Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 11224

 1                           Friday, 18 February 2011

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Good morning to everyone in and around this

 6     courtroom.

 7             Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

 9     everyone in and around the courtroom.

10             This is the case IT-03-69-T, The Prosecutor versus

11     Jovica Stanisic and Franko Simatovic.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

13             This morning, Judge Picard is unable to attend, due to urgent

14     personal reasons.  The other Judges, Judge Gwaunza and myself, have

15     decided that it would be in the interests of justice to continue hearing

16     this case, so, therefore, we're sitting, the two of us, under

17     Rule 15 bis.

18             I'd like to inform the parties that we have time until 1.00

19     sharp, not one minute more.  Let's try to get through all the

20     housekeeping matters which are on our desk as quickly as possible.

21             I hereby put on the record that the parties were informed on 11th

22     of February of this year that a housekeeping session would be held today

23     between 9.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.  I would like to start, first, with the

24     items which are on the housekeeping e-mail which was sent on the 28th of

25     January and which was later filed on the record filing 1st of

Page 11225

 1     February 2011.

 2             The first item is about new versions or translations.  The

 3     Chamber received no indication that there is disagreement among the

 4     parties in relation to these new versions, the versions which are found

 5     in this e-mail, and, therefore, Madam Registrar is instructed to make the

 6     necessary changes into -- in e-court.  These are the numbers of the list,

 7     starting with P442, last item on that list, P1666.

 8             Madam Registrar, you are instructed to replace the old versions

 9     by the new ones, as found on that list.

10             I move onto the second -- the third item on that list.  That is,

11     uploaded versions of the Theunens document.

12             First of all, I'd like to ask whether the Prosecution has

13     uploaded the corrected version of the five documents mentioned.  That's

14     P1013, P1016, P1025, P1090, and P1310.

15             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honours, we have, indeed.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Then hereby the Registry is instructed to replace

17     the old versions by the corrected versions.

18             As far as P1090 is concerned, there was an additional issue about

19     the missing introduction and also about adding the years to the pages of

20     the excerpt of the chronology.

21             Has this been done as well?  I'm talking about the report of the

22     Dutch Institute for War Documentation or the Dutch acronym being NIOD,

23     N-I-O-D.

24             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.  The document as you mentioned is

25     partially in Dutch.  We -- the English translation was completed but

Page 11226

 1     we're still awaiting the B/C/S translation.  When it becomes available,

 2     we will upload it under 65 ter 4245.1 and then we'll inform the Chamber

 3     and the parties.

 4             With respect --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  The English translation is available to the parties.

 6             MS. MARCUS:  Yes.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then we will wait for the B/C/S version.  If

 8     that causes the Defence any problems, then the Chamber would like to be

 9     informed.

10             I think that covers item 3 on the e-mail.

11             We move onto item 4.  This is about revised versions of P1122 and

12     P1601.

13             Have the revised versions been uploaded?

14             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, they have, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Madam Registrar, you are hereby instructed to

16     replace the old versions by the revised versions of P1122 and P1601.

17             I move -- if there's any matter in between where I move too fast,

18     please, do not hesitate to interrupt me.

19             Yes.

20             MS. MARCUS:  Thank you, Your Honour.

21             With respect to P1601, the complete translation of this is still

22     pending.  So the Prosecution will keep the Chamber and the parties

23     informed of the progress on this.  I spoke too soon:  P1122 in fact has

24     been uploaded and is ready for replacement.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  So P1601 is not yet in a final version.

Page 11227

 1             MS. MARCUS:  That's correct.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  When do you expect that this could be completed?

 3             MS. MARCUS:  We expect it the to be ready by Monday, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  If that causes the Defence any specific problems,

 5     then the Chamber would like to be informed about it.

 6             Then I move on to item 5.  Item 5 is about unofficial and

 7     non-corrected versions of prior testimony of Rule 92 quater witnesses.  I

 8     give one example of that, is P589.  The Prosecution would look for a

 9     better copy of the document.  Was also a problem with legibility.  Now I

10     do understand that for P589 another version has been found.

11             Is that correct?

12             MS. MARCUS:  That's correct, Your Honour.  In fact for all those

13     listed in the weekly notification that we sent out, we have uploaded

14     replacement transcripts with the doc IDs as indicated.  They are all

15     ready for uploading, including P589.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Has the -- where I earlier referred to 92

17     quater witnesses, some of them are also testimony of non-92 quater

18     witnesses.

19             Has the legibility problem been resolved by that as well,

20     Ms. Marcus?

21             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then the Registry is hereby instructed to make

23     the necessary replacements and replace the old versions by the official

24     versions which are now received by -- from the Prosecution.

25             I move -- yes.

Page 11228

 1             MS. MARCUS:  Excuse me, Your Honour, I'm sorry, as the Chamber

 2     requested we did look into additional ones other than the ones mentioned

 3     by the Chamber.  I just want to note that we found some additional ones.

 4     We've included them in the weekly --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  They're included.  And Madam Registrar is

 6     sufficiently aware of what are the ones added of those found on item 5 of

 7     the e-mail.

 8             Madam Registrar, you ...

 9             THE REGISTRAR:  I have the weekly update from the OTP.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Is it sufficient perhaps after the break we'll

11     just compare the lists we have, the old -- the list the Chamber provided

12     being on item number 5 and then to see what other exhibit numbers were

13     replaced or at least new version was uploaded by the Prosecution so that

14     we have a full record on what is new now.

15             We'll do that after the break, compare the list.  Perhaps you

16     could also see which ones in addition to what the Chamber asked for

17     are -- how many are there.

18             MS. MARCUS:  I could do that immediately, Your Honour, if you --

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please do so.

20             MS. MARCUS:  Yes.

21             The additional up ones in addition to what the Chamber mentioned

22     will be P38, P39, P62, P63, P68, P104, P105, P296, P303, P356, P402,

23     P408, P491, P496, P510, P589 - we did mention that earlier - P -- that

24     would be it, Your Honours.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  That would be it.

Page 11229

 1             Those, in addition to the ones mentioned in the e-mail of the

 2     28th of January.

 3             I move on to the next item, which is a document marked by

 4     Witness Todorovic.

 5             Has 65 ter 113, because that was the document we were talking

 6     about, has that been uploaded?

 7             Ms. Marcus.

 8             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, it has, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, Madam Registrar, you are hereby instructed to

10     attach the uploaded document, 65 ter 113, to attach it to P1582.

11             Then we move on, item 7, which is about document P1698.  We are

12     talking about the statement of Mr. Kojic, where the parties have made

13     submissions on the admissibility.  We had the issue of - let me see -

14     whether the Defence objections remain.  It was mainly about the

15     applicability of Rule 92 ter here.

16             Mr. Jordash, is there anything you'd like to submit and, if so,

17     if you could limit it to three minutes.

18             MR. JORDASH:  I was hoping that we could file some written

19     submissions on it.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Because I do understand that there's no

21     agreement between the parties as to the admissibility of the document.

22     When do you think you could file -- I would have given you an opportunity

23     here.  It seems that it's mainly a matter of can it be admitted under

24     Rule 92 ter, is there any possibility of admitting it under 89(C).  Did

25     you say I'd rather make written submissions then, of course, causes

Page 11230

 1     further delays in knowing exactly what the evidence is.  But, at the same

 2     time, if you --

 3             MR. JORDASH:  Could we just move it to the back of the list and

 4     then I'll have a look at it as we sit here and --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  We put it at the back of the list.  Let's see, that

 6     is.

 7             MS. MARCUS:  Excuse me, Your Honour.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 9             MS. MARCUS:  May I just note that we filed a written submission

10     on that matter also so --

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I -- that's the written submissions dated 9th

12     February, 2001 [sic].

13             MS. MARCUS:  That's correct.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  That is an eight-page submission altogether,

15     Prosecution's further submission on the admissibility of P1698.

16             Yes, I'm aware.  We are just seeking the response of the Defence.

17             Mr. Jordash, I put it at the end of the list.

18             Then I move to item 8 on the e-mail list.  Item 8 is about

19     Witness JF-026.  First is a letter to the Victims and Witness Section

20     which the OTP wanted to have that admitted.  The OTP informed us that the

21     Defence would have no objections; is that accurate?

22             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.  Thank you.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  So then whenever Mr. Jordash speaks, Mr. Petrovic...

24             MR. PETROVIC:  We have no objections either, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, then the letter to the Victims and

Page 11231

 1     Witness Section, Madam Registrar, are you aware what the document is,

 2     because I would like to invite you to assign a number to it.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  I would like to hear the exact...

 4             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, it's 65 ter 5879.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, have you identified the document?

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, I did, Your Honours.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  If I look at it from a distance, it's in English

 8     only at this moment; is that correct?

 9             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honours, as far as I know, it's been translated

10     and uploaded in both languages.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.

12             THE REGISTRAR:  Both languages have been uploaded, Your Honours.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Madam Registrar, and then the number would

14     be ...

15             THE REGISTRAR:  One moment, Your Honour.  Apologies.

16             The number will be P2493, Your Honours.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  P2493 is admitted, under seal.

18             There was a related issue and -- because the parties wanted to

19     have a look at the VWS response to that letter.  Have you had access to

20     it?  The response of VWS.

21             MR. JORDASH:  That was the recent one the one that we received

22     two days ago, I think?

23             JUDGE ORIE:  I do not whether you received it.  I think, as a

24     matter of fact, that the Chamber would have to give permission to release

25     it.

Page 11232

 1                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Apparently my staff know what you received two days

 3     ago, Mr. Jordash.  They say it's a different one.

 4             MR. JORDASH:  I just realized that.  We haven't seen the VWS

 5     response.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  The parties wanted to have a look at it.

 7     Madam Registrar, the Registry is permitted to share that letter with the

 8     parties.

 9             If that leads to any further problem or any further development,

10     the Chamber would like to be informed without delay.

11             The Prosecution tendered in relation to still the same witness a

12     media article which had not received yet an exhibit number.  First of

13     all, would there be any objections against admission of that media

14     article, which is 65 ter --

15             MR. GROOME:  65 ter 5874.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  5874.

17                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  But before I invite the Defence to take a position

19     on that, I think the Chamber has invited the Prosecution to explain to us

20     the relevance of that media article.

21             MR. GROOME:  Given that this witness's evidence was taken in

22     closed session, I believe it would be more appropriate that we do this in

23     private session.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  We move into private session.

25                           [Private session]


Page 11233











11 Pages 11233-12241 redacted. Private session.
















Page 11242

 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   (redacted)

23                           [Open session]

24             THE REGISTRAR:  We're in open session, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.


Page 11243

 1             We move to item 9 on the e-mail list of questions, relating to

 2     P1605, an intercept.

 3             On the 11th of February, the OTP has filed further details.  Does

 4     the Defence maintain its objections?

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, we do.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  You do.

 7             Would you like to make short submissions in view of the latest

 8     information or do you think that the matter has been sufficiently dealt

 9     with?

10                           [Defence counsel confer]

11             MR. JORDASH:  Can I just have a very brief moment, Your Honour,

12     please.

13             Your Honour, could we come back to that.  I would be able to give

14     an answer to that --

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  It's the item about intercepts where an audio

16     is missing.  I'll put it, again, at the end of my list.

17             I then move on.  The next one, item 10, under list of questions

18     which is about P1634, an unredacted version was in need to be uploaded.

19             Has this been done?

20             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, it's Your Honour, it has been uploaded as 65

21     ter 2578.1.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And that's the list of call-signs.

23             MS. MARCUS:  Correct.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the unredacted version replaces the redacted

25     version.

Page 11244

 1             Madam Registrar, you're hereby instructed to replace it.  And I

 2     don't think there were any objections against the list of call-signs, as

 3     such.  Therefore, Madam Registrar, the number would be -- no, the number

 4     we have already it's P1634.  P1634 is admitted into evidence.

 5             We move on to the next one.  It's item 11 on the list of

 6     questions.  P1688, the important issue being what the provenance of that

 7     document was.

 8             Could I inquire with the Defence whether the objections against

 9     P1688 still stand?

10             MR. JORDASH:  Yes, they do, Your Honour.  We -- I don't think

11     we've had... sorry.  I beg your pardon.  We've had an indication from a

12     Prosecution investigator dated the 9th of February, 2011, which says the

13     document -- or the document was obtained by a former OTP member of staff

14     from a disc containing RS MUP dispatches on the 27th of January, 2005

15     from the Croatian State Archives.  But that is the sum total of the

16     indication as to origin.  And the contents of the document are disputed,

17     as is the authenticity of the document, and we would submit that there

18     ought to be a further clarification of how it was obtained and the RFA

19     that gave rise to the request and the precise response.

20             The witness who testified about this document was not able to

21     advance the issue any further, simply remarking that based on what is

22     discussed in the document, the witness believes that it is authentic and

23     but then going on to say that the witness had not seen this information

24     previously.  And I'm reading from the witness's comments on page 8.

25     Nothing the witness said, in our submission, changes the situation.

Page 11245

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Are there any specifics as far as the

 2     challenge to the authenticity is apart from what you just told us?  Is

 3     there anything in typewriters never being used by the authority which

 4     supposedly has issued this document, or you know anything else which

 5     would be a reason found in the document that it would not be authentic.

 6             MR. JORDASH:  No, it has certainly indications.  It has a stamp

 7     of the -- purporting to be a stamp of the Serbian Army of Krajina

 8     Main Staff.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  If you say on -- well, let's say on the face of the

10     document, there we do not find the reasons for our challenge to the

11     authenticity, but it's, rather that is we have insufficient detailed

12     information about how it was obtained, from whom exactly it was obtained,

13     what the chain of custody may have been before it ended up in the archive

14     were it was found.  If you say, That's the type of authenticity challenge

15     we're making, not the other type I asked for, then --

16             MR. JORDASH:  Certainly.  What we would say is we challenge the

17     authenticity of the document.  In order to be able to do that effectively

18     we require further information, so that we can conduct our own

19     investigations.  At the moment to be told it comes from an archive

20     doesn't enable us to set out and do the relevant investigation.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

22             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we support the

23     position of Mr. Stanisic's Defence on this matter.

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

25             We then move onto item 12 on the list, which is P1705, a clip

Page 11246

 1     which is also contained in P2161.

 2             To that extent, the portion is already in evidence, but for

 3     purely practical reasons, the Chamber suggests that we would nevertheless

 4     have it admitted as a clip, because it is far easier for future reference

 5     not to refer to a lengthy video, but, rather, to refer in a focussed way

 6     on a specific portion which has then its own exhibit number.

 7             Any objections by the parties to that?

 8             If not, P1705 is admitted into evidence; although the content

 9     already contained in P2161.

10             I move onto item 13 on the list.  D55, D56 and D70.

11             Mr. Jordash, I think it is a -- these are documents which were

12     originally provided by Mr. Stanisic.  You would make further

13     investigations into the provenance of where Mr. Stanisic got them from.

14             Could you update the Chamber.

15             MR. JORDASH:  We wrote to the national council to obtain the

16     documents afresh.  We received a response in relation to D55 and there's

17     a new version uploaded as 1D1927.  The correspondence indicating request

18     and response to and from the national council is uploaded at 1D1929.1.

19     1D1926, and 1D1928.1, and we await responses in relation to D56 and D70.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Which, Mr. Groome, leads me to ask you whether, now

21     limited to D55, there's any objection now knowing or at least having

22     another copy received through formal channels.

23             MS. MARCUS:  Yes.  Your Honour, last we heard there was no

24     translation of the response to D55.  This is the first I've heard of the

25     documents that have been uploaded.  So if Your Honours would give us an

Page 11247

 1     opportunity to look at that, and if it has been translated then we can

 2     certainly review it and get back to Your Honours in this session.

 3             And we would, of course, maintain our objections to D56 and D70

 4     until we hear further.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  That's right.  We only received everything late

 6     yesterday, and so we apologise for not letting the Prosecution know that

 7     in advance.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Which means that I think we leave all three of

 9     them at this moment, pending -- Mr. Jordash, you will understand that the

10     Chamber, at a certain moment has to consider, and I'm now mainly

11     focussing on D56 and D70, whether we leave it on the MFI list or whether

12     we, in view of the stage we have reached in the proceedings, whether we

13     would, without prejudice, either invite to you withdraw them at this

14     moment or not to admit them, which, of course, leaves it open that if

15     there ever will be a Defence case you will have an opportunity to

16     reintroduce them.  But, otherwise, we -- we might -- I might add to my

17     bad reputation of having long MFI lists.

18             MR. JORDASH:  We understand, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  That's understood.

20             So D55 -- Ms. Marcus, perhaps it would even be possible to look

21     at the correspondence.  Of course, the correspondence is related to D55,

22     but D55 is translated, is available in translation.  So perhaps you will

23     have an opportunity to look at the correspondence with the assistance

24     of -- of a language assistant because the correspondence is not -- is

25     uploaded but is not tendered, is it, Mr. Jordash?

Page 11248

 1             MR. JORDASH:  That's right.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  So it's just for your information at this

 3     moment.

 4             So if at all possible we'd like to hear from you about your

 5     position in relation to D55 and the Chamber will then further consider

 6     what to do with D56 and D70.

 7             Then I move onto item 14.  There is a revised version uploaded, I

 8     do understand, of D118; is that correct?

 9             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Then may I take it that the revised version does not

11     meet any objection.  Ms. Marcus.

12             MS. MARCUS:  No objection.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  No objection.  Madam Registrar, you are hereby

14     instructed to replace the document originally uploaded and assigned

15     number D118 by the revised version, and D118 revised version is admitted

16     into evidence.

17             I move to item 15, the homeland war collection.

18             Mr. Simatovic -- Mr. Petrovic, the Simatovic Defence was invited

19     to upload revised versions of various documents which apparently were

20     taken from this book, a collection of documents.  I add to this that

21     D103, which was one of these documents, is already admitted as an

22     associated exhibit to the Babic testimony.  But the others, have revised

23     versions been uploaded?

24             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  They have been.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  These are the originals.  There was also an issue

Page 11249

 1     about a revised English version of D103, but that may --

 2             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my apologies.  I need

 3     to seek clarification.

 4             The revised versions have been uploaded.  By revised, we mean the

 5     version from the book of documents, the Croatian Homeland War, where

 6     parts of other documents were then removed from the pages where the

 7     documents which were of interest to us also appeared.  This has been

 8     done, and, of course, accompanying translations have also been attached.

 9             However, Your Honour, it seems to me that you're mentioning --

10     that you are referring to originals, but so far, we have not had access

11     to them.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  As a matter of fact, that was -- this item was for

13     me split up in two questions.  The first is the copies taken from the

14     book; and the second item was that I was supposed - and I'm reading now

15     from my paper - that I'm supposed to inquire whether the authenticity

16     dispute, that is missing originals, whether those authenticity dispute,

17     whether that remains.

18             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.  The Prosecution maintains its

19     objection to the documents.  We would like to see the originals.  These

20     are all excerpts from a book, whether they're cut out from the book or --

21     or tendered through the book makes no difference to us; we would maintain

22     our objection.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Now, Mr. Petrovic, you have suggested, if my

24     recollection serves me well, that they could then remain MFIs, up till

25     the moment that you could provide the originals rather than copies from a

Page 11250

 1     book where we do not know whether they are fully in accordance with any

 2     originals, whether any originals do exist.

 3             Now, we are close now at the stage, and I'm telling you the same

 4     as I told Mr. Jordash a minute ago, we are close to the end of the

 5     Prosecution case.  The Chamber would not like to have a long list of MFIs

 6     which would be taken from the Prosecution's case to possibly a Defence

 7     case.  So, therefore, your suggestion that to -- to keep them as MFIs is

 8     not very welcome to the Chamber.  So there are a few options.  Either you

 9     withdraw them and, of course, have an opportunity to tender the originals

10     whether through a witness or as a bar table document at a later stage, if

11     there will be a later stage of the proceedings.  Of course, the Chamber

12     could also at this moment decide to deny admission, because there is too

13     much uncertainty about whether originals corresponding with these

14     documents do exist and whether the -- whether the published documents are

15     the same as any originals, if they do exist.

16             What would be your preference?  Because the Chamber would again

17     like to start as much as possible with a clean slate, if it comes to a

18     Defence case.

19             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, our preference would

20     that they retain the status that they have now.  In other words, that

21     they be MFI'd.  However we acknowledge your wish to try and wrap up as

22     many as issues as possible, so if you feel that this is inappropriate,

23     that they remain MFI'd, we can withdraw them and once we obtain the

24     originals we would then - and we are sure that they do exist - we would

25     then submit them for admission, either through the bar table or via some

Page 11251

 1     witnesses, when the time comes.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  You say you can withdraw them.  Do you

 3     withdraw them?

 4             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, well, it is clear

 5     what your preference is, so the answer would be yes, we withdraw these

 6     documents.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Groome.

 8             MR. GROOME:  Your Honour, just to raise a purely practical aspect

 9     of this.  I would be concerned if perhaps one witness - and I don't know

10     that it is true but I'm willing to undertake this analysis - if the

11     witness were to say, when shown that document, Yes, the place mentioned

12     in line 2 was a place that I went to, that the Chamber -- if that is now

13     removed from the exhibit list and the Chamber has no sight of it the

14     Chamber might be able to understand the witness's evidence.  I don't know

15     if that's the case for any of these, but perhaps, if the Chamber wishes,

16     the Prosecution will undertake to see whether it believes that any

17     particular one of these, despite being MFI'd are essential to the

18     Chamber's understanding of the witness's evidence.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I see your point.  That if ever reference is

20     made to these documents, to the content of it, that we might lose

21     evidence.

22             What I would like to do under those circumstances as a matter of

23     fact is that you review the transcript, identify any portion where a

24     witness refers to a portion of those MFI'd documents and where the

25     relevant text of that document is not found in the words spoken either in

Page 11252

 1     the question or in the answer, and then to - if you identify such

 2     portions - then to agree with the Defence on what the relevant portion of

 3     that document reads and then to make a joint submission so that we do not

 4     lose evidence, that's clear, that's not the intention with which the

 5     Chamber kindly invited the Simatovic Defence to withdraw.

 6             Is that --

 7             MR. GROOME:  Yes, Your Honour.

 8                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I put on the record what the result is.

10             The result is that D100, D101, D102, D105, D106, D110, D112, and

11     D120 are withdrawn by the Simatovic Defence without prejudice.

12             That the revised -- the new version of D103 should replace the

13     existing D103 as a document associated with the Babic testimony.

14             Madam Registrar, you are hereby instructed to replace the old

15     one.

16             That being clear -- one second.

17                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I then move onto the next, which is item 16 on the

19     list of questions, the e-mail list:  Provenance of the documents D139 and

20     D146.

21             Is there any progress made in investigating the provenance of the

22     documents?  Until recently, we were informed that no progress was made.

23             I'm looking at the party which tendered D139, D146, the one being

24     a Pauk order and the other one being a -- I think both of them also came

25     from a potential Defence witness.

Page 11253

 1             Mr. Petrovic, any further news on the matter?

 2             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as relates to the

 3     parties, we have not been able to make any advances.  The positions

 4     remain as they were of both parties.  We've explained on a number of

 5     occasions what the situation was with us, and in view of the people that

 6     we thought we might call in as witnesses, and we will continue to work on

 7     these matters, and we will see whether these people who now have the

 8     status of people possessing potential information, whether that status

 9     could be upgraded to witness status.

10             So that remains to be seen.  But as for D146, we did discuss this

11     issue with our counterparts and this is a document where we have the same

12     interview or conversation but they appear to be different.  At the top of

13     one of the pages, the addressee appears different in these different

14     versions.

15             So the D146 document that is at issue here has an ERN number

16     within the Prosecutor's collection of documents and that document has

17     been uploaded as 2D308.1, and we understood that to mean that our

18     counterparts from the Prosecution would agree to D146 being replaced by

19     2D308.1, so that, for the time being, this issue can be overcome, the

20     issue of the D146 exhibit, with the caveat that perhaps at a later time

21     we can revisit this issue but that, of course, would depend on the -- on

22     further developments and it may reappear via a witness that we call in to

23     testify.

24             So it was our understanding that the Prosecutor is prepared to

25     substitute D146 for 2D308.1.

Page 11254

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Marcus.

 2             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.  With respect to these two

 3     documents, we did discuss them at the meeting, that's true.  I think

 4     there must have been some misunderstanding with respect to D146.  Our

 5     understanding was that the Defence was comparing the document they

 6     tendered with another one as a way of supporting their assertion of

 7     reliability.  But if the Defence is actually saying that it is the same

 8     document as we have, I'd like Your Honours to give me a few moments to

 9     check that document and I will get back to you.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  D146 being on the -- tendered through

11     Mr. Theunens, if I ...

12             Now, we discussed D146.  About D139, do I understand that there's

13     no development there?

14             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] That's correct, Your Honour, no

15     developments.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I would also invite you perhaps to not leave

17     that on the MFI list, and without prejudice, to see whether we can empty

18     that list and see whether it reappears at any later stage of these

19     proceedings, if there will be any.

20             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] We withdraw it, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  D139 is withdrawn by the Simatovic Defence.

22             I move onto item 17, where the Stanisic Defence was instructed to

23     either provide further details as to redactions or provide an unredacted

24     version of this document.

25             What I do understand that you asked for an unredacted version and

Page 11255

 1     that the Serbian government was kind enough to send you a -- a new copy

 2     just as redacted as the previous one.

 3             MR. JORDASH:  Precisely.  And we wrote back to them and said,

 4     well, if you want redactions, please apply for protective measures, and

 5     we await their response.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Here the same question arises as whether we

 7     should keep them -- I don't know what the next step would be, whether

 8     even a more heavily redacted version would be -- I do not know.  But it's

 9     becoming a bit unfortunate to wait.  I must admit, that I don't have a

10     clear recollection at this moment as to the content of the document.  I

11     don't know how vital it is at this moment.  Of course, every document is

12     important but how vital it is, whether you would consider to withdraw,

13     not having any further -- not any better version.  I could have a look at

14     it in e-court if --

15             MR. JORDASH:  I mean, I'm content that we withdraw it for the

16     moment.  We will certainly seek its admission at a later time but I don't

17     think it's vital that --

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, if this is an later stage of these proceedings,

19     then you withdraw this without prejudice.

20             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Ms. Marcus.

22             MS. MARCUS:  Thank you, Your Honour, just a technical question.

23     When we previously had documents that were withdrawn, the Chamber marked

24     them not admitted so that the number would be still there in the e-court

25     system.  I'm just wondering whether we're going to continue doing that

Page 11256

 1     for the same reason as what Mr. Groome raised for cross-referencing if

 2     the document is ever previously mentioned.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, we're now entering the reign of the

 4     technicalities.  Withdrawn would finally result in marked not admitted.

 5     Is that ...

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  That's correct, Your Honour.  It remains in the

 7     e-court but marked as not admitted.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then that concern seems to be dealt with.

 9             We have then on the record at this moment that D160 is withdrawn;

10     therefore, not admitted.

11             The next one, item 18, D163 and P1075, MFI'd, revised versions.

12             Have we received?

13             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, the revised versions have been

14     uploaded.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And I think, then for the one, D163, is still

16     in need to be admitted, and the revised version -- does the revised

17     version cause any objections or any --

18             I do understand there where no objections against D163.  D163 is

19     admitted into evidence.

20             Now, for P1075, I think that's one of the associated exhibits to

21     the testimony of -- the report of Mr. Theunens.  So, therefore, the

22     Chamber will deliver its decision on the Theunens associated exhibits in

23     writing.

24             Therefore, at this moment the only thing that has to be done is

25     replace the old version of P1075 by a new one and the Chamber will then

Page 11257

 1     decide in that other decision on admission.

 2             Madam Registrar, you're hereby instructed for such replacement.

 3             I move on.  Item 19.  D207, that should become a combined

 4     document and uploaded as such.

 5             Mr. Petrovic.

 6             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that has been done.

 7     And it is now marked as 2D395.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  And is -- because there's no change in the content

 9     is admitted into evidence.

10             I have forgotten that we're sitting in the morning hours and by

11     usually we take a break at 30 minutes past the whole hour.  I should have

12     been more attentive and I should have taken a break at quarter past 10.00

13     because we started at 9.00.  I apologise for having ignored that.

14             And we take a break, and we resume at 11.00.

15                           --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.

16                           --- On resuming at 11.06 a.m.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  I think there were a few leftovers from before the

18     break.  The first one being - let me see - P1698, item 7 on the

19     questionnaire.  I think we're still waiting for the position of the

20     Defence, in relation to the statement of Mr. Kojic.  Or is that a matter

21     you asked for written submissions but you would consider, I think

22     Mr. Jordash, whether you'd be able to make any oral submissions.

23             MR. JORDASH:  I'm almost there, Your Honour.  But I was looking

24     also at the issue concerning P1605 over the break.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, okay.  Then we leave 1698, for a second, aside.

Page 11258

 1             MR. JORDASH:  I can report on the Prosecution motion to admit

 2     P1605.  We withdraw objections.   We will advance further submissions or

 3     evidence in due course concerning the veracity of the information

 4     contained within but we accept that it crosses the admissibility

 5     threshold.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  That is the newspaper article isn't it?  No.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  It's the intercepted telephone conversation between

 8     Martic and [Overlapping speakers] ...

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  [Overlapping speakers] ...  Yes, I have to find it.

10     Can you tell me which one is it on the list of questions?

11             MS. MARCUS:  It's number 9, Your Honour.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Number 9.  Thank you, Ms. Marcus.

13             Yes, that's the missing audio.  As far as the Simatovic --

14             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we join the position

15     by the Stanisic Defence on this score.  Thank you.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Then P1605 is admitted into evidence but I think it

17     should be admitted under seal.  Is -- P1605 admitted, under seal.

18             Then let me see.  D55.  Ms. Marcus, I think we were waiting for

19     your position.

20             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.  The Defence has provided the RFA

21     and the response to the RFA and the document that they received is,

22     indeed, the same.  They received it from the Croatian State Archives.

23     This was in -- pursuant to a response to the -- to the Croatian

24     authorities.

25             So the Prosecution withdraws its objection to the admission of

Page 11259

 1     this document.  I would add just one query, with leave of Your Honours,

 2     with respect to P1688, to which the Defence maintains its objections

 3     on -- which was a document received from the Croatian State Archives.  I

 4     just wonder if there's any -- any reason which might be relevant to this

 5     document.  As I said, we withdraw our objection because we're satisfied

 6     that if it comes from the Croatian State Archives that it is authentic.

 7     So we just query the Defence`s objection.

 8             Thank you.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  Let's take it one by one.  D55, you now received

10     another version of that, if I -- Mr. Petrovic.  Oh, let me see.  No, that

11     was Stanisic Defence.

12             D55, we have now the same document but from a different source.

13     Any -- is it exactly the same, including or whatever?  Is there -- if it

14     is exactly the same, there's no need to replace the old one by the new

15     one.  If there's, however, any slight difference...

16             MS. MARCUS:  To us it appears exactly the same.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Exactly the same.  So then there are no objections

18     against D55 anymore.  D55 is admitted into evidence.

19             As far as D56 and D70 are concerned, Mr. Jordash, what about to

20     withdraw them for the time being and have them receive the status of

21     non-admitted, which you could then at any future stage...

22             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.  We agree with that, Your Honour.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  D56 and D70 ...

24                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I have to address you as well, Mr. Petrovic.

Page 11260

 1     Because D70 was one of your documents.

 2             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  We do agree

 3     that they be withdrawn.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Then D56 and D70, now being withdrawn, receive the

 5     status of not admitted.

 6             Then let me have a look.  There was an issue about D146, which

 7     was supposed to be the same or approximately the same as 2D308.1, and

 8     that is item 16 of the list of questions.  That is, the -- Ms. Marcus.

 9             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.  We observed the documents.  We

10     noted that they are largely the same, but there are some differences.  I

11     discussed with Mr. Bakrac over the break and I agree with his proposal

12     which was that we would replace -- 2D308.1, we would replace what's

13     uploaded as D146 with that one.  In other words, that, with Your Honours

14     leave, of course, that 2D308.1 would become D146 and the Defence has

15     assured us that they would provide an updated translation, in fact, of

16     both the documents so that we could ultimately have the fully accurate

17     translation.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  I do understand that.  Is there any objection

19     against admission?

20             MS. MARCUS:  No, Your Honour.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  Then, for now, what will be the new D146, that is

22     2D308.1, no objections.

23             Madam Registrar, you are hereby instructed to replace the

24     document which is uploaded, until now, under number D146 by the document

25     uploaded by the Simatovic Defence, 2D308.1.  And that new D146 is

Page 11261

 1     admitted into evidence.

 2             For D139, the Pauk order, could we -- let me just check.

 3                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  I am reminded that that has been withdrawn and is,

 5     therefore, not admitted, so ...

 6             So then, I think, that we were at ...

 7                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  I finally return to the media article which was

 9     related to Witness JF-026.  65 ter 5874, media article, the Chamber has

10     decided that it admits into evidence this media article.

11             Madam Registrar, had we assigned a number already?  I don't think

12     so.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  No, Your Honours.  The number would be P2494,

14     Your Honours.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  P2494 is admitted into evidence.  It can be a public

16     document, I think.

17             Then I wanted to resume item 20 on the list of questions.  We

18     start with D209, up to D211.  Any progress made in the -- among the

19     parties?

20             Mr. Petrovic.

21             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I think that we can

22     say that some progress has been achieved.  We met with the Prosecutor,

23     and the Prosecutor gave us some information on the provenance of the

24     document.  The meeting took place on the 7th of February.  Based on the

25     information received from the OTP, in the next couple of days, we will be

Page 11262

 1     seeking from the government of Croatia to obtain these documents.  At

 2     that point, we will continue discussions between the parties.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Now we're talking about four documents in question

 4     number 20.  D209 -- yes.

 5             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm referring to

 6     three documents: D209, D210, and D211.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  When do you think the matter could be

 8     resolved?  Because if that would be a matter of months rather than days,

 9     we would suggest a similar approach as earlier.

10             But if there's a realistic expectation that you could resolve the

11     matter relatively soon, then ...

12             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.  We maintain our objection because

13     these are summaries of intercepts rather than the original intercepts,

14     and I agreed at the meeting that the Simatovic Defence would sent an RFA

15     to obtain the original intercepts, if I'm not mistaken.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  The full intercepts, yes.

17             MS. MARCUS:  Yes.  Thank you.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic, same question.  We're not going to

19     leave MFI's forever.  When do you think that ...

20             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, unfortunately, the

21     matter will not be resolved in the next couple of days, that's for sure.

22     Once the RFA is sent, the experience shows that the procedure takes

23     between several weeks and several months.

24             So we can state with certainty that it's not going to be resolved

25     in the next couple of days.  We would like it to remain MFI'd.  We know

Page 11263

 1     what your position is, and if your position applies to these three

 2     documents across the board, then we will withdraw them and as soon as we

 3     receive a response from the Republic of Croatia, we will be re-tendering

 4     them.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  I understand this as a withdrawal.  At any

 6     time you can reactivate the matter once we have sufficient information.

 7     But, especially at this stage of the proceedings, it should be perfectly

 8     clear what the evidence is and what perhaps is in a further future

 9     evidence.

10             Therefore, D209, D210, and D211 are -- have now the status of not

11     admitted.  The decision is without prejudice.

12             P1708 was --

13             MS. MARCUS:  We discussed this with the Defence in our meeting.

14     We agree that the matter is now for the Chamber.  It seems to me we all

15     agreed that the document can come in, but, of course, there's a dispute

16     that rains but as to how the document would be interpreted.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  But I do understand there is no objection

18     anymore against admission.  If that is the case, P1708 is admitted into

19     evidence.

20             I move to item 21 on the question list; D214, annexes to witness

21     statement of Witness JF-029.

22             I do understand that this is a new translation uploaded.  If that

23     is correct ...

24             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that's correct.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we'll instruct Madam Registrar to replace the

Page 11264

 1     existence -- the document which is now uploaded under D214 to replace

 2     that with 2D394.

 3             And then my question to you, Ms. Marcus, is whether there are any

 4     objections.

 5             MS. MARCUS:  No objection, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Then D214 as newly uploaded is admitted into

 7     evidence under seal.

 8             I move to the next question, number 21.  Yes, there was some --

 9     some unclarity as to whether the OTP wished to tender the associated

10     exhibits for Witness JF-026.

11             Ms. Marcus, I go through them in -- in a  numerical order.  268

12     was one of them but that is now P1885.  Then we have 287 up to 291.  Is

13     that what you want to tender?

14             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.

15             JUDGE ORIE:  293.

16             MS. MARCUS:  Correct.

17             JUDGE ORIE:  414.

18             MS. MARCUS:  Yes.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Then the next one, 416, being an associated exhibit,

20     but is already in evidence as P2144.

21             Then the next one, P1947, followed by P1993 --

22             MS. MARCUS:  Sorry, Your Honour, perhaps 65 ter numbers rather

23     than P numbers [Overlapping speakers] ...

24             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, I apologise, these are 65 ter numbers. I

25     correct myself in this respect.

Page 11265

 1             Then the next one, 65 ter 2846 is already in evidence as D154.  I

 2     follow with the 65 ter numbers 3760, 4031, 5868, and 5872.

 3             These, as far as I am aware, are the associated exhibits you had

 4     not tendered but you intended to tender.

 5             MS. MARCUS:  That's correct, Your Honour.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we learned from you that there would be no

 7     objections.  Let's verify that with the Defence.  Any of these documents,

 8     any objection?

 9             I hear of --

10             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.

12             Then, Madam Registrar, we have, at this moment -- I think these

13     are 13 documents.  The ones I mentioned before.  These 13 documents,

14     Madam Registrar, could you assign a range of numbers to them in the order

15     which is, by the way, the exact numerical order in which I mentioned

16     these documents.  Could you tell us what the exhibit numbers, the range

17     of 13 exhibit numbers would be assigned to those documents?

18             THE REGISTRAR:  This would be documents P2495, P2496, P2497,

19     P2498, P2499, P2501 -- P2500, P2501, P2502, P2503, P2504, P2505, P2506,

20     and P2507.  Your Honours.

21             JUDGE ORIE:  P2495 up to and including P2507 are admitted into

22     evidence, and the parties are invited to verify in e-court what exactly

23     appears under what number.  But, again, it follows the order in which I

24     mentioned them earlier.

25             Is there any need to have them under seal?

Page 11266

 1             Ms. Marcus.

 2             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, I would have to double-check, but I would say

 3     yes.  And perhaps then we could have a double look at it.  But because

 4     they're associated to [Overlapping speakers] ...

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  They are provisionally admitted under seal.  And if

 6     there's any document which could become a public document, we would

 7     expect you to inform the Chamber on short notice.

 8             We move on to -- do I also understand that these are the

 9     associated exhibits you wanted to tender and no others?

10             MS. MARCUS:  That's correct, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE ORIE:  Then we move to item 24 of our -- one second.

12                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  That's now clear for Witness JF-026.

14             Ms. Marcus, as far as Witness Stoparic is concerned, is there any

15     further associated exhibits you intended to tender, or have we dealt with

16     all the associated exhibits you had on your mind?

17             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, the associated exhibits for Stoparic

18     were already admitted as P1707, P1708 and P1709.  There are no additional

19     ones.

20             JUDGE ORIE:   There are no additional ones.

21             Then we move onto the next item, which is item 24 on the list of

22     questions.

23             I do understand that all parties agree that P1653 is a duplicate

24     of D28 and that, therefore, P1653 could be vacated.

25             MS. MARCUS:  That's correct, Your Honour.

Page 11267

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  Hereby, P1653 is vacated.

 2             Item 25.  25 is about the previous testimony of

 3     Witness Stevanovic.  We have received the portions that were indicated by

 4     the parties and as we have previously set out, we'll not admit them but

 5     we'll consider them when deciding on document P973.

 6             And, therefore, the Simatovic Defence is invited to -- not only

 7     to informally bring them to the attention of the Trial Chamber but to

 8     file those portions so that they're on the record and that we can

 9     consider them.

10             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe that this

11     has already been done.  We made a filing within the time-limit stated.

12     The relevant portions have been uploaded, and I'll give you the D numbers

13     in a moment.  The filing clearly refers to the D numbers.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  One second.

15                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic, what was apparently done is that you

17     filed and referred to numbers.  What the Chamber would like you to do is

18     to file the text, the actual text, and not a reference to the numbers.

19     Because you refer to numbers under which it's uploaded, but we want the

20     text to be on the record.  If it's uploaded in e-court, that's not on the

21     record yet.  There are -- there are, of course, technical problems with

22     admitting them into evidence but, nevertheless, as often, the Chamber can

23     consider the content of -- as we often do, for example, if we're talking

24     about protective measures, we -- even without them being in evidence,

25     we -- we read the statements of investigators so we have information

Page 11268

 1     available which is not evidence but which assists in taking decisions.

 2     Here, a decision on admissibility.

 3             Now, as a matter of fact, we have read them, so to that extent,

 4     the Chamber is already in a position to decide.  But we want the full

 5     text of the documents you refer to and the portions you refer to, to have

 6     them filed.  So if you would just copy that text, attach it to a filing

 7     so that it's clear what the content is, the Chamber has considered when

 8     deciding on the admission of document P973.

 9             Is that clear?

10             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.  It will be done

11     today.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I -- under those circumstances, we can already

13     decide on the matter because, as I told you before, the Chamber was in a

14     position to consult the text which will now be attached to -- will be

15     part of a filing, and the Chamber has decided that it admits P972 and

16     P973 into evidence, provisionally under seal.

17             The next one is question 26 on the list.  P671 and P716.  These

18     really are numbers to play a major role in future in a comedy of errors,

19     but I was referring to P671 and P716.  These are two remaining intercepts

20     related to Witness JF-002.

21             I do understand well the Defence objections remain?

22             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  Do you want to make any further submissions on the

24     matter or do you think that the matter has been sufficiently dealt with?

25             MR. JORDASH:  I think both parties have advocated extensively on

Page 11269

 1     the issue, and we don't wish to advance any further.

 2             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you.

 3             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, our objection remains

 4     and there are no elements, as far as we're concerned.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Mr. Petrovic.

 6                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  The Chamber had considered the matter earlier and

 8     since there are no new submissions - these are documents where the audio

 9     are missing, although there are monitoring notes and there are

10     transcripts - the Chamber has decided that it admits into evidence P671

11     and P716.

12                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

13             JUDGE ORIE:  P716, admission is an admission under seal.

14             I think we have gone through the list of questions which doesn't

15     mean that my -- we are yet at the end of my agenda.  I would like to move

16     to other matters.

17             The next item.  The OTP was requested on the 22nd of June of last

18     year to file a public summary of the testimony of Witness JF-006's

19     previous evidence.  And, on the 18th of August, the Prosecution has

20     alerted the Chamber to the fact that, due to post-session redactions,

21     that nothing of the witness's testimony remained in public session.  The

22     Chamber is satisfied with this explanation and does not expect a filing

23     of the public summary for Witness JF-006.

24             I move to the next item.  On the 1st of September, the

25     Prosecution asked for a provisional redaction because they wanted to

Page 11270

 1     investigate whether a mentioned person was a protected witness.  I refer

 2     to transcript page 6726.  Meanwhile, it has been confirmed by the

 3     Prosecution that there's no need for such a redaction; and, therefore,

 4     the Registry is hereby instructed to make this portion - it's all found

 5     on the same page - to make this portion public.

 6             D143 should have been admitted under seal, where it was not.  And

 7     the Registry is hereby instructed to formally change the status of D143

 8     into confidential, under seal.

 9             I move to my next item.  P2123.  The Prosecution was supposed to

10     provide a revised translation of this document.

11             Has it been provided, has it been uploaded?

12             MS. MARCUS:  Can I have a moment, Your Honour.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please.

14                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Let me then already to keep you all busy already

16     tell you that the same question arises for D223 as far as the Defence is

17     concerned.

18             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour, we have a revised translation of

19     P2123 and we're ready to upload it.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Would you please upload it.

21             And, Madam Registrar, you're hereby instructed to replace P2123

22     by the newly uploaded revised translation.  The document was admitted

23     already into evidence.  If the revised translation causes any problems as

24     far as the Defence is concerned, the Chamber would like to be informed

25     without delay.

Page 11271

 1             I move onto now D223, where the Defence is -- was supposed to

 2     have done the same, to provide a revised version of the document.

 3             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have uploaded it,

 4     and it is 2D396.1 now.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, you are hereby instructed to

 6     replace what is now under D223 by the newly uploaded 2D396.1.  D223 was

 7     already admitted.  If it causes any concerns to the Prosecution, the

 8     Chamber would like to hear without delay.

 9             We had a few documents where there were more than one English

10     translations attached to these documents in e-court.  The Prosecution had

11     been requested to identify which translation is the correct one, and I do

12     understand that this has been done, Ms. Marcus.  Is that ...

13             MS. MARCUS:  Yes, Your Honour.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Therefore, the Registry is hereby instructed to

15     remove any translation other than the ones now identified as the correct

16     English translations.

17             We are talking about documents P1915, P1943, and P1107.

18             Madam Registrar, have you received sufficient information to --

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Yes, indeed, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Then that matter has been dealt with as well.

21             The next item on my list concerns 65 ter number 4263.  The

22     Chamber had deferred its decision in relation to this document in the

23     Prosecution's -- which was contained in the Prosecution's first bar table

24     motion, and we deferred our decision on the 3rd of February of this year.

25             The issue was a seemingly wrong translation.  It was the lists of

Page 11272

 1     employees of the RDB where, at least, the first of the two lists the

 2     translation did not show any years; whereas, it was clearly visible in

 3     the original that a year -- or a range of years was present.

 4             Ms. Marcus, my question to you is do you intend to provide a

 5     correct translation?

 6             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, I'd have to check.  But, of course,

 7     my -- my instinct is, of course, we intend to provide a revised

 8     translation but I'm not familiar with the issue.  If you'd give me a

 9     moment to check, I can get back to Your Honour.

10             JUDGE ORIE:  The two documents are quite similar and for the

11     second one there is a range of years.  By the way, a rather wide-range

12     still.  I think 1992, 1995 on the first one.  But on the first one,

13     certainly the years which are found there in the heading of the document,

14     the heading being practically the same as for the second one, that the

15     years are not translated.

16             So I do not know whether there's any other thing wrong in that

17     translation, but, of course, it need -- there's need to revise it.

18             MS. MARCUS:  We will provide a corrected translation,

19     Your Honour.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  When would do you that?

21             MS. MARCUS:  We'll submit it and keep the Chamber informed.

22     We'll submit it immediately.

23             JUDGE ORIE:  "Immediately" means?

24             MS. MARCUS:  Today.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Today.  Then I don't have to set a deadline.  At the

Page 11273

 1     same time, if you don't do it today, then, of course, you are in trouble.

 2     Otherwise I would have given you till Monday or Tuesday.  But we expect

 3     it to be provided today.

 4             The next one -- yes, let me check that one carefully.

 5             Yes, my next item is about the Babic, the previous Babic

 6     testimony.

 7             The Chamber received a filing dated the 4th of February.  Before

 8     that, on the 28th of January, the Prosecution has requested, through an

 9     informal communication, that it be granted until that same 4th of

10     February to investigate it, whether Babic's testimony in the Krajisnik

11     case could you made a public exhibit.  We granted that request, and the

12     submission of the 4th of February informs the Chamber that the testimony

13     in question could be public.  But then another matter arose.  The

14     Prosecution also asked to be granted leave to rectify the portions of the

15     Babic's previous testimony in the Krajisnik case, by the way, portions of

16     his testimony which had been admitted by the Chamber.

17             Now, there is an table in that submission and, of course, the

18     first question that came to the Chamber's attention where the numbering

19     apparently is incorrect, whether we looked at the portions the

20     Prosecution really intended to have admitted into evidence and whether we

21     decided on a proper basis on admission.

22             The Chamber, meanwhile, verified that, and that although the

23     numbers were incorrect, the material which was submitted to the Chamber

24     was the correct material.  So the Chamber - and this is for the -- just

25     to inform the parties - the Chamber decided on the basis of the material

Page 11274

 1     which was really at the basis of the Prosecution's request for admission.

 2     So the change in the numbering does not bring any change in what the

 3     Chamber considered and what the Chamber -- on what basis the Chamber

 4     decided on admission.

 5             By the way, there was one -- the Chamber, in that decision, made

 6     a small mistake and that was in relation to an excerpt of a portion of

 7     the testimony not covered by this correction.  That is, the second

 8     excerpt, which were -- the transcript pages T.3350 up to and including

 9     3353, in the decision you'll find that we said that this is a transcript

10     of the 3rd of June, 2004, where it actually is the 2nd of June, 2004.

11     But apart from that mistake made by the Chamber, I would like to hear

12     from the Defence whether any additional submissions should be made.

13     Again, the substance of what was tendered, of what was considered by the

14     Chamber, and what the Chamber intended to admit into evidence is

15     unchanged.  It's just wrong numbers.

16             MR. JORDASH:  No comments, Your Honour.  Thank you.

17             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] No, no, Your Honour.

18             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I briefly read into the record what has now

19     been changed -- no, I rather refer to the filing of the 4th of February,

20     2011 under the title "Status notification for Babic materials, including

21     correction of transcript references," I refer to page 2 of that

22     submission containing a table and where the transcript references are

23     referred to, the transcript references as were found in the May 2007

24     motion, that -- where the Chamber decided that, on admission of the

25     portions of the transcript, that the correct transcript references are

Page 11275

 1     found in the second column under the title: "Correct transcript

 2     references".

 3             So these are now -- is the references to the portions of what was

 4     admitted by the Chamber.

 5             And, Madam Registrar, you're therefore, to the extent that the

 6     wrong pages were uploaded, these are the correct pages.  And perhaps I --

 7     let me see whether it's clear enough.

 8                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  The Registrar has to verify whether what is uploaded

10     into e-court are the correct pages or the wrong pages.  She is hereby

11     invited to verify that and instructed to replace any uploaded portion of

12     the earlier testimony which does not correspond to the correct transcript

13     references as found on page 2 of the 4th of February, 2011 submission.

14                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

15             JUDGE ORIE:  Chamber staff confirmed that it was clear enough to

16     him.  I hope the same is true for all others in this courtroom.  If not,

17     please tell me.

18             Then I -- also the Registry is hereby instructed to make public

19     what the Prosecution submitted could be made public in that same 4th of

20     February, 2011 filing.

21             I -- we have to take another break.  We can't go on for two

22     hours.  And what we have still on the agenda is, first of all, the

23     remaining MFIs on the MFI list, and then I have one or two other items on

24     my agenda.  I hope that we will be able to deal with that in 40 to 45

25     minutes.  We really have to stop at 1.00 sharp.  I'm -- if we would need

Page 11276

 1     45 minutes, we could only do that with a bit of a shorter break, or to

 2     give Mr. Stanisic a bit more time to return into the courtroom and

 3     missing perhaps five or ten minutes of the hearing.

 4             I would like to hear, Mr. Jordash, what would be preferred.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Can I just quickly check?

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

 8             MR. JORDASH:  Could we have a 15-minute break, please.

 9             JUDGE ORIE:  We will have a 15-minute break.  But with the

10     indulgence of all others involved, we will stop a bit earlier then.  But

11     I would like to start in 15 minutes sharp from now.

12                           --- Recess taken at 11.59 a.m.

13                           --- On resuming at 12.17 p.m.

14             JUDGE ORIE:  Next item on my agenda is remaining MFIs from the

15     MFI list.  We have dealt with many of them but ...

16             The first one, P378.  Has the Chamber well understood that the

17     Prosecution has prepared a translation and that it's uploaded.

18             MS. MARCUS:  That's correct.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Madam Registrar, you're hereby instructed to replace

20     the old translation by the new one as uploaded by the Prosecution.

21     Admission will be decided later in a decision on the Mladic bar table

22     motion.

23             Next one, P395.  Clips from a video as shown to

24     Mr. Manojlo Milovanovic.  It is again portions of P2160 and P2161.  In

25     line with our earlier decision, separate clips do not disappear in the

Page 11277

 1     whole of the video but will remain separate exhibits.  P395 which was

 2     waiting for another witness to be called is ready to be admitted.

 3             Any further comments or objections?  Then P395 is admitted into

 4     evidence.

 5             Next one is a series of underlying documents to P512.  It's

 6     mainly forensic documentation.  There was one objection against P911 and

 7     P912, because of the indication contained in those that the victim may

 8     have died from natural causes and hypothermia was mentioned.

 9             Both Defence teams would still consider what to do, whether they

10     would maintain their objection.

11             MR. JORDASH:  We don't maintain the objection.

12             JUDGE ORIE:  Then all of these, and I take it that you spoke on

13     behalf of both Defence teams, Mr. Jordash.  Then the following exhibits

14     are admitted into evidence:  P722; P740 up to and including P753, P765 up

15     to and including P775, P796 up to and including P798.  P800 up to and

16     including P818, P824, 825, 826, 827, and P828, P836 up to and including

17     P916, P925, up to and including P931, and P933, 934, 935, 936, and P937.

18     All admitted into evidence.

19             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, may I just for the record indicate

20     that in relation to two of the autopsy reports, they related to two

21     victims.  I think I can say that the victim's names in public.  One is

22     Luka Bilaver and the other is Danica Razov.  We withdraw our agreement to

23     those witnesses being victims of crimes committed as alleged in the

24     indictment.  The autopsy reports reflect that those deceased died from

25     natural causes.

Page 11278

 1             JUDGE ORIE:  I just mentioned that and you then you said did

 2     not --

 3             MR. JORDASH:  We don't object to the admissibility of the report

 4     but we --

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  That's fine.  It might even be good to have them

 6     which enables the Chamber to better decide what the --

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Precisely.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  -- cause of death may have been, either on the basis

 9     of this evidence or on any other.  But we are alerted to at least the

10     forensics here, leaving it open, or even I don't know the details, but

11     even hinting at hypothermia as a possible cause of death.

12             MR. JORDASH:  Thank you.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  That's clear.  The next one is -- yes, P967.  At a

14     housekeeping session in late September, the OTP indicated that this

15     document would be included in an upcoming bar table submission.  Now it

16     seems not to be in any bar table submission, so, therefore, the Chamber

17     wonders what we should do with it.

18             MS. MARCUS:  Your Honour, could I have an opportunity to look

19     into that and get back to you, sir.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Before 1.00, please.

21             MS. MARCUS:  Yes.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.

23             P975, before the Chamber would decide on admission, we wanted to

24     read the document first.  We've done so, and P975 is admitted in

25     evidence.


Page 11279

 1             Before I move to the next item on my list on the -- which is

 2     P1522, I'd first like to give an oral decision.

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13                           [Private session]

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 11280











11 Pages 11280-11286 redacted. Private session.
















Page 11287

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

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

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

 8             So I'm dealing with 1626, 1642, and 1643 --

 9             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, I can, I think, assist to shortcut the

10     matter.

11             For the Stanisic Defence, we withdraw our objection to those

12     proposed exhibits.

13             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  Then 1626 -- let me first hear whether the

14     Simatovic Defence joins in that?  Or I don't know whether there was any

15     objection.  I think it was only Mr. Jordash who said that you wanted to

16     look at the paperwork.  Yes, that apparently is done.  There was no

17     objection by the Simatovic Defence.

18             Then P1626, P1642 and P1643 are admitted into evidence.

19             P1628, I'd like to know whether Defence has now seen the

20     translation of this document and whether it has any objections against

21     admission.

22             MR. JORDASH:  The situation is this, that there has been a

23     revised translation.  However, the revised translation of the words,

24     "Arkan is embedded there," has simply been repeated.  So there a dispute

25     on the record.  When it was translated in the courtroom, the translator


Page 11288

 1     said that those words in fact were, "Arkan has put himself there," which

 2     is what our case is, that there -- that -- that the record reflects that.

 3             JUDGE ORIE:  Okay.  Apparently there's a dispute about the

 4     translation.

 5             MR. JORDASH:  Between the translation in the court and the

 6     official translation document.

 7             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  What we usually do under those circumstances

 8     is to ask CLSS to review the translation of the written document and

 9     report to us what is the correct translation.

10             MR. JORDASH:  I think, though that's been done and they've come

11     back with the same translation, which we dispute is the right

12     translation.  On the basis of what our client has instructed, but also on

13     the basis of what has been translated in the courtroom when we asked the

14     witness to read the English version and had the translation done in the

15     courtroom.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  That's exactly the reason why we usually do

17     not ask interpreters to translate written documents because that's done

18     in a second; whereas, the review of translations often require far more

19     research and detailed information.

20             We defer our decision and we'll give a decision ...

21                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

22             JUDGE ORIE:  Whatever the fate will be of finding out or not

23     we'll admit it or not, the translation should be replaced by the now

24     verified translation.  Still not a reason, Mr. Jordash, to give up your

25     objections to it, but, at a certain moment we have to work on the basis

Page 11289

 1     of a certain translation.

 2             MR. JORDASH:  Your Honour, yes.  But I would like -- this is an

 3     extremely important area for us.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  It's on the record that your interpretation of that

 5     document is not reflected in the translation as it has been reviewed

 6     until now by CLSS.

 7             MR. JORDASH:  Yes.

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  If that's on the record, then we'll later

 9     decide on admission.

10             I move on.  P1644.  The Prosecution informed the Chamber in its

11     weekly notification that both Defence teams had withdrawn their

12     objections.

13             I do not hear any protest.  Therefore, P1644 is admitted into

14     evidence.

15             The next one on my list is P1666.  The -- there was agreement

16     between the parties that if four words would moved from the document,

17     that the objections would not be maintained.

18             MR. JORDASH:  The objections are withdrawn, Your Honour.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  And I don't know whether, then, the present

20     document is without the four words.

21             MR. JORDASH:  It is without the four words.

22             JUDGE ORIE:  It is.  The only matter remaining, then, is whether

23     P1666 should be under seal or can be a public document.

24             MS. MARCUS:  I can let you know within a minute, Your Honour.

25             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes, please do so.

Page 11290

 1             The next one is P1670.  Same matter as we had before, an excerpt,

 2     a small footage of the Skorpion videos.  We take the same approach.

 3     P1670 is admitted into evidence.

 4             Next one is P1671, up to and including P1694, and P1696, up to

 5     and including P1697; documents and photos on which Witness JF-029

 6     commented.

 7             I do understand that there are no objections apart from P1688,

 8     and I think that Ms. Marcus has made -- no, I don't know whether it was

 9     on this document.

10             If this is true, we'll separately deal with P1688 and admit all

11     the others into evidence, which means P1671, up to and including P1687,

12     and then P1689, up to and including P1694, and P1696, up to and including

13     P1697, are admitted into evidence.

14             P2106, the Chamber has -- admits this courtesy sheet under seal.

15             P2109, similarly, also is admitted under seal.

16             I now move to P2127, requesting a response from the Republic of

17     Serbia to RFA 1887A.  The Stanisic Defence has objected to the tendering

18     but has not outlined its objections in the presence of the witness.  Then

19     the OTP indicated in its weekly notification that the Stanisic Defence

20     maintains objections and will further consider the matter.  We have not

21     heard the details of the objections.

22             Mr. Jordash.

23             MR. JORDASH:  As I recall this issue, the Prosecution want to

24     admit the RFA to show the questions that were asked in relation to the --

25     a particular exhibit.  But, in fact, what the Prosecution are seeking to

Page 11291

 1     do is place a good deal of irrelevant material from the RFA in front of

 2     Your Honours, including a list of -- or I should say, notably a list

 3     running into 377 names, which are completely irrelevant to the issue at

 4     hand.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Yes.  The Chamber will consider it.

 6             I'm looking at the clock.  It's two minutes to 1.00.

 7     Unfortunately, we failed to complete the housekeeping session.  There's

 8     no way that we could continue this afternoon.  The reason why we have

 9     this housekeeping session today and why there's limited time is because

10     we wanted to meet the concerns expressed by the Stanisic Defence that

11     they would like to have it done as quickly as possible.  That's the

12     reason why we did not wait until next week.  The reason why we can't

13     continue, I have a firm commitment which I could not possibly change and

14     which starts in half an hour from now elsewhere in The Hague.

15                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

16             MR. JORDASH:  I -- Your Honour, I don't know if this assists.  My

17     plans have changed somewhat.  I'm available all next week if that's a

18     concern for Your Honours.

19             JUDGE ORIE:  Well, of course, we tried to accommodate you.  If

20     you are available, then I would like to invite you, I don't know what's

21     the case with the Simatovic Defence.  We might not need the whole of the

22     team.  There is limited material left.  What we also could do is the

23     following:  Is that you would meet with Chamber's staff, if you -- I

24     don't know whether you -- you're still here, Mr. Petrovic, next week, or

25     Mr. Bakrac.

Page 11292

 1             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour in keeping with

 2     everything that has been said, both by the Trial Chamber and the Stanisic

 3     Defence, we planned our time and our activities accordingly, and we have

 4     planned to travel to Belgrade tonight, in keeping with that.

 5             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I suggest the following:  To the extent

 6     possible, please meet with Chamber's staff this afternoon.  Perhaps two

 7     Defence teams together so that could you go through the remainder of the

 8     MFI list and the other items which were on my agenda.  There were four or

 9     five.  Please identify to what extent both Defence team have a common

10     position.  I could imagine that Mr. Jordash would be willing to present

11     on behalf of the Simatovic Defence whether they join in your positions.

12             We also could, perhaps this afternoon, try to find out whether

13     there are any matters on which we would need the specific input of the

14     Simatovic team for next week and see how we can, in a practical way,

15     proceed so that we have dealt with all matters by Monday, even in the

16     absence of Mr. Bakrac or Mr. Petrovic.

17             Of course, another solution would be to have a videolink for this

18     later next week.  I have got no idea whether that's practically possible,

19     whether the costs involved would be an obstacle to doing that.  I have

20     got no idea.  But I would suggest that you would meet this afternoon with

21     Chamber's staff to see whether, for the limited number of issues

22     remaining, whether a practical solution could be found.  Where we tried

23     to accommodate a wish which now turns out to be not a primary one, at

24     least plans have changed, we have sought a solution which, unfortunately,

25     worked out only for 85 per cent, although I want to praise the party for

Page 11293

 1     the adequate preparation for today's housekeeping session.

 2             Ms. Marcus.

 3             MS. MARCUS:  Just to inform the Chamber, I have been informed

 4     that the Belgrade field office can arrange a videolink within 24 to 48

 5     hours notice.

 6             JUDGE ORIE:  Then ...

 7                           [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]

 8             JUDGE ORIE:  With full appreciation of the performance of the

 9     Belgrade office, I do understand that you need the job to be done on both

10     sides of the line and therefore I'm informed that if Belgrade can do it,

11     it does not automatically mean that it can be done or that The Hague

12     could meet what is needed for those purposes.

13             Is there a chance that you could meet today with Chamber's staff?

14             MR. JORDASH:  Providing that, with Your Honours' leave, that my

15     legal assistant can attend instead of me.

16             JUDGE ORIE:  For informal communications, I think that would

17     be -- of course, if it comes to final decisions, then of course I take it

18     that you would be consulted on it.

19             MR. JORDASH:  I've already been consulted, thank you.

20             JUDGE ORIE:  Mr. Petrovic.

21             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, that may be so, but

22     as far as we are concerned, we cannot really go beyond 1500 hours.  We're

23     only available up until that time, approximately.

24                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

25             JUDGE ORIE:  I'm convinced that until 1500 hours, the practical

Page 11294

 1     arrangements could be resolved, not perhaps necessarily all the content,

 2     but at least that we would know by then how we will proceed.

 3             MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.

 4             JUDGE ORIE:  Then I thank the parties very much.  There may be

 5     another session next week.

 6             We adjourn, therefore, sine die.

 7                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.06 p.m.,

 8                           sine die