Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 1804

1 Monday, 22 October 2001

2 [Pre-Defence Conference]

3 [Open session]

4 [The accused entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.

6 JUDGE HUNT: Call the case, please.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Case number IT-98-32-T, the Prosecutor versus

8 Mitar Vasiljevic.

9 JUDGE HUNT: Now, before we get to the pre-Defence conference,

10 Mr. Groome, you've put a document in with some further exhibits which I

11 understand are being tendered by consent. Have you got any proposed

12 numbers? I've lost complete -- any sense of the numbering system you're

13 using, but we're happy to adopt whatever it is.

14 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. I believe we've numbered them on

15 the bottom. The diagram of the court would be Prosecution document 57.

16 JUDGE HUNT: I see, the usual little slip, 148, and -- the

17 measurement on that plan, by the way, that's to where the person who the

18 witness thought was the judge sits in the Bench in front of us here,

19 that's the first of the measurements, and then the next one is to where

20 we're sitting; is that right?

21 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.


23 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, if I can just point something out on the

24 Muslim calendar. There are two dates. The fourth day of Bajram, the

25 column on the left is the ordinary calendar. The number 13 on the right

Page 1805

1 of the fourth day of Bajram is a Muslim calendar. So to avoid any

2 confusion, it's the 14th, the Sunday, the fourth day of Bajram.

3 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry. What date is it, then, in the end?

4 MR. GROOME: It's the 14th of June.

5 JUDGE HUNT: The 14th of June, the fourth day of Bajram.

6 MR. GROOME: Right.

7 JUDGE HUNT: Right. Now, Mr. Domazet, according to the document,

8 you have no objection to these documents being tendered?

9 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]

10 JUDGE HUNT: I'm sorry. We're getting no translation. You have

11 to start again, Mr. Domazet.

12 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] That is quite true, Your Honour.

13 Can you hear me now? We do not have the -- we do not have any objections

14 except that, rather than Saturday, as I heard in the interpretation, it

15 was Sunday, the 14th of June. That was the fourth day of Kurban Bajram.

16 I see that the transcript says Sunday, and we heard from the booth

17 Saturday. Otherwise, we have no objections.

18 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you. Then the plan of the courtroom will be

19 Exhibit P57. The Muslim calendar will be Exhibit P148. The summary of

20 the videotape that we were -- that was tendered on the last occasion is

21 Exhibit P50, 5-0.

22 Now, Mr. Groome, one matter that slightly concerns us, you have

23 not tendered any of the reports that you produced or your expert produced

24 about the validity of the hospital records.

25 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, the result of the report is that there

Page 1806

1 was no finding that there was anything -- no obvious forgeries or other

2 irregularities regarding the documents. Because it offered no evidence

3 that there was anything irregular about the documents, they were not

4 tendered. I would be willing to make them available on consent to the

5 court should the court wish to see those two reports.

6 JUDGE HUNT: Well, if you make a concession that they demonstrated

7 nothing to show that the documents had been forged, it's not necessary to

8 have the reports.

9 MR. GROOME: I will make that concession.

10 JUDGE HUNT: Very well. That's good.

11 Now, is that the end of the -- oh, there's the transcript of the

12 accused's statement to the Prosecution.

13 MR. GROOME: That has been completed by Mr. Ossogo. It just

14 remains for Mr. Domazet to sign off on the redactions and we can have it

15 to the court this afternoon.

16 JUDGE HUNT: Right. Well, then, that's now your case, subject to

17 that one matter, right?

18 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.

19 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you.

20 Now, Mr. Domazet, in relation to your pre-Defence documents, I

21 notice that a number of the witnesses shown as having safe conduct. Now,

22 I don't think this Trial Chamber has made any orders. Have you sought

23 them from somebody else?

24 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, no, but when these

25 witnesses concerned, we wish to apply for special measures. In the

Page 1807

1 submission, all that is said is that we are applying for that measure.

2 For you -- it is for you, the Trial Chamber, to decide on that.

3 JUDGE HUNT: I confess I did not understand from the document that

4 you were applying for it. I wondered whether it had already been done by

5 somebody else. But clearly you would have to put a motion on and then we

6 will make the orders. But it is usual to make those orders for Defence

7 witnesses if they seek it, but it's the first we've heard of our duty to

8 make it in this case. So if you put a formal motion on, perhaps this

9 afternoon, and we'll make the orders. When is the first of them likely to

10 come?

11 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Well, the witnesses for the Defence,

12 this week we've envisaged only Mitar Vasiljevic himself and his wife

13 Milojka Vasiljevic.

14 JUDGE HUNT: That's good. That will mean we have plenty of time

15 to make the orders. That's what I was concerned about. Are you seeking

16 any other protective measures, such as facial distortion, pseudonyms, and

17 the works, or are you taking a principled stand that you don't need them?

18 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my position in

19 principle is that we do not need that. I hope that none of the proposed

20 witnesses will ask for that at a later date, and I believe that they will

21 all testify under their own name and without any particular other

22 measures.

23 JUDGE HUNT: The problem --

24 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Except --

25 JUDGE HUNT: May I just say this: The problem that we face in all

Page 1808

1 of these cases is that that's their view when they leave their home. They

2 come here, they're staying in a hotel, a lot of the witnesses are there

3 together, they start to talk to each other, and all of a sudden we start

4 to get applications. The Prosecution have been instructed by the Victims

5 and Witnesses section to seek information from each of the witnesses

6 specifically about protective measures in advance. I think it might be a

7 good idea, if you have somebody on the ground, that they spoke to them

8 before they came here so that these orders can be made. There are a

9 number of problems in trying to make them at the last moment.

10 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, we shall do that.

11 The only problem, if I may call it that, is a witness who is on the

12 Defence list and who lives in the territory of the Federation of

13 Bosnia-Herzegovina, he's a Muslim, and with whom we had no contact, except

14 that at the time of disclosure we received from the Prosecution his

15 statement to the Prosecutor and his statement given to the police. In

16 other words, I'm not sure if that particular witness might ask for some

17 protective measures or not because that is the only witness that we have

18 had no opportunity to communicate.

19 JUDGE HUNT: Is that the witness whom you cross-examined one of

20 the investigators about and got him to identify the statements?

21 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Indeed, Your Honour.

22 JUDGE HUNT: Well, now, if you -- if you still have the fear that

23 you've expressed at that time, that he may not come, we are able to issue

24 a subpoena which may have some effect. I'm not sure quite what because

25 there's nothing to do we can to enforce it. Nevertheless, the paper

Page 1809

1 sometimes assists witnesses to consider their position, and if you want

2 one, you should make an application for one.

3 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do not know. Perhaps

4 somebody from the Victims and Witnesses Unit might try to talk to that

5 witness first in order to avoid the measures that the Trial Chamber may

6 take. So in case he refuses to come and testify, then perhaps in that

7 case the Chamber might decide to issue a subpoena.

8 JUDGE HUNT: You have already given the details of this particular

9 witness to the Victims and Witnesses Section, have you, so they can

10 prepare for visas and things? That means that they may well have been in

11 touch with the witness. May I suggest that you or your co-counsel speak

12 to the Victims and Witnesses section to see what the witness's attitude

13 is. That may save any problem at all.

14 Now, the next thing: You have two experts on your list of

15 witnesses. The second one, Professor Djurdjic, professor of criminal

16 law. There is no requirement that any of these offences with which your

17 client is charged be an offence also within the Federal Republic or within

18 Bosnia, but the sentencing practices of the relevant area certainly would

19 be relevant if we come to this issue of sentencing. I'm not quite sure

20 from the description here how far this professor of criminal law proposes

21 to go. Have you got his report yet?

22 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, we haven't, Your Honour. He was

23 preparing it, but he still has not given me his final report because he

24 doesn't know whether he will be called as an expert witness, and so he

25 didn't know whether to give it to me then or not. But the matters that

Page 1810

1 you have just raised will be covered by that report.

2 JUDGE HUNT: Well, the moment you have that report, if you give it

3 to the Prosecution, they may well say they don't require him for

4 cross-examination. It would be absurd to bring him here if the

5 Prosecution doesn't want to ask him any questions.

6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I expect there will be

7 no need for his cross-examination in view of what he will be testifying

8 about. But of course I shall do my best to disclose his report to the

9 Prosecution as soon as possible.

10 JUDGE HUNT: Well, you know the Rule because you've taken

11 advantage of it, that it has to be served a certain time before he's

12 expected to give evidence. And whilst the Prosecution, I can't imagine

13 would go quite so far as to take the same objection that you did, if you

14 do give it to them within the time required by the Rules, then they've got

15 plenty of opportunity of telling you they don't require him to attend for

16 cross-examination.

17 The other expert is a neuropsychiatrist. Have you got her report

18 yet?

19 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, because the

20 neuropsychiatrist has gone through most of the written reports that we've

21 procured, and that is in addition to the evidence which can be found in

22 the record of 1992. There is also some evidence dating back to 1984 about

23 the treatment that Mitar Vasiljevic underwent for alcoholism. And as the

24 expert witness told me, she thought it necessary to also see the findings

25 -- both the findings of the doctors and the paramedics who had treated

Page 1811

1 him. And to write the report, she would also need to talk with the

2 accused.

3 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that's placing a great deal of pressure on the

4 Rule, if I may say so. When is she going to come to Den Haag to speak to

5 your client?

6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Well, she could be here next week

7 already when we shall have no hearings. I've already applied for the

8 visa, and if there are no problems in that regard, or any other problem,

9 then she will be ready to be in The Hague as early as next week.

10 JUDGE HUNT: And are you contemplating, then, sending her home and

11 calling her later? Because this is a report in which the Prosecution may

12 have a little bit more interest than the other one. The relevance of it

13 is, to say the least of it, unclear. It depends upon what the report

14 says. It may be relevant to identification, of course, the identification

15 of your client as the person who was in hospital. But otherwise, the fact

16 that he suffers from alcoholism does not immediately suggest to me any

17 relevance. But that's something which can only be determined after the

18 report has been seen. I think the Prosecution, however, would be

19 justified in asking for it some time in advance of her giving evidence so

20 that they can seek some expert assistance in relation to that report.

21 That's the purpose of the whole Rule, to enable the parties to come to

22 some issue by being prepared in advance of the witness giving the

23 evidence. If you can keep that in mind, it may be necessary for your

24 neuropsychiatrist to have two trips to the Netherlands.

25 Now, the last of the doctors is an expert witness in relation to

Page 1812

1 the fracture of the lower leg. I was a little concerned, as you may

2 recall, to hear Dr. DeGrave say that the original x-ray had been

3 in his custody ever since it first arrived here in the Netherlands. That

4 suggests that your expert has had no opportunity of seeing it. Have you

5 made any arrangements with the Prosecution to obtain access to that x-ray

6 for your expert to see?

7 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, I haven't, because

8 we first got in touch this morning. But I do not think there will be any

9 problems, at least insofar as the Prosecution is concerned. I don't think

10 there will be any problem.

11 JUDGE HUNT: Well, I hope not, because the Prosecution, of course,

12 has an obligation under the Rule to put its case in relation to these

13 x-rays to all of your doctors who are able to speak on the subject, and I

14 should imagine that each of the doctors would be able to speak on it

15 because they are doctors. Dr. DeGrave was only a general practitioner

16 himself, as far as I recall.

17 Now, there are a number of witnesses that you have identified as

18 giving evidence in relation to the persecution count. May I ask,

19 persecution of whom? Is it to answer the evidence of the Prosecution or

20 is it to raise this other issue of some form of attack upon the Serbian

21 civilian population?

22 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Well, precisely the witnesses

23 proposed by the Prosecution were called to testify about the persecution

24 so that the witnesses that I am proposing, I also want them to testify

25 about that count, except in the case of witnesses testifying about two

Page 1813

1 specific events, that is, the incidents with which the accused is charged

2 with. These witnesses should show not attacks on the population, that is,

3 the persecution of the population; they should be testifying about Mitar

4 Vasiljevic, that is, about what they knew about him during the relevant

5 period of time and who can also testify about the developments in Visegrad

6 at the time.

7 As Mitar Vasiljevic is charged with being a member of a

8 paramilitary unit commanded by Milan Lukic and the Defence will endeavour

9 to prove through those witnesses that that was not the case, and that

10 during the time in question, he was either in the military canteen at

11 Prelovo as a member of the civil defence or was in the town itself engaged

12 in the cleaning of the town until his injury in 1992.

13 JUDGE HUNT: But, Mr. Domazet, I hope you won't mind if I say that

14 you still are leaving a very wide track when you say they are going to

15 testify about the developments in Visegrad at the time. Now, are these

16 witnesses going to answer the allegations made by the Prosecution

17 witnesses that the Muslim population was being attacked and persecuted, or

18 are they going to give evidence alleging that the Serb civilian population

19 was being attacked or being persecuted?

20 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] I expect, Your Honour, that these

21 witnesses who will be coming here to testify about the circumstances -

22 there are, I think, four or five - and I can say straight away that we

23 shall cut the list shorter. We expect to give up two of those witnesses

24 so we shall have fewer of them here. They will be testifying, among other

25 things, about what went on in April/May 1992 before the arrival of the

Page 1814












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 1815

1 Uzice Corps, during its stay there and after that.

2 JUDGE HUNT: During the period before the Uzice Corps arrived,

3 that leads me to your submission as to the relevance of the evidence to be

4 given by Mr. Simic, I think his name is. The whole of his evidence,

5 according to what you have said, relates to incidents before the Uzice

6 Corps arrived and I want to know just how you can make that relevant.

7 You see, the Prosecution's second response to your submission - which if I

8 may say so is a much better considered one than the previous one - draws

9 attention to the fact that, according to the Tribunal's jurisprudence, you

10 are required to identify for the Tribunal -- for the Trial Court the

11 particular issue to which that evidence is to go. Now, I have not

12 obtained, if I may put it this way, any satisfactory answer from you in

13 any of your submissions as to how that material is relevant to anything we

14 have to decide in this case. The Prosecution has conceded that if it were

15 relevant to any particular incident, they would have no objection to it,

16 which is perhaps less than helpful as narrowing the issue, but

17 nevertheless they have pointed to matters where we could see that there

18 would be some relevance.

19 For example, if it contested any of the Prosecution evidence - and

20 I don't remember any Prosecution evidence that it could contest - which

21 showed that Muslims were improperly terminated from their positions of

22 employment by asserting that it was in fact Muslims who suspended or fired

23 Serbs, they have conceded that if there was evidence that it was the

24 Muslims who prompted the division of the police force along ethnic lines

25 in March of 1992, then that would be admissible. But other than that, it

Page 1816

1 seems that there is no issue that any material about attacks upon the

2 Serbs would be relevant.

3 Now, how is this evidence, the 21 incidents, all of which occurred

4 before the Uzice Corps arrived, how could they be relevant to any issue

5 in this case?

6 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I was not thinking, and

7 I believe I already said so, with regard to those incidents which are

8 mentioned in the pre-trial brief. I did not think that they would be

9 subjected to proof -- subject to evidence, especially when we talk about

10 things that happened in -- prior to 1992 and 1991 and even in 1990. But

11 the incident which happened one of those days after the Uzice Corps had

12 arrived in the town, and it had to do with the occupation of the hydro

13 power plant, threats to open the sluices, threats to take Serb hostages;

14 all of these incidents were some of the matters of which the Prosecutor

15 showed evidence, and that is what we intend also to show evidence for.

16 Not those things that happened in 1991 or 1990, only those things that

17 happened as of April 1992, because that is the time relevant for the

18 indictment.

19 And when it comes to the witnesses specifically, you mentioned

20 Witness Simic, he is not a witness who will be testifying about that. But

21 witnesses under 13 and 14 are people who, at the time, worked for the

22 police and who know whether the police was separated, was split into the

23 Muslim and the Serb police, and how it came about. Also, they can testify

24 about a number of things related to paramilitary formations which is of

25 great importance for my client.

Page 1817

1 The witness under 15 is a witness who was a councilwoman in

2 Visegrad, in the Visegrad Assembly at the time, but I'm afraid she will

3 not be coming now because she will probably make a deposition or perhaps

4 we shall simply decide not to call this witness under 92 bis.

5 The same also goes for the witness under 27. So that we shall

6 only have two witnesses to testify as to the circumstances, people, that

7 is, who will be coming here, who will be called to come here and make

8 their testimony here.

9 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Domazet, there is no suggestion in anything that

10 I've said that you cannot call these witnesses. My concern is that you

11 keep their evidence to what is relevant in the case.

12 Now, Mr. Simic's 21 incidents, I still have got no idea from you

13 how that can be relevant in this case, the 21 incidents. Only one of

14 them, I think, happened in 1992. That was the incident lettered R.

15 That's in your pre-trial brief.

16 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] But, Your Honour, I do not know --

17 when you say that Witness Simic is supposed to speak about 21 incidents, I

18 don't know which Simic you have in mind. I have one Simic, one witness

19 Simic, who is supposed to testify about Mitar Vasiljevic himself and what

20 he knows he did during the relevant time. So we have not proposed any

21 witness for these incidents, the 21 incidents. And yesterday -- last time

22 I indicated that, as regards these witnesses, we will be conducting their

23 examination only in respect of the events which took place after the month

24 of April 1992.

25 JUDGE HUNT: Well, what you said, I think, answers now the

Page 1818

1 question I have been posing I think since this case began. You are not

2 going to call evidence about the 21 incidents; is that so?

3 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] You're right, Your Honour.

4 JUDGE HUNT: Well, thank you very much for that. That will

5 certainly save a lot of time.

6 Now, the last matter I want to raise with you at this stage:

7 You've given fairly substantial estimates for these witnesses' evidence.

8 I suggest that you have more here than you may have anticipated so that

9 we can keep going. We don't want to run out of evidence during the week.

10 Let's assume that they are going to speak about the three or four relevant

11 issues which you have identified, I can't imagine anybody's evidence

12 taking a full day, except your client, of course. But I can't imagine any

13 of them taking a full day, and some of them for which you've identified a

14 half day, they don't seem to have sufficient in their evidence to last

15 that long.

16 So you better talk to the Victims and Witnesses section about

17 this, but when you do start calling your witnesses, other than your client

18 and his wife, you better have quite a few of them here so that we can see

19 how we go. We don't want to run out of evidence each week. If, in the

20 first week, you have some that aren't called that week, then they have to

21 spend the weekend in this cold and rainy country, I'm sorry, but

22 nevertheless I think we've got to keep going if we can. And after that

23 first week, we'll have a better idea, probably, as to the rate at which

24 the witnesses will be taken through.

25 Now, I propose to ask Mr. Groome what's happening about the

Page 1819

1 authenticity of your documents. But other than that, those were the only

2 questions which I have at this stage.

3 Mr. Groome, you'll see in the filing that we got on Friday that

4 they are awaiting your assent or otherwise to the authenticity of some

5 documents.

6 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, although this was filed on Friday, I

7 only received it yesterday, I would propose the court would grant me a few

8 hours after this conference to review these documents and convey our

9 either agreement or disagreement with the admissibility of them to both

10 your clerk and Mr. Domazet later on today.

11 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, that would be satisfactory. I realise the

12 problem of these filings. For once we did get a document the same day it

13 was filed. In fact, I think I got mine about 3.00 in the afternoon, and

14 the Chambers area in this building is usually the last to get anything.

15 So you were unfortunate.

16 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I do have some questions to raise, or

17 issues to raise with regard to these issues.

18 JUDGE HUNT: Oh, yes, certainly, in a moment.

19 Mr. Domazet, is there any other matter you want to deal with

20 before I turn to Mr. Groome -- Mr. Groome's questions?

21 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] I'm not quite clear what you have in

22 mind, Your Honour. I'm sorry.

23 JUDGE HUNT: I was just asking, was there anything that you wanted

24 to raise at this stage before your case starts? I'm going to hear what

25 Mr. Groome wants to say and you'll get the opportunity to reply to that,

Page 1820

1 but is there any other issue that you want to raise at this stage?

2 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, except as regards the schedule

3 for the trial. But I don't know whether this is the right moment to

4 discuss that particular issue, the calendar.

5 JUDGE HUNT: Well, I've been reminded that this Wednesday is a

6 United Nations holiday, about the one benefit we get out of being an

7 organisation of the United Nations, I think. So we can't sit on that day.

8 So we'll start your case tomorrow, resume it on Thursday and on Friday.

9 Then the following week, as we've told you, we can't sit, and then

10 thereafter we'll sit four and a half days a week unless either party seeks

11 a lay day or a lay week. If they can give us some decent reason for it,

12 we'll give you time. Otherwise, we want to just keep on going.

13 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if we are talking about

14 four weeks of uninterrupted hearings, I don't think I would have any

15 objections to that. I'm fully prepared to proceed in that manner.

16 However, I have a personal problem with the week of the 5th of November.

17 I have some personal commitments which are of such a significance that it

18 would be very difficult for me to work during that week. As regards all

19 other weeks, I'm fully prepared to work without any interruption. So my

20 question would be, would that be possible?

21 JUDGE HUNT: Your difficulty is for the whole week, is it, the

22 week of the 5th of November?

23 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. Yes.

24 JUDGE HUNT: Well, that's fair enough. After four weeks of solid

25 sitting, we probably could all have a break, and you may rest assured that

Page 1821

1 we will not sit on that week of the 5th of November.

2 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] The week of the 5th of November,

3 Your Honour.

4 JUDGE HUNT: Thank you very much.

5 Yes, Mr. Groome.

6 MR. GROOME: In light of that new schedule, that may meet some of

7 the concerns I have.

8 Your Honour, under Rule 67, the Defence is required to notify the

9 Prosecution prior to the commencement of trial of any special defence,

10 including a psychiatric defence. As I said to the Court yesterday, I

11 received this filing and in it there are six witnesses who are proposed to

12 talk about the psychiatric condition of the accused.

13 JUDGE HUNT: Yes, but what's the special defence in the Rules that

14 you're referring to?

15 MR. GROOME: Well, under Rule 67, the special defence including

16 that of diminished or lack of mental responsibility. Until I see the

17 report filed by the primary expert, the short little couple of sentence

18 summaries that I have of the other doctors don't give a clear indication

19 of what they will testify to other than the fact that they will testify to

20 their psychiatric treatment of Mr. Vasiljevic during the time that he was

21 in Uzice hospital.

22 JUDGE HUNT: That seems to me to be relevant, if to nothing else,

23 to the issue of identification that he was the person who was in

24 hospital. It would be relevant that he had this treatment. But then if

25 they want to go further, we may want to know what it's about. I've

Page 1822

1 already expressed my view that I am unable at this stage to see what the

2 relevance of alcoholism is to any issue in the case other than the fact

3 that he was in hospital receiving treatment for that illness at the time

4 when these events were alleged to have taken place.

5 MR. GROOME: Well, we know from the medical records that he didn't

6 go into the psychiatric ward until July, so I guess I wonder is it going

7 to be relevant to this issue of alibi or is it primarily going to be

8 offered to show some type of diminished mental capacity of which the

9 Prosecution had the right to be aware of at the commencement of trial? I

10 think the Prosecution is prejudiced in a number of ways. The Prosecution

11 certainly would have asked some questions of the witnesses regarding their

12 observations regarding his mental state during the time these crimes were

13 alleged to have been committed. Also, I found that --

14 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel slow down, please.

15 MR. GROOME: I'm sorry. I was told at the end of last week that

16 Mr. Vasiljevic will be the first witness. Certainly it prejudices me in

17 my examination of Mr. Vasiljevic not knowing what it is that's going to be

18 alleged regarding his mental state at the time that these crimes were

19 committed. So in a number of ways, I have been prejudiced, or the

20 Prosecution has been prejudiced by not being notified of this special

21 defence.

22 I'd also call to the attention of the Court that after the

23 Prosecution first received these medical records and noticed that

24 Mr. Vasiljevic had been admitted to a psychiatric facility, I specifically

25 asked the Defence would there be a psychiatric defence and was told that

Page 1823

1 there would not. And that was approximately one year ago.

2 So --

3 JUDGE HUNT: Mr. Groome, I understand everything you say, but we

4 can't deal with anything until we see what's in the report. Certainly, if

5 there is something in the report that you would have wished to

6 cross-examine the accused on, he will be recalled for you to do so.

7 There's no doubt about that in the world. But I don't understand how

8 alcoholism itself is relevant to any "special defence." You may or may

9 not be aware, but the Appeals Chamber has ruled that there is no special

10 defence of diminished responsibility in the sense of a defence to the

11 Prosecution. It's relevant only to the issue of sentence.

12 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.

13 JUDGE HUNT: And I can only say, as having been involved in the

14 partial defence of diminished responsibility in another place, that

15 alcoholism itself can never establish that anyway, according to all the

16 medical evidence that you can imagine.

17 But that's a different matter. Let's wait until we see the

18 report. Mr. Domazet, of course, is in a difficult position because he

19 hasn't seen it either. But if you are prejudiced in relation to your

20 cross-examination of the accused, you will be given the opportunity to

21 cross-examine him further later in the case. It is, however, worth

22 stating that Mr. Domazet is probably the first counsel for a very long

23 time to take the very sensible course of calling his client first, which

24 is what one would expect most counsel to do but which most counsel,

25 unfortunately, do not do, and thereby lay their client open to the comment

Page 1824

1 that his evidence has been tailored to suit the evidence which has

2 preceded it.

3 So I don't want to criticise Mr. Domazet for calling his client

4 first. I think he's done a very sensible and proper thing to do so. But

5 we keep in mind the problem that you may or may not have.

6 MR. GROOME: That meets my concern, Your Honour.

7 The one other is regarding the alibi witnesses. Yesterday, for

8 the first time I learnt of nine different witnesses who will testify

9 regarding alibi. Rule 67 also requires that in the event of alibi, the

10 Prosecution be provided with the names and addresses of alibi witnesses to

11 properly investigate and prepare for the examination of these witnesses.

12 It now appears that we will have a two-week hiatus starting next week. I

13 will endeavour to have investigators --

14 JUDGE HUNT: One week. I hadn't realised Mr. Domazet's week off

15 followed it immediately, but, Mr. Domazet, you can still have it.

16 Yes, well, you'll certainly have a good chance to do so. But you

17 are entitled to the names and addresses of any witnesses, and I suggest,

18 Mr. Domazet, that those names and addresses be supplied this afternoon.

19 MR. GROOME: And I will withdraw my rejection to the late notice

20 of these witnesses if we're able to --

21 JUDGE HUNT: It's unfortunate you didn't have them earlier. But

22 two weeks, I suppose, will be enough for you to find out what you need to.

23 MR. GROOME: I would also request, if there are statements in

24 addition to these very short summaries of the witnesses, I would

25 appreciate being supplied with the statements of those witnesses and also

Page 1825












12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts.













Page 1826

1 the order in which they will be called so that we can more adequately

2 prepare for the examination of the witnesses.

3 JUDGE HUNT: Well, when you say you want the statements, I suggest

4 you negotiate that with Mr. Domazet. There's no power we have to order

5 him to supply them.

6 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. I'm just requesting that.

7 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Not only you, but we would like to know the

8 order of the witnesses as well, and if you could -- Mr. Domazet, if you

9 could provide each Friday a list of the witnesses you propose to call the

10 following week and the order in which you propose to call them to the

11 Trial Chamber and to the Prosecution, it will be of substantial

12 assistance. The names and addresses you should supply to the Prosecution

13 this afternoon.

14 Now, is there anything else you want to raise, Mr. Groome?

15 MR. GROOME: No, Your Honour.

16 JUDGE HUNT: How about you, Mr. Domazet?

17 MR. DOMAZET: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE HUNT: Yes. Well, I'm sure that most of us will have an

19 awful lot to do in those two weeks, not necessarily to do with this case,

20 but we will certainly be busy. So we'll get at least three days in before

21 we go. I would like, if possible, to sit through on Friday afternoon to

22 get some more -- especially if it's to finish off one of your witnesses.

23 But if we finish at lunchtime, that's all right. Don't bother about

24 bringing any other witnesses along this week.

25 Well, we'll start tomorrow morning at 9.30 with the opening

Page 1827

1 address and the accused's evidence. We will now adjourn.

2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 10.20 a.m.,

3 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 23rd day of

4 October, 2001, at 9.30 a.m.