1 Wednesday, 16 April 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.00 a.m.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Good morning, everyone.
6 To continue with the evidence of 6D-2 we require to go straight
7 into closed session.
8 [Closed session]
11 Pages 25414-25509 redacted. Closed session.
22 [Open session]
23 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Hannis.
25 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I had an objection to raise concerning
1 the exhibit 6D614. I have a general objection about the process and I
2 have a more specific objection about several portions of it in that I
3 don't think they have any relevance or probative value for us. There's a
4 big section on non-violent crimes committed by unknown perpetrators
5 between July 1998 --
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Just hold on a second.
7 Mr. Lukic, is the whole of the relevant -- or what you consider
8 the relevant parts of that exhibit now translated?
9 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour, it is.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Mr. Hannis, this document is marked for
11 identification, so what will happen is that there will be a filing from
12 the Lukic Defence inviting us to admit the document, including the
13 translation, and at that point you should respond.
14 MR. HANNIS: I will, Your Honour. Thank you.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
16 The next witness, Mr. Lukic?
17 MR. LUKIC: Our next witness is our expert,
18 Mr. Branislav Simonovic.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
20 [The witness entered court]
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Good afternoon, Dr. Simonovic.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Would you please make the solemn declaration to
24 speak the truth by reading aloud that document now being shown to you.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
1 I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,
2 and nothing but the truth.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Please be seated.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: You will now be examined by Mr. Lukic.
6 Mr. Lukic.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 WITNESS: BRANISLAV SIMONOVIC
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 Examination by Mr. Lukic:
11 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Professor.
12 A. Good afternoon.
13 Q. You asked me to make a few corrections in the introductory part
14 before we move on to the actual subject matter. The introductory part of
15 your findings, that doesn't pertain to the police but you insisted we
16 clarified certain points.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all microphones
18 please be switched off, we cannot hear the speaker.
19 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Could you please look at page 4.
21 A. I already have it open.
22 Q. What it says here, the commander of the collective supreme
24 A. As the head of the federal state ex officio, this should be
25 deleted. Only the word "commander" should be there and it should replace
1 the words that should be deleted, the ones that you referred to. Is that
2 all right now? So the sentence reads as follows: "As the head of the
3 federal state he is ex officio the commander of the Army of Yugoslavia,"
4 and so on and so forth. Then it all fits in.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: It's finding it, Mr. Lukic, that's the main
7 MR. LUKIC: Give me one second.
8 MR. STAMP: I think it's the first paragraph of page 3.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Page 3, yes.
10 MR. STAMP: In English.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: I'm on the wrong page.
12 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Would you now please tell us about page 6, what should be
15 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could we please have a
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Just hold on a second.
18 First of all, what's the exhibit number for this document,
19 Mr. Lukic?
20 MR. LUKIC: The exhibit number is 6D668, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: All right.
22 And now we're on page 6 of which --
23 MR. LUKIC: B/C/S and we are looking for the English translation.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is the first paragraph of the
25 text in Serbian, so it would be the first paragraph of the text in -- the
1 first paragraph --
2 JUDGE BONOMY: All right. Tell us where?
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Just a moment.
5 MR. LUKIC: It should be page 7 in English.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, what's the heading of the section?
7 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Professor, what's the heading of the section?
9 A. Well, the heading of the section is: Division of competencies in
10 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Roman numeral I then, so it is the
11 third line from the bottom, the first paragraph.
12 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, that is --
13 MR. LUKIC: Page 8 --
14 MR. STAMP: -- page 4 in the English.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honour --
16 JUDGE BONOMY: It's --
17 MR. ZECEVIC: If I may be of assistance.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: It's in page 8 as far as -- sorry.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: I think the witness is referring to the previous
20 change that he did right now. He was citing the provision of the first
21 change that he did already. Now we are talking about the second one, if
22 I -- if I'm correct, which is on page 6 of the Serbian, second paragraph.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I say something?
24 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Do you know where it is in English?
1 A. Well, in the Serbian text it's page 6, so I have this other
2 suggestion. Page 6, the second paragraph, the second line --
3 MR. LUKIC: Mr. Stamp is right, it's on page 4, second paragraph.
4 It's page 5 in the e-court.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May I read it out? The first
6 sentence in the second paragraph: "The constitution of the FRY from 1992
7 establishes" -- I apologise for reading so fast.
8 "The constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
9 specified that the command of the Yugoslav Army should be the
10 responsibility of," and now before the "Supreme Defence Council" the
11 following words should be added: "The president of the FRY in accordance
12 with decisions of the Supreme Defence Council."
13 So that's the constitutional wording.
14 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Now page 7 in B/C/S and page 5 in the English version, otherwise
16 page 6 in e-court. Paragraph 2 in the English version.
17 A. Can I say what it is? The last paragraph on that page --
18 Q. In the B/C/S version I assume?
19 A. Yes, yes. The second sentence starts with the following wording:
20 "He or she proposes to the National Assembly candidates for presidents
21 and judges of the Serbian Constitutional Court proclaims laws by decrees,
22 conducts the Republic of Serbia
23 international organizations."
24 And now brackets should be opened there and the following wording
25 should be inserted: "(Upon the adoption of the constitution of the FRY
1 these regulations came under the jurisdiction of the federal state)," --
2 Q. You said regulations, did you mean regulations or affairs?
3 A. I beg your pardon, affairs, that's what I meant, these affairs
4 came under the jurisdiction of the federal state. If I said
5 "regulations," then I misspoke. And then this same sentence, this very
6 same sentence continues as follows. May I continue?
7 "Grants pardons, confers medals and awards pursuant to the law,"
8 and now add the following wording: "Although this law had not been
9 passed and therefore the norm was not applied."
10 So then the next sentence continues as follows: "Forms," it
11 should be a capital F, and then the rest reads as is stated here.
12 Q. Could you now slowly read this entire section so that we have it
13 right, just do it slowly, please.
14 A. Yes, yes. It's the last -- it's the second sentence in the last
16 "He or she proposes to the National Assembly candidates for
17 presidents and judges of the Constitutional Court of Serbia, proclaims
18 laws by decree, conducts the Republic of Serbia
19 states, and international organizations (upon adoption of the FRY
20 constitution these affairs came under the jurisdiction of the federal
21 state)," and then the text reads on as follows: "Grants pardons, confers
22 medals and awards pursuant to the law, although this law had not been
23 passed and therefore the norm was not applied. Forms," capital F, "forms
24 expert," and so on and so forth.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: I doubt if a full stop is appropriate there.
1 Surely the -- the way certainly the punctuation is provided in the
2 English, each of these parts is separated by a semicolon, and that makes
3 sense and the last section is the one beginning: "Forms expert and other
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That would be possible, yes, a
6 semicolon, it would fit in grammatically and logically.
7 MR. LUKIC: Also in English version we have a wording: "The
8 president of the Federal Republic of Serbia," so "the Federal" should be
9 removed and president of the Republic of Serbia
10 English text. The same paragraph at the -- in the -- the same -- fifth
11 page, it's five lines from the bottom.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: The next sentence is correct: "The president of
13 the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ..."?
14 MR. LUKIC: Yes.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thanks.
16 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Now we're moving on to page 9, Professor, the last paragraph,
19 A. Just a moment, please.
20 Q. It is page 6 in the English version, page 7 in e-court?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Paragraph 4 in the English version.
23 A. Page 9 in the text in Serbian, the third paragraph, the third
24 paragraph, the second sentence, it should be deleted from this text.
25 Q. Read the sentence.
1 A. I will.
2 Q. Just a moment, please. Read the sentence without any comments,
3 just read the sentence that should be deleted.
4 A. "The constitution gives that function to the collective organ,
5 that is to say the Supreme Defence Council, which includes the presidents
6 of the member republics as well."
7 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: We could not find it in
9 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Thank you. This is the last correction, page 55, otherwise it is
11 page 34 in the English version. In e-court it's page 35, paragraph 3.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Wait a moment, please.
14 [Defence counsel confer]
15 MR. LUKIC: And it's page 55 in Serbian version. In the e-court
16 then probably 56 because we have a number -- we need number 55.
17 Q. [Interpretation] What sort of an amendment is required on this
19 A. We have to delete the third paragraph, some words have remained,
20 decided on certain rules and duties ..." well this part has to be deleted
21 from the text.
22 MR. LUKIC: [Previous translation continues]... these words at
23 all, so I think this correction should be made in the English version.
24 There is actually -- yeah --
25 JUDGE BONOMY: How does that paragraph begin?
1 MR. LUKIC: "Relations between state administration organs ..."
2 JUDGE BONOMY: And where is --
3 MR. LUKIC: Actually, something -- the last sentence probably
4 should be corrected because -- I think that the best way is if the
5 Professor reads the last sentence from the previous paragraph, and that
6 should be translated instead of the last sentence from this paragraph in
7 the English version.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The last sentence reads as follows:
9 "This was already discussed in relation to other legal provisions, other
10 legislative provisions."
11 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Professor, are those all the amendments we wanted to make or that
13 you wanted to make?
14 A. Yes. When I asked for these amendments it was to avoid any
15 confusion in the text.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Can we look at P1505, please.
18 [In English] And I would kindly ask the assistance of the usher
19 [Previous translation continues] ... some documents from the Professor.
20 We need page 2 in both versions -- no, sorry. It is still page 1 in the
21 English version. I'm sorry. Number 2, we have to see number 2.
22 Q. [Interpretation] Professor, we'll go to the very heart of the
23 matter first. You have paragraph Roman II in the Serbian version, Arabic
24 2 in the English. Can you see what it says here, what the tasks of the
25 staff are?
1 A. Yes, you can see the tasks of the staff here, they're defined in
2 the decision on forming the staff, its task is in accordance with that
3 decision, it is to plan, organize, and manage the work of organizational
4 units in the ministry; and also, it has to manage attached units to
5 prevent terrorism in Kosovo and Metohija. And in the second paragraph --
6 am I going too fast? In the second paragraph the staff's tasks said to
7 be planning and organizing and uniting the work of organizational units
8 of the ministry and Kosovo and Metohija and they have to carry out
9 complex security-related tasks.
10 Q. Would it be possible for such staff tasks to be carried out in
12 A. In my opinion, on the basis of the analysis I carried out while
13 studying the literature and while analysing the organization of the
14 staff, the task or the tasks defined here couldn't be carried out in
15 practice. It was an impossible mission to carry out such tasks, and we
16 will discuss the reasons which it was impossible over the next few days.
17 I don't think the staff could have planned or organized or led the work
18 of organizational units of the ministry, and it couldn't have done that
19 in the case of the attached units.
20 Q. What would implementing this decision have required?
21 A. In order to implement the decision, in practice it would have
22 been necessary to establish completely different relationships which are
23 defined by the rules on the internal organization of the Ministry of the
24 Interior. Such rules determine certain relationships, certain
25 obligations of various organizational units within the system of the
1 ministry from the top down. So some new body could have carried out the
2 tasks assigned. It was necessary to change all the relationships, to
3 have new rules, it was necessary to have the organizational relationship
4 completely changed. The organizational relationship that existed
5 pursuant to the rules that regulated police operations. But this wasn't
6 done and it could not have been done at the time.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: So, Professor, did you work out the solution to
8 the conundrum, can you tell us why this was done?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm prepared to make
10 the utmost effort to try and explain this to the Court, to try and
11 explain why such a decision was formulated, a decision that couldn't be
12 carried out, and I tried to explain the entire organizational system in
13 existence, the one that I referred to in my report, and this system made
14 it impossible in fact to carry out this decision, to implement the
15 decision. Can I start at the first level of my analysis and then I'll
16 follow any suggestions you may have, and I'll be quite happy to be guided
17 by you.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: No, I don't want to disturb the way in which
19 Mr. Lukic intends to present this. I thought perhaps you had a simple
20 answer to the conundrum, but if you don't perhaps it should be developed
21 in questions by Mr. Lukic.
22 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. [Interpretation] In the transcript there's an interpretation
24 which means rules. Can you tell us the name of the document that you
25 referred to that should be changed?
1 A. Yes, if we are to discuss the system that required changes --
2 well, for the system to change one should have started with the rules
3 book on the internal organization of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, so
4 this is a rules book or these are rules adopted by the Ministry of the
5 Interior, and these rules regulate the system of internal organization
6 and of leadership within the ministry, from the top down. And the tasks
7 assigned to the staff if they were to be carried out it would be
8 necessary to change the entire system. Why wasn't that possible at the
9 time? Well for two reasons. One was a formal legal reason and there was
10 another substantial reason. May I continue? What's the formal legal
11 reason? What should have been changed? Assigned to the staff tasks that
12 they could carry out within the system in existence in the Ministry of
13 the Interior. Well, it would have been necessary to issue a new rules
14 book, and these rules would have to be adopted at governmental level.
15 The rules is a document that determines the internal organizational
16 systems within each ministry. One of the rules books is the book that
17 dealt with the internal organization with the Ministry of the Interior,
18 but to act in this way in accordance with the law in force at the time,
19 it would have been necessary to issue a new rules book with a fairly
20 complex procedure contained within it. And one you would have had to
21 have in the document called the decree on the principles for the internal
22 organization and systemization of work posts in ministries, and in
23 special organizations --
24 JUDGE BONOMY: I take it all of this is clearly set out in the
25 report, Mr. Lukic, which --
1 MR. LUKIC: Actually it's not. We have to go through some
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, what's the report all about then? Because
4 it's a very heavy document to read and to take in. There's a limited
5 extent to which I've been able to commit that all to memory and I'm
6 disclosing that by my intervention. But surely the purpose of bringing
7 an expert here with a report is that the report should set out his
8 position clearly and we shouldn't have to listen to all of this but we
9 should be hearing sharp, pointed questions and short answers clarifying
11 MR. LUKIC: Okay, I'll try to continue that way.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: It's just I'm expressing anxiety since we have a
13 whole catalogue of experts coming later. The whole point of this is to
14 identify the answers to the conundrums in the report. I want a simple
15 answer to the question why a minister of the government is passing an
16 order that just cannot be implemented.
17 MR. LUKIC: I asked the same question --
18 JUDGE BONOMY: And it doesn't look as though there is a simple
19 answer, which is a disappointment, but please continue.
20 MR. LUKIC: By presenting the expert analysis --
21 JUDGE BONOMY: I mean there's an English saying that where
22 there's a will there's a way; in other words, if you want to do something
23 you can achieve it, to hell with the rules.
24 MR. LUKIC: In police --
25 JUDGE BONOMY: The answer here that we're getting is: No, the
1 rules are there and you can't do anything because the rules stop you.
2 Well, I have a great big question mark over that.
3 MR. LUKIC: We'll try --
4 JUDGE BONOMY: -- in relation to the former Yugoslavia. So let's
5 be realistic about this and try to get to answers, real, genuine answers
6 to the questions that trouble the Trial Chamber.
7 MR. LUKIC: We'll try, but we think that in policing you cannot
8 go away from the rules, otherwise it wouldn't be police. So I think that
9 our evidence showed that this solution wasn't implemented and we are
10 trying to explain why it wasn't implemented.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, please continue.
12 MR. STAMP: Your Honour, I was just informed, firstly, the booth
13 is requesting that we preface all questions to the witness with a page
14 and a page number if we're referring to the report because they are
15 having significant problems --
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, the answer to that is we're not referring to
17 the report at the moment apparently so --
18 MR. STAMP: If we are.
19 Now, to get to the issues which are -- which you were referring
20 to at this point, I didn't object when the witness was asked to offer an
21 opinion, which is strikingly different from what he says in the report.
22 And I think perhaps we could address this at the end -- maybe in five
23 minutes at the end of today's session because it would be very difficult
24 for the Prosecution to deal with situations repeatedly occurring where
25 Rule 94 statements are not complete in terms of the fundamental
1 propositions that are stated in those statements.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah.
3 So there is already concern, I can tell you, Mr. Lukic, on the
4 Bench and we're also concerned about the witness's belief that he's going
5 to be here for several days because that is not our understanding of the
7 MR. LUKIC: I think that he just expressed his willingness to be
8 here as long as possible.
9 Q. [Interpretation] Professor --
10 A. Yes, please.
11 Q. -- we have to give answers that are brief and to the point.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Just a minute. Let me put my question first. You told us about
14 the procedure to change the rules book. You said that the approval of
15 the cabinet was required for that and that it was a demanding process.
16 Now that we're dealing with regulations, was it possible according to the
17 existing legislation to disrupt the relations of functioning, planning,
18 organizing, and leading within the ministry and the public security
19 sector by way of this decision on establishing the staff?
20 A. This decision could not have disrupted the relations that had
21 been established by a piece of legislation that was of a higher level and
22 that pertained to the entire ministry. This is why that individual
23 enactment could not have been implemented at that particular time, in
24 that particular area.
25 Q. Now let us look at P1044. Professor, we have seen this document
1 a number of times during the trial here. This document comes from 1996.
2 We see that at that period of time there was a MUP staff?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Can it be seen from this document whether the system of reporting
5 was disrupted within the MUP, owing to the existence of the MUP staff for
6 Kosovo and Metohija?
7 A. This document shows that the system of reporting was not
8 disrupted within the existing system, because in this document it is
9 stated that organizational units and secretariats need to report about
10 their work the Ministry of the Interior. But in paragraph 5, which I do
11 not have in front of me, in item 5 of this document in the Serbian
12 language it says -- could that be shown to me? Could I see item 5,
13 please? The following page. It says there that the secretariats of the
14 interior in Kosovo need to inform and need to report to the staff -- MUP
15 staff in addition to the ministry, the MUP staff functioning in Pristina,
16 and this was another side of reporting.
17 MR. LUKIC: [Previous translation continues]... in B/C/S.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. So based on this document we
19 can see that the system of organizational units was not changed, the
20 system that was established by the rules, the rules that I have mentioned
21 and that we will be discussing later. However, in order for something
22 else to be introduced into the system this dispatch was adopted, this
23 decision of the ministry, introducing the MUP staff under item 5 as one
24 part of the system, as a body, as an auxiliary body that was to be
25 reported to in parallel in addition to reporting to the Ministry of the
1 Interior. And this pertains only to the seven secretariats existing in
3 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MR. LUKIC: [Interpretation] Could we now see in e-court Exhibit
7 Q. Professor, although this document is very important it hasn't
8 been translated. We have an older version. Just a moment, please. We
9 will try to use that document, that version, because the difference is
10 minimal. The one we are showing is valid.
11 A. At the time.
12 Q. Yes, at the time. We just need to find the English document. I
13 need Article 7 of this document.
14 MR. STAMP: Your Honours, this segment of the new documents,
15 majority of the new documents on the list for this witness have not been
16 translated; however, I think this is a later version, one-year later
17 version of a document already in evidence what I'm trying to find --
18 JUDGE BONOMY: That's what Mr. Lukic is trying to do as well.
19 MR. STAMP: Very well.
20 MR. LUKIC: My learned friend across asked for five minutes to
21 address you, and I think that we also need those five minutes to organize
22 ourselves better.
23 Yeah, now we have it. It's P1072.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, deal with this question and then we can hear
25 what Mr. Stamp has to say.
1 MR. LUKIC: It opens the whole set of questions. We have to deal
2 with this document which is basis for functioning of MUP. We have to go
3 through several paragraphs.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: And this isn't dealt with in the report?
5 MR. LUKIC: But it needs further explanation.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: The report deals with all sorts of things that
7 have got not a lot to do with the police.
8 MR. LUKIC: You know that we had a problem with the expert at
9 that time, so we asked for extension of time.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah, but could this not all have been confined to
11 police expertise and much more focused rather than going through
12 constitutional relationships between the federal republic and the
13 republics and dealing with the army and the command structure and so on?
14 MR. LUKIC: I agree with Your Honour, but I didn't write it.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: No, but you commissioned it presumably and ought
16 to have given instructions that confined it to what's relevant.
17 MR. LUKIC: Our instruction was simply what it was -- the title
18 of this document, but it went further.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Stamp, is there something you want to add to
21 what you said earlier?
22 MR. STAMP: Briefly, Your Honours. I would just ask that if it
23 becomes necessary for an expert who has given a 92 -- a Rule 94 report to
24 say something that isn't new, that is significantly new, especially if it
25 is by way of an opinion relevant to the issues before the Court, if
1 perhaps we could be notified of that in the notification that we are to
2 get the week before. That's all I would wish to add. I would just add
3 that I hope that it would be a rare situation where that happens, but if
4 it does become necessary we need to be notified before we get to court.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, we wonder if that should happen at all
6 unless it's something that's cropped up and wasn't foreseen for some good
7 reason. The report should deal with everything that the witness is going
8 to give an opinion on, and we should not be expected to explore a wider
9 area with the witness apart from, in our opinion, the importance of being
10 told in advance what an expert is going to speak about and say. It does
11 seem to us grossly unfair to any opponent to put in a report that in the
12 main has nothing directly to do with the real issues to be addressed by
13 the expert and then to start asking him orally to expand upon the few
14 opinions he has expressed on the area that really matters as far as the
15 case for this accused is concerned.
16 So, Mr. Lukic, I hope you will make good use of the time
17 available to you overnight to decide whether, first of all, there are
18 parts of the report that we do not really need to admit; and secondly, to
19 focus the questions on the important issues but confine them to what's
20 absolutely necessary, to clarify the terms of the report on the important
21 and relevant issues.
22 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, previously presenting expert findings in
23 front of this Court I was told not to dwell on the expert report but to
24 tell something new if there is something new, not to repeat what's in the
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah, but that's to deal with things that may be
2 arisen that were not previously foreseen and that it's only right that
3 the witness should have an opportunity to address. What we don't expect
4 is that the real guts of your evidence will not be in the report.
5 MR. LUKIC: I don't think that's the case, but we'll try to tie
6 our extra testimony with the report.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: I hope -- is this the witness where at one stage
8 the anticipated evidence in chief was going to be ten hours and that
10 MR. LUKIC: Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, it's very difficult to imagine in this
12 Tribunal where reports are an essential part of the presentation of the
13 evidence of an expert that that expert -- that that witness would give
14 evidence for anything approaching that length of time.
15 MR. LUKIC: You know that we changed --
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, indeed, and I assume that that is now a
17 realistic assessment of the position, perhaps might even be generous.
18 So with any luck we should deal with most of the evidence of this
19 witness tomorrow.
20 Well, Professor, we have to bring our sitting for today to an end
21 at this stage and resume it tomorrow, which means you will have to return
22 here to resume your evidence at 9.00 tomorrow morning.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you, Your Honour. I
24 have understood. Everything will be fine.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: You may now leave the courtroom with the usher.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All right.
2 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
3 [The witness stands down]
4 JUDGE BONOMY: And we shall resume at 9.00 tomorrow.
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.31 p.m.
6 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 17th day of
7 April, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.