on the 27th of October,
5 their responsive brief under 65 ter (F).
6 We also would like to know from the Defence whether - you haven't
7 mentioned it yet, and this includes both Mr. Seric and Mr. Krsnik -
8 whether you plan to offer any special defences pursuant to 67(A)(1)(ii).
9 I'm sure you've been thinking about that.
10 My intent, and I have the endorsement of my Chamber as well, is to
11 have this case ready for trial after a final Pre-Trial Conference sometime
12 in November. I'd like to get the filings first. But everything that can
13 be done to prepare for trial by then should be done - the pre-trial
14 motions filed, the witness lists narrowed to the extent they can, a
15 procedure for depositions and affidavits established - so that the case
16 could go to trial.
17 Now, quite frankly, given Chamber I's current schedule and the two
18 trials presently, it's unlikely that they can take up any new trial until
19 a few months into the next year. But there are at least considerations in
20 the Tribunal that if some other Chamber is able to finish their trials and
21 this trial is ready to go, it is quite possible that this trial could
22 begin then or even sooner.
23 Let me ask if the Prosecution or the Defence, either Mr. Krsnik or
24 Mr. Seric, have anything else that they want to raise at this Pre-Trial
25 Conference. Otherwise, we will wait and see what comes in from the
1 Prosecutor's filing and the Defence filings.
2 Anybody from the Prosecution? Do you have anything else,
3 Mr. Stringer?
4 MR. STRINGER: Your Honour, just one brief thing to add.
5 JUDGE WALD: Sure.
6 MR. STRINGER: Because I don't know that your Trial Chamber, or
7 even the Defence, are going to be aware of this until later. But earlier
8 this week we filed a motion which -- earlier this week we filed a motion
9 which, under the Rules, will go to Judge Jorda --
10 JUDGE WALD: Yes, I'm aware of that, and I -- go ahead and finish,
11 but I am aware of that.
12 MR. STRINGER: This is following up to what we said at the last
13 Status Conference. We've asked Judge Jorda to give us permission to
14 provide the Defence in this case with documents which were submitted in
15 the Blaskic case under seal as part of our submissions on international
16 armed conflict. So hopefully in the near future, if that request is
17 granted, then we'll be in a position to provide the Defence with about 120
18 documents which we will be tendering into evidence in this case to support
19 the international armed conflict component for Article II. So we'll
20 notify the Trial Chamber and the Defence if that request is granted.
21 JUDGE WALD: Well, that decision, of course, is the President's.
22 But I will tell you that I will haunt his Chambers to make sure that it
23 doesn't go unnoticed.
24 Mr. Krsnik, and then Mr. Seric, anything else you want to bring
25 up at this conference? Go ahead.
1 MR. KRSNIK: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that's precisely what I
2 wanted to raise at the previous Status Conference; that is, according to
3 the instructions of my client, and my client personally wrote a letter to
4 the Prosecutor, Mr. Terrier, precisely because the -- pursuing the
5 expediency of these proceedings. The Prosecutor's Office, the fact that
6 they are preparing their 50 key witnesses -- and my client is preparing by
7 taking the lie detector. My client discussed this with Mr. Terrier and
8 Mr. Terrier answered that he did not accept this.
9 I wanted to raise this again today, if it is possible - as far as
10 I know it is possible according to the Rules of this court - and perhaps
11 if this were to be allowed by this Trial Chamber, we would agree to that
12 mode of questioning as well.
13 JUDGE WALD: Mr. Krsnik, we, the Chamber -- I was copied with the
14 letter that you wrote to Mr. Terrier, but there is no, to my knowledge,
15 pending motion before the Chamber for any specific procedure that you and
16 your client are contemplating. If you want a ruling from the Chamber, and
17 I think this is a very thorny area into which we're traversing, but if you
18 want a specific ruling, I think you have to file a written motion with the
19 Chamber. That is a ruling which I, as the Pre-Trial Judge, would not feel
20 would be authorised by my decision alone. It would have to be decided by
21 the entire Chamber. So whatever it is, I suggest you would have to
22 formalise it. A letter would not be sufficient on that.
23 Mr. Seric, do you have anything you wish to raise?
24 MR. SERIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, nothing in particular for
25 this Status Conference. But I can answer your earlier question. We are
1 not planning any special defence.
2 JUDGE WALD: That's helpful. I appreciate that. I should also
3 say, though I hoped for even more, I do appreciate the fact that you were
4 able to find some of those list of intended facts that you were able to
5 agree to.
6 So we have our dates for the filings. We will have a final
7 Pre-Trial Conference, it looks like it would be sometime in November now.
8 Let me now take the second purpose of these conferences, and that
9 is to give an opportunity for the accused themselves to tell us if they
10 have any problems which are arising from their current detention. I will
11 begin with you, Mr. Martinovic, since you were the first person -- you've
12 been the longest in detention. Do you have anything you wish to tell us?
13 THE ACCUSED MARTINOVIC: [Interpretation] No, nothing.
14 JUDGE WALD: Okay. Thank you.
15 Mr. Naletilic.
16 THE ACCUSED NALETILIC: [Interpretation] I have already said it's a
17 B-category hotel, and I repeated this to the journalists who asked me that
18 question again.
19 JUDGE WALD: I'm sorry we can't raise it up to a four-star hotel,
20 but we appreciate your comments anyway. All right.
21 Well in that case, I think we have managed to get out of this
22 Status Conference in an hour, and I want to thank the Prosecution for
23 its -- for its promptness and its willingness to abide by a schedule, even
24 in a time of flexibility. And I'm sure the Defence will be equally
25 cooperative as we go along. And being an eternal optimist, I will retain
1 the hope that as we move along, Mr. Krsnik, you will find it possible for
2 us to shorten the process, without in any way impeding your client's
4 All right. The conference is closed. Thank you.
5 Mr. Martinez is in the back row there and she'll be happy to hand
6 out the chart.
7 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned at
8 5.03 p.m.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French
13 and English transcripts.