Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 26088

 1                           Monday, 5 December 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.

 7             This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and

 8     Stojan Zupljanin.

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

10                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

11             JUDGE HALL:  Good morning to everyone.

12             May we have the appearances today, please.

13             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner,

14     Sebastiaan van Hooydonk, our Case Manager, and with us today is intern

15     Tea Blakaj.

16             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

17     Slobodan Cvijetic, and Ms. Annemarie McNulty, appearing for

18     Stanisic Defence this morning.  Thank you.

19             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Dragan Krgovic,

20     Aleksandar Aleksic, Miroslav Cuskic, and Hamish Collings-Begg, appearing

21     for Zupljanin Defence.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.  There are a number -- well, Ms. Korner,

23     you are on your feet.

24             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours -- no, but if Your Honours are

25     going to deal with matters first, then I will come to the matters I need

Page 26089

 1     to deal with after Your Honours obviously.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, thank you.  The Chamber is in receipt of an

 3     application by the Prosecution for an extension of time for the filing of

 4     the completed CHS and related translations, and the Chamber is of the

 5     view that the 10th of January would be an appropriate extension.

 6             The second matter is this -- it's addressed to the -- well,

 7     actually to both Defence teams, but I think it was the Stanisic Defence

 8     team which initially raised it, whether the 54 bis matter has been

 9     satisfactorily resolved and whether we could take it off the list of

10     matters which are still like loose ends hanging about.

11             Mr. Stanisic [sic].

12             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, if you remember, I raised the issue

13     the last time when we were sitting, and Your Honours instructed us to

14     seek permission from the state in question to give us permission that we

15     can disclose this material to the Office of the Prosecutor, and after

16     that, seek -- seek to admit the documents after it's disclosed to the

17     Prosecution.

18             And we -- we -- we acted immediately and sent the more -- the day

19     after we received the instruction from the Trial Chamber, we sent the --

20     the request to the -- to the state, but we still haven't received a reply

21     yet.

22             As soon as we receive, we will inform the Trial Chamber, disclose

23     to the Office of the Prosecutor, and seek admittance of that document.

24             Thank you.

25             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

Page 26090

 1             Are there any matters which the parties wish to raise.

 2             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, the first matter, the one I was asked

 3     to raise, is the one Your Honours dealt with, that we have the extension

 4     of the deadline for the translations until the 10th of January.

 5             Your Honours, I sent an e-mail when we got the Defence e-mail

 6     saying that witnesses were being withdrawn, making various inquiries of

 7     the Senior Legal Officer as to what was going to be happening now and

 8     received the reply that matters were under consideration, so I don't

 9     suppose there is much point in me going through them all again in open

10     court.  I mean, the obvious question is if the Zupljanin Defence

11     concludes this week, as it will, what we're going to be doing, firstly

12     are we going to be sitting next week, what are we going to be doing in

13     January, and so on and so forth, which is the questions that I virtually

14     raised the last time we sat.  But I'm told matters are under

15     consideration so there is not much point in me repeating what I said in

16     my e-mail at this stage.

17             JUDGE HALL:  I would only add to what you have helpfully said,

18     Ms. Korner, that the -- in terms of the number of things which have to

19     happen, there's a sequence that would automatically follow upon the --

20     when the Zupljanin Defence has closed.  But we're alive to the

21     untidiness, for want of a better word, of where we are -- not so much

22     next week.  It seems that if the Zupljanin Defence closes as now they

23     expect that they would close, that I don't know if practically speaking

24     anything of next week can be salvaged.  But certainly in respect of

25     10th of January, we would have to give our attention as to how -- what

Page 26091

 1     we're going to be doing then when we return.

 2             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  Well, Your Honours, as I say, I mean, I was

 3     hoping that if we were going to be call rebuttal evidence, it could have

 4     been done next week to use the time productively, but I appreciate that

 5     that is not possible.

 6             Your Honours, the last matter I wish to raise, and it's really, I

 7     suppose, a matter for placing on the record, again, our dismay at the

 8     proofing note that we received last Wednesday as per Your Honours' order,

 9     which, as Your Honours may have seen, if you looked at the original

10     65 ter summary for the next witness, contain a mass of detail which was

11     not in that summary.  It's happened over and over and over again.  All

12     can I say is, it's not fair.  It puts us in a position where, at the last

13     minute, we have to do a great deal more work, taking people that we can

14     ill spare at this time.  Your Honours, we have already lost, as Your

15     Honours know, one of the lawyers working for the team and we're about to

16     lose another this week.  And that perhaps for future reference, for any

17     cases that Your Honours may be involved in the future, you may want to

18     reconsider the fact that the Defence are allowed to only produce at the

19     eleventh hour an actual proper summary of what witnesses are going to be

20     saying, as opposed to the rubbish that was contained in the 65 ter

21     summary.

22             But, we've raise it before.  Again, Your Honours, you will see

23     that there are matters that could have been put to witnesses and were

24     not, but we'll deal with that at the end of the case.

25             So I'm just registering my protest for what it is worth.

Page 26092

 1             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Krgovic, this is a matter which has been so well

 2     ventilated in the past that we think in the circumstances, both as a

 3     matter of fairness to the Prosecution and courtesy to the Chamber, some

 4     explanation ought to be forthcoming from you as to why this situation has

 5     again arisen, in respect of this witness.

 6             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I absolutely disagree

 7     with Ms. Korner when she said that what the witness said in the proofing

 8     note doesn't respond to the 65 ter summary.  Everything that the witness

 9     said was merely a clarification of some minute details that the witness

10     stated during an interview with me.  All this information is already

11     contained in the documents that are in evidence, and some brief witnesses

12     spoke about them as well.

13             Let me remind you, all this evidence I put on a list to show it,

14     and it seems that all this evidence are OTP evidence.  So there is

15     nothing that the OTP doesn't know, and I don't understand why they are

16     surprised.  I don't mean to be critical, but I would like just to add

17     when the Prosecution brought their witnesses, they wrote one thing in the

18     summary, whereas the testimony of the witnesses dealt mainly with the

19     activities of Zupljanin.  And all of that was also happening at the

20     eleventh hour.  The Defence being prepared properly for the trial, albeit

21     we received this belated information, and if what the OTP is saying, that

22     they are not prepared to do it, can be taken as a justification, we

23     accept that.

24             But let me just look at ST-202.  His summary contains only four

25     lines and there's no mention of Zupljanin at all.  The Prosecutor devoted

Page 26093

 1     half an hour to what Mr. Zupljanin was doing at some meeting without any

 2     prior notice.  And I think that the Prosecutor is the last one to object

 3     to what the Defence did or did not do.  In Witness 178, in his summary --

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  ST-128, interpreter's correction.

 5             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] -- you will find nothing that

 6     pertaining to Mr. Zupljanin.  Nevertheless, since we are familiar with

 7     the case, we are prepared and -- to accept that and we weren't taken by

 8     surprise.  The OTP should have told us this.

 9             I would just like to add that not a single piece of information

10     that this witness is going to provide is not disclosed to the OTP.  Only

11     two Defence witnesses did not have prior interview or statements given to

12     the OTP.  Specifically, this is this witness, and SZ-003.  However, the

13     Prosecution had the relevant documents that indicated the contents of his

14     testimony.

15             Therefore, I don't believe that the Prosecutor's Office cannot in

16     any way be surprised.  When they raised their objections, you could have

17     seen that they spent four, five, or six or more hours in

18     cross-examination which only proves that they had been well prepared.

19     This is objection is just a tactical move perhaps intended to exert some

20     pressure on the Defence.

21             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honour, Mr. Krgovic is the art proponent

22     of carrying the war into the other camp.  He says the same thing each

23     time.  It is inaccurate, it is not right, and as Your Honours can see

24     yourself from the 65 ter summary and what's in the so-called proofing

25     note, that the detail is given there.  And I can assure Your Honours that

Page 26094

 1     as a result of the proofing note -- I'm not saying we are not prepared.

 2     We are prepared, but I had to use, as I say, staff that I can ill afford

 3     to take off other ongoing projects.  And so that's my complaint.

 4             And as I say, it is perfectly plain to Your Honours that what was

 5     in the proofing not was not even remotely covered in the 65 ter summary.

 6             JUDGE HALL:  Anyway, are there any other matters which counsel

 7     wish to raise before we move to the witness?

 8             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, Your Honour, with the leave of the

 9     Trial Chamber I would just like to make an announcement about the revised

10     translations that we updated in e-court.

11             That is, revised translation of 1D571 and 1D397 we replaced in

12     e-court on the 20th of October.  Both Office of the Prosecutor and

13     Zupljanin Defence did not object to these revised translation, and I'm

14     just informing the Trial Chamber about it.

15             And the -- and, sorry, the second matter is, Your Honours, I sent

16     an e-mail yesterday that there are two issues we would like to address

17     the Trial Chamber with, and would seek direction from the Trial Chamber

18     about these matters.  But as I mentioned in my e-mail, which I sent to

19     all parties and Chambers, I don't think it is a pressing, and I believe

20     we can -- we can postpone that for the time when we don't have any

21     witnesses in court and maybe we can address this at length.

22             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.

23             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Well, the -- according to my information, the

25     next witness has been -- I'm reminded that the next witness, having been

Page 26095

 1     granted protective measures of closed session, we would move into closed

 2     session now so that the witness could be escorted into court.

 3             MS. KORNER:  And, Your Honours, can I ask, is there any chance

 4     that the heat can be reduced fairly quickly because it is absolutely

 5     almost unbearable.

 6                           [Closed session]

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 26096











11 Pages 26096-26174 redacted. Closed session.















Page 26175

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3                           [Open session]

 4             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  We take the adjournment, to reconvene tomorrow

 6     morning at 9.00.

 7                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,

 8                           to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 6th day of

 9                           December, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.