061124SE

Page 24

1 Friday, 24 November 2006

2 [Status Conference]

3 [Open session]

4 [The accused entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.

6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Madam Registrar, bon jour. Could you call the

7 case, please.

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

9 IT-05-88/1-PT, the Prosecutor versus Milorad Trbic.

10 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Mr. Trbic, good morning, to you. I just want

11 to make sure you are receiving interpretation.

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours.

13 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. And the Prosecution is Mr. Vanderpuye

14 and Ms. Soljan, and for the Defence it's Mr. Piletta-Zanin assisted by --

15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [interpretation] Madam Elisa Krahenbuhl. The

16 name in writing will be given to the court reporter later on.

17 JUDGE AGIUS: This is a special Status Conference that we have

18 convened during which we will discuss -- we will give a resume of the

19 latest developments in the case, which are in themselves the reasons for

20 some concerns that we have that we will share with you and also hopefully,

21 if he's prepared to discuss matters with us, later on in due course with

22 the accused himself.

23 We will stay in open session for a while, and then when we address

24 ourselves to certain matters that require us to be in closed session, then

25 we'll conduct the rest of the business in closed session.

Page 25

1 You will all recall that a few months ago on the 26th of June of

2 this year the Trial Chamber, who was then -- which was then differently

3 composed, ordered the severance of this case against Mr. Trbic, the case

4 against Mr. Trbic from that of the other seven co-accused in the so-called

5 Srebrenica 2 trial. It's Prosecution versus Popovic et al. Pretty soon

6 after, and that's on the 14th of July, we issued a confidential decision

7 granting the Defence a request for certification of the severance decision

8 that I mentioned already. On the 20th of June, the duty judge issued a

9 confidential order granting the Defence a request to suspend the time

10 limits concerning these appeal proceedings until further order. The

11 suspension remains in force. I'm referring to the duty judge in the

12 Appeals Chamber, and that was Judge Schomburg, as you will recall. That

13 decision to suspend the time limits is still valid.

14 Before we had even decreed the severance of the case, the Office

15 of the Prosecutor had filed a motion for the referral of Mr. Trbic under

16 Rule 11 bis of our Rules to be tried in Bosnia and Herzegovina. That was

17 on the 4th of May. Six days later, on the 10th of May, the matter was

18 referred to -- this matter was referred to the Referral Bench by the

19 President of this Tribunal, and on the latest development that we have

20 is -- goes back to a couple of days ago, 22nd of November, 2006, when the

21 Referral Bench issued an order for further submissions on the referral

22 request and Scheduling Order for hearing. Basically, the Referral Bench

23 notes that questions have been raised by the Pre-Trial Chamber seized of

24 these proceedings, the pre-trial proceedings, relating to the mental

25 health of the accused and that the Referral Bench wishes to obtain

Page 26

1 submissions from the parties and the government of Bosnia and Herzegovina

2 on the provisions of Bosnian law, or the law of Bosnia and Herzegovina,

3 addressing an accused's possible lack of fitness to enter a plea and to

4 stand trial, and also on the compatibility of the legal system of Bosnia

5 and Herzegovina with Rule 11 bis (B) under these conditions.

6 I will stop here for a moment, because from our experience here,

7 we usually note that while counsel for the accused to have received a copy

8 of such an order, such a decision, relatively straight away upon -- or

9 soon after filing, it's not usually the case with the accused who requires

10 first to have the order or the decision translated into his own language.

11 So first thing that we want to ensure ourselves of, make sure of, is

12 whether Mr. Trbic has received or has been notified with -- served with a

13 copy of this decision in his own language.

14 Perhaps either you, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, or Mr. Trbic, directly

15 can -- I don't know if you -- I suppose you have discussed this with him

16 already.

17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. The accused is not

18 aware of the decision for a very simple reason. I myself was travelling

19 when the decision arrived on my desk. I saw Mr. Trbic very early

20 yesterday morning, so I myself had not been aware of this decision when I

21 saw him, and I did not have the time it took to have it translated. So he

22 didn't see it in his language. A brief summary might, therefore, be

23 useful.

24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. This was the brief summary. I can, for

25 your benefit, Mr. Trbic, read out slowly the --

Page 27

1 [Trial Chamber confers]

2 JUDGE AGIUS: I think it's better, because we've got very limited

3 time and we need to continue with the other case. I think you will

4 certainly have an opportunity to try and explain to the -- to your client

5 the decision of the Referral Bench. But basically it's what I noted just

6 a few minutes ago, that the Referral Bench is moving, and it has

7 highlighted to us and to you, and to you, of course, Mr. Piletta-Zanin,

8 that the mental health of your client is a real issue that needs to be

9 addressed, and I'll come to that later on.

10 Now, you will recall in particular -- particularly you, Mr.

11 Piletta-Zanin, and also Mr. Trbic, that during the Status Conference of

12 the 15th of September, which -- over which I presided, and I think

13 Ms. Soljan was here but not you, Mr. Vanderpuye, the accused chose to make

14 some statements spontaneously. He stated that he did not have any

15 problems at the Detention Unit. He also stated that his state of mental

16 and physical health was stable and good, and that attempts to obtain

17 medical expertise on this matter were unnecessary and unjustified. He

18 also stated that he wished his case to be referred to the authorities of

19 Bosnia and Herzegovina under the procedure of our Rule 11 bis, and that

20 all other requests were unnecessary. He added that he had spoken to

21 Mr. Piletta-Zanin about this for a long time and was aware that the

22 referral matter was not yet decided but that it was still pending before

23 the Referral Bench. He added that he did no longer stand by his previous

24 statements and requested that these be ignored or no longer considered.

25 And last but not least, he stated that he was not bothered by the issue of

Page 28

1 disclosure of his identity in the media and that he did not have any

2 problems at the Detention Unit in relation to that.

3 In the past months, on a regular basis we have been asked to

4 continue authorising or advise the President about authorising, continuing

5 to authorise the health of Mr. Trbic each time for a period of 30 days,

6 and the last request has been -- goes back to a few days ago, rather

7 almost a month, to the 31st of October, and that kind of monitoring order

8 is still in force.

9 I am now proceeding to give some details about matters relating to

10 the issue of whether the accused is fit, medically fit, to enter a plea

11 and to stand trial.

12 You will recall that months ago we ourselves had asked the

13 Registrar to appoint a psychiatrist to examine the accused. The Registrar

14 appointed a psychologist first, who gave us -- came forward with a report

15 which, for whatever it was worth, and it was worth everything that one

16 could expect from a psychologist, we accept it, but the report itself

17 indicated that the matter should be studied further, the accused should be

18 examined further by a fully fledged professional psychiatrist. The

19 Registrar appointed a psychiatrist. The psychiatrist examined the accused

20 with what was available. He came out with an assessment which raised

21 doubts as to the mental capacity of the accused to stand trial; however,

22 also made it clear that this was not a time assessment. The assessment

23 was based on the condition of the accused at the time and would be need --

24 would be needed -- would need to be reviewed from time to time until there

25 was -- there came a stage when a final assessment could be reached.

Page 29

1 This was happening at a time when the Prosecution was not aware of

2 the fact that it was happening, and it was then decided that there was no

3 point in hiding this from the Prosecution any further. It was being done,

4 of course --

5 [Trial Chamber confers]

6 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. I'm being advised by my colleagues that

7 perhaps it would be better if we go into private session, and I have

8 absolutely no objection to that. So we continue in private session.

9 [Private session]

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 (redacted)

24 (redacted)

25 (redacted)

Page 30

11 Pages 30-44 redacted. Private session