Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 23107

1 Wednesday, 3 December 2003

2 [Open session]

3 --- Upon commencing at 9.09 a.m.

4 [The accused entered court]

5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Good morning. Registrar, could you call the

6 case, please.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. This is case number

8 IT-99-36-T, the Prosecutor versus Radoslav Brdjanin.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you.

10 Mr. Brdjanin, can you follow the proceedings in a language that

11 you can understand?

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. I can.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you. Please take a seat.

14 Appearances, Prosecution.

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

16 Sureta Chana, assisted by Denise Gustin, case manager.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, and good morning to you all.

18 Appearances for Radoslav Brdjanin.

19 MR. ACKERMAN: Good morning, Your Honours. I'm John Ackerman.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: And good morning to you.

21 There were rumours in the corridor that there may be problems with

22 the witness today.

23 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, after proofing at about 9.30 last

24 night we made the decision not to call this witness, and we're now,

25 starting right now the process of proofing the next witness. The result

Page 23108

1 of that is that we've gained about a day. The witness that will be coming

2 tomorrow, will then be finished by Friday and not be held over till

3 Monday. So we've gained at least a day, maybe a day and a half. So we're

4 staying on schedule. In fact, we've improved the schedule. But for

5 reasons that must remain private, we just are not going to call this

6 witness.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Yes, Ms. Korner. I don't know if you need to

8 comment on this, but --

9 MS. KORNER: I don't, Your Honour. I have a rather disappointed

10 Ms. Chana sitting next to me who has done a great deal of work.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: I would imagine. The same doesn't apply only to

12 you; it applies also to us and our secretaries who, between yesterday and

13 today, are preparing the documents for us and us reading the documents, or

14 going through the documents, not necessarily reading them, because most of

15 them we have seen before. But it's a lot of work. Anyway, Mr. Ackerman,

16 I have obviously -- I cannot say anything above your decision. That

17 is -- belongs entirely to you. And we cannot interfere in that.

18 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, I appreciate that, and we of

19 course also did a lot of work.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, yeah. I understand that. I understand that.

21 Probably your problem is bigger than ours, if we really have a problem.

22 But --

23 MR. ACKERMAN: Any speculation as to reasons --

24 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't care. I don't want to know. I wouldn't

25 even try to know. I mean, it's not my business.

Page 23109

1 MR. ACKERMAN: In any event, Witness 34 we'll now have available

2 tomorrow, and we're right on schedule then for next week's witnesses, 40,

3 63, and 64, I think, our schedule for next week.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: Let me just check.

5 MS. KORNER: I thought we had four next week, although I was in

6 fact also wondering how we were going to get through them, as we're

7 sitting a maximum of four days.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's check this out a little bit, Ms. Korner.

9 MS. KORNER: Although I think some of them will be very short.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Today we were supposed to have 31, and he's not

11 coming. Tomorrow we'll have number 34. We have the summary already. This

12 is Bosanski Novi that we're talking of. And we'll finish that witness end

13 of business Friday. If by any chance, Mr. Ackerman, you encounter the

14 same difficulties with this witness, since you're only starting to proof

15 him now... But you don't think you will.

16 MR. ACKERMAN: No. We won't with him. We've had more than one

17 opportunity to be with him. The problem -- I'm not going to go into it.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. No, no. But in case, just let us know in

19 good time, all right? Because we have enough work to concentrate upon if

20 we find the time.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: Unfortunately, because of the schedule we were on

22 yesterday, with an afternoon session --

23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, I know that, Mr. Ackerman.

24 MR. ACKERMAN: We couldn't -- there was no earlier time that we

25 could have let you know --

Page 23110

1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Let's look into next week. Next week the

2 first witness will be number 40.


4 JUDGE AGIUS: And he is scheduled to testify for one and a half

5 days.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: And this is the protected witness.

7 MS. KORNER: Yes, Your Honour. I think I can say that it -- if --

8 I don't know who -- whether Mr. Ackerman or Mr. Cunningham is calling him

9 but he's not likely to be very long.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Then we have number 63, who will last

11 one day.

12 MR. ACKERMAN: That's a very short witness, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: And then I have at least on my list number 64.


15 JUDGE AGIUS: Who will also -- is also anticipated to last one

16 day.

17 MR. ACKERMAN: Maybe less. And then number 11.

18 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, with him, I wouldn't be so sure. He's a

19 different category.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: I see. Do you think you will bring forward also

21 number 11 for next week?

22 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes. All four of them will be here, Your Honour.

23 And I think there's a real good chance we'll finish all four of them

24 because some of them are just very short.

25 JUDGE AGIUS: Because then on Thursday, as I explained, we have a

Page 23111

1 plenary Thursday and Friday and you were supposed to come back to us and

2 tell us whether you want to work on Thursday morning.

3 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes we do.

4 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I thought we both do, yes.

5 MR. ACKERMAN: We both want to do that.

6 MS. KORNER: Yes.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So, registrar, please, could you communicate

8 this decision to Carline, telling her that we intend to work on Thursday

9 morning and that she should try to find us a courtroom. It seems that

10 there is Courtroom I available. No. That's Courtroom I. There seems to

11 be only Courtroom III available, if it's still available, but I would say

12 that it should be. Because Blagojevic is meeting in Courtroom II, yes?

13 All right?

14 THE REGISTRAR: Very well, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: And if she can confirm to you as early as possible

16 so that we let both parties know that it is okay.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Very well, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we better schedule a sitting for the 11th,

19 just in case we don't finish these four witnesses. I mean, I prefer to be

20 on the safe side rather than risk keeping someone then for four days, five

21 days, to testify for half an hour or so.

22 Yes. So that settles the first incident.

23 Second incident.

24 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, it enables me perhaps to take a little

25 more time than I would otherwise have done on the question of

Page 23112

1 Your Honour's rulings now that we've had the written judgement.

2 Your Honour, it relates specifically and only to one ruling that

3 Your Honours made, referred to in paragraph 30 of the judgement. I don't

4 know whether Your Honours brought it with you this morning.


6 [Trial Chamber confers]


8 MS. KORNER: Effectively, if I can summarise this: My application

9 is really a threefold further in the alternative application. The first

10 is for Your Honours perhaps to clarify that ruling. Secondly, if that is

11 perhaps not the best way of dealing with it, to reconsider; and thirdly,

12 and as a last resort, to grant a certificate for an appeal.

13 Your Honours ruled that counts 1 and 2, there was sufficient

14 evidence to proceed under the various heads of liability, save for --

15 JUDGE AGIUS: The type of joint --

16 MS. KORNER: Exactly, the third type of joint criminal enterprise,

17 the third category of joint criminal enterprise. And Your Honours stated,

18 in paragraph 30, that in order to arrive at a conviction for genocide

19 under Article 43(A), the specific intent for genocide must be met. And as

20 explained further in paragraphs 55 to 57 below, this specific intent is

21 incompatible with the notion of genocide as a natural and foreseeable

22 consequence of a crime other than genocide agreed to by the members of the

23 JCE.

24 Then Your Honour said this, and this is, if I may respectfully

25 submit, a slight complication. For this reason, the Trial Chamber finds

Page 23113

1 that there's no case to answer with respect to count 1 in the context of

2 the third category. Now, in actual fact, Your Honours found there was a

3 case to answer, but said that, as I understand it, that as a matter of

4 law, the third category of --

5 JUDGE AGIUS: You are perfectly right. Yes, but I can read her

6 exactly. I know what the point of law is. Yes, you are right. If you're

7 talking of first category of joint criminal enterprise in relation to

8 genocide and complicity in genocide, yes.

9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's what I understood.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. Exactly, yes.

11 MS. KORNER: But Your Honour, can I put it this way: Your Honours

12 have excluded, as I understand it, and that's the clarification I'm asking

13 for - any further address at the conclusion of the case under that

14 particular category, which is a mode of liability of committing an

15 offence. Well, Your Honours, if I'm right in that, then my application is

16 for Your Honours to reconsider that matter. That's my first application.

17 For this reason: At the moment, there is no authority at all on this

18 particular category at this mode of commission of an offence from the

19 Appeals Chamber.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: There is Stakic who decided the same thing.

21 MS. KORNER: And Stakic is now under appeal, but we haven't had a

22 ruling yet.

23 JUDGE AGIUS: I know that. I'm fully aware of it.

24 MS. KORNER: Your Honours, therefore it is really our respectful

25 submission that whether or not at the end of the day this is the right

Page 23114

1 category for this particular case, nonetheless, at this stage,

2 Your Honours perhaps might reconsider a ruling that would preclude any

3 further address to Your Honours, particularly in the light of the fact

4 that, A, the Stakic matter is under appeal, whether that's heard or not

5 before the end of this case is another matter.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: That's true.

7 MS. KORNER: But the Krstic matter may also deal with that,

8 because there the whole concept of whether or not genocide applies to that

9 particular incident is under review at this moment. And I think it's more

10 than likely, indeed I'm sure that there will be a judgement in that.

11 JUDGE AGIUS: Definitely I would imagine so, and I would expect

12 so. I mean, that's our anticipation.

13 MS. KORNER: Absolutely. And I think that may, we hope, solve a

14 great deal of many of the problems. But what I'm asking Your Honours to

15 do at this stage is not to exclude, by virtue of this ruling, any further

16 address on the topic of whether or not the concept of joint criminal

17 enterprise in its third form can be allowed to be applied to the facts of

18 this case. That's really what I'm asking Your Honours to reconsider.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: To the facts of this case? I think we need to be

20 specific, because what we decided here, and I think we tried to make

21 ourselves as clear as possible, without going into much detail, because,

22 as you've said, this is something that is sub judice in the Stakic case

23 before the Appeals Chamber. And it would be very important for us if we

24 got a pronouncement from the Appeals Chamber definitively on this matter.

25 But, however, pending that, the conclusion that we arrived at was that you

Page 23115

1 couldn't reconcile the concept of what lies at the basis of the third

2 category of joint criminal enterprise within the context of genocide,

3 which requires a very specific -- according to, at least, to the

4 mainstream of the case, because there is divergence even there.

5 But -- and that was our conclusion and we amplified on that for the

6 purpose of allowing you space to appeal and for being -- providing

7 ourselves with a sufficient ground for certification. And then in

8 paragraphs 55 and 57. Because we do consider that this is something which

9 is absolutely important.

10 Now, the position from a strictly legal point of view, as I see

11 it - and you, as a lawyer and Mr. Ackerman as a lawyer, will certainly

12 agree with me - is this: Leaving aside the option of reconsidering, for

13 the time being, there are two possibilities: One is letting things stay

14 as they are; the other one is going to appeal, which would involve

15 certification on our part. I don't know. We haven't obviously come to a

16 decision on that. But I personally do concede this is a very important

17 matter, so --

18 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, that's why I was quite urgent

19 about raising it.

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Let me finish. What would be the legal

21 consequences, taking these two options? If there is an appeal, then

22 obviously our decision on this matter will be considered to be sub judice

23 by ourselves in the first place because it will be pending an appeal. So

24 at that point in time, at that point in time, we will need to discuss

25 whether we would entertain in due course any further submissions on the

Page 23116

1 matter in case the situation does not change between now and the closing

2 arguments that we will get sometime in March/April. I don't know when

3 that's going to happen. I do not anticipate at the time that the Stakic

4 appeal would be finished. I don't know. But I can't say that with

5 authority, anyway, because I don't know.

6 It may be easier for the Appeals Chamber maybe to decide just this

7 one issue, if it's the case, especially since there would be a trial

8 pending. That's -- if matters stay as they are, then obviously I don't

9 think that there should be any other legal consequence except for our

10 decision to take effect, the legal terms for filing an application for

11 appeal having lapsed. So at that point in time, I would consider our

12 decision to have become res judicata, with all the legal effects that it

13 would carry.

14 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour -- sorry.


16 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's really -- it would be, in our

17 submission, Your Honours, simpler if the matter were dealt with at the end

18 of the case. One of the submissions, obviously, we would be making is at

19 this stage of the case, that for Your Honours to make a legal finding like

20 that goes beyond the scope of Rule 98. But the second would obviously be

21 that -- that would be our submission, that Your Honours - and I say this

22 with great respect because I know it's a complicated topic, this - having

23 effectively found that the third category of joint criminal enterprise

24 applies to other crimes of specific intent, such as persecution and

25 torture, both of which require specific intent, should not have made the

Page 23117

1 difference, certainly not at this stage, between genocide, which although

2 it's a high intent, is still nonetheless a crime of specific intent, and

3 that the mens rea, our submission would be, is that which is required to

4 be a party to a joint criminal enterprise rather than the specific offence

5 itself. And that's the complication.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: We are fully aware of the complication. This is one

7 matter that we obviously discussed, as you can imagine, during our

8 deliberations, particularly with regard to persecution. But we came to

9 the conclusion that there is a difference, but we also came to the

10 conclusion that within the Rule 98 parameters, as established by previous

11 case-law of this Tribunal, that was -- I disagree completely with you.

12 That was something that we could decide. There are several decisions that

13 delineate or establish the parameters, both as regards findings on matters

14 of law and as regards facts. Of course, as you can imagine, there is

15 always this dichotomy between the civil law tradition and the common law

16 tradition, because --

17 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, it's not that --

18 JUDGE AGIUS: But again, I mean --

19 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, of course Your Honour has an absolute

20 right at the stage at the end of the Prosecution case to say: There is no

21 evidence to support a count. Our submission would be that it's not quite

22 the same when you say: You cannot have, as part of the remainder of the

23 case. We find there is evidence on the count and we're allowing the count

24 to proceed, but not under a particular mode of liability. That's the

25 difference.

Page 23118

1 JUDGE AGIUS: But there are general principles of law, general

2 principles of law, Ms. Korner, for example, one of nulla poena sine lege

3 and nullum crimen sine lege.

4 MS. KORNER: Judge Schomburg is very fond of that word.

5 JUDGE AGIUS: These are fundamental in any criminal law system, be

6 it civil or be it common-law-based, and those matters transcend the usual

7 or accepted practice in exercises like that contemplated in Rule 98 here,

8 which I better not elaborate on, because it's a system which has been

9 adopted from the common law tradition, where the judge or magistrate who

10 decides that matter is usually not going to be the judge or magistrate who

11 will decide the merits of the case later on, and most of the time the

12 merits being left in the hands of lay jurors. But here we have got this

13 hybrid animal of transporting the common law principle and putting us in

14 the anomalous situation where we have to acknowledge that we -- the three

15 of us suffer from schizophrenia. We have to convince ourselves that we

16 are not going to be the Judges that will eventually try this case at the

17 end and just put ourselves in -- anyway, it's an awkward -- believe me,

18 it's the first time I'm doing this in my life, knowing that I'm going to

19 be the judge who will decide the issue later on, together with Judge Janu

20 and Judge Taya, and trying to convince Judge Janu and Judge Taya and

21 myself, forget about that, just imagine that's going to be someone else.

22 But I still believe that, apart from that exercise, Ms. Korner,

23 there is basic principles of law. If the Prosecution comes forward, for

24 example, with an invented crime, something that does not exist, then the

25 finding of the Trial Chamber at the committal stage - I'm using a language

Page 23119

1 that you will understand, makes it easier for me to explain - at that

2 point in time, yes. I mean, there is no judge in a common law tradition

3 that acknowledges and sees that there is no such crime in the Statute and

4 gives the go-ahead; there is a prima facie case to answer and sends

5 everything to the director or public prosecutions or whatever you have now

6 in England and Wales and say you can issue an indictment. And again, I

7 don't know exactly how it works in the States, Mr. Ackerman, but this

8 exercise is done in the common law jurisdictions in order to authorise the

9 formulation and issue of an indictment, while here we operate on an

10 indictment which has been confirmed already before the trial even begins.

11 So it's --

12 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I don't want to take -- then if

13 Your Honours take the view that you wouldn't reconsider that ruling --

14 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm not saying that. I mean, that is a decision

15 which I cannot obviously take on my own, or even assume or assume on my

16 own. We need to discuss it. If we are not sitting today, we can perhaps

17 discuss it in the course of this morning.

18 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, may I -- we have only seven days.

19 Then my, as I say, my alternative application that Your Honours grant a

20 certification for appeal, because we would have to file by Friday, which

21 is why I tried to ask yesterday, but we got a bit caught up.

22 [Trial Chamber confers]

23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Because I can tell you why we are not

24 prone to reconsider, Ms. Korner, because we gave this matter a lot of

25 thought, and it was, obviously, a decision that needed to be taken whether

Page 23120

1 to group it together with persecution, torture, where also as you rightly

2 pointed out specific intent is needed, or whether to select it and keep it

3 separate from the other two for reasons that we briefly hint at in

4 paragraphs 55 to 57. And that's the decision we took. Obviously, there

5 was a big temptation to go into persecution as well, more than in torture.

6 But genocide was also, as far as the factual basis is concerned, something

7 on which we were divided, as you know.

8 MS. KORNER: I do.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: But that's also one point that you need to keep in

10 mind.

11 So it will be difficult for us to go back on the decision which

12 was taken unanimously, I may say. If you're asking for certification, I

13 just hear what Mr. Ackerman has to say on the matter and we will decide.

14 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I really have very little to say.

15 JUDGE AGIUS: I imagine so.

16 MR. ACKERMAN: Except, I suppose, this: I'm a bit astounded by

17 the proposition that you should not decide a matter if it's not been

18 decided by the Appeals Chamber, because that would just stop the law in

19 its tracks. That's how you get to the Appeal Chamber --

20 JUDGE AGIUS: Let me interrupt you for a moment, Mr. Ackerman.

21 You've obviously read, I would imagine, more than once our decision.

22 There are areas where we put the two or three versions merging from

23 case-law, ours and Rwanda Tribunal, and specified that we are reaching our

24 decisions this way and not that way, because either the matter is still

25 pending before the Appeals Chamber or because we simply disagree

Page 23121

1 completely with --

2 MR. ACKERMAN: I understand that.

3 JUDGE AGIUS: So we did not adopt a firm and uniform approach in

4 each and every matter, on each and every matter that was -- or that is

5 still pending before the appeal. There are certain areas where we decided

6 we ought to be categoric and straightforward, saying we agree with this,

7 we don't agree with that. And even in footnotes, as you may have seen,

8 there are principles that were pronounced in Stakic that we adopted. But

9 in part we disagree with them, so we said it. And this is all pending

10 before the Appeals Chamber. But there are other -- we do not consider

11 ourselves bound not to pronounce ourselves on a matter simply because it's

12 not been pronounced before by the Appeals Chamber.

13 MR. ACKERMAN: Just very briefly: It seems to me that there is a

14 procedure under which one can request relief if they're not happy with a

15 decision that you've made. That procedure is to request certification.

16 That's been done. If you grant certification, I can't complain about

17 that. But I don't think you should reconsider. You spent a long, long

18 time working on this. It's evident that you put a lot of your time and

19 effort and toil into it. I think you ought to stay where you are, and if

20 she wants to appeal it, then you want to let her do that, then fine. Go

21 ahead.

22 JUDGE AGIUS: Obviously, I'm fully trained to write judgements

23 which are unappealable or inappealable, Mr. Ackerman. I had earned quite

24 a reputation in the first years of my career in that, when I just wanted

25 to make sure that any appeal would fail, I was an expert at that. But you

Page 23122

1 can read the decision, and we wrote it in a way which specifically allows

2 you for an appeal, because we do consider this matter important. I mean,

3 it was not a decision that we reached lightly, as you can imagine. Also,

4 I am revealing that we discussed matters relating -- identical matters

5 relating to other crimes that show up in the indictment. But we decided

6 to select this and to omit the others precisely for a purpose.

7 Yes. So I think we can grant certification here and now orally.

8 MS. KORNER: Thank you very much.

9 JUDGE AGIUS: We are granting certification, Ms. Korner, on the

10 basis that we think that this is a matter which, under the Rules, deserves

11 to be considered by the Appeals Chamber, and it will speed up the

12 proceedings and also put us in a better position, hopefully, to be able to

13 have a clear picture on what the state of law is on this matter before we

14 come to the final stages of this trial.

15 MS. KORNER: Thank you, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE AGIUS: And on my part, I will do my best, I will promise

17 you -- I promise you, to try and, if it is at all possible, to try to send

18 a message to the Appeals Chamber that this is a matter that really is

19 important for us and we would appreciate if it is decided in good time

20 before we reach our final decision.

21 At that point in time, at this point in time, we will need to

22 decide at a later stage whether to allow submissions on the third category

23 of joint criminal enterprise responsibility, relating to counts 1 and 2,

24 but I think this is something that we have not discussed amongst

25 ourselves, and I would rather reserve our position on this until later, if

Page 23123

1 we need to come to it.

2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I know the difficulties, of course, that

3 we know that the Appeals Chamber has now really appeals stacked up. But I

4 think, if we can say that Your Honours -- it is likely that final briefs

5 will be delivered in March in this case.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: I reckon according to --

7 MS. KORNER: And therefore, we could have a ruling in March.

8 JUDGE AGIUS: The schedule that we have here would

9 probably -- closing arguments and briefs, we're talking of April,

10 Ms. Korner. We're talking probably of April. No. No, no, no. Sorry.

11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, if the evidence ends on February 12th --

12 JUDGE AGIUS: End of March. End of March.

13 MS. KORNER: That's what I rather assumed, yes.

14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. So is there anything else you'd like to

15 discuss? Yes.

16 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

17 MS. KORNER: And, Your Honour, we're still tomorrow afternoon, can

18 I confirm.

19 JUDGE AGIUS: Tomorrow is in the afternoon.

20 MS. KORNER: Right. Thank you.

21 MR. ACKERMAN: I have a question about tomorrow afternoon. We

22 have that -- you have that hearing at 4.00. I assume that is going to be

23 rather short and we will then resume our work once that's completed.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: Actually, we were meeting later on this morning with

25 our staff to see exactly --

Page 23124

1 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the president, please.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: -- how best to go about it not to disturb this case.

3 No. As I said, it's an Initial Appearance -- I think -- I don't

4 anticipate it to take more than -- certainly not more than half an hour,

5 or probably even much less than that, because it's a procedure which is

6 different from the normal trial procedure, and had it depended entirely on

7 me, we would have started and finished everything tomorrow, but --

8 MS. KORNER: I think Your Honours invited us to be present, but if

9 it's to be in Courtroom II.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: I didn't invite you.

11 MS. KORNER: You said we could be present.

12 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. If you want to be present, you're both

13 free to --

14 MS. KORNER: Well, I think probably we both would, but I'm not

15 sure how we can get everybody into court -- it's going to be in this court

16 again, is it?

17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. But we can try. And the decision to be taken

18 is whether to leave that until the very end of the day's hearing, say we

19 stop at 6.30 and then we have the Maglov hearing and we finish it at 7.00.

20 That's one option. Or have it in between.

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 JUDGE AGIUS: But in any case, it's not going to take any of our

23 time. And if we can shift to another courtroom, it will be even easier.

24 MR. ACKERMAN: If you look at the public schedule, it looks like

25 our trial finishes about 3.45. That hearing is at 4.00 and that ends the

Page 23125

1 day.

2 JUDGE AGIUS: But it wasn't meant to be like that, Mr. Ackerman.

3 MR. ACKERMAN: I understand that.

4 JUDGE AGIUS: I told you that already. I don't know whether you

5 were present here.

6 MR. ACKERMAN: I think I wasn't.

7 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think you were, in fact, but I made that

8 clear that that wasn't going to be the case. We would stop for about half

9 an hour. Ms. Korner actually asked what was going to happen and I said

10 we'll stop for half an hour, if possible, change courtroom, even to gain

11 that quarter of an hour break, but that was it, I mean. All right? So we

12 stand adjourned for today and we will resume our labours tomorrow,

13 Thursday, at 2.15. Yes. The understanding, when I say Maglov, I invite

14 you to be present, that applies also to the accused, if he wants to be

15 present, but it's up to him. For the Maglov proceedings, in other words.

16 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, for these purposes, I'm not sure --

17 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know, but I want to make it clear that I'm

18 not excluding him.

19 MR. ACKERMAN: I don't think either of us will be here,

20 Your Honour.

21 JUDGE AGIUS: I doubt whether you really have an interest, but

22 it's up to you.

23 Thank you. Have a nice day, and we'll meet tomorrow afternoon.

24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 9.49 a.m.,

25 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 4th day of

Page 23126

1 December 2003, at 2.15 p.m.