note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing. It is merely
Jim Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers, made the following statement:
In terms of scheduling:
This afternoon, the sentencing
hearing in The Prosecutor v. Predrag Banovic will be held at 2.30 p.m.
in Courtroom I.
4 September 2003, there will be a Status Conference in The Prosecutor v.
Dragan Nikolic in Courtroom I at 3 p.m.
The further initial appearance
for Mitar Rasevic will be held on 16 September 2003 at 3.30 p.m in Courtroom
The following day on 17
September, the Appeals Judgement in The Prosecutor v. Milorad Krnojelac will
be rendered at 3 p.m. in Courtroom I.
You are of course
all invited to cover these events.
the court documents we have received from the last briefing:From the Trial
On 29 August,
in The Prosecutor v. Miodrag Jokic, we received an "Order on
Miodrag Jokic’s Motion for Provisional Release", in which Trial Chamber
I granted the provisional release under certain terms and conditions. For more
details I refer you to the press release that we put out on Friday.
on 29 August, in The Prosecutor v. Fatmir Limaj, Haradin Bala and Isak Musliu,
we received the "Decision on the Application of Isak Musliu for
Extension of Time to File Reply to ‘Confidential Prosecution’s Response to Application
for Provisional Release Filed by the Accused Isak Musliu", in which
the Pre-Trial Judge, Judge Martin Canivell, granted leave to the Defence to
file a reply and ordered the Defence to file the reply to the response no later
than 3 September 2003.
terms of other court documents:
27 August, in The Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar, we received the "Prosecutor’s
Pre-Trial Brief Pursuant To Rule 65 ter (E) (i)".
On 28 August,
in The Prosecutor v. Darko Mrdja, we received the "Defence Motion
to Amend Scheduling Order".
the same day and in the same case, we received the "Defence Motion for
Appointment of Expert Witness and Medical Examination".
2 September, again in The Prosecutor v. Darko Mrdja, we received the
"Prosecution’s Response to Defence Motion for Appointment of Expert
Witness and Medical Examination".
29 August, in The Prosecutor v. Milutinovic, Sainovic and Ojdanic, we
received the "Amicus Curiae Brief of Association of Defence Counsel
of ICTY in Support of Appeal and Motion for Leave to File Same".
29 August, and again in The Prosecutor v. Milutinovic, Sainovic and Ojdanic,
we received the "Reply Brief: General Ojdanic’s Appeal of Decision on
Motion for Additional Funds".
29 August, in The Prosecutor v. Naletilic and Martinovic, we received
the "Appeal Brief of Mr. Vinko Martinovic".
1 September, in The Prosecutor v. Enver Hadzihasanovic, and Amir Kubura,
we received the "Joint Defence Response to Prosecution Motion for Leave
to Amend the Amended Indictment".
on 1 September, in The Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakic, we received the
"Prosecution’s Notice of Appeal".
the same day and in the same case, we received the "Appellant, Milomir
Stakic’s Notice of Appeal".
2 September, in The Prosecutor v. Mitar Vasiljevic, we received the "(Additional)
Defence Brief in Reply".
ever, copies of all the documents I have mentioned are available to you on request.
Harmann, Spokeswoman for the Office of the Prosecutor made no statement.
Asked if the
Miodrag Jokic plea agreement was confidential, Landale replied that it was indeed
asked whether the head of the ICTY Belgrade Office had left, Landale replied
that, although it was a very complimentary thing to say, Matias Hellman was
not the head of the Belgrade Office. He was the Coordinator of the Outreach
Programme for Serbia and Montenegro. He had done a sterling job and was now
moving on to be replaced by Aleksandra Milenov.
if the head of the ICTY Belgrade Office was still Deyan Mihov, Hartmann confirmed