Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 1925

 1                           Wednesday, 15 July 2009

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           [The accused Stanisic not present]

 5                           --- Upon commencing at 2.28 p.m.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon to everyone.

 7             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

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

 9     IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  We have to deal with a few procedural matters before

11     we can invite the Prosecution to call its next witness.  First is the

12     health situation of Mr. Stanisic.

13             The Chamber has received a report from Dr. Rowell.  The Chamber

14     also received a request that further questions would be put to

15     Mr. Rowell.  For those reasons, could I receive information on whether

16     Dr. Rowell is available and whether that's viva voce or whether that's

17     through videolink.

18                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Before we invite Madam Usher to escort Dr. Rowell

20     into the courtroom, I'd like to inquire with the parties, do they feel

21     that there's any need to -- Dr. Rowell, to invite him to make a solemn

22     declaration, all the reports were filed until now, not under oath, or not

23     under a solemn declaration.  Are the parties considering this an

24     appropriate approach?  Then we will refrain from inviting him from making

25     a solemn declaration.

Page 1926

 1             MR. KNOOPS:  Your Honour, we don't have objection to continuation

 2     of the previous manner to interview the doctor.  The Defence is not in

 3     possession of the report of Dr. Rowell, by the way.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Oh.  I do understand that there was a first report

 5     which was dated the 15th of June which the Chamber did not exclude for

 6     the possibility that that was a mistake and that a second report would be

 7     prepared.

 8                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but if the parties would accept that one ...

10                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  The report with the right date on it will be

12     distributed within the next few minutes.  I already, then, proceed with

13     other matters.

14             But I'd first like to hear from you, Mr. Jovanovic, whether you

15     would have any objection against proceeding in the way as we did before,

16     that is, not invite doctors to make solemn declarations when they provide

17     their reports.

18             MR. JOVANOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours, we have no

19     objection.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the next issue, I'd like to put on the record

21     that the -- the court-appointed gastroenterological expert has requested

22     a short extension for his next report, and the Chamber granted that we

23     are talking about days rather than about weeks.

24             I would further like to inform the parties that it is already

25     certain that this Chamber will not sit, perhaps it would not have sit

Page 1927

 1     anyhow, but Friday the 16th of October is a day on which this Chamber is

 2     unable to sit.  The week after that, that is the week of the 19th up to

 3     and including the 23rd of October, there will be no hearings.  For the

 4     23rd of October that goes even without saying because that's a UN

 5     holiday.

 6             I'd like to turn into private session for a second.

 7                           [Private session]

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19                           [Open session]

20             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber has received a request by the

22     Stanisic Defence that is not to sit in the week of the -- the first week

23     of September.  I think the Senior Legal Officer has asked for further

24     information.  The Chamber will consider the request as soon as possible.

25             Is Dr. Rowell, meanwhile, available?

Page 1928

 1             Madam Usher is trying to find him.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  We'll wait until he arrives.

 4             Let me use this time to read the reasons for granting the

 5     Prosecution motion for additional protective measures for Witness C-015.

 6             In 2002, the protective measure of pseudonym was granted for

 7     Witness C-015 by a Trial Chamber.

 8             I'll stop at this moment because that will take too much time

 9     and ...

10                           [Dr. Rowell entered court]

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Good afternoon.

12             DR. ROWELL:  Good afternoon, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  You're Dr. Mike Rowell?

14             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  And you are employed as a medical doctor by the --

16     what organisation?

17             DR. ROWELL:  By the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical

18     Weapons.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.  You have provided a report on the health

20     situation of Mr. Jovica Stanisic.

21             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, I have.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  And that was a request by the parties to be able to

23     put further questions to you about this.  And the Chamber may have some

24     questions as well.

25             Mr. Knoops, I think you are the one who requested to have an

Page 1929

 1     opportunity.

 2             MR. KNOOPS:  Yes, Your Honour.  My co-counsel Mr. Jordash will

 3     lead the questioning.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Jordash.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 6             Good afternoon.

 7             DR. ROWELL:  Good afternoon.

 8             MR. JORDASH:  I represent Mr. Stanisic, and I would like to ask

 9     if I may about your report very briefly and then about the medication

10     that Mr. Stanisic is taking.

11             You note in your report - I'm looking at paragraph paragraph 2 -

12     that consistent with depressive illness and his medication regime, he

13     showed varying impairment in the range of higher functions.  Could you

14     please explain what those higher functions are?

15             DR. ROWELL:  Higher functions are those functions that we would

16     normally associate with interaction with other people, being able to

17     think clearly, being able to follow conversations, being able to

18     construct arguments, just being able to deal with other people.

19             Now, also listed there is memory, thought, intellect, speech,

20     understanding, perception, et cetera.

21             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  Well, that was going to be my next

22     question, that on the one hand you note varying impairment in a range of

23     higher functions, and you just listed some of those.  And then the last

24     line of paragraph 2 you note that his judgement and perception appeared

25     relatively unaffected.

Page 1930

 1             Is that inconsistent or --

 2             DR. ROWELL:  No, it's not inconsistent.  Within depression there

 3     are a range of features which a depressed person may show, and they don't

 4     have to demonstrate a degree of impairment in all of them to still be

 5     depressed.  In his case, I believe that his judgement and perception were

 6     okay.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  So -- okay.  Let me try to make it clearer for

 8     myself.  So judgement and perception are okay but affected.

 9             DR. ROWELL:  They -- he showed varying impairment in a range of

10     functions but not in all functions and not all to the same degree.  So in

11     this case judgement and perception were relatively unaffected.  However,

12     some other factors like speed of thought, clarity of thought, memory,

13     were mildly affected.

14             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  Okay.  So in relation to his medication

15     regime, could I just ask you a few questions about that.

16             Are you able to identify whether the impact on his higher

17     functions is caused by the depressive illness or the medication regime or

18     a combination of the two?

19             DR. ROWELL:  I think in essence this is a question better

20     directed towards Dr. Eekhof or towards his treating physician.  It is

21     likely that his current state is a combination of both, but the degree to

22     which element contributes, I cannot say.

23             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  Did you conduct any objective or

24     standardised tests?

25             DR. ROWELL:  I didn't conduct a standardised test such as a

Page 1931

 1     Mini-Mental State on him, no.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  And when speaking to him, you noted that he had

 3     occasionally rambling answers.

 4             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Were you able to make sense of those answers?

 6             DR. ROWELL:  The -- I was able to make sense of them.  They went

 7     on, and they went into an area that I wasn't particularly interested in,

 8     but in some other areas of questioning he gave very good answers.  So

 9     there's a mixed pattern present.

10             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  There's a mixed pattern.  On some occasions

11     he can focus and answer directly and reasonably.  On other occasions he

12     drifts off into unrelated topics.

13             DR. ROWELL:  As is consistent with somebody with his condition,

14     yes.

15             MR. JORDASH:  And that's consistent with somebody who has

16     difficulty concentrating.

17             DR. ROWELL:  At times, yes.

18             MR. JORDASH:  And you were speaking to him about his illness,

19     were you?  Was that when you noticed that he had difficulty concentrating

20     at times?

21             DR. ROWELL:  I spoke to him partially about his illness and

22     partially about his inability to attend here today.

23             MR. JORDASH:  You didn't speak to him about the case or the

24     details of the case.

25             DR. ROWELL:  No.

Page 1932

 1             MR. JORDASH:  It was really just the mechanics of whether he

 2     would go to court and what and how he was feeling in relation to his

 3     illness.

 4             DR. ROWELL:  My focus was purely on his ability either to attend

 5     here or to be able to attend via video-conference.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  Now, in relation to the medication that he's

 7     taking, I hope I've got a list which might speed things up a bit.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash, the list was provided to the Senior

 9     Legal Officer this morning, and in order not to lose time we took the

10     freedom to provide the doctor with a copy of that list.

11             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  He may not have it in front of him at this moment.

13     I do not know whether you have it at hand.  If so, then please proceed.

14             DR. ROWELL:  I have a copy, Your Honour.

15             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             MR. JORDASH:  I'll be brief.  I'm not going to take you through

18     each and every medicine in your brief, you'll be relieved to know.  But

19     objectively this is a lot of medication.

20             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

21             MR. JORDASH:  And a lot of different types of medication, ranging

22     from antidepressants to pain-killers to anti-diarrhoea agents; is that

23     right?

24             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

25             MR. JORDASH:  And am I right that Clomipramine is an

Page 1933

 1     antidepressant?

 2             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  And some of the side effects can be drowsiness and

 4     fatigue?

 5             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  And sleep disturbance.

 7             DR. ROWELL:  Yes.

 8             MR. JORDASH:  Sometimes, is this correct, confusion?

 9             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

10             MR. JORDASH:  Dizziness and at times.  Less common, but sometimes

11     hallucinations?

12             DR. ROWELL:  Uncommonly, yes.

13             MR. JORDASH:  And in relation to Lamotrigine, is this a medicine

14     for seizures, or to prevent seizures obviously?

15             DR. ROWELL:  It is a medicine for seizures.  It is a

16     neuro-stabilising drug.  One of its indications is also to stabilise

17     mood.

18             MR. JORDASH:  Can lead to sleepiness and dizziness.

19             DR. ROWELL:  Yes.

20             MR. JORDASH:  And just moving down the list:  Zolpidem, is that a

21     sleeping tablet?

22             DR. ROWELL:  It's most commonly used as a sleeping tablet, yes.

23             MR. JORDASH:  And it's a fairly strong one.

24             DR. ROWELL:  The strength is really based on the dose.

25             MR. JORDASH:  And the dose that Mr. Stanisic is receiving?

Page 1934

 1             DR. ROWELL:  Is a normal dose.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  Is a normal one, so it would act as a sleeping pill

 3     but not necessarily a strong one.

 4             DR. ROWELL:  Not particularly so, no.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  Tramadol is a pain-killer; is that right?

 6             DR. ROWELL:  That's correct.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Can impair thinking or reactions.

 8             DR. ROWELL:  Again, depending on the dose.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  And the dose that Mr. Stanisic is receiving?

10             DR. ROWELL:  Is a relatively low dose.

11             MR. JORDASH:  Drowsiness, is that one of the effects of Tramadol?

12             DR. ROWELL:  It can be, particularly in combination with other

13     drugs.  In the dose that he's receiving, it's not particularly marked.

14             MR. JORDASH:  Sorry, what do you mean by that?

15             DR. ROWELL:  He is receiving a relatively low dose, and that

16     drowsiness would not commonly be a marked feature of the dose that he's

17     receiving.

18             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  Just, sorry, going back up the list to one

19     of the medicines the Metronidazole, does this treat serious bacterial

20     infections; is that right?

21             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

22             MR. JORDASH:  And side effects can be depression; is that right?

23             DR. ROWELL:  Uncommonly.

24             MR. JORDASH:  Confusion?

25             DR. ROWELL:  Uncommonly.

Page 1935

 1             MR. JORDASH:  What are the side-effects?

 2             DR. ROWELL:  The Metronidazole is an antibiotic, essentially.

 3     And Mr. Stanisic is receiving it in an appropriate dose for the

 4     infections he's commonly receiving.  The drug interactions, as you can

 5     imagine, are many and varied.  Metronidazole could contribute to such

 6     side effects, but it would be very uncommon.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  And let me just deal with one more, which

 8     is the Bromazepam.  That's an anti-anxiety drug; is that correct?

 9             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.

10             MR. JORDASH:  And just stepping out of the courtroom for a

11     minute, you wouldn't -- there's a recommendation you wouldn't operate

12     automobiles or heavy machinery while taking that medicine.

13             DR. ROWELL:  I think generally the recommendation is that care

14     should be taken when operating motor vehicles, not that you could not do

15     it.

16             MR. JORDASH:  Okay.  But it can cause drowsiness and fatigue.

17             DR. ROWELL:  Yes, that's correct.  It's the same family

18     essentially as Zolpidem.

19             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  And slurred speech.

20             DR. ROWELL:  Could do in sufficient dose.

21             MR. JORDASH:  Right.  Now, I know this is perhaps asking for the

22     impossible, but if you put all of this together, all these moderate and

23     low doses of drugs which cause drowsiness and fatigue and so on --

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jordash.

25             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

Page 1936

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Until now all the questions were about what they can

 2     do.  Now in your question to Dr. Rowell, you say all these in these doses

 3     which cause.  That's not the same.

 4             MR. JORDASH:  Certainly.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Could you please keep that in mind.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  We're talking about potential side-effects which can

 8     occur depending on those and depending on -- that's apparently what you

 9     wanted to use in your question to Dr. Rowell; is that correctly

10     understood?

11             MR. JORDASH:  I can --

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Then please put your question to Dr. Rowell.

13             MR. JORDASH:  The first question I want to ask is what is the

14     impact of these medicines on Mr. Stanisic's ability to focus for lengthy

15     periods or for any periods?

16             DR. ROWELL:  With respect, I would like to refer back to what my

17     mandate for reviewing Mr. Stanisic was, and that was to see whether he

18     was fit or not to attend today.  I have said that I believe that his

19     medications do contribute to his clinical findings, but the degree to

20     which they contribute I'm not in a position to assess because I'm neither

21     his treating doctor, nor am I completely familiar with his case.  I

22     believe that they would have an affect.  However, it is impossible to

23     tell this without removing those drugs from his treatment regime.  So I

24     would be reluctant to comment on the effect of those drugs on his ability

25     to concentrate.  All I can comment on is his ability to concentrate.

Page 1937

 1             MR. JORDASH:  I see.  Can I ask you this then:  How did you

 2     arrive at the 45 minutes through a videolink conclusion?

 3             DR. ROWELL:  As in any matter of this nature, it is an educated

 4     guess based on my clinical experience of patients with similar or related

 5     findings.  It was in large part determined by similar events that he had

 6     already demonstrated a capability of doing as evidenced in the

 7     observation logs.  He had shown one hour to one and a half hour periods

 8     where he could watch television, talk to other inmates, talk with his

 9     wife, ambulate around the cells.  A conservative estimate based on those

10     one to one and a half hour periods of activity was that he would be cable

11     of dealing for 45 minutes with the workings of the court.

12             MR. JORDASH:  But doesn't it follow from the benchmark you were

13     applying, and I'm not criticising you at all, but doesn't follow from the

14     benchmarks you were looking at, watching TV, moving around, that what

15     you're assessing is his ability to do everyday things such as watch TV

16     and move around, rather than focus on the details of a trial?

17             DR. ROWELL:  My understanding is that he has not engaged in any

18     of the video-conference so far nor attended the court in the last one to

19     two months.  The only genuine way to assess what he is capable of is for

20     him to come along and do it.  We would test his capability and work from

21     there.  As I said, it is an educated guess, 45 minutes, but one which I

22     believe is reasonable and evidence based.

23             MR. JORDASH:  But one based on you not really knowing what

24     happens in this courtroom.

25             DR. ROWELL:  Indeed.

Page 1938

 1             MR. JORDASH:  Okay.  Thank you very much, Doctor.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Brehmeier, do you have any questions?

 3             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  Just a few, Your Honour.

 4             Dr. Rowell, good afternoon.  My name is Doris Brehmeier-Metz, and

 5     I appear on behalf of the Prosecution.  Just a few questions following

 6     from what my learned friend has asked you.

 7             You've already said that you are not really familiar with

 8     Mr. Stanisic and his case.  Can I ask you, prior to today, how often have

 9     you examined him?

10             DR. ROWELL:  Not at all.

11             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  So this was actually the first time that you

12     ever saw him?

13             DR. ROWELL:  No.  I had met him on Monday as a preliminary event,

14     simply to introduce myself to the workings of the gaol.

15             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  Thank you.  My learned friend has asked you

16     in respect to a few of the medications listed in that list, about the

17     height of the dose that is mentioned there.  Overall, would you say that

18     the doses given there is average or considerably higher or considerably

19     lower than you would expect to be given?

20             DR. ROWELL:  Again, I am reluctant to pass comment on the details

21     of the drugs.  I don't believe that I have examined that with appropriate

22     care, but I would say in general he is on relatively low doses of all of

23     these drugs.

24             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  Are you able to tell us whether since last

25     week, the 7th, which was the last court hearings, there were any changes

Page 1939

 1     made to that medication.

 2             DR. ROWELL:  There have been no changes in the last one to two

 3     months that I'm aware of.  And I am also aware of blood testing in late

 4     June which demonstrated that none of these drugs were present in a high

 5     dose or a toxic level.

 6             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  And finally, Dr. Rowell, this list that you

 7     have before you, are you aware why this list was provided and to whom?

 8             DR. ROWELL:  The list I have is the list from his medical

 9     treatment file.  I believe that the list that the Court has is a separate

10     list.

11             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  Thank you.  I have no further questions.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Ms. Brehmeier.

13             Dr. Rowell, I have one or two questions four.  You said that he

14     was unfit for being transported.  Could you explain on the basis of what

15     finding you came to that conclusion.

16             DR. ROWELL:  His overall mobility is very restricted.  He is

17     unsteady on his feet, very slow to move, and presents physically as

18     relatively frail.  Today when I saw him.  I've not witnessed video

19     recordings of him moving around the cells or going to the smoking room or

20     anything else.  From what I saw, he would be unable to transport from

21     there to here.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  My next question is you're referring to the logs.

23     Have you reviewed all of them or for a certain period of time?  You

24     apparently are talking about what you find in the logs as far as --

25             DR. ROWELL:  I reviewed the logs --

Page 1940

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  -- family visits are concerned, for example.

 2             DR. ROWELL:  I reviewed the logs back to Friday of last week as

 3     an indication of the sort of activity that he engages in, in a normal

 4     day.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  When you say talking with wife, is that telephone

 6     conversation or during a visit?

 7             DR. ROWELL:  His wife visited over the weekend.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And these conversations took place when he was

 9     lying in bed to -- or was he seated?

10             DR. ROWELL:  Various positions, Your Honour, but often he would

11     lie in bed.  His wife would sit on the end of the bed, and they would

12     talk.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  And this is what you take from the logs.

14             DR. ROWELL:  From the logs, purely from the logs.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, purely from the logs, not from your own

16     observation.

17             DR. ROWELL:  No.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you for those answers.  No further questions.

19             Then, Dr. Rowell, I'd like to thank you very much for coming to

20     this courtroom and answering the questions that were put to you.  Thank

21     you very much.  The Chamber will consider how to proceed, but that's --

22             DR. ROWELL:  You're welcome.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  -- outside the medical sphere.

24             Madam Usher, could you escort Dr. Rowell out of the courtroom.

25                           [Dr. Rowell withdrew]

Page 1941

 1                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  The next thing I'd like to do is finish reading the

 3     decision.  I therefore restart to read the reasons for granting the

 4     Prosecution motion for additional protective measures for Witness C-015.

 5             In 2002, the protective measure of pseudonym was granted for

 6     Witness C-015 by a Trial Chamber.  Pursuant to Rule 75(F) of the

 7     Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence, this protective measure

 8     continues to have effect in this case unless it is rescinded, varied, or

 9     augmented.

10             On the 23rd of June, 2009, in addition to the pseudonym, the

11     Prosecution requested the protective measures of face and voice

12     distortion which, it argued, were needed in light of threats received by

13     the witness.

14             On the 29th of June, both the Stanisic and Simatovic Defence

15     opposed the request, asserting that the Prosecution did not fully specify

16     the threats against the witness and that the threats were made in the

17     context of personal disputes that the witness was involved in.  They also

18     pointed out that the threats against the witness did not cause him any

19     fear.  The Stanisic Defence further expressed doubt about whether the

20     requested protective measures of face and voice distortion would be

21     effective protection for the witness.  The Simatovic Defence requested

22     that the pseudonym be rescinded, submitting that many years have passed

23     since the witness provided the Prosecution with his first statement

24     without any specific jeopardy to his security.  The Defence's objections

25     can be found at transcript pages 1559 to 1561, 1563, and 1577 to 1579.

Page 1942

 1             On the 29th of June, 2009, after having heard the witness on the

 2     matter, the Chamber granted the requested face and voice distortion in

 3     private session, and the public is hereby informed of it.  The hearing of

 4     the witness and the Chamber's decision can be found at transcript

 5     pages 1565 to 1576 and 1579.

 6             The parties seeking protective measures for a witness must

 7     demonstrate an objectively grounded risk to the security or welfare of

 8     the witness or the witness's family should it become known that the

 9     witness has given evidence before this Tribunal.  This standard can be

10     satisfied by showing, for example, that a threat was made against the

11     witness or the family in relation to his future testimony.  However, the

12     mere expression of fear by the witness is not sufficient to justify

13     protective measures.

14             Witness C-015 received threats both prior to and after his travel

15     to the Tribunal for testimony in a prior case.  In addition to that, the

16     witness recently received threats to his life due to the fact that he was

17     scheduled to testify in this case.  From the information provided by the

18     witness, the Chamber concluded that the threats against the witness could

19     not be attributed to personal disputes.  The Chamber further considered

20     that once an actual threat to the security of a witness is established,

21     the witness's personal attitude towards the threat, for example, whether

22     the witness felt fear or not, is of secondary importance in the

23     determination of whether protective measures will be granted.

24             For the foregoing reasons, the Chamber found that the Prosecution

25     had demonstrated an objectively grounded risk to the security of the

Page 1943

 1     witness.  As for the Stanisic Defence's concern whether face and voice

 2     distortion would be sufficient to protect the witness's identity, the

 3     Chamber found that it would be adequate protective measures provided that

 4     certain sensitive matters were dealt with in closed or private session.

 5             The Chamber therefore granted the Prosecution's motion for

 6     additional protective measures, thereby augmenting the existing

 7     protective measure of pseudonym.

 8             This concludes the Chamber's reasons for granting additional

 9     protective measures for Witness C-015.

10             I would like to move on.  I would like to turn into closed

11     session.

12                           [Closed session]

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 1944

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 8             Mr. Jordash, you would like to raise a matter.

 9             MR. JORDASH:  I will be brief, but we submit there's -- there's

10     grounds to adjourn on the basis of the evidence heard, the basis of the

11     report filed by this new doctor, and on the basis of what we submit is

12     our continuing inability to be able to obtain instructions.

13             And perhaps I've put it in the wrong order, because what inspired

14     our request to the Trial Chamber to ask questions of the doctor was our

15     continued inability to obtain instructions and our observations of the

16     accused, who appeared to us to have become increasingly fatigued, and it

17     was less an issue of any deterioration in his focus, more an issue of the

18     fact that he couldn't, it seemed, maintain sufficient energy for any

19     meaningful discussions to take place longer than five or ten minutes, and

20     from that we sought to obtain further information about his medical

21     regime.

22             In our submission, that information which has been given by the

23     doctor is sufficient to raise our application for an adjournment.  We

24     submit that this collection of medicines, the accused's demonstrable

25     medical conditions, and the lack of information which has driven us to

Page 1945

 1     make the application for the fitness questions to be asked and for

 2     further information to be requested from Dr. De Man combine to provide

 3     proper and cogent grounds to adjourn the case until we know more and

 4     until we can be satisfied the accused isn't suffering from these

 5     sides-effects from his medical regime, and before we can be satisfied

 6     that his conditions do not undermine his ability to participate

 7     effectively through the video-conferencing provision or to prevent him

 8     from coming to court.

 9             Those are my submissions.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, Mr. Jordash.  As you may have seen earlier, I

11     consulted with my colleagues.  We briefly exchanged whether the report

12     given and the questions and answers put to the doctor were a reason not

13     to proceed, and then I did not pronounce on that because there was no

14     application.  But let me see whether your submissions change in any way

15     the conclusions the Chamber reached before.

16                           [Trial Chamber confers]

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Brehmeier, I briefly consulted with my

18     colleagues, because we know that the Prosecution until now has -- and

19     also -- also from your questions that there was no reason to assume that

20     the Prosecution would support the application by the Defence.  So I

21     consulted with my colleagues at this moment on the basis of you opposing

22     against any decision other than the conclusions we reached before.

23             Is that a correct assumption?

24             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  That is absolutely correct, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the further submissions by you, Mr. Jordash,

Page 1946

 1     have not changed the conclusion of this Chamber that we should proceed.

 2             Then we turn again into closed session.

 3             Yes, Mr. Jovanovic.

 4             MR. JOVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.  We can

 5     proceed in open session.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, but if -- is there any matter you would like to

 7     raise at this moment?

 8             MR. JOVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.  It's about

 9     today's witness.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.  One second.  Before we move to today's

11     witness, first of all, I didn't ask you about whether or not to proceed

12     because it doesn't affect in any way Mr. Simatovic's position, I would

13     say.  That's the reason and the only reason why I didn't ask for your

14     opinion on the matter.

15             If it's about today's witness, I earlier moved into closed

16     session, and we started discussing a matter in relation to today's

17     witness.  If there's anything you consider we should hear submissions

18     about before we deal with the matter I would like to deal with in closed

19     session, then please tell us.

20             MR. JOVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.  I

21     thought it advisable to discuss this issue before the witness enters the

22     courtroom, and it has more to do with the activity of the Office of the

23     Prosecutor than the witness himself.

24             Immediately before today's session, the OTP submitted to the

25     Defence a list of names and places the witness is expected to mention

Page 1947

 1     during the examination-in-chief.  Judging by the names mentioned, this

 2     essentially changes the -- the nature of the testimony of the witness.

 3     No matter whether the witness has first-hand experience with the people

 4     and places mentioned here, what I would like to know is how the OTP came

 5     by this new information, namely, information that is not contained in any

 6     of the written statements submitted so far.

 7             I would also like to mention that this witness has not testified

 8     in other cases before.  So far we have never received information about

 9     an interview that may have taken place before this testimony.  So I would

10     like to know how and when the OTP came by this information, these names,

11     people and places, that change the very essence of this testimony?

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Brehmeier, is this a matter you can respond to

13     in open session?

14             MS. BREHMEIER-METZ:  I think it can be responded in open session,

15     but I would ask Mr. Hoffmann to address it.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

17             Mr. Hoffmann.

18             MR. HOFFMANN:  Thank you, Your Honour.

19             Very briefly, this -- this list is simply supposed to be an aide

20     to the court reporters and interpreters.  It's basically based upon the

21     previous statements.  We just went through that looking for names and

22     places that would be potentially mentioned by the witness or by the

23     parties in today's session, so it's easier for the court reporters and

24     interpreters to pronounce and spell those places correctly.

25             This -- this list has never been shown to the witness, is of no

Page 1948

 1     indication whatsoever.  It may potentially contain names or places from a

 2     previous list, basically just in expectation that something may arise.

 3     This doesn't change in any way the testimony, prior evidence of this

 4     witness.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  So it was created by yourself.  It was never shown

 6     to the witness.  It's your own initiative, and it's just in order to

 7     assist interpreters and transcribers.

 8             MR. HOFFMANN:  That's absolutely correct.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Jovanovic, any further questions in relation to

10     this?

11             MR. JOVANOVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honours, but I certainly

12     will have in case the witness should mention any of these names, and I

13     will say why I object to any of these names if so.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Well, we'll see, then, whether you can object

15     to answers the witness wants to give.

16             This particularly would have been a matter which I would have

17     expected the parties to raise before court.  I take it that you would

18     have asked Mr. Hoffmann that you would have received the same answer with

19     which at this moment at least you seem to be, for the time being,

20     satisfied.  Therefore, that was -- I wouldn't say loss of time, but a

21     loss of court time.

22             We move into closed session.

23                           [Closed session]

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 1949











11 Pages 1949-1958 redacted. Closed session.















Page 1959

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11                           [Open session]

12             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

14             I'd forgotten before we took a break to go into open session.

15     This is hereby corrected for the record.  At the same time, I have to

16     announce that reasons to go in closed session do exist, and therefore we

17     return into closed session.

18                           [Closed session]

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 1960











11 Pages 1960-2012 redacted. Closed session.















Page 2013

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22                           [Open session]

23             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honours.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

25             Ms. Brehmeier, you have a witness ready for tomorrow?

Page 2014

 1             Yes.  I was informed that tomorrow in the afternoon we will move

 2     from -- I think originally it was -- we are still in -- we were scheduled

 3     for Courtroom I, but we will be in Courtroom II.

 4             If there's nothing further to be raised at this moment, we will

 5     adjourn, and we will resume on Thursday, the 16th of July, quarter past

 6     2.00, Courtroom II.

 7                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.48 p.m.,

 8                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 16th day

 9                           of July, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.