1 Wednesday, 1 November 2006

2 [Status Conference]

3 [Open session]

4 --- Upon commencing at 9.11 a.m.

5 [The accused entered court]

6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.

7 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.

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

9 IT-03-67-PT, the Prosecutor versus Vojislav Seselj.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11 Today we have a Status Conference. I'd like to have the

12 appearances.

13 Prosecution, first.

14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Good morning, Your Honours. For the

15 Prosecution, Mr. Dan Saxon, and my name is Hildegard Uertz-Retzlaff. We

16 are accompanied by our case manager, Ms. Ana Katalinic.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff.

18 Mr. Seselj, you are present. You are representing yourself.

19 Before I continue, can you hear me in a language you understand?

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Orie, first of all, I demand

21 that you remove these spies from the courtroom, the ones that are acting

22 as my counsel. That is the basic pre-condition for having this Status

23 Conference held. Basic procedure is not there for as long as they are

24 here.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj, my question to you simply was whether you

1 could hear me in a language you understand.

2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am telling you, Mr. Orie, that you

3 have to throw these spies of yours out of the courtroom.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj, by your answer, I take it that you could

5 hear my question.

6 I now move to the presence of stand-by counsel. Could they

7 introduce themselves.

8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] They cannot introduce themselves

9 because they are not the Defence team.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj.

11 THE ACCUSED: [No interpretation]

12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj, I -- yes, Mr. --

13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Hooper cannot say anything on

14 behalf of my Defence. He is your spy.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj, I did not ask Mr. Hooper to say anything

16 on your behalf. I asked Mr. Hooper, who is appointed as stand-by counsel

17 with specific functions, to introduce himself, and I'll give him an

18 opportunity to do that now.

19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] He cannot even introduce himself

20 because he is your spy who is acting as my counsel, pretending to be my

21 counsel. I cannot defend myself for as long as he is here. Either remove

22 me or remove him. Both of us cannot stay on in this courtroom.

23 [Trial Chamber confers].

24 MR. HOOPER: First of all --

25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Nothing, nothing, he cannot say a

1 thing here. Nothing. He does not have the right to say anything here.

2 He is a liar who is falsely introducing himself as my Defence counsel. He

3 is your spy. Hooper is a spy who is hindering my defence.

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hooper, the Chamber will adjourn for a minute at

6 this moment, and upon our return, the Chamber will inform everyone in this

7 courtroom about what it considered during this adjournment.

8 We'll stand adjourned for, most likely not more than 10 minutes,

9 so I would like everyone to stay stand-by.

10 --- Break taken at 9.16 a.m.

11 --- On resuming at 9.26 a.m.

12 JUDGE ORIE: We will resume this hearing.

13 Mr. Seselj, I'd like to bring a few matters to your attention.

14 First of all, in an order of the 25th of October, 2006, this Trial

15 Chamber ordered the Registrar to appoint stand-by counsel with necessary

16 support staff to perform the functions as described in that order. Did

17 you receive a copy of that decision in a language you understand, Mr.

18 Seselj?

19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Microphone, please.

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I did not get any decision. I just

22 got an order from the Trial Chamber that was addressed to the Registrar.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the order concerning appointment of

24 stand-by counsel and the late commencement of trial, dated the 25th of

25 October. Are you referring to that decision, to that order?

1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, that's what I mean.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you receive that in a language you

3 understand?

4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I got it in the Serbian language,

5 partly impaired Serbian language, but still Serbian.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then, did you receive a copy of a decision

7 dated the 30th of October, 2006, a decision by the Deputy Registrar, in

8 which he decided, pursuant to the Appeals Chamber decision of the 20th of

9 October, 2006, and the Trial Chamber's order of the 25th of October, 2006,

10 to withdraw Mr. Hooper and Mr. O'Shea as counsel and co-counsel and to

11 assign Mr. Hooper as stand-by counsel and Mr. O'Shea as co-counsel to

12 Mr. Hooper, effective as of the date of that decision? Did you receive a

13 copy of that decision, Mr. Seselj, in a language you understand?

14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj, you're hereby informed that if, for

16 whatever reason, you disagree with the order or the decision, that you

17 could seek whatever remedy that is available to you, the remedy not being

18 interrupting Mr. Hooper if he starts speaking in this courtroom.

19 Mr. Seselj, you have interrupted more than once when I gave an

20 opportunity to Mr. Hooper to introduce himself. You are hereby warned

21 that if you would interrupt again, if I give Mr. Hooper an opportunity to

22 introduce himself, or later to speak, that the Chamber will consider this

23 as a persistence in disruptive conduct, and that if you would persist in

24 such disruptive conduct, that it would warrant the removal of you from

25 this courtroom, under Rule 80(B) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

1 If the Chamber, which it hopes has no need to do that, if the

2 Chamber would have to take such a decision, then it would also decide, as

3 provided for in the order of the 25th of October and the decision of the

4 Registrar of the 30th of October, it will, if it comes to that, instruct

5 Mr. Hooper to temporarily take over, as provided in that decision and

6 those orders -- in that order and that decision.

7 Just for your information, I will quote. It's in the decision,

8 under (H), being part of the functions to be performed by stand-by counsel

9 in this case, "to temporarily take over the conduct of the defence from

10 the accused should the Trial Chamber find, following a warning, that the

11 accused is engaging in disruptive conduct or conduct requiring his removal

12 from the courtroom, under Rule 80(B) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure

13 and Evidence."

14 I'll repeat what I said after I verified that you had received

15 these orders: That if you are unhappy with them, if you want them to be

16 reversed, that you can seek remedies that are legally open to you, not,

17 however, to express your disagreement by disrupting conduct in this

18 courtroom.

19 Having said this, Mr. Hooper, you are invited to introduce

20 yourself.

21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Orie, I demand that I be given

22 an opportunity to state my views on your warning. It is my right to state

23 my views on that warning. The Appeal Chamber reminded you of that as

24 well, that I have the right to state my views before you pass a decision

25 on removing me.

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj, the Chamber decided that Mr. Hooper will

3 have the opportunity first just to say who he is and that he is present in

4 this courtroom, and then you'll have an opportunity to raise any issue

5 about his presence after he has -- after we have on the record that Mr.

6 Hooper is in this courtroom, accompanied by Mr. O'Shea.

7 Mr. Hooper, would you please introduce yourself.

8 MR. HOOPER: I'm David Hooper, with Andreas O'Shea, and assisted

9 by Ms. Lea Kulinowski. And I stress this time: We do not represent this

10 accused, Dr. Seselj. We do not represent him. And we have had no contact

11 with him. I make that plain so that he can hear me say that, because I

12 wondered this morning whether he may have been under the misapprehension I

13 was here to represent him. I am not. I am here, together with Mr.

14 O'Shea, to act as stand-by counsel, on the instruction of the Registrar,

15 following the order of the Chamber.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Hooper.

17 Mr. Seselj, I understand that you wanted to raise an issue in

18 relation to the presence of Mr. Hooper and Mr. O'Shea in this courtroom.

19 You have the opportunity to do so.

20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Hooper and O'Shea filed at least ten

21 motions on my behalf and without my approval. I have come to learn that

22 Hooper even signed some kind of agreement with the Prosecutor, and I don't

23 know anything about the content of that agreement. In that way, they

24 introduced a certain practice here that does not exist in the civilised

25 world; that someone who is imposed on behalf of the Defence without his

1 agreement undertakes matters related to procedure. In that way, my

2 defence becomes senseless from the very start.

3 I demand from you that you remove either them or me from this

4 courtroom. In this courtroom there is not enough room both for Hooper and

5 me, and now it is up to you. Do whatever you want. My defence is

6 impossible for as long as Hooper and O'Shea are sitting there where the

7 Defence is supposed to sit. So even an outside observer would get that

8 they are the ones who are representing the Defence rather than me. You

9 can declare me insane or whatever, but you cannot do that without proper

10 medical expertise, and it is only then that you can bring in someone who

11 is going to play-act as my Defence counsel.

12 It is my place to sit in the first row, because when Prosecution

13 witnesses come in, they have to get the right impression, that I am on a

14 footing of equality with the Prosecution. This way it's -- everything is

15 upside down. It is psychologically unbearable for me to bear Hooper and

16 O'Shea sitting in front of me in the courtroom. If I have to be full of

17 anxiety in terms of what they are going to do next on my behalf, then I

18 can't conduct my defence. There is no compromise solution here. You have

19 to decide either to remove them or to remove me.

20 [Trial Chamber confers]

21 MR. HOOPER: Mr. President, if it's any contribution, and if it

22 makes any difference at all, if Mr. Seselj wants to sit here and we don't

23 mind giving up these seats to sit somewhere else convenient.

24 May I just say, in respect of my motions that at one time were

25 demanded of us, our understanding is those are all in abeyance in any

1 respect, and so Mr. Seselj at this point has, as it were, a completely

2 open field and he shouldn't feel that any previous motions that were, in

3 fact, submitted by us, as we were directed to do, are binding on him,

4 because I don't believe that they are.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Hooper, seating in this courtroom is not

6 the first issue raised by Mr. Seselj, and how to deal with any motions or

7 submissions that have been filed by you during the period when you acted

8 under the then relevant orders as assigned counsel is also a matter for a

9 later stage to discuss.

10 The first issue Mr. Seselj raised is that he seems not to accept

11 you - and he referred to you as a person - to be appointed as his stand-by

12 counsel.

13 Mr. Seselj, I already informed you that, for whatever reason,

14 including any reason concerning the person of Mr. Hooper and the way he

15 acted in the past period, if you disagree, you can seek the remedy that's

16 available to you. And I would say if it comes to the person of --

17 appointed stand-by counsel, I think it would be that you have -- you would

18 have to address the Registrar --

19 THE ACCUSED: [No interpretation].

20 JUDGE ORIE: -- Mr. Seselj, I have not finished yet. Therefore, I

21 repeat that disrupting the order in this courtroom is not one of the

22 remedies available to you.

23 Then, second, I did understand your primary request for this

24 Chamber to choose whether to remove Mr. Hooper or you from the courtroom,

25 because, as I understood you, you could not be within this courtroom with

1 him. Apart from seating where, that is a matter that comes second and is

2 not of primary concern, if I understood you well. The Chamber denies your

3 suggestion to remove Mr. Hooper, wherever seated, from this courtroom.

4 That's the ruling on this matter.

5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] In that case, Mr. Orie, I request

6 that I be removed from the courtroom. This is my procedural right.

7 Because, for as long as Hooper is here, there is no room for me in the

8 courtroom. It is impossible for me to conduct my defence. And don't you

9 ever even bring me into the courtroom until Hooper is removed.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, first of all, whether it is your right to

11 be removed from the courtroom is not, in my view, a correct understanding

12 of the law. We will continue, and the warning stands, that if you behave

13 in a disruptive manner, then the Chamber has warned you that this might

14 warrant your removal, and then we'll see what happens.

15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Orie, you may not continue until

16 Hooper and O'Shea are removed from the courtroom. You cannot continue

17 with me present here. I've said here long enough, and I'm quite surprised

18 that you seem to initially have understood me well and now you are acting

19 contrary to that. It is impossible for Hooper and me to be present in the

20 same courtroom simultaneously. It is absolutely impossible.

21 [Trial Chamber confers]

22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Seselj, your last interruption has been

23 considered by the Chamber. You interrupted when I wanted to proceed with

24 this Status Conference. The Chamber considers this persistence in

25 disruptive conduct. And since you have been warned that such conduct may

1 warrant a removal of the accused from the courtroom, the Chamber hereby

2 decides that you will be removed from the courtroom.

3 Mr. Seselj.

4 [The accused leaves the courtroom]

5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hooper, in accordance with the order of the

6 Chamber, the order of the Chamber of the 25th, under (H), the Chamber

7 draws your attention to the fact that it belongs to your duties at this

8 moment to temporarily take over the conduct of the defence from the

9 accused, since the Trial Chamber has found, following the warning, that

10 the accused is engaging in disruptive conduct and considered this conduct

11 such that it ordered the removal of the accused from the courtroom, under

12 Rule 80(B) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

13 I take it that your present position is clear to you.

14 MR. HOOPER: Yes. Yes, Mr. President.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll continue with the Status Conference.

16 No agenda has been distributed among the parties. The Chamber has

17 an agenda on its mind but considered it not appropriate to distribute it

18 among the parties if no copy would be available in a language the accused,

19 who was supposed to represent himself during this Status Conference, was

20 available to him. I said the language the accused understands would be

21 available to him.

22 We have on our list, first of all, and unfortunately Mr. Seselj

23 left the courtroom so I would have introduced to him the present

24 composition of this Bench: Judge Robinson, sitting to my right, and Judge

25 Hoepfel sitting to my left. I think it was by a decision of the President

1 of yesterday that Judge Hoepfel was not only appointed for pre-trial

2 matters but also for the trial of Mr. Seselj.

3 First of all, I would like to inform you that the Chamber

4 considers it, at this moment, not feasible to have a pre-trial conference

5 following this Status Conference. The Chamber considers that we are not

6 sufficiently ready to do that today. So we will continue with the Status

7 Conference, and we had in mind to schedule another Status Conference next

8 week, but the present situation might cause us to reconsider the court

9 scheduling for the next week or even for this week.

10 What I had on my agenda was a review of the decisions since the

11 20th of October, 2006. I had in mind that the Chamber would go through

12 this decision, which we very briefly did, with the accused, and then to

13 pay attention to the role of stand-by counsel as well.

14 Mr. Hooper, just for a moment, forgetting about that your

15 situation has been temporarily changed - at this moment you have taken

16 over duties; you're conducting the defence - well, let's just assume that

17 this is temporary and that you'd be back in your position as stand-by

18 counsel soon. Of course we cannot predict what will happen. But are

19 there any questions in respect of your position, if you would be stand-by

20 counsel again, as far as your role is concerned?

21 MR. HOOPER: Yes, thank you, Mr. President. Well, let's revert

22 entirely to stand-by --

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

24 MR. HOOPER: -- stand-by counsel. Thank you.

25 The position of stand-by counsel is wholly reactive to the wishes

1 of the Chamber, in my understanding, and is not, in any way, proactive,

2 not to any significant degree in any event. From time to time, there

3 might, it seems to us, be issues that we can see that perhaps could be

4 usefully raised in order to be discussed and resolved which could, for

5 example, not be raised by the -- by Dr. Seselj himself.

6 Now, of course, it might be that he's considered the particular

7 matter and decided not to raise it. That's one obvious situation.

8 Another situation might be that representing himself with such a feast of

9 matters to consider, that perhaps he may have overlooked a particular

10 aspect. You can see that at present, certainly, and I don't see the

11 matter changing in the future, you can see at present that our

12 relationship with Dr. Seselj is an absolute zero. There's no contact

13 between us. So there's no situation whereby we can informally, for

14 example, raise or discuss matters with him outside the court.

15 So it's against that background that we wonder whether the Court

16 has any expectation that we, in fact, become slightly proactive to the

17 extent of raising matters which are not themselves raised by the Chamber

18 or raised by the accused.

19 It might be, for example, that we could sit here and consider that

20 there could be a significant point that could be raised in the distant

21 future, which it would be far more appropriate to raise now. And, in

22 fact, if it had been full counsel, it would probably be our duty to raise

23 with the Chamber so that the matter could be considered and disposed of

24 and otherwise dealt with and reacted upon. So it's against that kind of

25 background that we wonder what our position is.

1 Aside from that, can you just give me one moment, Mr. President.

2 [Defence counsel confer]

3 MR. HOOPER: That is the matter, in fact, yes.

4 [Trial Chamber confers]

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Hooper.

6 MR. HOOPER: Aside from that, I don't think there are any other

7 matters that arise at the moment while stand-by counsel.

8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you, Mr. Hooper. It's not only that the

9 Chamber doesn't expect you to raise any issue on your own behalf because

10 you consider it to be -- to contribute to a smooth and, perhaps, fair

11 hearing of this case. The Chamber even expects you not to do so unless

12 specifically invited by the Chamber to address the Chamber on a certain

13 matter or instructed to do so by Mr. Seselj, even if you would have low

14 expectations as far as ever receiving such an instruction. That's how the

15 Chamber interprets its own decision of the 25th of October, as far as the

16 functions of stand-by counsel are concerned, which have been given a

17 follow-up in the Registrar's decision to appoint you as stand-by counsel.

18 So we take this decision literally; that is, even if, for example,

19 Mr. Seselj would raise an issue which you could support with case law or

20 whatever, or if there would be an issue that would materially advance the

21 proceedings and not raised by Mr. Seselj, you not being invited by the

22 Chamber to address the matter, the Chamber therefore expects you not,

23 then, to raise any issue. That's how we consider your role as stand-by

24 counsel, and, of course, Mr. O'Shea's position as stand-by co-counsel or

25 co-stand-by counsel. I don't know how to say it. That's how the Chamber

1 sees it. Is this clear?

2 MR. HOOPER: Yes, Mr. President. I appreciate that.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Then I'd like to move on to what is our second point

4 on the agenda, the second point on the agenda for us being the readiness

5 of the parties to commence trial.

6 Of course, we are finding ourselves in a bit of an awkward

7 position here because I would have liked to hear from Mr. Seselj what he

8 would still need, if anything at all, to start the trial.

9 Mr. Hooper, could you make any observations at this moment from

10 two points of view; that is, first of all, in the situation where Mr.

11 Seselj would represent himself again at the start of the trial, whether

12 you at this moment would have any observations as to what would still be

13 needed for him to prepare for the start of the trial, and perhaps add to

14 that what would be needed if the temporary situation would become - we

15 don't know whether it ever will - would become a permanent situation so

16 that the Chamber doesn't have to come back soon and ask one time, what if

17 Mr. Seselj represents himself, what if Mr. Seselj will be represented. So

18 the Chamber would like to be informed about your views on both situations.

19 MR. HOOPER: Very well. Dealing, first of all, with Dr. Seselj's

20 position today, towards the end of August, Dr. Seselj lost his right to

21 represent himself and that right was only given back to him just over a

22 week ago or so, on the 20th of October. In those circumstances, it would,

23 in our view, be most unlikely that Dr. Seselj could be in a position to be

24 properly prepared for his case in the near future, because he would have

25 effectively have lost almost two months when he was, presumably mentally

1 very much on the back foot, thinking that he wasn't in fact representing

2 himself.

3 Now, at this stage, also, there are a large number of motions that

4 he needs to address his mind to and which he would not have been

5 addressing his mind to because most of them arose, in fact, since he lost

6 his right to self-represent; and in respect of none of them, until a week

7 or so ago, was there any expectation that he himself would be responding.

8 So those two matters, in a way part of the same thing, but taken

9 together, together with the history of disclosure here, both of exhibits

10 and of witnesses, all of which have come very late in this case,

11 considering he's been in custody for three and a half years, suggests to

12 us that Dr. Seselj will not be prepared to start his trial in the

13 immediate future.

14 In respect of the other matter, it's very difficult to wear these

15 two hats, in a way, and --

16 JUDGE ORIE: If you'd -- perhaps I could intervene. I do

17 understand. Earlier, at a Status Conference, when, also in the absence of

18 Mr. Seselj, the start of the trial has been discussed, and later on you

19 have requested a, well, let's say, a slow start for the proceedings - two

20 days a week for November; three days a week for December. Perhaps I

21 should limit my question because I can imagine what uncomfortable feelings

22 you'd have.

23 If the situation in which you would represent Mr. Seselj would

24 continue, not on a temporary basis but on a more continuous basis, is

25 there anything that would change, in view of submissions you've made

1 before?

2 MR. HOOPER: Submissions in respect of response to motions, for

3 example?

4 JUDGE ORIE: No.

5 MR. HOOPER: Sorry.

6 JUDGE ORIE: I'm mainly talking about the speed of the start, the

7 pace of the trial in the early stages, and the starting moment.

8 MR. HOOPER: Well, it won't come, I'm sure, as a surprise to know

9 that the events of the last ten days or two weeks have rather taken the

10 wind out of our sails as well. We have been effectively out of the case

11 for ten days, coupled with which, both this week and last week, there was,

12 on my part for example, the necessity of coming here, and every visit here

13 is a loss of effectively the best part of two days, as you'll probably

14 appreciate. In fact, in terms of actual attention, work paid to a case in

15 the case of the witnesses it's not very effective or hasn't been in the

16 past.

17 The result of that is that any course has, I think, to be altered

18 by the addition of about two weeks in terms of preparation.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

20 MR. HOOPER: Having said that, the only other worrying concern is

21 this: That there are significant matters in respect of motions and

22 responses that need to be addressed, particularly, for example, in respect

23 of early witnesses, and this -- finding oneself in this halfway house in

24 terms of no continuum of presentation - I know, Mr. President, you can

25 appreciate - places us, as far as us wearing that hat, in a difficult

1 position at present. Thank you.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that answer.

3 [Trial Chamber confers]

4 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Uertz-Retzlaff, several times reference has

5 been made to disclosure, well, let's say, since mid-August, of a

6 substantive amount of material. Could you update the Chamber on -- to

7 what extent this disclosure, and under what rule it was, whether this

8 material has been disclosed at an earlier stage, and at what format it had

9 been disclosed at an earlier stage, and whether it was disclosed to

10 counsel only. I take it that this is what happened after the Registrar

11 had appointed Mr. Hooper as counsel, up to the moment that the Appeal

12 Chamber has reversed the Decision of this Chamber, the Appeal Chamber's

13 Decision of the 20th of October. Could you please inform us, and could

14 you also explain to us if there is a substantial amount of material

15 disclosed that was not earlier disclosed, either under a Rule 92 ter

16 motion or in any other respect, how you'd consider that the Defence - and

17 you know the Defence is accused and counsel, so for whatever situation -

18 would have sufficient time to prepare for that material.

19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, before the assignment of

20 Mr. Hooper as counsel, the accused had actually received several batches

21 of materials, according to Rule 66 and also according to Rule 68.

22 However, as it was in electronic format mostly, he didn't use it. He

23 rejected the acceptance of these materials. He received some Rule 68

24 material in hard copy, and that he kept. He received certain materials

25 that was in English language that he did not accept.

1 Since the assignment of Mr. Hooper as counsel, we --

2 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you: Material in English, which he did not

3 accept --

4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

5 JUDGE ORIE: -- Material disclosed under what rule? Because under

6 66(A)(ii) and 66(B), I think the material should be disclosed in a

7 language the accused understands, whereas Rule 68, with the exception of

8 exculpatory material, can be disclosed in another language as well. Could

9 you inform us about that.

10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: What, actually, Mr. Seselj did was, whenever

11 we provided materials to him, we usually provided them in both languages,

12 B/C/S and English, and he always would exclude the English, send it back,

13 and keep the B/C/S material, whenever it was in hard copy. And that was

14 usually filings. For example, if we did 92 bis filings and the like, he

15 would actually keep the B/C/S versions and send back the English. That's

16 what I was addressing when I spoke about him sending back materials in

17 English.

18 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask one question in that respect. When you're

19 talking about 92 bis, I take it that this is the old 92 bis.

20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, that's the old rule.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Quite a substantial part of material that may have

22 been disclosed may have been in English only, especially if I think it,

23 all through, went to 92 bis (D), transcripts are not available in B/C/S.

24 How was this material disclosed to him?

25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I have now to ask ...

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

2 [Prosecution counsel confer]

3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, when those materials were -- the

4 English transcripts were provided and sent back by the accused. But at

5 the same time, we proposed through the Registrar to provide audiotapes,

6 but that option was never taken. It was actually when we make filings,

7 it's up to the Registrar to provide the translation, and we proposed to

8 send him audio files but that was not done, as far as we were informed.

9 And he would have sent it back anyway because it would have been

10 electronic.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What would have been done by him is, of course,

12 speculation --

13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

14 JUDGE ORIE: -- Although one could have certain expectations. Does

15 that mean that -- perhaps I should address the Registry in this respect as

16 well, that any 92 bis material, and I'm specifically thinking about

17 transcripts of other cases, were finally not offered to Mr. Seselj, not

18 even in electronic format? The representative of the Registry, could he

19 inform the Chamber of what happened in this respect.

20 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

21 JUDGE ORIE: We do understand that the representative of the

22 registry would need to verify some of the information he thinks is correct

23 information, but before putting it on the record.

24 THE REGISTRAR: That's correct, Your Honour. I would have to

25 double check on the exact status of those tapes -- the.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then you will have an opportunity to answer this

2 question later on after you've had a chance to inquire with colleagues in

3 the Registry.

4 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, I will. Thank you, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE ORIE: So there seems to be some uncertainty.

6 Madam Uertz-Retzlaff, I interrupted you. Please proceed.

7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes. Since the assignment of Mr. Hooper, we

8 actually made four submissions of Rule 66 -- Rule 66 materials, and they

9 were only sent to him and not disclosed to the accused. And it was in

10 electronic format. If we now would have to repeat this exercise for the

11 accused, submitting this same material to the accused, it would take us

12 about two weeks to put it all together. It would be much easier if we

13 could simply copy the CD-ROMs that we provided to Mr. Hooper. Then it

14 would be a matter of a day or two.

15 JUDGE ORIE: Are these CD-ROMs only in English?

16 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: English and B/C/S, Your Honour.

17 JUDGE ORIE: B/C/S is available. So it was disclosed at that

18 time --

19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Mostly statements of witnesses that we are

20 going to call or that were of interest to the Defence.

21 JUDGE ORIE: No transcripts?

22 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Previous testimony as well and also DVDs and

23 audios.

24 JUDGE ORIE: In what language?

25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The audio of previous testimony. In B/C/S.

1 JUDGE ORIE: In B/C/S. So do I understand that all the

2 material that has been recently disclosed to Mr. Hooper was accompanied by

3 B/C/S versions of that same material.

4 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour.

5 JUDGE ORIE: That's for the full, 100 per cent correct.

6 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour, that's correct.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Then, of course, the Chamber will consider whether

8 disclosure would have to be repeated for an accused who represents

9 himself. We are temporarily in a situation where he is not, but we have

10 to anticipate to a situation that we'd proceed on the basis as we started

11 this morning.

12 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, perhaps one more remark. In

13 relation to Rule 68, we also provided to counsel Rule 68 material in

14 English and B/C/S. We would have to repeat that as well, but it's not

15 very much so that can be done in -- on very short notice, if we have to

16 repeat that same disclosure to the accused as well.

17 JUDGE ORIE: Okay.

18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: So that's not significant.

19 JUDGE ORIE: You're saying you would need not more than two weeks

20 to disclose anew any material which was recently disclosed to Mr. Hooper

21 when he was acting as counsel for the situation where the -- the present

22 situation, although temporarily interrupted, the present situation where

23 Mr. Seselj is representing himself, and again only temporarily now

24 interrupted by the decision of this morning.

25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour. But let me also mention a

1 third issue.

2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That's delayed disclosure. We have a lot of

4 witnesses who've delayed disclosure, and there are also two motions

5 pending to this issue. This also needs -- will have to be done at the

6 time when we are -- have to do that.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you give us any impression about the

8 amount of that material? Again, are we talking mainly about statements,

9 which are usually smaller in size, or are we talking about transcripts,

10 which are usually huge in size?

11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour, we are speaking about both.

12 It's statements and it's also transcripts. And they all relate to our

13 motions in relation to 92 bis and ter.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll have to see whether we have sufficient

15 information to have an estimate of the size of that material.

16 Mr. Hooper.

17 MR. HOOPER: Yes. May I just add that there's the exhibits as

18 well, all of the exhibits.

19 JUDGE ORIE: All the exhibits. And all the exhibits are how

20 many?

21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The exhibits related to the delayed

22 disclosure witnesses. You can actually see it easily from our pending

23 motions, where we always have an ex parte annex, and there you can see the

24 statements, the transcripts, and also the related exhibits.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Does is always give the number of pages, each, of the

1 exhibits?

2 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.

3 JUDGE ORIE: So it's difficult for us. If I have a hundred

4 exhibits, it could be a hundred pages, but it could be 2.000 as well. So

5 the Chamber is very much trying to form its opinion about what would be

6 needed to prepare, to look at these materials. And these exhibits, have

7 they been disclosed at an earlier stage?

8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE ORIE: And to what extent? Most of them? Part of them?

10 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I think most of them. If you speak about

11 delayed disclosure witnesses, the neutral documents were disclosed. But

12 those bearing a name and certain relevance to the witness were not

13 disclosed. What you can see is, attached to the motions were the DVDs,

14 that entire material including the exhibits. And when you look at the

15 index of these materials, you can actually see the range of the ERN

16 numbers and then you can see how many pages there are behind a certain

17 exhibit.

18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That needs a lot of calculations.

19 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

20 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will consider -- who is going to do those

21 calculations?

22 MR. HOOPER: It is quite a lot of calculations, and some of it is

23 unknown to us because, of course, some of these are ex parte matters and

24 my friend there is talking about matters that haven't been served at all.

25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

1 MR. HOOPER: But the exhibits themselves were served on us, and I

2 mean the totality of the basic exhibits were served on the 5th or 6th of

3 September, on us, but they wouldn't, I think, have been served on the

4 accused. And indeed that's right. So he hasn't had any of the exhibits

5 in this case. That's right.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Unless they were among the material that was offered

7 to him before. Whether or not he then accepted it, whether he accepted

8 them in electronic format --

9 MR. HOOPER: They're all on CDs, and so I'm not sure they ever

10 were, in fact, even tendered to him. They weren't, in fact, because

11 people calculated his reaction would be to reject them.

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I understood that on various occasions,

13 Mr. Seselj refused to accept them. But, of course, that's different from

14 not having offered them to him.

15 MR. HOOPER: That's true, but -- that's true. But from the time

16 that, certainly, I came on the scene, I think the Prosecution viewed

17 service on me as sufficient, given his reaction and -- his main reaction.

18 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that, Mr. Hooper. But whether it has

19 been disclosed to him at an earlier stage so that he could be --

20 familiarise himself already with the content of the material, now knowing

21 that this material will be used during the examination of witnesses,

22 that's, of course -- those are two different matters. Disclosure is one

23 and disclosure specifically pointing at the use of that material at the

24 testimony of a certain witness is a different matter.

25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, we have not disclosed the

1 exhibits when we filed the exhibits list because we were then waiting for

2 a decision on the form of disclosure. And when this decision was taken,

3 we put everything together and wanted to provide it to Mr. Seselj, but

4 then Mr. Hooper was assigned and so we gave it only to Mr. Hooper.

5 JUDGE ORIE: So it took you from the 4th of July until, what was

6 it, mid-August?

7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, because it was a huge amount of

8 exhibits. So he didn't get them. It's only with Mr. Hooper.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. We'll consider that matter.

10 [Trial Chamber confers]

11 JUDGE ORIE: Is there anything else, Madam Uertz-Retzlaff, that

12 you'd like to raise in relation to disclosure issues at this moment?

13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour.

14 JUDGE ORIE: I think what the Chamber would need is a clear,

15 concise overview of what has been disclosed, offered, not accepted, what

16 language, what format, so that we have, for once and forever, that we know

17 exactly the facts on which will have to base our decisions.

18 Similarly, I am now addressing the representative of the Registry,

19 the Chamber would also like to be informed in detail about what facilities

20 were given to Mr. Seselj as far as computers offered to him, assistance in

21 training, people stand-by available to Mr. Seselj in the Detention Unit to

22 provide access to material, even if he would not have accepted it and

23 therefore not received it. But the Chamber would like to know what

24 exactly facilities were available to him in order to be in a better

25 position to see what opportunities he has had to look at these materials

1 and to what extent he was not in a position to do so.

2 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]

3 MR. HOOPER: Mr. President, can we raise one other matter?

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me first finish. One second.

5 MR. HOOPER: All right.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask the Registry how many days you could

7 prepare a -- perhaps a short memo on this to be distributed among the

8 parties which, perhaps, would have attached any communications in writing

9 on the matter? How much time would you need to prepare for that?

10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this will require me to be in touch

11 with the United Nations Detention Unit and the Office of the Legal Aid and

12 Detention, and I would anticipate having a response to you tomorrow, by

13 close of business.

14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. The Chamber would appreciate it if you

15 would provide us with such a survey.

16 Mr. Hooper.

17 MR. HOOPER: Maybe a further matter that could also be addressed

18 by the Registry is what facilities, or whether adequate facilities have

19 been provided to Dr. Seselj in terms of the investigation of his case.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you include that?

21 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. That's taken note of.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps it would be good, also, to be aware of any

23 further thoughts developed within the Registry on facilities to be given

24 to Mr. Seselj, what facilities to provide to him or what facilities he

25 asked for specifically. Of course, we have some information from the

1 past, but we have no update on whether he recently asked for further

2 matters, and it's important for the Chamber, to assess the preparedness of

3 Prosecution and Defence, to have this information available.

4 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.

5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is there- let me just go back to my agenda- any

6 other matter to be raised in relation to preparation for trial,

7 preparedness, and disclosure?

8 Madam Uertz-Retzlaff.

9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour, I would like to refer to

10 our letter to the Trial Chamber --

11 JUDGE ORIE: May I interrupt you for a second. The Chamber is

12 aware that you sent a letter -- well, you're referring to it in open

13 court, although you said the letter was confidential. I don't know

14 whether it's about the existence of that letter or whether it was some

15 aspects of the content that should be dealt in a confidential way. The

16 Chamber noted that this letter was sent to the Chamber, copied to the

17 accused, but the Chamber is not aware of any translation provided to him.

18 So, just for the record, and anticipating a situation that the taking over

19 of Mr. Hooper is on a temporary basis, I would like you to introduce any

20 matter contained in that letter that we have not dealt with now, orally.

21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, actually, Mr. Seselj did receive

22 the letter in a language he understands.

23 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber wasn't aware of it.

24 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: We had a translation going with it, and also

25 we provided a copy to stand-by counsel.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So, therefore, that doesn't need, then, the

2 confidentiality of the matter?

3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: The confidentiality related to one witness

4 issue, that was point 3, and I wouldn't actually -- I would not raise it

5 here. I only want to mention the witness scheduling, and I have already

6 mentioned in the letter that we need sufficient advance notice of the

7 trial date where the witnesses have to be appear, and we think the -- we

8 and the witness -- Victims and Witnesses Unit would need two weeks so that

9 we know in advance two weeks.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

11 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: We also addressed in this letter that we

12 consider to change the witness order back to the original, starting with

13 the insiders. We have actually -- we have actually taken now a different

14 view, because if we would do that, it would cause a considerable delay

15 because of these delayed disclosure issues.

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

17 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Therefore, we have decided that we will go

18 along according to the revised order, starting with one insider and then

19 having crime-base witnesses for the following weeks. That's what I

20 actually want to bring to your attention.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You address a matter, Madam Uertz-Retzlaff,

22 which the Chamber considered already with some concern, because if you

23 would have moved back to your original schedule, then it might have caused

24 the Chamber to further delay the calling of these witnesses in order to

25 give additional time for preparation, in view of disclosure. That's also

1 the reason why we want to be informed in such detail about disclosure

2 issues, late disclosure, the form of disclosure, et cetera.

3 But I do understand now that, whether we'd start in the present

4 situation, although temporarily interrupted, that Mr. Seselj represents

5 himself, or whether we start -- we would have started in the situation war

6 Mr. Hooper would represent Mr. Seselj, that the order of calling witnesses

7 would not be different.

8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That's correct, Your Honour.

9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that information.

10 I'm looking at the clock -- yes, Mr. Hooper.

11 MR. HOOPER: Mr. President, we don't know at present, of course,

12 how long "temporary" is and, in particular, what the position is in

13 respect of necessary response to motions, decisions in respect of those

14 motions being, of course, quite crucial to the way in which the case

15 unfolds, and in particular with respect to the first and subsequent

16 witnesses, who are rather loosely described as crime-base but rather go

17 more pointedly to the accused than certainly what one's general conception

18 of crime base might imply.

19 I don't know whether, speaking here essentially as stand-by

20 counsel, it would at all assist you and the future of this case, whether

21 you were, in fact, to have a Status Conference, as it were, where Dr.

22 Seselj attended and we did not. I can see, of course, certain

23 difficulties that might arise because of that. But there's no way for me

24 to gauge the full reaction, as it were, of this accused, and the only

25 conduit for that is through the Chamber.

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Can I say I would not be in a position to accept

2 that course. The procedures here are not to be determined by the

3 accused.

4 MR. HOOPER: I do very much appreciate that position, Judge

5 Robinson, very much so. But, as I say, as stand-by counsel with a common

6 interest in the interests of the accused, or his perception of interests,

7 it's -- perhaps nevertheless remains a possibility, that without him

8 determining what this Chamber does, and being quite clear on that,

9 nevertheless there may be an opportunity for at least him to express

10 particular views which, for some reason, he feels unable to express - he's

11 expressed already - with my presence. But that's --

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: The point is that you have been appointed, and

13 quite properly appointed. If he has a difficulty with that, then he must

14 pursue whatever remedies are open to him under the Rules.

15 MR. HOOPER: Yes. I think that was made very clear to him this

16 morning. That merely takes time, and if it's, to some extent, a gauging

17 of an opinion, an explanation, I'm merely saying that we, for our part,

18 won't feel slighted in any way if, in fact, that other course were taken.

19 I make that absolutely clear.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: What would be slighted in my view, would not be

21 you but the dignity and prestige of the Chamber, of the Tribunal, were

22 that course to be followed.

23 JUDGE ORIE: I think the Chamber appreciates that you raised the

24 issue. Judge Robinson expressed already clearly that it's a course that

25 he would not support, and of course the Chamber will consider whatever you

1 have raised and-- to see how to proceed.

2 MR. HOOPER: Mr. O'Shea points out one final matter, and that's an

3 issue of new deadlines for motions.

4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.

5 MR. HOOPER: But there's quite a lot there and we may need time to

6 reflect on it.

7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What I'd like to do is adjourn for a break

8 which is a little longer than usual so that the Chamber has an opportunity

9 to consider a few matters during this break, and then to resume ...

10 [Trial Chamber confers]

11 JUDGE ORIE: To resume at 11.30. I inform the parties, meanwhile

12 that, on my agenda, the one remaining point was to inform the accused of

13 what has been said during the 65 ter Conference as far as what the Chamber

14 anticipates might be its decision on the -- on the reduction of the

15 indictment. Of course, there's no need at this moment to raise the issue

16 in the absence of the accused, although we might decide that we'll just

17 read, for the record, the most important part so that at least there's an

18 opportunity, perhaps at a later stage - I don't know whether that will

19 materialise or not - for the accused to listen to it or have only those 10

20 or 20 lines translated for him. I'm not the master of all the

21 practicalities and I'm not in control of everything that should be given

22 to him if he's not formally entitled to it. But we might decide to do

23 that. That was on my agenda.

24 Then the other items would be the accused's health and conditions

25 of detention. Of course, the Chamber would have preferred to hear this

1 from the accused himself rather than in any indirect way. But

2 nevertheless, if there's anything to be said about it, then the parties

3 are invited to do so.

4 Another matter which was on the agenda: To inform Mr. Seselj

5 about the presentation of documents in court, to explain to him that we'll

6 use the e-court system but that he would not have to suffer under it.

7 He'd just have to adapt the presentation of documents in such a way that

8 they could be scanned and they could be used for e-court purposes.

9 There's no need, I take it, to give a lot of attention to it, since at

10 this moment the parties are aware of how the e-court system functions and

11 instructions for the accused, perhaps, could be better given at another

12 occasion. This also is related to the issue of facilities given to the

13 accused. But it's mainly instructing the accused on how to present

14 whatever he would like to tender in evidence, mainly exhibits.

15 Are there any other matters, before we adjourn, the parties would

16 like to add to the agenda so that the Chamber could include them in its

17 considerations during the break?

18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour. Thank you.

19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hooper.

20 MR. HOOPER: No, thank you, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll adjourn and resume at 11.30.

22 --- Recess taken at 10.40 a.m.

23 --- On resuming at 11.51 a.m.

24 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has considered the present situation, the

25 present situation being that Mr. Hooper has taken over, on a temporary

1 basis, the defence. Since this is only on a temporary basis, the Chamber

2 primarily considers how to proceed if this temporary situation would be

3 ended, and therefore the Chamber is very much interested to know from

4 Mr. Seselj himself about his preparedness for trial, because the Chamber

5 did not receive that information today. Therefore, the Chamber will issue

6 a Scheduling Order and would preferably have in that Scheduling Order that

7 we'll have another Status Conference this Friday. Of course, we have to

8 look at availability of courtrooms and teams to assist us, technical teams

9 and interpreters, so therefore time and courtroom cannot be announced yet.

10 We do not know whether it will be feasible at all to do that on Friday,

11 but that's what we're aiming at. And then to restart, or to start, that

12 Status Conference, having ended the temporary situation in which Mr.

13 Hooper has taken over, and then see whether the Chamber can receive the

14 information it needs to make further determinations as to when the trial

15 could start, based upon other matters, on the information it hopes to

16 receive from Mr. Seselj. If the Chamber will not receive that information

17 from Mr. Seselj at the Status Conference, the Chamber will then consider

18 again how to proceed.

19 That's not yet a ruling but in anticipation of the Scheduling

20 Order issued preferable today, what the Chamber has in mind.

21 Before the break we briefly looked at any remaining agenda points.

22 I then indicated that the Chamber, of course, would like to receive

23 further observations, and of course we'll repeat that at the next Status

24 Conference, on the accused's health, on conditions of detention, from

25 Mr. Seselj himself.

1 But, Mr. Hooper, if there's anything you would like to raise in

2 this respect, having temporarily taken over the defence, you have an

3 opportunity to do so.

4 MR. HOOPER: No, there's nothing. But I'm sure the Scheduling

5 Order and request will be translated into Serbian and provided very soon.

6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course.

7 MR. HOOPER: Thank you.

8 JUDGE ORIE: We will take care of that. With the utmost urgency,

9 the order will be provided. But also this Chamber is dependent on CLSS

10 resources, but we hope we will be in a position to have it translated not

11 later than tomorrow, or even today.

12 Is there any other matter you'd like to raise, Madam

13 Uertz-Retzlaff?

14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour. First, one information.

15 We have meanwhile -- there is a secondary tool to go through the exhibits

16 list to find out how many pages there are. It's not very accurate, but

17 according to our findings, it's that the exhibits list has actually 35.000

18 pages, B/C/S documents, including, of course, photos, sketches, charts,

19 and these kinds of things.

20 JUDGE ORIE: And would that --

21 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That actually amounts to 40.000 pages,

22 English translation.

23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And would that include any transcripts to be

24 tendered under Rule ...

25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: As exhibits, yes.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, as exhibits. Is there any way -- because you

2 may have noticed that the Chamber is interested to know -- I mean, what we

3 have to do with the 92 -- old 92 bis, or new 92 ter, material, is what

4 time to be given for preparation is still to be considered. But we know

5 that that's the bulky material. What, then, remains is the statements,

6 photos, so everything but excluding the transcripts, which often are

7 hundreds and hundreds of pages? What would then remain, apart from --

8 because, Madam Uertz-Retzlaff, at a certain moment, you and perhaps the

9 Chamber would also have to consider whether it becomes more efficient to

10 have a witness in court for three or four hours to repeat some of his

11 evidence, perhaps partly on the basis of 89(F) in order to avoid that we

12 have to read a thousand pages of transcript, of which perhaps 200 are of

13 great relevance for the case. So we'll have to consider that, and

14 therefore I'm emphasising again and again, what is transcript material,

15 which is known to be always bulky material, and what is statements,

16 documents, reports, photographs, maps, et cetera? Is there anything you

17 can say about that?

18 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour, I can't do that, because

19 it's just the exhibits I've just referred to. And in this exhibits list,

20 we have these packages, 92 bis packages. It's just mentioned as a

21 position and not with page numbers. So we couldn't say that.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps if you could prepare for the next

23 Status Conference, to see whether we can get some more information about

24 that, because it might be of importance for the Chamber to -- for any

25 determination of the further proceedings.

1 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour --

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I just endorse what the Presiding Judge said

3 about that, because the whole purpose of the transcript procedure is to

4 achieve expeditiousness. And if, in this particular instance, it is not

5 achieving that, and if, in this particular instance, it would be more

6 expeditious to have the witness testify in court on the basis of a

7 statement under 89(F) and be available for cross-examination, if that is

8 the decision, then I think that is something which you should consider.

9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you. We will do

10 that. But I will also -- I can actually say that many of the 92 -- many

11 of the transcripts come from the Milosevic case, and actually what we have

12 there is a very brief cross-examination, more or less, and the -- and the

13 tendered statement. Do you see what I mean?

14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but then the -- but then it's not bulky material

15 anymore. That's exactly what I wanted to find out. To what extent these,

16 what I'd say, old 92 bis material is bulky material, because if we're

17 talking about 30.000, 35.000 - in English 40.000 - pages, then I'd very

18 much like to know whether we're talking about 2.000 pages of documents,

19 maps, statements, et cetera, and 33.000 pages of 92 bis (D) material, or

20 whether the balance is different. Because, as just explained by Judge

21 Robinson, if the bulky material would require such an enormous time for

22 further preparation, both the Bench, perhaps the Defence, then at a

23 certain moment we should consider what is the most expeditious way of

24 proceeding.

25 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

1 JUDGE ORIE: Whether it's to proceed under 92 bis or 92 ter road

2 or to, perhaps, differentiate and say here the material is not bulky, it's

3 easy to prepare for that, so we could consider admission of that material

4 under Rule 92, et cetera; and perhaps for others to say this material is

5 so bulky, so just hearing the testimony will be far more expeditious and

6 far more easy to digest than to have it all prepared on the basis of this

7 bulky 92 bis material.

8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: This is understood, Your Honour, and we will

9 do that.

10 The other thing I wanted to inform you about: In the past, we

11 have actually filed four disclosure reports detailing what was provided to

12 the accused and what -- what was his reaction to this, whether he took it

13 or rejected it, and that covers the years 2003 and most of 2004. Do you

14 want us to repeat this information in our now new disclosure report, or

15 could we simply cover now the time period from October 2004 to today?

16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If it would be easy either for us or for you to

17 link the information in these old reports to recent disclosure, then there

18 should be not a major problem, either for you or for us. We might ask

19 you -- we might not yet ask you to link it and see whether we can do it

20 without too many problems. If it becomes problematic, we might invite you

21 to say, Well, show us exactly what, in this report, on that disclosure,

22 whether it's linked or it's the same material. I have not every recent

23 disclosure in my mind. But please check whether it's easy to link it,

24 easy to make -- to see whether the recent disclosure is already part of

25 earlier disclosed material which -- and also whether the information,

1 whether he accepted or did not accept it, whether it was prior to the 4th

2 of July decision; whether it was after the 4th of July decision, so that's

3 the format. So that's all clear so we have a very transparent picture of

4 what is new, what was rejected, what was accepted, what was known to the

5 accused, what was not known to the accused, in what format it was brought

6 to the attention of the accused, so we have a clear picture of that --

7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes.

8 JUDGE ORIE: -- because that's our major concern at this moment.

9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Thank you, Your Honour.

10 JUDGE ORIE: Anything else?

11 [Trial Chamber confers]

12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Finally, the Chamber would ask the Registry to

13 provide the B/C/S audio of this Status Conference to the accused and to

14 verify whether the necessary facilities to listen to this audio are

15 available to the accused so that he can -- has effective access to that

16 audio material, preferably to be prepared today. If not, the Chamber

17 would like to be informed when it will be provided to him.

18 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. The Chamber will be appraised

19 of the status of this particular Status Conference in its audio format, or

20 if the Chamber would also prefer, if we can have a VHS tape in the B/C/S

21 language provided to the accused, the Chamber would be acceptable, because

22 we ...

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE ORIE: The concern of the Chamber is that the accused has

25 access to what has been said during this Status Conference. If he would

1 be provided with a VHS in B/C/S, then, of course, he would be able to look

2 at it as well, which is not essential for the Chamber, but the Chamber

3 does not oppose, as long as he has effective access to whatever has been

4 said during this Status Conference, be it audio, be it VHS; both fine, as

5 long as he can --

6 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour.

7 JUDGE ORIE: -- hear it. And if it is a video, then at least he

8 has an opportunity to see it as well.

9 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. The Chamber's ruling is duly

10 considered.

11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Any other matter?

12 [Trial Chamber confers]

13 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that that's all the information the Chamber

14 has requested, both from Registry and the Prosecution, that it's clear

15 what is expected, that is, the information about facilities offered to

16 him, unless you'd like to give that information right away.

17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, during the break, I've had the

18 opportunity to consult staff at the Office of Legal Aid and Detention, and

19 we've been informed that to put together a comprehensive report, as the

20 Chamber requested, they're requesting that the Chamber consider that

21 report be filed sometime early next week.

22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I -- if at least the basic information would be

23 available, even if not in its final written form, at the next Status

24 Conference, that be highly appreciated, because otherwise we might get

25 stuck there.

1 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, I will indicate this to the

2 concerned authority.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Hooper.

4 MR. HOOPER: May I mention one matter, because we may not get an

5 opportunity to mention it again, and it's merely this: I think as an

6 earlier stage we may have indicated our response to the question of

7 submitting statements rather than having oral testimony from the witness.

8 And since then, I think we've been overtaken by a change in the rules, in

9 92 ter, of course. And just basically in terms of our position now, we

10 just say that. Generally, it's our view that that would have a radical

11 effect -- or there is a radical effect on that, on the interpretation of

12 that rule, when you have a defendant who's representing himself and who

13 may not, therefore, be skilled in cross-examination. It's another factor

14 to take into account.

15 And also, that that is a particular matter, because it concerns,

16 for example, the first witness the Prosecution intend to call, VS-017,

17 it's a particular matter that is imminent, needs to be addressed. And Dr.

18 Seselj really, perhaps, needs to focus, perhaps, on that particular

19 aspect.

20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'll consider this change in the Rules and the

21 effect it will have on the self-representation of Mr. Seselj, and if need

22 be, we'll raise the matter in his presence.

23 [Trial Chamber confers]

24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber will consider the matter seriously

25 and see what attention should be paid to it, either at the next Status

1 Conference or at any other moment.

2 MR. HOOPER: Thank you.

3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we'll adjourn until the next Status

4 Conference of which the date, time, and courtroom are not determined yet.

5 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned

6 at 12.11 p.m.

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25