Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 11

 1                           Wednesday, 21 September 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The appellant entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.29 a.m.

 5             JUDGE AGIUS:  Good morning, everybody.

 6             Madam Registrar, could you kindly call the case, please.

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

 8     IT-05-87/1-A, the Prosecutor versus Vlastimir Djordjevic.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Madam.  Could I have the appearances for

10     the parties, starting with the Prosecution, please.

11             MR. WOOD:  Good morning, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE AGIUS:  Good morning.

13             MR. WOOD:  Kyle Wood and Christine Dahl for the Prosecution,

14     along with case manager Colin Nawrot.

15             JUDGE AGIUS:  Kyle Wood?

16             MR. WOOD:  Yes, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  And appearances for Appellant

18     Djordjevic.

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] I wish good morning to all,

20     Your Honours.  I am co-counsel, Veljko Djurdjic.  With me is

21     Ms. Marie O'Leary, she is our legal assistant and a member of our team.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you, Mr. Djurdjic.

23             Before I proceed any further, I want to make sure that the

24     Appellant Djordjevic is able to follow the proceedings in a language that

25     he can understand.

Page 12

 1             THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Yes.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.

 3             So this Status Conference, as you know, is called in accordance

 4     with Rule 65 bis of our Rules of Procedure and Evidence.  Rule 65 bis in

 5     its paragraph (B) requires a Status Conference to be convened within

 6     120 days after the filing of a Notice of Appeal and, thereafter, within

 7     120 days after the last Status Conference.  The idea is to allow any

 8     person in custody pending appeal the opportunity to raise issues in

 9     relation thereto, including the mental and physical condition of that

10     person.

11             In the present case, the parties filed their Notices of Appeal,

12     respectively on the 24th of May, 2011, and as you recall the first

13     Status Conference was held and presided over by me on the 30th of May of

14     this year.

15             Today's Status Conference, being the second one, was scheduled by

16     an order signed by me and issued on the 24th of August.  Let's start with

17     the first main issue; namely, the detention conditions and health of

18     Appellant Djordjevic.  First of all, I would like to point out

19     particularly in relation to health issues, if there are any, that should

20     appellant -- should your client, Mr. Djordjevic, wish so, we can discuss

21     these in private session.

22             So let me ask about -- inquire about the status of his detention

23     conditions first.  Are there any problems that your client would like to

24     signal or raise or have discussed?

25             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I am co-counsel

Page 13

 1     Veljko Djurdjic.  As for the health and detention conditions, as regards

 2     my client, there have been no changes, and according to his words,

 3     everything is fine as it is.

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  You have got nothing to add yourself,

 5     Mr. Djordjevic, have you?

 6             THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.  I am fine.

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Now, the second matter that we are

 8     going to deal with is the recent procedural history and what arises in

 9     the wake of what has taken place already.

10             On the 11th of March of this year, as you recall, the parties

11     were granted an extension of time of 60 days to file their Notices of

12     Appeal, this was mainly because of the complexity of the case which was

13     recognised by myself and my colleagues in the Appeals Chamber.  On the

14     24th of May, 2011, both the Prosecution and the Djordjevic Defence filed

15     their respective Notices of Appeal.  The Prosecution presented two

16     grounds of appeal, while Djordjevic presented 19 grounds of appeal.

17             On the 27th of May, 2011, the Djordjevic Defence filed a motion

18     requesting an extension of time and word limit in respect of its appeal

19     brief.  At the Status Conference of a few days after, namely of the

20     30th of May, 2011, and after hearing oral submissions from the parties, I

21     extended the dead-line for filing appeal briefs by seven days up to the

22     15th of August, 2011, and that was applicable for both parties.  In

23     addition, I granted the Djordjevic Defence team an extension of up to

24     15.000 words for its appeal brief.  That brought up the total allowed of

25     4 to 5.000 words.  I also granted the Prosecution the same extension in

Page 14

 1     respect of its brief and response.

 2             Both appellants brief were filed on time on the 15th of August,

 3     and I wish here to thank you both for having been punctual in your

 4     filing.  The respondent's briefs are due no longer than the 26th of

 5     September, namely, in another five days' time, and the briefs and reply

 6     no longer than the 11th of October, 2011.  We need to move forward, and

 7     therefore I enjoin you to comply with these dead-lines to the best of

 8     your abilities.

 9             And I would also like to remind the parties, and this is very

10     important what I am going to say, particularly in relation to the

11     Defence, of the obligation to file public redacted versions of their

12     confidential submissions.  I note that the Prosecution filed already the

13     public redacted version of its appeal brief on 17th August 2011.  To

14     date, however, more than a month later, we have not yet received a public

15     redacted version of the Djordjevic appeal brief.  I encourage the Defence

16     to make this filing as soon as possible, and before I establish the date,

17     I would like to know from you how long do you think it can take you or it

18     would take you to be able to do this?

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would be

20     able to do that after we received the respondent's brief.

21             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, but what does that have to do, because what I

22     am asking for is a -- you filed a confidential appeal brief.  Now you are

23     required to also file a public redacted one; in other words, the brief

24     itself is not going to change depending on what the respondent's brief

25     will contain.  So it's a question of going through what you have already

Page 15

 1     filed confidentially and redact what needs to be redacted so that you can

 2     file it as a public redacted version of the same brief.

 3             So how long do you think -- this should have already been done,

 4     let's say, about a month ago.  So when will you be in a position to do

 5     so?

 6             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, because of the

 7     obligations we had we neglected this obligation, but we will do our best

 8     to submit and file this public redacted version as soon as next week.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  So next week, 29th, all right.  I will

10     give you a little bit more than you have asked for.  I will give you up

11     to the 3rd of October, 3rd of October, to file the public redacted

12     version.  That means not the coming Monday, the Monday after.  So you

13     will have the rest of this week, entire next week, and Monday of the

14     following week.  Okay.  Thank you.

15             As regards the filing, I think I have got nothing else to say.

16     We are expecting, as I said, the brief replies by not later than the

17     11th of October, and at this point I would like to ask you whether there

18     are any issues that you have and that you would like to raise before we

19     conclude.  Start with the Prosecution.

20             MR. WOOD:  Yes, just briefly, Your Honour.  I noticed that you

21     just said the 11th of October for the reply briefs.

22             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.

23             MR. WOOD:  Earlier you had said the 10th of October.  We just

24     want to clarify.  Our calculation also showed the 11th of October would

25     be the due date for the reply briefs.

Page 16

 1             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes.  If I said the 10th, I must have made a

 2     mistake somewhere.  It's the 10th -- 11th of October.

 3             MR. WOOD:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE AGIUS:  Okay.  Thank you.  Any issues, Mr. Djurdjic?

 5             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, yes, I do have an

 6     issue that I would like to raise, perhaps it's a bit too early, but we

 7     are getting closer to the time where the Defence would like to submit --

 8     to file a request for an extension of the dead-line for the represent in

 9     brief, and also an extension -- another extension of the number of words

10     in the appeals brief.  We would request another 15.000 -- to be granted

11     another 15.000 -- 1.500, which would mean that the total would amount to

12     6.000 words.  Now the entire case has 65 pages with the annex -- the

13     indictment, there are 14 municipalities mentioned in the indictment upon

14     which our client was convicted, and also in the Appeals Chamber there --

15     in the appeal's brief there are 19 grounds of appeal mentioned by the

16     Prosecutor.  And you have allowed an extension to the Prosecutor as well

17     to 45.000 words as -- which is the same number of words that you have

18     granted us.  So we believe that this extension would contribute to an

19     efficient unrolling of this -- proceedings and it would allow us to

20     submit all our filings in reasonable time and within a reasonable

21     dead-line.

22             And I just need to mention one more thing:  To date we have yet

23     to receive the translation of the judgement into the language of the

24     client, of my client, the accused, and this would be another reason why

25     we would appeal or why we would request for the extension of the number

Page 17

 1     of words in our appeals brief.

 2             Your Honour, my apologies, but I've just been told by my

 3     assistant that the number of words was not quite precisely recorded in

 4     the transcript.  So we are requesting an extension of the number of words

 5     by 6.000 which would amount to a total of 15.000.  And, of course, an

 6     extension of time for another 15 days, which would then amount to a total

 7     number of 30 days.

 8             JUDGE AGIUS:  Yes, thank you.  The Prosecution have any comments

 9     about that?

10             MR. WOOD:  The Prosecution would not object, Your Honour, to an

11     extension of time, but we would object to an extension of words.  Seeing

12     no particular specific reason for such a grand extension of words, of

13     course, a reply is just that, a reply.  It is limited only to what is in

14     the response.  It's not an opportunity to expand the arguments.  As it

15     stands now, the Prosecution can see no particular special reason for such

16     an extension of words.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE AGIUS:  Thank you.  Let me get this clear, you want an

18     extension, the number of words, of 6.000, an extra 6.000 words?

19             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  In the Sainovic

20     case, which relies on the same factual and legal basis, the Pre-Trial

21     Judge allowed such an increase in terms of the number of words in the

22     reply, from 3.000 up to 9.000 words.  In other words, General Lukic, who

23     was a police general, was accorded 9.000 extra words; General Ojdanic,

24     5.000; and Mr. Sainovic as well as Generals Pavkovic and Lazarevic got

25     3.000 each.  Having in mind that we are alone in these proceedings and

Page 18

 1     that we have to cover all the bases, and also keeping in mind that the

 2     Prosecution will most likely use up its fund of 45.000 words in their

 3     reply, we believed that this increase by 6.000 words suffices in order

 4     for the Defence to do its work properly, in addition to all the other

 5     reasons I specified.

 6                           [Appeals Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 7             JUDGE AGIUS:  So the Trial Chamber, having -- not Trial Chamber,

 8     the Appeals Chamber, having heard the submissions and oral motion from

 9     the Djordjevic Defence, having also heard the response orally from the

10     Prosecution, decides as follows:  In relation to the requested extension

11     of time of 15 days, there being no objection forthcoming from the

12     Prosecution, and because on the face of it the request seems to be

13     justified, the Appeals Chamber accedes to the request and extends the

14     dead-line for the filing of the briefs in reply for both Defence and the

15     Prosecution from the 11th of October to the 26th of October.

16             In relation to the request from the Djordjevic Defence for an

17     additional 6.000 words.  Having heard the response of the Prosecution,

18     which essentially objects to such a request, and having considered the

19     particular circumstances of this appeal, the Appeals Chamber acknowledges

20     that an extension of -- a kind of extension would be warranted, albeit

21     not to the extent requested by the Djordjevic Defence, and accordingly

22     grants an extension of 3.000 words to the Defence team, bringing the

23     total now from 9.000 to 12.000.  That should be more than sufficient,

24     believe me.

25             Are there any other issues?

Page 19

 1             MR. WOOD:  Not for the Prosecution, Your Honour.  No.

 2             JUDGE AGIUS:  Basically when I say there is an extension of

 3     3.000 words, if you want to make use of that facility as well and ask me,

 4     I will grant it, too, but I don't think it's the case.  Okay.

 5             MR. WOOD:  No, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Thank you.

 7             Anything else you would like to raise?

 8             MR. DJURDJIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE AGIUS:  All right.  Thank you.  This concludes today's

10     Status Conference.  I thank the parties for their attendance and adjourn

11     these proceedings.  Thank you.

12                           --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned at

13                           9.53 a.m.