Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 1

1 Wednesday, 4 April 2001

2 [Status Conference]

3 [The accused entered court]

4 [Open session]

5 --- Upon commencing at 4.30 p.m.

6 JUDGE MAY: Let the Registrar call the case.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Case number

8 IT-00-39-&-40-PT, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik and

9 Biljana Plavsic.

10 JUDGE MAY: The appearances, please.

11 MR. PIACENTE: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Nicola Piacente and

12 Carolyn Edgerton, for the Prosecution, assisted by Carmela Annink-Javier.

13 MR. BRASICH: Good afternoon, Your Honour, Deyan Brasich for the

14 Krajisnik Defence. I'm aided by Mr. Goran Neskovic of the Bosnia and

15 Herzegovinac bar, as well as by Mr. Karkin Fahrija, also of that bar.

16 Good afternoon, Your Honour.

17 MR. PAVICH: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Robert Pavich on behalf

18 of Biljana Plavsic.

19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

20 MR. PAVICH: Good afternoon, Your Honour. Robert Pavich on behalf

21 of Bilijana Plavsic.

22 JUDGE MAY: The purpose of this hearing is to work on the progress

23 of this case. I should say that I have to attend a meeting of the Bureau

24 at five o’clock so we need to be expeditious, if you please.

25 I think the easiest way to deal with it is this, that the Trial

Page 2

1 Chamber has drawn up a timetable. It's a prospective timetable, but we

2 would expect it largely to be adhered to. I will hear what counsel, of

3 course, have got to say about it, but it might be simplest if the legal

4 officer or somebody would kindly distribute the proposed timetable. Just

5 one for the Prosecution and one each for the Defence.

6 You will see, first of all, that the proposed trial date is the

7 second half of November. That is because this trial cannot take place

8 before the new Judges have been installed and the Trial Chambers have been

9 reconstituted. But with that in mind, this Trial Chamber -- this trial

10 should clearly take place as soon after that event as possible, bearing in

11 mind that one of the accused has been in custody for nearly a year

12 already. Bearing in mind too that the other accused has more recently

13 come and, therefore, should have time for preparation of the trial.

14 This will be a substantial trial, and the Trial Chamber has in

15 mind the difficulties of preparation for both sides, but also the need

16 that the trial should take place as soon as possible in order that times

17 in custody are kept to a minimum before trial.

18 With those considerations in mind, it's necessary to give as much

19 time as possible for reasonable preparation, and the proposed timetable,

20 you'll see, is there should be a further conference on the 17th of May;

21 that the Prosecution should complete disclosure by the 22nd of June;

22 pre-trial brief, 29th of June. Pausing there, that will allow the

23 Prosecution three months from today's date to be ready.

24 I will hear any submissions on that, but in my view, they should

25 be ready by now considering the amount of time that has elapsed since this

Page 3

1 indictment was first preferred and since the first accused came into

2 custody.

3 That would be followed by a Status Conference at the beginning of

4 July, another one at the beginning of September. The Defence Pre-Trial

5 briefs would then be on the 28th of September. Pausing there, that will

6 have allowed the Defence a period of three months between the Prosecution

7 Pre-Trial brief and the submission of their own briefs. A Pre-Trial

8 Conference would then be scheduled for the 5th of November and an earlier

9 Status Conference on the 3rd of October.

10 All that should lead to the trial being ready, this case being

11 trial-ready, by the second half of November of this year.

12 Now, I'm sorry that you haven't had greater notice of this

13 proposed timetable, but it's important that we get on with it. And so

14 I'll hear any submissions that anybody has about it, and after that, we

15 will deal with any other matters, bearing in mind the constraints of

16 time.

17 Now, Mr. Piacente, it seems to me that the 29th of June is the

18 very latest that the Prosecution can have for their Pre-Trial brief.

19 MR. PIACENTE: Your Honour, I'm afraid I cannot share the same

20 opinion, considering the warning scenario this case has developed in the

21 last month. The previously appointed senior trial attorney, Ms. Brenda

22 Hollis, left the OTP, and the newly appointed senior trial attorney, Mark

23 Harmon, is engaged in the Trial Chamber dealing with the Krstic case.

24 There will be the need to restructure the whole trial team, considering

25 the fact that I myself will be leaving the OTP by the end of May.

Page 4

1 So I would say, reconsidering, reading what Your Honour submitted

2 to both parties, I would say that the Prosecution can be ready to disclose

3 the bulk, the biggest part, of the material falling within the language of

4 65 ter (E) by the first week of July.

5 We will try the best, beyond best, to finish, to be ready with the

6 Pre-Trial brief by the fall of this year, 2001, and --

7 JUDGE MAY: Just a moment, Mr. Piacente, you are proposing this

8 autumn for the Pre-Trial brief?

9 MR. PIACENTE: Yes, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE MAY: Am I not right this case was subject to Rule 61

11 proceedings, this indictment, in 1996.

12 MR. PIACENTE: Not to my knowledge, Your Honour. It was the

13 indictment against Mr. Karadzic.

14 JUDGE MAY: Yes, same indictment. Well, be that as it may, you've

15 had since April last year to prepare a Pre-Trial brief. It's unacceptable

16 now to come before the Trial Chamber and say that you need 18 months,

17 which is what it would have been, to prepare a Pre-Trial brief. It should

18 have been ready months ago. Now, I understand you have problems. We've

19 heard before from Ms. Hollis about the number of documents that you've had

20 to go through. Of course. But that doesn't mean that you can't be

21 getting on with the Pre-Trial brief so that the accused know the case they

22 have to meet and so that the Trial Chamber knows the case which it's going

23 to have to try.

24 You must restructure your work, you must restructure your team.

25 You've got three months and that should be sufficient to do it. By this

Page 5

1 stage, your case should be almost ready.

2 MR. PIACENTE: Well, Your Honour, the trial preparation might be

3 more expeditious, for example, if we did not have a fully litigated case.

4 Today, only a few minutes before the beginning of this Status Conference,

5 we received a response from the Defence of Mr. Krajisnik about a number of

6 adjudicated facts and other allegations subject to stipulation, and of

7 course, in the next hours, and the next days, we are in the process to

8 analyse them. Plus we were submitted a number of facts by the Defence for

9 potential and possible stipulation, and we also have to analyse it. This

10 is with reference to Mr. Krajisnik, and this is the latest update about

11 the situation.

12 But with reference to Mrs. Plavsic, let's say that we had last

13 week some fruitful discussions, meetings, with the Defence counsel, but so

14 far, we have not agreed to any kind of stipulation and we are waiting, of

15 course. I mean we understand that the Defence counsel just took over the

16 case, and just took over, you know, the interests of Mrs. Plavsic. So we

17 wait to hear from Mr. Pavich, whether it's going to be a fully litigated

18 case or whether there are some areas of agreement. I understand that both

19 parties are tending to --

20 JUDGE MAY: Well, Mr. Piacente, that of course is much to be

21 encouraged. Any agreement that can be reached in order to shorten the

22 case will of course have the Trial Chamber's full blessing. And I'd

23 encouraged you before, and I would encourage you again, to continue with

24 these negotiations, these discussions. But that cannot in any way affect

25 your duty to produce a Pre-Trial brief on the basis, if need be, that this

Page 6

1 is a fully argued case.

2 As I say, the programme gives you three months to do it. Yes?

3 MR. PIACENTE: Yes, Your Honour, again, I mean, the concern coming

4 from the Prosecution bench is related to a professional preparation of the

5 case and the Pre-Trial brief in order to avoid any other delay or

6 adjournment of the case. So what I was proposing, humbly proposing, to

7 Your Honour, was, let's say, a realistic prospective of the Prosecution,

8 which at the end for -- with reference to the, let's say, important aspect

9 of the whole issue, which is the beginning of the case, won't affect very

10 much the scheduled trial date because we will do our best to be ready, but

11 the date scheduled by the Trial Chamber or at the latest, at the very

12 beginning of December of this year.

13 JUDGE MAY: No. The beginning of December is not acceptable. The

14 date which is at the moment is the latter half of November, and

15 Mr. Piacente, it must be understood that the Prosecution is to be ready by

16 then.

17 Now, the dates which we have put forward, which I have suggested,

18 seem to me to be realistic dates in order to meet a trial by the end of

19 November. As I've already pointed out, one of the accused has already

20 been in custody for a year. I remember at the very first Status

21 Conference Ms. Hollis saying for the Prosecution that it would take a year

22 to prepare this case. You've now had a year and you're asking for another

23 six months and more.

24 MR. PIACENTE: Considering -- I'm sorry, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE MAY: I don't think there is much point debating it

Page 7

1 further. The matter should be ready for trial within that time.

2 I will hear what the Defence have got to say in a moment. But as

3 far as the Prosecution are concerned, that must be the timetable.

4 MR. PIACENTE: I suppose I'm not allowed to propose another

5 scenario of difficulties to you, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE MAY: Yes, you can mention what -- Mr. Brasich, I'll hear

7 you in a moment.

8 Yes. What other difficulties have you got?

9 MR. PIACENTE: You may argue, Your Honour, that it is not strictly

10 related to the preparation of the trial brief, but still, I mean we're

11 finding a lot of difficulties in the procedure set out by the new

12 Rule 92 bis. Of course, we are in the process and we intend to use, as

13 much as extensively possible, these Rules in order to expedite the case.

14 So we are in the process, in an active process to identify all the

15 witnesses with statements falling within the language of this new Rule.

16 But, Your Honour, please consider that no procedure, practical

17 procedure how to get the statements is being set up yet, and to my

18 knowledge up-to-date, up to this date, no presiding officer has been

19 proposed yet. And as we are talking about 41 municipalities and crime

20 base which includes a big part of country which is Bosnia, definitely our

21 estimation is that in order to expedite the case, we should submit to the

22 Court the biggest number possible on 92 bis statements. And in order to

23 do so, we must be, you know, in the position to get these statements and

24 to get all the -- and to meet all the requirements, and this situation,

25 the current situation, is not helping us very much.

Page 8

1 JUDGE MAY: Well, Mr. Piacente, if you have difficulties about the

2 Rule and the Trial Chamber can be of assistance, perhaps you'd like to set

3 them out in the form of a motion or the like and we'll consider the

4 difficulties.

5 MR. PIACENTE: We will consider it, Your Honour.

6 JUDGE MAY: That should not hold you up.

7 MR. PIACENTE: We'll consider it, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes.

9 Yes, Mr. Brasich.

10 MR. BRASICH: Good afternoon, Your Honour. I, of course, have

11 just gone on board in this particular case, and I will have to rely on the

12 Office of the Prosecutor's completion of their tasks before I can really

13 start preparing my defences. However, a thought came to me, Your Honour,

14 with regard to a possible solution.

15 The Court, if I read the comments made, is very conscious of a

16 speedy trial situation. There has been a change, a political change, in

17 Yugoslavia. Perhaps if the Prosecution would consent to a provisional

18 release, the time constraints would not be an issue, and I would invite

19 the Prosecution to seriously consider such an arrangement.

20 With regard to the plan itself, Your Honour, as I said, I do not

21 speak for Mrs. Plavsic, but she surrendered. My client has been in for

22 over a year. The experiences that I have had with the other case that I

23 have had the honour to represent a client in, the provisional release has

24 had no problems and the --

25 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Brasich, with respect, that's a separate issue.

Page 9

1 MR. BRASICH: Yes, Your Honour.

2 JUDGE MAY: We hear what you say, and no doubt the Prosecution can

3 consider what is suggested.

4 MR. BRASICH: Fine. Your Honour. With regard to --

5 JUDGE MAY: With regard to the timetable, I understand you've only

6 just come into the matter, and Mrs. Plavsic, of course, has surrendered

7 more recently, but nonetheless, one would hope that some work has been

8 undertaken. There was a problem at an earlier hearing which was raised

9 about the provision of resources. I understand that the Registry are

10 making much more resource available in this case than they are normally.

11 MR. BRASICH: That is correct, Your Honour. With regard to that,

12 Your Honour, in you schedule, I plan to make some in limine motions.

13 Would there be a schedule in regard to that? We have been served so far

14 by 85.000 pieces of paper. Perhaps we can cut down the necessity of all

15 of those documents with the proper in limine motion.

16 Would the Court like to hear such a motion? That would be my

17 first question.

18 My second question, Your Honour, is I'm an American, July 4th is

19 the traditional holiday. We had last year, that problem. I was wondering

20 if we could move it either a little bit earlier or later so that I

21 wouldn't lose the July 4th weekend.

22 JUDGE MAY: That would be one of the easier matters to deal with.

23 MR. BRASICH: Thank you, Your Honour.

24 JUDGE MAY: As for motions, the usual Rules apply about motions,

25 as to when they should be entered, and I don't think there will be any

Page 10

1 distinction in this case. Perhaps you would like to consult the Rules and

2 act accordingly.

3 MR. BRASICH: The reason why I'm saying that, Your Honour, is I

4 can't make a motion in limine until I get all the disclosure. That's why

5 I'm asking the question.

6 JUDGE MAY: You'll have to take whatever course you think fits.

7 If you can put a motion in earlier, so much the better. If it has to be

8 later, well, then, we'll deal with it later.

9 MR. BRASICH: Okay, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE MAY: Now, is there anything anybody else wants to say about

11 the proposals? Yes.

12 MR. PAVICH: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honour, I know the

13 Court is pressed for time. Nonetheless, I have some grave concerns that I

14 think must be raised before the Tribunal at this time.

15 I was assigned as Mrs. Plavsic's counsel approximately three weeks

16 ago with the purpose of determining the scope and magnitude of the case

17 against her so as to determine what might be necessary and what might be

18 required for adequate representation.

19 Toward that end, we've had several conferences and two meetings

20 with the Prosecution over the past three weeks, and in those meetings, I

21 think we have determined that the scope and magnitude of this case is

22 greater than any other that has come before this Tribunal for a number of

23 reasons. First, all the other cases that have been tried before this

24 Tribunal. If we look at paragraphs 18 and 20 of the consolidated

25 indictment, for example, to see the detention camps and villages that are

Page 11

1 listed, many of these cases have been tried over the past nine years and

2 essentially have been rolled into this case.

3 We've had fruitful discussions, as Mr. Piacente has said, in our

4 meeting last week with Mr. Piacente and Mr. Harmon, and I think that going

5 through the consolidated indictment paragraph by paragraph, as we did last

6 week, it became clear that at this time, it would seem that the case

7 against Mrs. Plavsic is going to be a case without holding the

8 Prosecution, at this time, to any commitment. But based on the facts that

9 the Prosecution has at this time, we believe that this case is going to

10 involve a case in which the question about Mrs. Plavsic will be whether

11 she should have known what was occurring during the period of the

12 indictment and whether she should have taken greater steps or more steps

13 to prevent what was happening.

14 I mention that because this is the broadest possible charge that

15 can be made. We're not talking about an individual charge at a specific

16 moment in time, but we're talking about what she knew or should have known

17 more particularly during this period and whether she should have taken

18 certain steps or perhaps even more steps than she did take in order to

19 prevent or mitigate what happened.

20 To that extent, I was advised that behind the indictment there are

21 approximately 3 million pages of documentation. That relates to the basic

22 indictment itself. We spoke briefly about Rule 68 and materials that

23 might have to be disclosed under Rule 68. Mr. Harmon advised me that the

24 documentation would amount to approximately 3 million pages. That does

25 not, however, I think, include an interpretation of Rule 68 that I brought

Page 12

1 to the attention of the Prosecutors last week and that is whether material

2 in mitigation -- as Your Honour knows, mitigation is considered at the

3 same time that the underlying liability is considered in the case, whether

4 material in mitigation would be --

5 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please speak a bit slower.

6 THE INTERPRETER: -- be advised to mind the interpreters, please.

7 JUDGE MAY: Could you slow down.

8 MR. PAVICH: I apologise, Your Honour. I'm conscious of your time

9 frame and I apologise.

10 Whether material in mitigation would be limited to the period of

11 the indictment, we believe that it would not. The reason I mention this

12 fact, together with one other important fact, the indictment, the

13 consolidated indictment mentions a number of other additional facts

14 beginning, I think, with paragraph, I believe, 48 through 67. These are

15 facts that do not necessarily relate directly to the facts that need to be

16 proven by the Prosecution but, as Mr. Harmon and Mr. Piacente explained to

17 me, these are facts that are necessary in order to create the proper

18 context so that the Tribunal may understand the full context in which the

19 Prosecution is making its case.

20 The comments, of course, from our end on that is that there may be

21 additional facts that we feel may become necessary in order to more fully

22 complete the context that the Prosecution may feel is necessary for the

23 Court to fully understand the situation. If the Court would look at these

24 paragraphs, it will see that these paragraphs relate almost exclusively to

25 what the Bosnian Serbs were doing at particular moments in time. It has

Page 13

1 nothing to say about what may have been done to the Bosnian Serbs at this

2 particular time.

3 The reason I mention this context of additional facts in the

4 Prosecution's consolidated indictment and the Rule 68 is that the

5 3 million documents and 3 million pages that stand behind this indictment

6 apparently may not even go to documents that may be necessary under a full

7 or more complete Rule 68 disclosure relating to, say, mitigation or to

8 additional facts that may become necessary in order to more fully advise

9 the Court as to the context of the proceedings.

10 THE INTERPRETER: Can the counsel please slow down?

11 JUDGE MAY: Can you slow down, please?

12 MR. PAVICH: May I proceed, Your Honour? With all this in mind,

13 I've taken the time to also meet with the Registrar, and have expressed

14 both to the Registrar, and to Mr. Piacente and Mr. Harmon most recently,

15 my grave concerns about whether Ms. Plavsic will be able to defend herself

16 in this matter, and that's going to depend on whether she is given

17 adequate resources to defend herself.

18 A simple point, Your Honour: 3 million pages, if it takes --

19 Defence counsel must look at the documentation that's behind the

20 indictment. I cannot, as an officer of the Tribunal or as assigned

21 counsel to Mrs. Plavsic, undertake this case without undertaking the

22 responsibility of looking at the documentation. If, for example, we take

23 two minutes per page - and I'll bore the court very briefly with this very

24 simple proposition - at 3 million documents, that's 6 million minutes. If

25 one person were to take 365 days a year, 8 hours a day, if I were to

Page 14

1 undertake that, at 2 minutes per page, it would take me 34 years in order

2 to simply read the documents. So --

3 JUDGE MAY: Let me interrupt you before you go on. I don't know

4 where this figure of 3 million documents came in. My recollection from

5 what was said in an earlier hearing was that the Defence were looking

6 through and -- Prosecution, I'm sorry, were looking through a million

7 documents - still a substantial number - to see what number they had to

8 disclose. But at this stage, there may be little point in discussing

9 whether it's a million or 3 million. I take the point that it is a very

10 substantial number.

11 The important point, if I may say, is to ensure that what is

12 disclosed is what is relevant to the case, and that a large amount of

13 documents are not disclosed which are totally irrelevant.

14 I know there are problems about resources. They have been raised,

15 and I understand that the Registry has made particular efforts to ensure

16 that adequate resources are available to you.

17 MR. PAVICH: May I mention my discussion with the Registry in that

18 regard?

19 JUDGE MAY: Except for this, that this is another logistical

20 problem, I agree an important one, but it's a logistical problem which

21 must be seen to. What are you asking me to do, having regard to the

22 time?

23 MR. PAVICH: Your Honour, unfortunately, this is a logistical

24 problem of such a magnitude that it raises -- rises to the level of

25 whether or not Mrs. Plavsic is going to be able to defend herself. I've

Page 15

1 met with the Registrar's office. They have made extraordinary efforts in

2 this case to provide resources, but the resources that have been given,

3 which would amount to 8.600 hours, would not even allow us to complete

4 reading the documentation that has preliminarily been disclosed, and that

5 is the 26.000 or 27.000 pages of hard copy. And the 29 CD-ROM disks, that

6 would be approximately another 90.000 pages. And, Your Honour, this is

7 simply -- we are only talking at this moment about reading documentation.

8 We are not even -- this is the very preliminary aspect of any Defence.

9 And so these logistical problems, these management problems,

10 raise -- rise to the level of fundamental fairness and whether or not we

11 are going to be able to defend her. I cannot, in good conscience,

12 undertake a representation of Mrs. Plavsic if I know from the beginning

13 that I'm not going to be able to complete even reading the documentation

14 that may stand behind the indictment.

15 I believe what we have is a situation under Article 21, which

16 created the Tribunal, which specifically indicates in Article 21 that the

17 Defence --

18 "In the determination of any charge against the accused ... the

19 accused shall be entitled to the following minimum guarantees, in full

20 equality:"

21 and,

22 "(b) to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of

23 his defence."

24 As Your Honour has mentioned, the Prosecution has basically had

25 eight years to prepare its case, and has in fact been working on smaller

Page 16

1 cases that have been rolled into this indictment for the past eight

2 years. They have an institutional memory that we can never compete with.

3 They have an office. They have an entire Tribunal, essentially, behind

4 them. I, Your Honour, on behalf of Mrs. Plavsic, have nothing behind me.

5 I have no desk. I have no chair. I'm not trying now to be facetious, but

6 if we do have 3 million pieces of paper. We have to have a place to put

7 them.

8 JUDGE MAY: Mr. Pavich, at this stage, you have warned us of the

9 difficulties which you face. What would be most sensible is this: If you

10 gather together the current position that you are in - so roughly what

11 you've said today - explain the position, and it would be better, it seems

12 to me, to put the matter into writing and the Trial Chamber can then

13 consider it.

14 MR. PAVICH: I would be happy to do that, Your Honour.

15 JUDGE MAY: And we will review the whole position. But not only

16 are there constraints of the size of the case, there are also time

17 constraints, as I have mentioned earlier on.

18 MR. PAVICH: This is where the resources become critical, Your

19 Honour.

20 JUDGE MAY: Particularly with people in custody. Now, we will

21 also find out from the Prosecution the precise size of their anticipated

22 disclosure, and in that way, we will get a full picture of the task which

23 you're facing.

24 MR. PAVICH: I simply wanted at this point, at the earliest

25 possible moment, Your Honour, raise what I believe are very, very grave

Page 17

1 concerns about whether or not Mrs. Plavsic is going to be unable under the

2 circumstances to defend herself unless some drastic measures are taken to

3 provide either resources or to drastically reduce the amount of material

4 that would be necessary to review. However, I'm not optimistic that the

5 latter will be possible for this reason, Your Honour: The indictment, as

6 I understand it, our Defence and the Prosecution are going to be focusing

7 in this case on whether she should have known what was happening and

8 whether she should have taken more serious steps to do more to stop what

9 had happened. And in that broad context, I think it's going to be very

10 difficult, Your Honour, to substantially narrow the documentation. In any

11 event, I think it was important for me to raise this, and Mr. Piacente may

12 have a comment. I don't mean to speak out of turn, but I do believe that

13 we did discuss this and did I raise my concerns with him last week in

14 general.

15 JUDGE MAY: Well, it's helpful to have the issue narrowed in that

16 way, and if it is narrowed, one would hope there could be a narrowing of

17 the amount of evidence necessary.

18 Mr. Piacente, I don't want to continue this debate very much

19 longer but is this figure of 3 million an accurate one?

20 MR. PIACENTE: Your Honour, Ms. Brenda Hollis mentioned in the

21 last Status Conference that we were dealing with 2.700.000 pages of

22 documents we have in-house. Of course, the selection and the analysis of

23 these documents is going very, very narrow, so definitely we are not going

24 to submit to the Defence all the documents we have in-house. That's

25 definitely not our purpose. Definitely, I mean, our theory of the case

Page 18

1 will be specified in our Pre-Trial brief and I'm afraid it won't be the

2 same that the Defence counsel has anticipated. And I don't want to add

3 anything else about that, but definitely our theory of the case won't

4 imply the necessity to hand over to the Defence or to the Trial Chamber

5 such a huge amount of documents.

6 JUDGE MAY: And you will have heard what I said about narrowing,

7 as far as possible, the documents which are disclosed to those which are

8 really relevant.

9 MR. PIACENTE: Your Honour, we asked both Defence counsels of both

10 accused to specify, if they are available, to their potential or future

11 theory of the case or strategy of the Defence. We didn't mean anything

12 but try to understand what the theory of the case might be and try to

13 adapt our disclosure process to that theory of the case, in order to

14 narrow as much as possible and to expedite as much as possible the trial

15 preparation. Also for the counterpart.

16 JUDGE MAY: And are you in a position to say what volume of

17 documents might be disclosed?

18 MR. PIACENTE: I don't want to be wrong, Your Honour, so let me

19 not answer this question, please.

20 JUDGE MAY: Very well. Clearly, Mr. Pavich, what would assist

21 would be further discussions with the Prosecutor and Mr. Brasich, too, in

22 order to try and narrow the scope of the case which would be in

23 everybody's interest; yours in terms of preparation, Prosecution in terms

24 of their disclosure. It may be in that way that some progress can be

25 made. But the Trial Chamber -- I should make this point to both sides,

Page 19

1 that the Trial Chamber is available, and I as the Pre-Trial judge am

2 available at any time to assist in these matters. And although I've

3 listed Status Conferences, it's perfectly possible to have additional

4 hearings at any time which is convenient, and it may be that that would be

5 a sensible way forward.

6 Now, is there anything anybody else wants to raise at the moment?

7 There is the necessity for the Trial Chamber to inquire about

8 detention. This is the opportunity for the accused to raise issues in

9 relation to detention. Is there anything that anybody wants to raise?

10 MR. PAVICH: As Your Honour knows, when I was assigned, an

11 application had been pending for Pre-Trial release. We withdrew that

12 simply to give us an opportunity to refile it and in order to prepare in a

13 way in which I think we may be able to get some additional guarantees. So

14 I anticipate filing an application within the next two weeks.

15 JUDGE MAY: Very well. Mr. Brasich, anything you want to say?

16 MR. BRASICH: No, Your Honour, not at this -- I keep forgetting

17 that. Not at this time, Your Honour, I'm too new in the case to have

18 really taken all possible steps on behalf of my client, so I would like to

19 reserve.

20 JUDGE MAY: Very well. Well, this matter will be adjourned.

21 There will be a Status Conference at the latest on the 17th of May, but

22 meanwhile, the Trial Chamber will be reviewing the position, having regard

23 to what's been said here today, and if necessary, further hearings will be

24 scheduled.

25 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned at 5.08 p.m.