|
Please
note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing.
It is merely a summary.
ICTY Weekly Press Briefing
Date: 21.07.2004
Time: 12.00 p.m.
Registry and Chambers:
Jim Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers,
made the following statement:
Good afternoon,
In the Milosevic case, we have just received from Trial Chamber
III the "Further Order On Future Conduct of the Trial Relating
to Severance of One or More Indictments". As I know this
it is of interest to you, I will read the operative parts:
NOTING the "Order on Future Conduct of the Trial",
issued by the Trial Chamber on
6 July 2004, in which the Trial Chamber stated, inter alia,
"that it may be necessary to assign counsel to the Accused,
and/or adopt other measures to ensure a fair and expeditious conduct
of the trial",
NOTING the "Further Order on Future Conduct of the
Trial", issued by the Trial Chamber on 19 July 2004, in which
the Trial Chamber, inter alia, stated (a) "that it might
be necessary for the Trial Chamber to consider further steps to
ensure the fair and expeditious conduct and completion of the trial",
(b) "the resolve and determination of the Trial Chamber to
conclude the presentation of the defence case by October 2005",
and (c) ordered submissions on the specific role a counsel would
have "in ensuring the fair presentation of the defence case",
HAVING given further consideration to ways in which the
trial may be concluded in a fair and expeditious manner, including
the possibility of severing one or more of the Indictments,
NOTING that the Appeals Chamber contemplated the possibility
of severance in principle in its "Reasons for Decision on Prosecution
Interlocutory Appeal from Refusal to Order Joinder",
CONSIDERING that the Trial Chamber should be in a position,
as soon as possible, to give full consideration to the future conduct
of the case,
PURSUANT TO Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
of the International Tribunal
HEREBY INVITES the parties to file written submissions,
by 27 July 2004, on the question of severance and, should the Trial
Chamber decide to sever, which Indictment should proceed first.
Copies of the Order will be available after this briefing.
In terms of the of the court schedule:
The Krajisnik trial is due to recommence on Monday 26 July at 9
a.m. in Courtroom III. On Wednesday, it is due to move to Courtroom
II.
There will be status conferences in:
The Prosecutor v. Kvocka, Radic, Zigic and Prcac today immediately
after the additional hearings starting at approximately 1.25 p.m.
in Courtroom III.
The Prosecutor v. Kordic and Cerkez this afternoon at 4
p.m. in Courtroom III.
The Prosecutor v. Ljubicic on Friday 23 July at 2.30 p.m.
in Courtroom I.
The Prosecutor v. Miodrag Jokic also on Friday at 3 p.m.
in Courtroom II.
The Prosecutor v. Momir Nikolic on Monday 26 July at 2.30
p.m. in Courtroom II.
The Prosecutor v. Martinovic and Naletilic also on Monday
at 4.15 p.m. in Courtroom II.
The Prosecutor v. Stakic on Tuesday 27 July at 2.30 p.m.
in Courtroom II, and
The Prosecutor v. Galic on Wednesday 28 July at 8.30 a.m.
in Courtroom II.
Finally, I understand that the ADC will give a briefing after this.
See
also the latest ADC-ICTY press briefing.
Office of the Prosecution:
Florence Hartmann for the Office of the Prosecutor made no statement.
Questions:
Asked if the Prosecution would be disappointed if an Indictment
in the Milosevic case was severed, Hartmann replied that she would
have to consult with her office before a comment was made. Landale
pointed out that the Order had just been issued.
Asked what exactly the Decision would mean if one of the Indictments
was severed, Landale replied that it was premature for him to say
what the Trial Chamber would do. At the moment what they had done
was to ask for submissions from the parties on this as a possible
course of action, said Landale.
Landale added that what the Trial Chamber had done a few weeks
ago was to put down a marker when it said that it would conduct
a radical review of the future conduct of the trial. Landale said
that what we had seen was that the Trial Chamber was exploring the
medical situation very thoroughly in terms of asking for a number
of different medical reports in order to be in a position to be
absolutely clear what the medical situation was and what effect
that might have for the future conduct of the trial.
The Trial Chamber had also asked the Registrar to identify possible
candidates to be appointed as standby council should the Trial Chamber
decide that was the appropriate action to take. Landale said that
here we were seeing the Trial Chamber looking at exploring the possibility
of severance. That was not to say that it would take that option,
but that the Trial Chamber wanted to have before it all of the background
and views of the parties on these issues before it decided what
the appropriate course of action was, said Landale.
Asked if there was a deadline for the Registry to identify a lawyer,
Landale replied as soon as it could, but that there was no specific
date given.
Asked if the Registrar had a list already of possible candidates,
Landale said that it was actively being pursued.
Asked if there was any chance there would be a Decision or outcome
on everything by 31 August, Landale replied that he would leave
that up to the Trial Chamber, but that theoretically they could
take a decision before 31 August. He added that if there was a public
decision, it would be made available to the media.
Landale added that the future conduct of the trial was something
that the Trial Chamber was going to consider very carefully. All
of the elements such as the medical situation, the issue of standby
council, and the question of severance were not matters that they
would take lightly and that they would give them extremely careful
consideration.
Asked if there were any comments on rumours of negotiations with
Mladic, Hartmann replied that she had no comment.
Landale added that the Tribunal would be delighted to see Mladic
or Karadzic in The Hague as soon as possible. He added that on the
he wanted to be absolutely clear that only a Trial Chamber could
decide on a deferral of a case to a national court.
Asked if it was correct to say that some of these decisions would
have to be taken before Milosevic started his defence, Landale stated
that he would leave that up to the Trial Chamber.
Documents:
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan Milosevic
16 July 2004 "Amici Curiae Motion in Relation to the Accused’s
Disclosure Obligations and Requests for Additional Time." 10pg
19 July 2004 "Order to Presecution to File a Response."
1pg
19 July 2004 "Final Decision on Admissibility of Intercepted
Communications Tendered Through Witness Hrvoje Sarinic."2pg
20 July 2004 "Order To Prosecution On Indictments Following
Rule 98bis Decision."
20 July 2004 "Order Concerning Exhibits Marked For Identification
During The Prosecution Case."2pg
20 July 2004 "Second Order Granting Leave To Amend The Croatia
Indictment." 2pg
20 July 2004 "Further Order On Future Conduct Of The Trial
Relating To Severance Of One Or More Indictments."
The Prosecutor v. Vojislav Seselj
07 July 2004 "Prosecution’s Response To ‘Defence Motion For
Provisional Release.’" 145pg
12 July 2004 "Prosecution’s Reply to Vojislav Seselj’s ‘Motion
in Rebuttal’ To Prosecution’s Appeal from the ‘Decision on Motion
by Vojislav Seselj Challenging Jurisdiction and Form of Indictment’."
37pg
16 July 2004 "Decision on Defence Motion for a Ruling on the
Rights of the Accused to Communication and Visits While in Detention."
3pg
The Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brdjanin
15 July 2004 Concerning Allegations Against Milka Maglov "Scheduling
Order". 1pg
16 July 2004 Concerning Allegations Against Milka Maglov "Order
to Amicus Curiae Prosecutor". 2pg
The Prosecutor v. Ivan Cermak and Mladen Markac
15 July 2004 "Ivan Cermak’s Motion on the Form of the Indictment".
17pg
The Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galic
16 July 2004 "Decision on Defence’s Request for Reconsideration".
3pg
19 July 2004 "Defence Appelant’s Brief." 150pg
The Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar
15 July 2004 Addendum II "Defence Submission: Expert Report
V". 155pg
19 July 2004 Addendum II "Defence Submission: Expert Report
V". 58pg
The Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakic
20 July 2004 "Decision on Prosecution’s Motion to Disallow
a Ground of Appeal and to File a Further Response". 4pg
The Prosecutor v. Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic
19 July 2004 Partially Confidential "Prosecution’s Pre-Trial
Brief". 183pg
The Prosecutor v. Mile Mrksic et al
20 July 2004 "Decision on Form of Modified Consolidated Amended
Indictment". 10pg
The Prosecutor v. Momcilo Krajisnik
19 July 2004 "Order Relating To Prosecution’s Application
To Admit Evidence Pursuant To Rule 92bis." 2pg
20 July 2004 "Prosecution’s Request To Trial Chamber To Suspend
Consideration Of Currently Pending Rule 92bis Motions."
2pg
*****
|
