Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 17245

 1                           Thursday, 11 November 2010

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.12 a.m.

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

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.

 7             This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and

 8     Stojan Zupljanin.

 9             Thank you, Your Honours.

10             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Mr. Registrar.

11             Good morning to everyone.  May we have the appearances, please.

12             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner and

13     Crispian Smith for the Prosecution.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

15     Slobodan Cvijetic, and Ms. Merinda Stewart, appearing for

16     Stanisic Defence this morning.  Thank you.

17             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Dragan Krgovic and

18     Aleksandar Aleksic, appearing for Zupljanin Defence.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

20             Is there anything that need engage our attention before we revert

21     to closed session?

22             In which case [Microphone not activated]

23                           [Closed session]

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 17246











11 Pages 17246-17320 redacted. Closed session.















Page 17321

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5                           [Open session]

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, we're now in open session.  Thank

 7     you.

 8                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

10             Inasmuch as there's a possibility that the interpreters don't

11     have copies of these two rulings, I'm going to pace myself in the

12     delivery of them.

13             On the 14th of July, 2010, the Prosecution filed its motion to

14     amend its Rule 65 ter witness list by adding Witness ST-257 in which it

15     seeks, first, to add ST-257 to its Rule 65 ter witness list and,

16     secondly, to adduce ST-257's evidence, pursuant to Rule 92 ter.

17             The Prosecution seeks to call ST-257 to testify on an attack on

18     the village of Renovica.  The Defence responded jointly on the 28th of

19     July, 2010, opposing the motion, arguing that the Prosecution failed to

20     exercise due diligence by neglecting to identify the best and most

21     credible witness which it planned to rely upon.  Considering that

22     ST-257's evidence would be probative and necessary for the Prosecution to

23     prove the attack on Renovica as alleged in its indictment and also

24     considering that given the nature of 257's expected testimony, the

25     Trial Chamber would prefer to hear 257 viva voce.

Page 17322

 1             The Trial Chamber grants the Prosecution leave to add ST-257 to

 2     its 65 ter witness list, orders that the Prosecution call 257 viva voce,

 3     and grants it 45 minutes for its examination-in-chief.

 4             Second ruling is as follows:  On the 12th of October, 2010, the

 5     Trial Chamber granted the Prosecution leave to add ST-041 to its Rule 65

 6     ter witness list, to respond to a Defence challenge to

 7     Adjudicated Fact 1268 arising from its cross-examination of witnesses

 8     ST-216, and ST-162.  The Prosecution had proposed that ST-041 be heard

 9     pursuant to Rule 92 bis and the Trial Chamber ordered the Prosecution to

10     file any such application within seven days of the date of the Chamber's

11     decision.

12             On the 19th of October, 2010, the Prosecution filed a motion

13     submitting two statements from Witness ST-041 for admission pursuant to

14     Rule 92 bis, highlighting in blue passages relevant to challenged

15     Adjudicated Fact 1268, and highlighting in yellow contextual information

16     relevant to those facts.

17             The Stanisic Defence and the Zupljanin Defence filed a joint

18     response on the 2nd of November, 2010, opposing the admission of the

19     statement into evidence and requesting that the Trial Chamber order

20     ST-041 to appear for cross-examination, asserting that the only means to

21     confront the evidence and challenge the adjudicated fact is by

22     cross-examination of ST-041.

23             Citing its decision on the 12th of October, 2010, the

24     Trial Chamber recalls that the Defence's cross-examination of ST-216 and

25     ST-162 constituted a prima facie reliable and credible challenge to

Page 17323

 1     Adjudicated Fact 1268, pertaining to the discriminatory application of a

 2     curfew to non-Serbs in Doboj in May 1992.

 3             Considering that the challenge is limited to only the enforcement

 4     of the curfew and not the adjudicated fact, considering also that ST-041

 5     is to testify to a fact on which the Trial Chamber has received

 6     conflicting evidence, the Trial Chamber, pursuant to

 7     Rule 92 bis(A)(ii)(C) denies the Prosecution's request to receive

 8     ST-041's evidence pursuant to Rule 92 bis and instead grants the

 9     Prosecution leave to call ST-041 viva voce and grants the Prosecution

10     30 minutes for examination.  The Prosecution's examination shall be

11     limited to facts pertaining to enforcement of the curfew.

12             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, may I just inquire.  I'm sorry.  I

13     completely misunderstood.  We were given advance by Your Honours.  I

14     thought Your Honours ruling was going to be on all the 92 bis witnesses

15     that we've applied to call for the adjudicated facts.  And this --

16     this -- this -- clearly isn't.  I'm simply asking -- I'm inquiring,

17     Your Honours, again, for the purpose of arranging for future witnesses,

18     when we are likely to get that?

19             JUDGE HALL:  I know, Ms. Korner, that I'm beginning to sound like

20     a broken record, but that is still being refined, and we fully expect to

21     be in a position to deliver that finally tomorrow.

22             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

23             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Just for your information, to the Prosecution and

24     to the Defence, the reason why the Chamber has taken its time to put

25     together this decision on the 92 bis witnesses is that we wanted to wrap

Page 17324

 1     up all pending matters and try and see if it was possible to set out a

 2     time schedule for the remaining part of the Prosecution's case.  So

 3     tomorrow will be the time when we will seek, and hopefully we will

 4     deliver our decision on the 92 bis witnesses and to the remaining pending

 5     issues on witnesses for which the Prosecution has filed motions, and also

 6     to the adjudicated fact witnesses, and to attempt to put out a closing

 7     date for the Prosecution's case.

 8             MS. KORNER:  Thank you, Your Honour.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

10             So we take the adjournment to tomorrow morning at 9.00.

11                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.49 p.m.,

12                            to be reconvened on Friday, the 12th day of

13                            November, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.