Site Internet consacré à l’héritage du Tribunal pénal international pour l’ex-Yougoslavie

Depuis la fermeture du TPIY le 31 décembre 2017, le Mécanisme alimente ce site Internet dans le cadre de sa mission visant à préserver et promouvoir l’héritage des Tribunaux pénaux internationaux.

 Consultez le site Internet du Mécanisme.

ICTY Weekly Press Briefing - 16th Oct 2002

ICTY Weekly Press Briefing 16 October 2002

note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing. It is merely
a summary.

ICTY Weekly
Press Briefing

Date: 16.10.2002

Time: 10:30


Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers, made the following statement:

I would like to remind you that tomorrow there will be the Sentencing Judgement
in the Prosecutor v. Milan Simic in Courtroom III at 4.30 p.m. On 15 May 2002,
Simic pleaded guilty to two counts of torture as crimes against humanity. All
other charges against Milan Simic were dismissed. On 28 May 2002, the Trial
Chamber formally severed the case against Milan Simic and on 22 July the pre-sentencing
hearing took place.

the issue of provisional release, we have a separate sheet to hand out to you
after this which should clarify who is currently on provisional release, who
has requested provisional release, and who is appealing provisional release

terms of court documents:

On 9 October, in the Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakic we received the Defendant’s
"Motion for Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 bis". Copies on request.

- On 10
October, in the Prosecutor v. Janko Bobetko we received the "Prosecution’s
Response to the Application of the Republic of Croatia to Submit an Interlocutory
Appeal Against the Warrant of Arrest and Order for Surrender of 20 September
". We gave out copies of this last week when we received it, however
further copies will be available after this.

Again on 10 October, in the Prosecutor v. Milan Martic we received the "Decision
on the Motion for Provisional Release
", which again some of you might
already have.

- And also on
10 October, in the Prosecutor v. Sainovic and Ojdanic, we received the "Registry
Comments on Trial Chamber’s Invitation to Comment on Defence Request for Review
of Registrar’s Decision From the 13th of September 2002

- On 11 October,
in the Prosecutor v. Simic, Tadic and Zaric, we received the "Written
Reasons for Decision on Motions for Acquittal

- Again, on 11
October, in the Prosecutor v. Janko Bobetko, we received an "Order of
the President Assigning Judges to the Appeals Chamber

- On 14 October,
in the Prosecutor v. Krajisnik and Plavsic, we received the "Krajisnik
Defense Rule 65 ter (F) Pre-Trial Brief

- Again on 14
October, in the Prosecutor v. Blagojevic, Obrenovic, Jokic and Nikolic, we received
the "Accused Blagojevic’s Written Submissions as Directed by the Trial
Chamber’s Scheduling Order of 8 October 2002 Regarding the Appeals Chamber’s

- And
also on 14 October, in the Prosecutor v. Brdanin and Talic, we received a "Motion
on Behalf of Jonathan Randal for Release of Transcript

- On 15 October,
in the Prosecutor v. Milosevic, we received the "Prosecution’s Motion
to Admit Documents Relating To Helena Ranta
". This will be available
on request.


In terms of
the court schedule:

afternoon, there will be a status conference in the Prosecutor v. Ojdanic and
Sainovic in Courtroom II at 3 p.m. This might be switched to Courtroom III.
We will keep you informed if it does.

that at 4 p.m. there will be hearing in the Stakic case on the accused’s motion
for acquittal, which I mentioned earlier. That will continue the following afternoon,
starting at 2.15 p.m.

Judges and Prosecutors from Kosovo are currently visiting the Tribunal. This
is the third visit of legal professionals from the province to the Tribunal,
organised in cooperation with the ICTY Outreach Programme. The central aims
of the working visit are to provide judges and prosecutors at the District Court
level from Kosovo with a first-hand opportunity to view ongoing trials at the
Tribunal, be provided with a comprehensive introduction and overview of Tribunal
procedures and to meet and discuss matters of interest with senior Tribunal

participants have expressed a particular interest in learning more about criminal
procedure and applicable law at the Tribunal.

Hartmann, Spokeswoman for the Office of the Prosecutor, made the following statement:

Prosecutor will visit the Balkans next week. She will go firstly to Tirana on
Friday. This visit was planned a long time ago as part of a group of visits
to the neighbouring countries of the former Yugoslavia. The Prosecutor has already
been to most of them but not to Albania. In Tirana she will meet with the President,
the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Defence Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister.

From Monday
to Wednesday, the Prosecutor will be in the former Yugoslavia. Firstly, she
will visit Belgrade where she will meet with members of the Federal Government,
namely the Council for Cooperation and with members of the Serbian Government.
Following this, she will go to Pristina where she will meet with internationals
based there. The same applies for Sarajevo, where she will go the next day.
The Prosecutor will conclude her visit on Wednesday in Zagreb, where she will
meet with the Croatian Government.


to a journalist, the Prosecutor stated that she knew Ratko Mladic was in Serbia
and that she had information to prove it. Asked for more news on this subject,
Hartmann replied that this was not the first time that the Prosecutor had
insisted on the fact that Ratko Mladic was in Serbia. The Prosecutor would
not reveal to the public at this stage where he was. She had promised to give
details to the press only when Mladic was arrested and had arrived in The
Hague. Hartmann added that the Prosecutor did not need to give more details
at this stage as her information was corroborated by the information of many
western governments. There was no doubt that Mladic was in Serbia and that
it was only a question of the political will of the Yugoslav authorities as
to why he had not yet been arrested.

Asked to
confirm that the Prosecutor would reveal all of the details of Mladic’s whereabouts
after his arrest, Hartmann replied that the Prosecutor had said in an interview
a few months ago that she would give some details after Mladic was arrested,
but for the moment she would not do so. The information under discussion did
not come only from the Tribunal but was information which was established
by other people on the basis of other sources.

Asked whether
the Prosecutor would give this information to representatives from the FRY
Government, Hartmann replied that the Prosecutor had already informed representatives
from the FRY Government during her last visit to Belgrade. She added that
she was sorry that she could not provide the information to convince the media,
but that the discussions held with the FRY representatives were based on very
clear information.

to a journalist, Belgrade representatives claimed to have no information on
Mladic’s whereabouts. Asked whether last time the Prosecutor was in Belgrade
she had given the authorities Mladic’s address, Hartmann said that the Prosecutor
had given them many details concerning his whereabouts over the last year.
This included information concerning all of his visits and travel throughout
Serbia, the method of travel used and by whom he was being protected. These
details were something that she would not give publicly. It was established
that Mladic was in Serbia but she could not comment any further on the issue.

Asked to
confirm that this issue was the main purpose behind the Prosecutor’s visit
to Belgrade next week. Hartmann replied, that the purpose of her visit to
Belgrade and to the other countries in the former Yugoslavia was to discuss
the matter of cooperation, which was linked with the question of the arrest
of fugitives, but also with access to archives and witnesses. All these issues
would be discussed. The OTP would ask Yugoslavia to comply with its obligations
and it would ask Zagreb to do the same. The law was the law. If a Government
had been given an arrest warrant for a fugitive who was in their country,
they had to arrest the fugitive and to hand the fugitive over to The Hague.

Asked what
specific issues the Prosecutor would raise in Zagreb, Hartmann replied that
in Zagreb, as with the other places she would visit, the Prosecutor would
speak about cooperation. This was a regular visit, she concluded.

Asked whether
the Tribunal had reviewed the medical records of General Bobetko, Hartmann
replied that in relation to Bobetko, there was only one thing to be said.
The OTP would continue to insist until Bobetko was arrested that he had to
appear before Judges of the Tribunal. The Government of Croatia was informed
with enough notice prior to the Indictment and arrest warrant being sent,
in order for them to prepare for Bobetko’s arrest. They missed this opportunity.
This did not change anything, the law was the law. There was an arrest warrant
and Bobetko had to appear before the Tribunal.

A journalist
added that in both documents sent by the Croatian authorities to the Tribunal,
it was indicated that further medical information could be made available.
Asked whether this medical information was received by the Tribunal, Landale
replied that he would look into whether further medical information had been
sent. It could be the case that information was sent but that it was confidential
as was often the case for medical information.

Asked whether
he as Spokesman for Registry and Chambers took the same position on the Bobetko
issue, Landale replied that on behalf of the Tribunal he took the same position
as the OTP. The Croatian authorities were in possession of an arrest warrant
and an Indictment and they had a clear legal obligation to act on both of
those documents, to apprehend and transfer Bobetko to the Tribunal.

Asked whether,
concerning witnesses and documents, the OTP had seen any progress in cooperation
from FRY since the establishment of the Council for Cooperation, Hartmann
replied that some elements of cooperation had improved. She added that many
others had not, but that she would leave it to the Prosecutor to address this
issue following her visit in Belgrade. While in Belgrade, Hartmann reiterated
that the Prosecutor would be meeting with Goran Svilanovic, who as well as
being the Minister for Foreign Affairs at the Federal level, was also the
President of the Council for Cooperation.

Asked if she
could clarify reports that the Prosecutor would request President Jorda to
report Yugoslavia’s non-cooperation to the Security Council, and if so, would
President Jorda also be asked to report Croatia at the same time, Hartmann
replied that the visit of the Prosecutor next week had been purposely scheduled
to take place prior to her address to the Security Council at the end of October.
Through the meetings in the former Yugoslavia, the Prosecutor would be able
to asses the situation on cooperation. It was known that the OTP had problems
with the FRY and the Prosecutor had already met with President Jorda to ask
him to address this problem before the Security Council.

added that the President had discussed the issue with the Prosecutor and he
was considering the situation.

Asked for
what reason the amended Indictment against Karadzic had been kept under seal
for two years, Hartmann replied that the amended Indictment against Karadzic,
which was a compilation of the two existing Indictments against him, was kept
under seal because it mentioned the names of two co-accused, members of the
‘joint criminal enterprise’, Krajisnik and Plavsic. When the amended Indictment
was issued, the Indictment and arrest warrants against Krajisnik and Plavsic
were still under seal.

Asked to
confirm her statement made to the press that there would be new Indictments
made against citizens of the FRY, Hartmann replied that the Prosecution would
continue to conduct investigations until the end of 2004. There would be new
Indictments. She would not give any details as to the nature of them. They
would cover the whole of the former Yugoslavia. In the case of Yugoslavia,
there was a long list of suspects who were members of the ‘joint criminal
enterprise’ and who were mentioned in some public documents. If investigations
conducted against them reached their goal, new Indictments would be issued.

Asked whether
this was a subject to be discussed with the representatives during the Prosecutor’s
visit, Hartmann replied that these issues were not to be discussed. It was
the confidential work of the OTP. The representatives knew this.

Hartmann went
on to say that the question obviously related to an interview by the Minister
of Justice of Yugoslavia which discussed Article 39 of the Yugoslav Law on
Cooperation. The OTP had already said that Article 39 of the Yugoslav Law
on Cooperation was not in fitting with the Statute of the Tribunal. Mr. Kostunica
had promised the Council of Europe that he would amend the Law to conform
to the Statute of the Tribunal. She hoped that they would do this. Yugoslavia
had to comply with its obligation and would have to accept new Indictments
and to arrest the people related to those Indictments. There was no time limit
involved, only the Security Council could give a time limit to the Tribunal.

to reports, Carla Del Ponte had once said that it was Kostunica who was protecting
Mladic. Asked whether she would meet him during her visit, Hartmann replied
that the Prosecutor would be meeting the people competent for cooperation
with the Tribunal. At the Federal level she would be meeting Goran Svilanovic,
the leader for the Council for Cooperation with the ICTY. She would also be
meeting some representative of the Serbian Government, as there was some competency
for cooperation matters at the level of the Republic.