Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 1

1 Thursday, 14 July 2005

2 [Open session]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.

5 JUDGE LIU: Call the case, please, Mr. Court Deputy.

6 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case number

7 IT-01-48-T, the Prosecutor versus Sefer Halilovic.

8 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

9 We have heard some new developments in the Defence case so first

10 of all, I would like to ask Mr. Morrissey to brief us the status of the

11 Defence case at this moment.

12 MR. MORRISSEY: Defence case is about to close, Your Honour.

13 There remains -- I think we indicated in a memo that may have come to the

14 Court's attention that the Defence conducted some discussions with the

15 Prosecution in the past, and following those discussions, a decision was

16 taken to call no further evidence. The witness -- there were two 92 bis

17 witnesses and one live witness who was still outstanding. One witness --

18 there has been a resolution to that witness by discussions between the

19 parties, whereby the Defence doesn't rely on a particular paragraph, and

20 that was the witness Sahirlic [phoen] and the Defence agreeing not to rely

21 upon paragraph 13 of that statement. The Prosecution thereafter does not

22 wish to cross-examine that witness and the rest of the statement can

23 simply be admitted as a 92 bis statement.

24 As to the 92 bis or previous 92 bis witness Malinovic, he is not

25 going to be called and we withdraw his statement altogether. Following on

Page 2

1 the witness, Witness J, who gave evidence in the course undertaken by the

2 Prosecutor then, we had discussions with the Prosecutor and it was

3 indicated to us at that time clearly and on more than one occasion that no

4 rebuttal evidence was to be led. As a result of that we determined not to

5 call Jusuf Hero at all and we've removed him and that's the situation and

6 that's been communicated of course to him and to the witnesses.

7 What's remaining in the Defence case is a number of residual

8 matters. There is outstanding the matter of some agreed facts which arose

9 at a time when a witness Bahrudin Comor was proposed to be called. The

10 Defence and Prosecution had some discussions there and reached agreement

11 on some agreed facts concerning the military security service and as a

12 result of that agreement, the Defence does not -- and we've indicated this

13 before, does not propose to call Bahrudin Comor. Now, the way in which

14 that agreed fact is proposed to be handled is that we have drafted a

15 motion that's being filed, the contents of the motion are known to the

16 Prosecutor and we understand that they consent to that course being taken

17 so that what will occur is that four agreed facts concerning the military

18 security service will become part of the trial evidence and in addition to

19 that, another document will be admitted into the evidence, that being a

20 law on district military courts, and that document is an attachment to the

21 motion which was filed this morning, and Your Honours will receive.

22 For the sake of the trial record, I'll read into the transcript

23 the agreed facts concerning the military security service which found --

24 which are part of that motion.

25 It's headed "Agreed facts concerning the military security

Page 3

1 service."

2 "1: The responsibilities and competencies of the military

3 security service [the SVB] in Bosnia in 1993 were contained in the rule

4 for the military security service [Exhibit 137 in this trial].

5 "2: Under rules 39 and 40 of the rule for the military security

6 service the military security service had the duty to investigate crimes

7 within its competence.

8 "3: The investigation of a crime of murder, if suspected to be

9 committed by a member of the military, was within the competence of the

10 military security service.

11 "4: Under rule 41 of the rule for the military security service,

12 the military security service had the duty to submit a criminal report to

13 the relevant military prosecutor once in possession of sufficient

14 information to warrant doing so."

15 Your Honour, those are the agreed facts or stipulations which have

16 been annexed as annex A to the motion that's coming. Annex B contains the

17 rule on the military courts and the reason for that being tendered I make

18 clear is a quite limited one. Article 25 of that body imports into the

19 jurisdiction of the military courts and the military security service the

20 ability to deal with the crime of murder. And therefore, it gives them

21 the jurisdiction to deal with that -- that matter.

22 So that's the agreed facts issue. There are then also outstanding

23 some documents which -- a list of which has been provided to the

24 Prosecution, some may be agreed to. A short motion seeking the admission

25 of those without the need to call further evidence will be filed in

Page 4

1 respect of any that cannot be agreed but in any event we expect that to be

2 done this afternoon so that's a very swift matter.

3 And subject to a couple of matters that Mr. Mettraux wants to

4 raise now, that is -- that will be the end of proceedings. So the Defence

5 case is effectively closed now and that's the report, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Could I get confirmation from

7 the Prosecution concerning of the four points about the agreed facts.

8 MR. WEINER: With regard to the four points I would like to speak

9 to Defence counsel at the break. There is just a wording issue on the

10 first one, again. I just want to change one bit -- or just straighten out

11 one wording issue. But other than that, there is an agreement. I just

12 want to check on one wording issue.

13 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Thank you.

14 Concerning of the Rule 92 bis statement of Mr. Sahirlic, we have

15 an oral ruling to make.

16 The Trial Chamber received a Defence motion concerning the

17 admission of abridged statement of Witness pursuant to Rule 92 bis on the

18 13th July 2005.

19 The Defence submits that the parties have agreed to the admission

20 of the statement of 92 bis witness Sahirlic in a redacted form. The Trial

21 Chamber decided on the 8th July, 2005, that the statement of Witness

22 Sahirlic would be admitted with cross-examination on the subject of the

23 investigation into the events in Grabovica. The subject of investigation

24 is primarily mentioned by the witness in paragraph 13 of his statement,

25 which paragraph we will now redact from the statement. The Trial Chamber

Page 5

1 therefore admits the statement of Witness Sahirlic in its redacted form

2 without cross-examination.

3 The statement in this redacted form will replace the statement

4 admitted on the 8th July 2005.

5 It is so decided.

6 MR. MORRISSEY: Could I just indicate that our mission is going to

7 occur early next week concerning the 892 bis statements and, Your Honours,

8 he's now included in that regime of statement-taking.

9 JUDGE LIU: I see. There is another matter, that is there was a

10 second statement of 92 bis statement of Witness Sesko who was mentioned in

11 the first 92 bis motion but as it was not attached to the motion, the

12 Trial Chamber did not decide on it. I wonder whether there is any

13 applications for the admission of that second statement from the side of

14 Defence.

15 MR. METTRAUX: Good afternoon, Your Honour, yes, we've made a

16 short application this afternoon. We understood that this motion would

17 have been received by Your Honour but we've also been in touch with the

18 Prosecution and the Prosecution has indicated they would have no objection

19 to the statement being admitted through 92 bis without cross-examination.

20 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.

21 Mr. Weiner?

22 MR. WEINER: Yes, it's pretty much consistent with the first

23 statement. There is no objection, Your Honour.

24 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much indeed.

25 Well, at this stage I have a question addressed to the

Page 6

1 Prosecution. I believe at this stage, Mr. Weiner, you are in the position

2 to inform us whether you would like to have some rebuttal procedure.

3 MR. WEINER: Two documents, Your Honour, I want to discuss. One

4 was we filed a motion for certification, requesting certification

5 yesterday in relation to the 1996 statement of the defendant, or of the

6 accused, and we also filed today a request for a 92 bis witness statement

7 in relation to a potential rebuttal witness. It was filed with the

8 Registry. We notified the Defence yesterday, notified them that we would

9 definitely be filing today and I notified the legal officer we were filing

10 it.

11 JUDGE LIU: You mean at this moment, you are not in the position

12 to say whether you would like to have the rebuttal or not --

13 MR. WEINER: No.

14 JUDGE LIU: -- pending on those two decisions?

15 MR. WEINER: No. One decision the certification makes no

16 difference with regard to rebuttal. The -- but we did file requesting

17 that one witness be -- a 92 bis witness or 92 bis witness statement be

18 received as rebuttal. That's what we've requested today.

19 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Well, since you have filed that

20 92 bis statement motion, I would like to know how soon the Defence will be

21 in a position to make a reply concerning the admission of those two

22 statements. Yes?

23 MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honours, I think we can reply as swiftly as

24 possible; we can do this over the weekend and endeavour to reply by

25 Monday. But I have to correct unfortunately something that was said by my

Page 7

1 learned friend there. My learned friend said that we notified the Defence

2 yesterday, notified them that we would definitely be filing today. That's

3 not accurate. We were notified yesterday that he was thinking about it

4 and that he would take a decision overnight.

5 MR. WEINER: That's not clear from what I said in the transcript.

6 I said we notified them yesterday and notified them today that we would

7 definitely be filing.

8 MR. MORRISSEY: That's correct. That is correct. It must be a

9 transcript --

10 MR. WEINER: That's incorrect in the transcript.

11 JUDGE LIU: I don't think this issue is a substantial one.

12 MR. MORRISSEY: No, no. Well, Your Honour, my friend's correction

13 is correct and it must have been a transcript issue.

14 Your Honours, as to dealing with that matter, we are very

15 disappointed about it but perhaps we should reply properly in a motion and

16 point to the reasons why we are disappointed and what's relevant to you in

17 making the decision rather than an off-the-cuff speech at this stage if

18 that's suitable to the Court. We will endeavour to reply to these as

19 quickly as possible. We haven't seen it yet. But there are some quite

20 clear reasons why we would oppose any such step being taken and we will

21 respond to that strongly on Monday. We will undertake to file this matter

22 Monday.

23 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Thank you.

24 And I believe there is some other matters that Mr. Mettraux would

25 like to brief us.

Page 8

1 MR. METTRAUX: Well, Your Honour, just one in response to

2 Your Honour's query which was the 96 statement. The response of the

3 Defence will be filed first thing tomorrow morning.

4 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Thank you very much.

5 Well, as for the final briefs, I believe that the other day we set

6 a date for the parties to file their final briefs. That will be on the

7 15th of August, Monday, and considering that the Appeals Chamber is seized

8 with the motion for the appeal filed by the Defence, I wonder whether the

9 Appeals Chamber could make a decision during the summer recess. So we

10 decided to postpone the date until the 22nd of August so that to give the

11 Appeals Chamber some time after the summer recess to deal with this

12 matter. So on the 22nd of August, I hope we could receive the final

13 briefs from both parties. And on the 25th and the 26th, we'll have the

14 final argument by both parties. The time for each party will be less than

15 three hours, since we have already had your final brief at our hands, we

16 could read the contents in that. Yes, Mr. Weiner?

17 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, we have some concerns concerning the

18 schedule because we will be filing a brief without knowing whether or not

19 that evidence is in fact admissible. That's our first concern. Our

20 second concern is that we could be arguing without knowing whether or not

21 that evidence is admissible, if the decision does not come down as quickly

22 as we hope for it to happen.

23 If the decision does not come down by the 25th or 26th, is it the

24 Court's plan to go ahead and argue anyways? Is one question. And the

25 second question is: If that -- if the Court does in fact affirm this

Page 9

1 trial court's decision or Trial Chamber's decision, will the Defence

2 decide to call evidence during the week of the 22nd? Or are they waving

3 their right to call additional evidence? Because if they are calling

4 evidence, then we are off probably another week or two.

5 JUDGE LIU: Well, I believe this is just preliminary date or

6 deadlines, and I believe that one of the purposes for us to grant the

7 appeal is that those appeals will facilitate the proceedings of the

8 trials. I don't hope that this will prevent us with our proceedings in

9 the Trial Chamber, and I hope we could get the decisions by the Appeals

10 Chamber in the first week after the summer recess. Once we get it, we'll

11 go ahead, but if we failed, I believe that the parties may make a request

12 to postpone the final dates but at this stage we have to set a kind of

13 deadline so that to keep everybody busy during the summer recess.

14 Yes, Mr. Morrissey?

15 MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honours, could I just respond to a couple of

16 matters raised there? As to the deadlines, the position that faces the

17 Defence team is always slightly different to that facing the Prosecution

18 because we are not employees and all of us are simply engaged for this one

19 case and therefore as a matter of the convenience of counsel and of other

20 team members it's important for to us get as much certainty as we can

21 about the dates. I appreciate that Your Honours are in the position that

22 you've indicated but we could certainly ask that to the extent it is

23 possible to do so, that the dates that have been given are complied with

24 because a point gets reached at which counsel are simply stranded in

25 The Hague without employment and that's a genuine issue.

Page 10

1 Secondly, we urge the Chamber to stick with the current schedule.

2 We think it's appropriate to work to prepare for that. We think we can

3 prepare for the -- either contingency, as to whether the interview is

4 admitted or not. If we need time we can ask you for time later and we

5 think it's best to prepare as best we can now and then if we find

6 ourselves embarrassed later we will tell you and ask for some extra time.

7 That seems to be the best approach.

8 Thirdly, could I just mention the issue of the length of closing

9 addresses? I hadn't come prepared to consider exactly how long I thought

10 I needed and how long the Tribunal thought was appropriate to award. I'd

11 like to give some thought to that and if we think we needed more time to

12 raise that matter with the Tribunal and indicate why it is that we thought

13 we did. My feeling now is that we may wish for some more time than that,

14 but once we've commenced the work on the brief it may be easier to

15 indicate that and to tell you why, if we do want more, that we do. So

16 we'll give you a reasoned basis rather than just wanting more air space,

17 Your Honours.

18 Those are the matters to raise.

19 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Well, I'll be very reluctant to

20 put any pressures on the Appeals Chamber for them to render their

21 decisions but however I could ask the Registrar or court deputy to convey

22 the views from the parties to them. They could read the transcript of our

23 proceedings and get a sense of the urgency of this case.

24 Thank you.

25 MR. WEINER: Your Honour, also related to that, I believe and the

Page 11

1 Registrar could check, we have no exhibit number at this time as to the --

2 as to the 2001 interview, and we would like it so we could at least refer

3 to it in our briefs.

4 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Well, I'll ask the Court deputy to assign a

5 number to it, if there is one.

6 MR. WEINER: Thank you.

7 MR. MORRISSEY: My friend has just raised a matter. Sorry,

8 Your Honour, I should have raised this before. With respect to the agreed

9 facts my friend has indicated here in court that he has a concern about

10 one part of those. I want this matter to be concluded. I wonder if the

11 Chamber would allow us now a short period of time to discuss before we

12 finish for the day so that we could come back to court and indicate that

13 that matter is dealt with.

14 MR. WEINER: We agree. A short break would be sufficient.

15 JUDGE LIU: Well, let us finish all the matters on our agenda

16 first, and then we'll break for 30 minutes or whatever the parties need

17 and then we'll resume to solve the last matter.

18 MR. MORRISSEY: Thank you, Your Honour.

19 MR. WEINER: One more question in relation to the record of

20 interview. We had asked and I just want to check for the record if

21 Defence is ready to say it at this time: Are they planning to call any

22 more evidence based on the decision one way or another? That was one of

23 the factors which you allowed certification and, just for scheduling, is

24 there a plan to call any additional evidence?

25 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Morrissey?

Page 12

1 MR. MORRISSEY: Well, Your Honours, we would have to see the terms

2 of the appeal judgement before entering any such comment. You can

3 obviously discern that we have run a very short Defence case here. But I

4 could not give any undertaking about it without seeing a judgement of

5 course. It would just be irresponsible to say anything on that topic. It

6 really depends on the terms of any judgement that might come. However,

7 you should be observe in terms of trial planning that we've called three

8 live witnesses.

9 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.

10 Well, I believe that Defence filed a motion for the provisional

11 release on the 6th July. Originally we have already said that we are not

12 going to consider it until the case is over. But now the Defence case is

13 closing earlier than we had expected so I believe that this Bench is still

14 seized with that motion. So I would like to know whether the Prosecution

15 would file a reply on that issue.

16 MR. WEINER: Yes. We will be filing a reply, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE LIU: Tomorrow?

18 MR. WEINER: Either tomorrow or Monday.

19 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Thank you very much. I think the earlier the

20 better, because we have five weeks --

21 MR. WEINER: We will try for tomorrow, at the end of the day.

22 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much indeed for your cooperation.

23 Another issue is that about the 96 statement motion. The

24 Prosecution seeking for the certification and the Defence will file

25 something in reply for that?

Page 13

1 MR. METTRAUX: As indicated earlier, Your Honour, we will file

2 that first thing tomorrow morning, 9.00.

3 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much indeed.

4 Concerning the decision on granting access to material for the

5 Accused in the Prlic case, I wonder if Defence is going to ask for

6 extension of time in order to identify any sensitive witnesses in the

7 Halilovic's case.

8 MR. METTRAUX: Thank you, Your Honour. Yes, that was the last

9 matter on our list. We will indeed -- we would indeed ask the Trial

10 Chamber for a very short extension of time, perhaps until Monday next

11 week. That would be the 18th, I believe, of July, to identify that

12 material. We think we have it pretty much identified and we've discussed

13 the matter with the Prosecution. They don't seem to have an objection to

14 this few extra days being granted to us to file a letter in relation to

15 this matter.

16 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.

17 [Trial chamber confers]

18 JUDGE LIU: Yes. I believe that we are in a position to make a

19 ruling that the request for extension of the time is granted.

20 The last matter on the agenda is the electronic disclosure suite.

21 We need some clarification from the Prosecution about Mr. Halilovic's

22 file. Last time the Prosecution informed us there is a Halilovic file but

23 there is nothing in it, and I ask the Prosecution to look into it again.

24 Any results?

25 MR. RE: I apologise. I can't quite give you an answer right on

Page 14

1 the spot. We've briefly spoken to the Chamber's legal officer and

2 suggested that a demonstration by the Trial Chamber and the Chamber's

3 legal staff may assist your determination and I understand that's being

4 arranged by the person in charge of the Prosecution's evidence unit. Of

5 course the Defence, I assume, will be welcome to join if they feel it's

6 necessary. The Prosecution doesn't need to be there. If Your Honour

7 wants -- if Your Honours need an answer as to what's in it at the moment,

8 I can't give it to you right on the spot. But if there is a short break I

9 should be able to come back and assist.

10 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.

11 Well, it seems to me that it's feasible for us to have a short

12 break and how long do you think we should take?

13 MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honours, if the matter can't be resolved in

14 half an hour, then we've got problems. I think it will be resolved in

15 about ten minutes. If you gave us perhaps 20 minutes and we'll tell the

16 court officer if there is any need for more time. But 20 minutes should

17 suffice, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Shall we have a break for 30 minutes and then

19 we'll resume at quarter past 3.00.

20 --- Break taken at 2.48 p.m.

21 --- On resuming at 3.27 p.m.

22 JUDGE LIU: Well, maybe the parties are in the position to inform

23 us about the language.

24 MR. WEINER: Yes, good afternoon. With regard to the agreed fact

25 on rule for the military security service, we are in agreement as to all

Page 15

1 four statements.

2 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Thank you very much.

3 Well, Mr. Re are you going to tell me something about the

4 electronic disclosure suite?

5 MR. RE: Yes. I have done a couple of printouts which I hope will

6 assist the Trial Chamber in the break. If I could hand up -- at first

7 sight, it may not appear to mean very much. If I could take Your Honours

8 to the first one, which is the white one, not the coloured one, that is

9 the screen shot or the screen's view that you get when you go into the

10 EDS, specifically for the Halilovic case. If you look on the left it's

11 actually in blue on the screen, if you look on the left it has "list of

12 disclosures, general collection" then underneath "IT-01-48 Halilovic," and

13 then there are three subfolders. The one at the top is the general

14 collection; that is, that contains the entirety of the OTP's holdings with

15 the exception of Rule 70 material and witness statements, the unredacted

16 witness statements. The folder underneath is the Halilovic case's

17 specific folder. Now, I'm informed that in relation to the first one

18 which was the date of the 29th -- sorry, if you go to the third one first

19 which is 080704, I'm informed that there are 7.023 documents in the third

20 folder. In the middle folder, I'm informed there are 8 documents, and in

21 the top folder, I'm informed that there are, I think, 42 documents, and

22 each of these bear a date which is the date upon which they were added to

23 the system.

24 What this essentially means is that on the 8th of July 2004, we

25 placed 7.023 documents into a Halilovic-specific case folder, which --

Page 16

1 they're the documents we have essentially disclosed to the Defence over

2 the preceding years. So that's how you go in, and if you see on the

3 right, there is a little box and it says, "Sefer Halilovic IT 01-48," and

4 there is an underlined search function. If I take Your Honours to the

5 blue piece of paper, now this is just a sample search I just briefly did

6 in the break. You'll see on the left-hand side in the search box, which

7 is in white, there is a name there. The name, that's the name of the

8 person who is the subject of the application to call rebuttal evidence and

9 because the last letter of the name contains diacritics, it has a -- an

10 asterisk which is the method of searching. So putting that person's name

11 in and searching across the three categories of documents,

12 Halilovic-specific, we've come up with 15 documents which contain that

13 name. Now, these don't all pertain to that person because the person --

14 this is everyone with that family name as opposed to a given name. So

15 this demonstrates how the -- this demonstrates in a paper form how the

16 results are obtained. It's just simply a Zy -- ZyLAB is the name of the

17 programme, form of searching which looks for these documents. Now, that

18 indicates how many documents are on the Halilovic folder and the most

19 basic form of searching although there are far more advanced searches one

20 can do. You can search by the ERN, by names, you can use Boolean terms,

21 there are many different ways of searching and they're indicated in the

22 help section of the programme. Does that assist Your Honours in

23 explaining the very basics of how the system works without -- of course, a

24 demonstration will show you this in maybe ten minutes in a far better way

25 than I could say.

Page 17

1 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. Well, I believe the other day we

2 informed the Bench that there is nothing in Halilovic's folder but now, if

3 you shake the tree, 7.000 documents are falling down. But my question is

4 that, you know, whether the Defence is in the position to use this search

5 programme to find out the documents they need.

6 MR. RE: The first thing is when I said, I think it was last week,

7 that there were no documents, I think I prefaced it or qualified it by

8 saying, "I believe." I hadn't actually checked. When I went into the

9 system I was informed that there were a lot more than I had thought and I

10 apologise if I inadvertently misled the Trial Chamber on the last occasion

11 and I correct myself now very publicly.

12 Can the Defence use it? Well, I used it five minutes ago to find

13 15 documents bearing that name. It's exactly the same as the Prosecution

14 searches for its documents through the various collections. If we are

15 looking for documents in the same way that our motion of today is dated,

16 the rebuttal motion says that we found or Mr. Weiner found it, a document,

17 it was by putting that name into our system and he came up with the

18 document bearing that person's name. It's exactly the same for us as it

19 is for them but we operate under the added disadvantage that we don't --

20 we are not native B/C/S speakers and we have to seek translation, whereas

21 the Defence team actually has native B/C/S speakers as part of the team

22 whereas we have to rely on language assistants. So there really is in our

23 submission an equality of arms in terms of the availability of the

24 material. They have access to all of the material bar Rule 70 and

25 unredacted witness statements which we have all searched. We searched

Page 18

1 those independently and provided any relevant material on CD. So I mean

2 unless the Defence can explain, it's obviously their problem. If they are

3 having a problem explain to the Trial Chamber what their problems are, we

4 aren't in a position to say anything other than, Well, it appears from our

5 rudimentary look at it that the two sides have seeming -- apparently equal

6 access to the OTP's vast document collection or at least 70 per cent of

7 it.

8 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much indeed, Mr. Re for your

9 explanation. I believe this Bench is in a better position to make our

10 decision concerning with the application from the Defence now.

11 Are there any other matters that the parties would like to raise

12 at this stage?

13 Well, it seems to me there is none.

14 [Trial chamber and registrar confer]

15 JUDGE LIU: Mr. Court Deputy will announce the number of that FMI

16 number of that interview.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honours. The MFI for the record

18 of interview for the accused dated 2001 will be MFI 452.

19 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

20 Yes?

21 MR. MORRISSEY: Your Honour, I should point out a couple of

22 matters concerning the screen saver that's been provided to you. I just

23 hold up the document to show you which one I'm talking about. It's the

24 one printed in blue. You'll see that at the top of the blue -- the large

25 blue square on the right, there is a search results for "Bekta" you will

Page 19

1 see there and it indicates there that what's been realised by this search

2 is 15 out of 115 documents that have got that combination of letters,

3 B-E-K-T-A. And Your Honours, it really underlines the need for what the

4 Defence says is the need for some sort of brief document description so

5 that rather than reading 115 documents that have "Bekta" in it you can see

6 the one that is might possibly have something to do with the case itself.

7 As to the way this might relate to the finding of the name of

8 "Bekta" or "Bektas" in the Prosecution's recent motion, we will leave it

9 to our motion to make a comment on that.

10 MR. RE: This is --

11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone please.

12 MR. RE: It was clearly unintended; as an illustration I didn't

13 use the name in Court. In relation to the index as my learned friend

14 says -- has asked we can't -- as I've said before, we are not in a

15 position to provide an index. But if you put in the correct given name of

16 the person as opposed to just a family name, you would get -- I do

17 apologise. It was 115 not 15; that was -- the screen said 15. You would

18 get far fewer and would you gets the relevant documents. It's a matter of

19 how you use the search terms. As I said before, the Defence and the

20 Prosecution are in the same position in searching for material. Without

21 an index.

22 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. I believe that the Trial Chamber

23 will make its rulings in due time.

24 Well, as for the sittings into the summer recess, at this stage,

25 this Bench is not in a position to make a ruling to call off all those

Page 20

1 reserved supporting teams for the trial. There might be -- it depends on

2 the 92 bis filings from the Prosecution. There might be some need for the

3 cross-examination in the sittings. It's very difficult for us to say at

4 this stage.

5 So I hope everybody will be available, at least to the end of the

6 last week, so that once our decision is rendered we could hold a hearing

7 the week after next. At this stage, this is what I could say. So I

8 believe that the hearing for today is adjourned.

9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.40 p.m.