Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 557

1 Thursday, April 29th, 1999

2 (Status Conference)

3 (Open session)

4 (The accused entered court)

5 --- Upon commencing at 2.29 p.m.

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Will the registrar call the

7 case?

8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your

9 Honours. Case number IT-95-9-PT, the Prosecutor versus

10 Milan Simic, Miroslav Tadic, Stevan Todorovic, and Simo

11 Zaric.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. May we have the

13 appearances?

14 MR. NIEMANN: Good afternoon, Your Honours.

15 My name is Niemann, and I appear with my colleagues

16 Ms. Paterson, Ms. MacFadyen, Ms. Hayden and

17 Ms. Annink-Janvier, as the case manager, for the

18 Prosecution, if Your Honours please.

19 MR. BRASHICH: Good afternoon, Your Honours.

20 Dan Brashich for the accused Todorovic. Good

21 afternoon.

22 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, good afternoon.

23 Pantelic, Defence counsel for Mr. Miroslav Tadic.

24 MR. DE SAINT JUST: (Interpretation)

25 Mr. de Saint Just from the Paris bar for Miroslav

Page 558

1 Tadic. Thank you.

2 MR. AVRAMOVIC: (Interpretation) I am

3 Mr. Branislav Avramovic for Mr. Milan Simic.

4 MR. PISAREVIC: (Interpretation) Good

5 afternoon, Your Honours. I'm Borislav Pisarevic for

6 Simo Zaric. Thank you.

7 MR. LAZAREVIC: (Interpretation) I am

8 Aleksandar Lazarevic, Your Honours, the legal assistant

9 of Mr. Pisarevic. Thank you.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: We have to ensure that the

11 accused are hearing the proceedings in a language which

12 they understand.

13 I call first on the accused Tadic. Are you

14 hearing the proceedings, Mr. Tadic?

15 THE ACCUSED TADIC: (Interpretation) Yes.

16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Mr. Todorovic?

17 THE ACCUSED TODOROVIC: (Interpretation) Yes,

18 Your Honours.

19 JUDGE ROBINSON: And Mr. Simo Zaric?

20 THE ACCUSED ZARIC: (Interpretation) Yes, Your

21 Honours.

22 JUDGE ROBINSON: This is a Pre-Trial

23 Conference, and I will, at the outset, outline the

24 matters that we will consider today and the order in

25 which we will take them.

Page 559

1 First, there is a motion by the Prosecution

2 for protective measures; secondly, there is a

3 Prosecution motion in respect of judicial notice;

4 thirdly, the question of status of disclosure of

5 witness statements; fourthly, Article 73 bis

6 requirements; fifth, the Defence Pre-Trial brief;

7 sixth, the trial date. There may be one or two other

8 matters to consider as well.

9 Before moving to the Prosecution motion for

10 protective measures, I should comment on the lateness

11 in starting the proceedings and to say that the Chamber

12 does not wish this to be a precedent for the trial.

13 The schedule time had been given and announced, and in

14 future, the Chamber expects that arrangements will be

15 made to ensure that we can start at the scheduled

16 time.

17 In respect of the first matter that I

18 outlined, the Prosecution motion for protective

19 measures, we have had the motion, and I'll just inquire

20 from the Defence whether any Defence counsel have

21 anything to say in relation to the motion.

22 Yes, Mr. Brashich?

23 MR. BRASHICH: On behalf of the accused

24 Todorovic, we take no position.

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.

Page 560

1 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, the same

2 position is for Mr. Miroslav Tadic, as Mr. Brashich

3 stated.

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.

5 MR. AVRAMOVIC: (Interpretation) Your Honours,

6 the Defence of Milan Simic takes the same position.

7 MR. PISAREVIC: (Interpretation) Your Honours,

8 the Defence of Simo Zaric also has the same position.

9 Thank you.

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I think it only remains then

11 to inquire from the Prosecution whether they are

12 requesting either a closed session or an open session

13 with certain other protective measures, because that

14 matter was left open in the motion.

15 MR. NIEMANN: I'll ask my colleague,

16 Ms. Paterson, to address that. She's been dealing with

17 that part of the case, if Your Honours please.

18 MS. PATERSON: Your Honours, based on the

19 information currently available to us from our

20 conversations with all but one of the witnesses on the

21 list, we believe that they are willing to testify in

22 open session, but they may request that their faces be

23 disguised. There's one witness that we have not been

24 able to make recent contact with, so I'm not able to

25 state the position concerning that witness. It may be

Page 561

1 that that witness, who is a sexual assault victim, may

2 want a closed session. But as far as we know, the vast

3 majority of them, we can go in open session but perhaps

4 with facial distortion.

5 (Trial Chamber confers)

6 JUDGE ROBINSON: The motion is granted in the

7 terms requested. But the question as to whether the

8 witness will testify in open or closed session will be

9 taken up immediately before the witness's testimony and

10 a determination made.

11 The next matter for consideration is the

12 Prosecution motion for judicial notice. The last time

13 when the Chamber was in session, this matter was left

14 in the following state: The Prosecution and the

15 Defence were to meet with a view to trying to agree on

16 certain facts in respect of which, up to that time,

17 there was no agreement.

18 May I hear from the Prosecution first?

19 MR. NIEMANN: If Your Honours please.

20 Your Honours, in relation to three of the

21 accused and their counsel, namely, the accused

22 Mr. Tadic, Mr. Todorovic (sic), and Mr. Zaric,

23 considerable progress has been made. The approach

24 taken, Your Honours, was to deal firstly with -- well,

25 firstly, there was a number of matters in the contested

Page 562

1 facts or adjudicated facts motion which had been

2 agreed, and those matters went through and were

3 settled. Secondly, the Defence had made some proposed

4 amendments which the Prosecution considered, and a

5 large number of those were accepted. Finally, Your

6 Honours, there was a number of compromised proposals

7 put forward to the Defence, and, by agreement, a large

8 number of those were settled.

9 Your Honours, if I said "Mr. Todorovic" had

10 reached an agreement, I have misspoken. The three

11 accused through which we have reached agreement are the

12 accused Tadic, Simic, and Zaric.

13 In relation to the accused Mr. Todorovic, we

14 have been endeavouring to make contact with

15 Mr. Brashich since the last occasion, and, indeed, on

16 quite a number of occasions, attempts have been made to

17 telephone him. Messages have been left. We have

18 written him letters and faxes, but unfortunately we've

19 been unable to contact him or to arrange any meetings

20 with him. We are in the unfortunate position at the

21 moment that with respect to three of the accused, we

22 have substantial agreement on the adjudicated facts,

23 but with one of the accused, Todorovic, we simply don't

24 know what the position is.

25 That would become very awkward at trial, Your

Page 563

1 Honours, because it would mean that in relation to

2 three of the accused, no evidence is required between

3 the three accused because they've agreed, but with

4 relation to one accused, Mr. Todorovic, unless some

5 sort of arrangement can be made, we would be leading

6 all the evidence in relation to that.

7 We're somewhat disappointed that we haven't

8 been able to achieve some sort of consensus on these

9 matters with Mr. Brashich, but all attempts to contact

10 him have failed on our part, Your Honours.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich?

12 MR. BRASHICH: With regard to the attempts of

13 being in contact with the Prosecution, I am sure that

14 this Court can take judicial notice of what is right

15 now happening in former Yugoslavia. I have been in the

16 unfortunate position of being under time constraints in

17 at least 21 cases where discovery cut-off schedules,

18 because of the bombing in Yugoslavia, had been cut off,

19 my ability to respond to prior outstanding orders. I

20 have apologised to the Prosecution this afternoon, but

21 it was, to a great extent, outside of my ability to

22 respond to all demands by various judges.

23 In addition, I have had two immediate members

24 of my family die in the last 30 days, so I have been

25 out of commission with regard to that.

Page 564

1 With regards to the judicial notice requests,

2 I've gone over them, and, frankly, with a number of

3 them, I am mystified as to what, if anything, they have

4 to do with my client. Whether or not Austria-Hungary

5 annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908, I do not see

6 relevance with regard to the indictment which my client

7 stands accused of.

8 I will endeavour, if my co-counsel have

9 reached a consensus on these historical issues, I will

10 most certainly go along with the consensus that, in

11 1908, Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina.

12 (Trial Chamber confers)

13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich, no doubt while

14 you are here, the Prosecution would be in a position to

15 take advantage of your presence and to carry out

16 consultations. The Chamber requires that that be

17 done.

18 In any event, we will give both sides a

19 period of two weeks in which to present us with a list

20 of the agreed facts so that the Chamber will be in a

21 position to make a determination on this issue once and

22 for all.

23 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.

24 (Trial Chamber confers)

25 JUDGE ROBINSON: The next matter that we move

Page 565

1 to is the status of --

2 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, excuse me. Can

3 I say a few words, please?

4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please go ahead.

5 MR. PANTELIC: On behalf of my colleagues, I

6 would like to inform this Trial Chamber that our

7 position is as follows because, unfortunately, our

8 distinguished colleague, Mr. Brashich, is not fully

9 aware and informed due to his personal problems and

10 circumstances. I would like to draw the attention of

11 this honourable Trial Chamber to the Prosecutor's

12 motion dated February the 10th, then to Defence

13 response of February 22nd. Following --

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: The 10th?


16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Defence response, the 22nd.

17 MR. PANTELIC: Defence response on the 22nd.

18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, yes.

19 MR. PANTELIC: Following the good spirit of

20 cooperation in previous parts of the proceedings, the

21 Prosecutor's Office and my colleagues and me, we were

22 able to open some discussions and to exchange some

23 proposed matters. However, I would like to outline

24 that we still stand very firmly in our relief requested

25 by our response of February 22nd. We consider these

Page 566

1 facts not as adjudicated facts or facts of common

2 knowledge. Finally, the Prosecutor's Office agreed

3 with us in his letter dated April 27 that I will quote:

4 "Please be advised that the Prosecution

5 agrees to the following statements for the purposes

6 only of the above matter before the Trial Chamber

7 pursuant to Rule 73 bis of the Rules of Procedure and

8 Evidence of the Tribunal."

9 So to clarify, and I'm sure that my

10 distinguished colleague, Mr. Niemann, also would agree

11 with me, that only for the purposes of Rule 73 bis we

12 have some agreements because the spirit of cooperation

13 is our common interest, and procedural economy too.

14 So, please, with regard to our other reliefs,

15 we, as I said, absolutely we stand on a position that

16 these facts could not be adjudicated or facts of common

17 knowledge. Fortunately, following the reliefs and

18 rulings by this same Trial Chamber based on a motion

19 for judicial notice about the character in our

20 response, we are quite familiar about the categories

21 which kind of facts might be considered as adjudicated

22 facts or facts of common knowledge, so now we are

23 speaking strictly about the facts in terms of Rule 73.

24 In addition, after a very profound and very

25 detailed discussion and communication with the Office

Page 567

1 of the Prosecutor, we found, after carefully reviewing

2 propositions provided to us by the Prosecutor, that

3 some of the paragraphs do not correspond to our

4 response. So for the judicial record, I would like to

5 outline as follows:

6 In Annex 1 of our response dated February

7 22nd, the Defence gave its statement of non-contested

8 matters of fact. In Chapter A, in Chapter B, with

9 paragraphs almost 60 and 68 or 65, I don't know, we

10 didn't find -- we didn't find some of these paragraphs

11 in the proposal of the Prosecutor. So maybe it's a

12 mistake in correspondence or whatever.

13 So for judicial record, the Defence would

14 like to outline that all paragraphs mentioned in its

15 response of 10th of February should be considered as a

16 non-contested matter of fact in terms of Rule 73.

17 In addition, we have noticed that some of the

18 proposed and discussed issues were not properly

19 mentioned in correspondence sent to us by the

20 Prosecutor, although we have agreed upon some facts and

21 we have discussed it in detail. This is paragraph

22 number 3 in your letter of yesterday about the

23 percentage of the statistics, et cetera. Probably it's

24 a typewriting mistake. And especially there is a

25 mistake in your paragraph (a)(16) speaking about the

Page 568

1 nature and scope of the conflict in the former

2 Yugoslavia which the Defence, by its letter sent to the

3 Office of the Prosecutor, basically is changed, and now

4 we found actually genuine and basic terms that you

5 proposed in your motion.

6 So, in short, the Defence absolutely agree

7 with the dateline proposed by the Trial Chamber and

8 ordered by the Trial Chamber. In this time, we shall

9 do our best in, I would say, clarifying some technical

10 mistakes or correspondence mistakes, and we shall find

11 a way to inform the Trial Chamber, probably by joint

12 motion, with regard to these facts in a spirit of Rule

13 73 bis. Thank you very much, Your Honours.

14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Does any other

15 counsel for the Defence wish to say anything on this

16 matter? If not, I shall just reiterate the ruling of

17 the Trial Chamber on this issue, which is that within

18 two weeks, the Prosecution and the Defence will present

19 the Chamber with a statement as to those facts in

20 respect of which there is agreement, and I would like

21 to assure Mr. Pantelic that the decision of the Chamber

22 will be reasoned and will, of course, take due account

23 of all the submissions that have been made, including

24 those made today.

25 We now move to the next matter, which is the

Page 569

1 status of disclosure of witness statements, and I would

2 just ask Mr. Niemann to inform us as to the position.

3 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honours. We have

4 disclosed all statements of witnesses that we intend to

5 call in the proceedings both in the English language

6 and in the language of the accused.

7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does any counsel for the

8 Defence wish to make any comment or observation on

9 this? If not, let us seize the agreement and move on

10 to the next matter, which is Article 73 bis

11 requirements.

12 The first matter is the pre-trial brief from

13 the Prosecution, which is at hand. The second matter,

14 as to admissions by the parties, that would be affected

15 by the question of judicial notice.

16 In respect of that, does any counsel wish to

17 say anything?

18 Yes, Mr. Niemann.

19 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour. I apprehend

20 that the admission and statement about other matters

21 not in dispute would largely be covered by the

22 adjudicated fact issue. I don't expect, Your Honours,

23 that it would cover every issue, and I would consider

24 that we may need also to address that as a separate

25 matter by way of perhaps the Prosecution putting to the

Page 570

1 Defence questions as to which matters are in dispute

2 and which aren't. This is something which may assist

3 in reaching some sort of status on that so that we know

4 what's in dispute and what's not.

5 I think that the adjudicated facts motion

6 would cover most of it, but there may be other matters

7 which aren't resolved by that.

8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does any counsel for the

9 Defence wish to say anything on that?

10 Mr. Niemann, these other matters which may be

11 affected, which may be included but which are not

12 specifically covered by judicial notice, you are not in

13 a position now to comment on that?

14 MR. NIEMANN: No, Your Honours. The position

15 is that it is largely affected by the judicial notice

16 part of the process, and we only basically reached

17 agreement yesterday or the day before yesterday on that

18 question, so it's only come in very recently.

19 What I envisage is one would need to look at

20 the indictment and compare it with the facts which are

21 agreed and then determine what matters are still

22 outstanding, having looked at the indictment, to

23 determine what matters are in dispute and what matters

24 are not contested, and that's a process which we will

25 have to do once we reach agreement upon the question of

Page 571

1 facts.

2 So it seems to me, Your Honours, that at

3 least with Mr. Brashich, we are in no position at this

4 stage to take into consideration any question of

5 facts. After we have our meeting with him, we can do

6 that. With the other accused, where we have made much

7 further progress, we're certainly much closer to being

8 able to do that.

9 (Trial Chamber confers)

10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Brashich?

11 MR. BRASHICH: Unlike the issue of judicial

12 notice, the accused Todorovic has pleaded innocent in

13 this matter, and by the fact that he has pleaded

14 innocent in this particular matter, all of the factual

15 allegations in the indictment -- and I specify the

16 indictment -- have been put in play. So with regard to

17 that issue, I do not and cannot, at this particular

18 point in time, agree as to any facts which are alleged

19 in the indictment.

20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We take note of that,

21 you join issue with -- with everything. I think the

22 best course for this is that at the end of the two

23 weeks that the Chamber has given in respect of judicial

24 notice, the Prosecution will then be in a position to

25 give us a statement as to the matters on which there is

Page 572

1 agreement.

2 MR. BRASHICH: Perhaps --

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann?

4 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honours. That's

5 certainly, I think, the best course, Your Honours.

6 Might I inquire through Your Honours whether

7 Mr. Brashich will be in The Hague next week because, I

8 mean, this is a process which will take some time. If

9 he doesn't intend to be here, I don't see us making

10 much progress, Your Honours.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich?

12 MR. BRASHICH: My plans were to spend Friday,

13 tomorrow, and Saturday here in The Hague either with

14 consultations with the Prosecution and more

15 specifically in consultations with my client. I was

16 not aware that tomorrow is a legal holiday. I was made

17 aware of that when I arrived here today. If necessary,

18 within the next two weeks, I will come back and meet

19 with the Prosecutor.

20 But to go back to the issue at hand as I see

21 it, Your Honour, the Rule is somewhat unclear, and, of

22 course, I don't know whether or not it has been

23 discussed in any one of the decisions. Rule 73 bis

24 (B)(ii): "... admissions by the parties and a

25 statement of other matters which are not in dispute."

Page 573

1 I take it that we are discussing this issue.

2 If the fact is that my client, Mr. Todorovic, was born

3 on such and such a date, yes, of course, we can have an

4 admission as to that particular fact. If we have a

5 request for an admission that Bosanski Samac is located

6 at a certain latitude and a certain longitude, I'm sure

7 that we can agree to that. But again I reiterate that

8 every factual allegation against my client, by the

9 entry of a not guilty plea, is put into play, and the

10 burden is upon the Prosecution to prove to the

11 satisfaction of this Trial Chamber the allegations.

12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann?

13 MR. NIEMANN: Your Honours, we're not

14 endeavouring to avoid our burden, we are merely trying

15 to comply with the Rules, and the Rules are drafted in

16 this way, whereas, as a pre-trial process, to endeavour

17 to eliminate any matters which need not be contested at

18 the trial.

19 Your Honours, it's encouraging to hear that

20 there are at least some matters that Mr. Brashich is

21 prepared to admit to, perhaps there are more, and I

22 believe that a meeting with him at some date over the

23 period of the next two weeks may be helpful in that

24 regard.

25 MR. BRASHICH: Again, Your Honour, perhaps

Page 574

1 I'm misreading the Rule. The Rule specifically

2 authorises the Trial Chamber to order the Prosecutor,

3 not the Defence, to file an admission by the parties,

4 and there is no admission by my client, and a statement

5 of other matters that are not in dispute. It is the

6 Prosecution's burden, if the Court so finds, to direct

7 the Prosecution to do so. This is not a joint effort

8 the way I read the Rule.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: I think the Rule is

10 sufficiently clear on its face. For the Prosecution to

11 discharge the responsibility which the Chamber will

12 place on it, it will be necessary for the Prosecution

13 to be in communication with the Defence to ascertain

14 those matters in respect of which there can be

15 agreement.

16 I would just like to reiterate that on this

17 matter, the Prosecutor should endeavour to meet with

18 Mr. Brashich and see to what extent they will be in a

19 position to discharge the duty that the Chamber has

20 placed on them within two weeks. I think they should

21 endeavour to take advantage of your presence here, and

22 it is a matter for you to say to the Prosecutor exactly

23 what you have said here. I really don't see that this

24 is a very complicated issue.

25 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.

Page 575

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: The next matter for

2 consideration is a statement of contested matters of

3 fact and law, which is the converse of the issue that

4 we just looked at.

5 Mr. Niemann, do you have anything to say on

6 that?

7 MR. NIEMANN: No, Your Honours, other than

8 those matters which I have already put to you.

9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does any counsel from the

10 Defence wish to say anything on that? We will move

11 on.

12 We come now to Rule 73 bis (B)(iv):

13 "(iv) a list of witnesses the Prosecutor

14 intends to call with:

15 (a) the name or pseudonym of each

16 witness."

17 That has been complied with.

18 "(b) a summary of the facts on which each

19 witness will testify."

20 That has been complied with.

21 "(c) the points in the indictment as to

22 which each witness will testify."

23 That has been done in the Prosecutor's

24 pre-trial brief.

25 "(d) the estimated length of time

Page 576

1 required for each witness."

2 That has been complied with.

3 The Chamber has some comments on the last

4 matter, but before making those comments, I just

5 inquire whether any counsel wish to say anything on any

6 of those four points.

7 Mr. Niemann, on the question of the estimated

8 length of time, you have, in fact, offered an estimate

9 as to the time that each witness will take.

10 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour.

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: And I imagine that

12 by aggregating those hours, one would arrive at an

13 estimate of the aggregate. Would you like to tell us

14 what that is?

15 MR. NIEMANN: Excuse me, Your Honours. Might

16 I consult, Your Honour?

17 I'm sorry, Your Honours. Your Honours, we

18 haven't actually ever sat down and added them up, but

19 our estimate was that it would take six to eight weeks

20 for the Prosecution witnesses to testify based on the

21 number of witnesses that we intend to call, that's the

22 60-odd witnesses, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I ask you whether the

24 estimate that you have given is confined to

25 examination-in-chief or whether it includes an estimate

Page 577

1 as to cross-examination?

2 MR. NIEMANN: The estimate that we have

3 provided for in our summaries was an estimate of the

4 Prosecution time for testimony. The eight-week period

5 would be a period of time allowed for

6 cross-examination, but I am hesitant to be too certain

7 about this. I say this because, Your Honours, (a) we

8 don't know for sure just how long cross-examination is

9 going to take, and (b), when there is four accused, the

10 process of cross-examination is always much lengthier

11 than what you can reasonably estimate. So there is

12 some allowance in the eight-week period for

13 cross-examination, and we would endeavour to see if we

14 could complete it in that time, but I wouldn't want to

15 be held to that, Your Honours. It really is a matter

16 that the Defence would have to address and perhaps give

17 their estimate too.

18 To put it another way, I would imagine it

19 would take no more than six weeks in chief for the

20 Prosecution case to present its evidence, but that

21 wouldn't be allowing for cross-examination.

22 I don't know whether that's much assistance

23 to Your Honour, but my experience in these matters is

24 when there is multiple accused, the cross-examination

25 in some cases can be very lengthy, and, of course,

Page 578

1 there is nothing the Prosecution can do about that.

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. My best

3 mathematics produce the following result: From the

4 witnesses that you have identified, there would be a

5 total of about 183 hours. That doesn't include the

6 witnesses that would take more than a day, of which

7 there are six. Four would take two days, in your

8 estimation; one, a day and a half; and one, one day.

9 In terms of the standards of this Tribunal,

10 this ought to be seen as a relatively short case, and

11 we should endeavour to ensure that it is as brief as

12 possible having, of course, regard to the interests of

13 justice.

14 The Chamber would encourage you, Mr. Niemann,

15 where you have witnesses who will be testifying for a

16 long time or, in any event, where witnesses testify to

17 a particular event, to consider whether there is a need

18 for repetition, and to the extent that that can be

19 avoided without prejudicing your case, we would

20 encourage you to take that approach.

21 There's one other matter on this question.

22 You haven't yet provided a sequence as to the

23 witnesses, the order in which they will testify.

24 MR. NIEMANN: No, Your Honour, that's true.

25 We can, of course, and will, of course, do that if Your

Page 579

1 Honours wish us to do it. Our position on it depends a

2 bit on whether or not it's easier to bring some

3 witnesses from the former Yugoslavia, having a regard

4 to the current situation, or to take them from other

5 places. That's a matter which has been exercising our

6 minds in relation to that process. But if the trial

7 date is set and Your Honours wish for us to file an

8 order of witnesses at some period of time prior to

9 that, I'm sure that we can comply with that.

10 (Trial Chamber confers)

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann, the Chamber

12 considers that it is more than useful and it will

13 facilitate its work, not only its work but the work of

14 the Defence as well, to have filed a list as to the

15 sequence in which witnesses will give their testimony.

16 In this regard, the Chamber will require that this be

17 done no later than three weeks before the date that we

18 will set for trial.

19 MR. NIEMANN: Certainly, Your Honours.

20 There's no difficulty with that. The reason I raise

21 the difficulty is because Your Honours are aware of the

22 fact that the war at the moment has restricted movement

23 in the whole of Yugoslavia. It's not just in Serbia.

24 In fact, movement of people in and out, witnesses and

25 so forth, has become extremely difficult. That was the

Page 580

1 reason why we hadn't settled on any matter. But

2 certainly three weeks would be adequate, Your Honours.

3 JUDGE ROBINSON: The next matter for

4 consideration is the Prosecutor's list of exhibits, and

5 that has been filed. Is there any comment from any

6 Defence counsel on that?

7 I turn next to the Defence pre-trial brief.

8 The Chamber has considered this matter and will require

9 that the Defence pre-trial brief be filed by the end of

10 May.

11 I turn next to the trial date. Having given

12 consideration to all the matters that we have discussed

13 and considered, the Chamber will set a date of June the

14 22nd as the commencement date, that's a Tuesday, until

15 the 14th of July for the first sittings. Thereafter,

16 the Chamber will determine the dates as it is

17 convenient. Note that June the 22nd is a Tuesday.

18 There is one other matter that we have to

19 consider. Mr. Niemann, the accused Blagoje Simic is

20 not present, and it seems likely that he will not be

21 present for trial, but he's on the indictment.

22 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour.

23 JUDGE ROBINSON: So I wish to inquire what

24 course the Prosecution intends to take in respect of

25 that matter.

Page 581

1 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour.

2 Your Honours, the course that was taken in

3 the Tadic case in relation to this was that -- he was

4 charged with another accused. The indictment in that

5 case wasn't amended. The indictment simply lay on

6 file. We proceeded with the Prosecution that Mr. Tadic

7 learned, and at the end of the day, there was no

8 finding, of course, in relation to the accused whose

9 name was Mr. Borovnica. That was the decision taken in

10 that case.

11 I have in mind that there was in other cases

12 an amendment made to the indictment so that the name of

13 the accused was removed and proceeded by separate

14 indictment.

15 Your Honours appreciate that we must keep the

16 indictment alive. We simply can't ask you to dismiss

17 it in relation to that accused. It probably is tidier

18 to just allow the name to lay on file, for the

19 indictment to be alive in relation to that accused, and

20 for the trial will proceed against these accused. Your

21 Honours will be asked to make no finding in relation to

22 that accused.

23 I am in Your Honours' hands. If we have to

24 prepare a separate indictment, we will be pleased to do

25 that, but we would have to have two indictments.

Page 582

1 (Trial Chamber confers)

2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann, we have given

3 consideration to this matter of Mr. Blagoje Simic, who

4 is not present and is not likely to be present. We

5 have considered the course that you have suggested of

6 leaving him on the indictment and then the Chamber not

7 making a finding in respect of him. The Chamber is not

8 in favour of that approach. The trial should proceed

9 without Mr. Blagoje Simic being on the indictment, and

10 the Prosecution must take the necessary measures to

11 ensure that he's not on the indictment.

12 MR. NIEMANN: Your Honours, in relation to

13 that, may I just mention something? If Your Honours

14 wish us to file another indictment, we can certainly

15 take steps to do that. Might we ask that we not be

16 required to do it until the morning of trial? I say

17 that because, A, it won't cause any prejudice to the

18 other accused, but, B, if this accused does, in fact,

19 turn up between now and that date, we don't want to be

20 in a position where we then have to seek a compound of

21 the indictment because we would have severed the

22 indictment. If Your Honours wish us to file a fresh

23 indictment, we can do it, but if we can just leave it

24 to the day of commencement of the trial, we would be

25 most grateful in that regard.

Page 583

1 JUDGE ROBINSON: There's no difficulty with

2 that. It can be done the day of the commencement of

3 the trial.

4 MR. NIEMANN: If Your Honours please.

5 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I just return to the

6 dates set for trial? I had given the dates Tuesday,

7 June 22nd to the 14th of the July. That will be

8 affected by the meeting of the Plenary which is

9 scheduled for -- I'm just getting the dates of the

10 Plenary. The Plenary is the 30th of June to the 2nd of

11 July. On those dates, there will be no sittings.

12 Mr. Niemann?

13 MR. NIEMANN: I'm sorry, Your Honours. Your

14 Honours, there is one matter that we would wish to

15 raise in relation to a confidential witness. We would

16 ask if we could do it simply in private session. We're

17 not asking Your Honours to go into closed session but

18 that the sound be turned off to the public so we can

19 briefly just raise this matter, if we may.


21 MR. NIEMANN: My colleague, Ms. Paterson,

22 will raise the matter, Your Honours.

23 (Private session)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 584













13 Page 584 redacted in private session













Page 585

1 (redacted)

2 (redacted)

3 (redacted)

4 (redacted)

5 (redacted)

6 (redacted)

7 (redacted)

8 (redacted)

9 (redacted)

10 (Open session)

11 JUDGE ROBINSON: We're back in open session.

12 There being no other matters for consideration and

13 decision, we will adjourn.

14 --- Whereupon the Pre-Trial Conference

15 adjourned at 3.26 p.m.