1 Tuesday, 11 April 2000
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 --- Upon commencing at 4.06 p.m.
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good
7 afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
8 Madam Registrar, would you call the case,
10 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] This is
11 IT-98-29-PT, the Prosecutor versus Stanislav Galic.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good
13 afternoon to the interpreters, to the technical booth,
14 and good afternoon, once again, to the voice that I've
15 been hearing all afternoon. I hope you're still in a
16 position to be able to work, that you're not too tired,
17 speaking to the French interpreter.
18 Let me turn to the Office of the Prosecutor.
19 Mr. Terrier, would you give us the appearances for the
21 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Good afternoon,
22 Your Honour. The Prosecutor is represented by
23 Ms. Sureta Chana, Mr. Michael Blaxill, and Ms. Carmela
24 Annink-Javier and myself, Franck Terrier. Thank you,
25 very much.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] The
2 appearances for the Defence, please.
3 MR. KOSTIC: Good afternoon. My name is
4 Nikola Kostic, and I represent Mr. Galic.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Good
6 afternoon, General Galic.
7 The Trial Chamber has agreed that I would be
8 designated as the Pre-Trial Judge of this case,
9 pursuant to the provisions of Rule 65 ter, paragraph
10 (A), and in any case my colleagues wanted to sit with
11 me. I know that there are various practices in the
12 different Chambers, but we can always be together and
13 that's all a good thing.
14 Therefore, we are meeting today for the
15 Status Conference in the Galic case, and this Status
16 Conference has several objectives. First of all, it's
17 to review the status of the case; then to organise
18 exchanges between the parties; then to give the
19 possibility to the accused the opportunity to raise any
20 issues relating to his medical condition and his
21 detention conditions. I mention once again detention
22 and health conditions.
23 In order to reach these objectives, I suggest
24 to the parties that we follow the following agenda.
25 These are the large subjects, because after I'm going
1 to take each one of them which has subthemes.
2 The first one would be the status of the case
3 now; then the participation of the Defence in the
4 pre-trial management, that is, Rule 65 ter (F); the
5 calendar, this is an important aspect when we speak
6 about organisation; and then other issues, by that, I
7 mean issues raised by the parties, because as
8 indicated, we must give the floor to General Galic as
10 We can begin with the first subject that we
11 have to deal with. The first thing would be to share
12 with the parties the general idea of this Trial Chamber
13 regarding pre-trial management. You know that
14 pre-trial management plays a very important role in the
15 way cases are conducted and the preparation of those
16 cases. We can see, if we look at Rule 65 ter, we reach
17 the conclusion that there are basically two pre-trial
18 phases; the Prosecution's pre-trial phase, which is
19 covered by paragraph (E), and then the pre-trial
20 management for the Defence, which is (J). If you look
21 at the text, you'll see that what is recorded is almost
22 the same. The Prosecution is covered under (E), which
23 is what is required under (G) for the Defence.
24 But there is participation by the Defence in
25 the Prosecutor's pre-trial management; therefore, I'm
1 referring now to paragraph (F).
2 From the point of view of, how can I say
3 this, of general philosophy, of general principles, I
4 think this is what we have to share as a concept so we
5 can work together. From the point of view of
6 objectives, if you look at section (K), under (i) one
7 speaks about a file, and under (ii) there is a second
8 file. By this I mean a file for the Prosecution;
9 another one for the Defence.
10 If you look at paragraph (K), in relation to
11 paragraph (E), as regards the Prosecution, mention is
12 made of a pre-trial brief. This is what I wanted the
13 essential message to be today that I was going to give
14 to you. I was thinking that we should work for the
15 case file, as mentioned under paragraph (K). For the
16 time being, the Prosecutor, and then the Defence, don't
17 have to file a series of briefs in order to begin our
18 work. What I think we can do instead is to work with
19 the parties, discuss the issues that need to be
20 discussed, and most of them are indicated under
21 paragraph (E), and then at the end of the pre-trial
22 phase, set up a case file.
23 I think this would save us a lot of time and
24 save the parties a lot of time, why not say it that
25 way. What I would like to say to the parties is how
1 we're going to work from the point of view of the
2 objectives. What are our working objectives? What are
3 the issues that we've got to discuss between the
4 parties? And what are the conclusions or agreements
5 that we have got to seek? And subsequently, to have
6 all of this in the case file.
7 Therefore, in the pre-trial management --
8 pre-trial phase of the Prosecution's case, there are
9 subchapters. First would be the disclosure of
10 documents by the Prosecutor; the second would be the
11 preliminary motions; the third point would be
12 consultation between the parties; the fourth would be
13 the list of witnesses for the Prosecution; five, the
14 list of exhibits; six, judicial notice.
15 We're going to go back now to each of these
17 Disclosure of documents by the Prosecutor,
18 that is, we're referring to the very heart of Rules 66
19 and 68 of our Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The
20 Prosecutor indicated during the Initial Appearance
21 hearing for General Galic that the supporting materials
22 of the indictment would be disclosed on that same day
23 to Defence counsel, in English and in the language of
24 the accused.
25 I would now like to ask the Prosecutor
1 whether this disclosure to the Defence of all of the
2 supporting material has, in fact, been carried out,
3 pursuant to the provisions of Rule 66 of the Rules, and
4 when that was.
5 Mr. Franck Terrier, please.
6 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Yes,
7 Mr. President. The disclosure of the evidence was done
8 completely on the 5th of January of this year, and we
9 received in the following days a receipt from
10 Mr. Kostic. And I believe that these were the
11 commitments taken by the Prosecution before you at the
12 moment of the Initial Appearance.
13 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
14 very much, Mr. Terrier.
15 Let me ask the Defence whether it would like
16 to react to what has just been said.
17 MR. KOSTIC: Your Honour, we have received
18 what I believe to be the supporting documents, which
19 I'm led to believe were given to the Judge who
20 authorised the criminal indictment and the warrant at
21 that time.
22 We also have received, subsequent to the date
23 that I received the English version, we also have
24 received a version in the Serbian language, which was
25 given to General Galic for his review.
1 One of the issues that we may have, Your
2 Honour, is the fact that, as I have reviewed the
3 documents that we have received, I did contact
4 Mr. Terrier because I felt that the supporting
5 documents themselves, and I know this is a Status
6 Conference, not an argument, so I'm trying to be
7 somewhat more precise here, that some of the documents
8 were either portions of a longer statement by certain
9 witnesses or attributed to certain witnesses. So parts
10 of them are very short. In other situations, it
11 appeared that the witness had given other statements on
12 the same topic, so we don't know whether that -- what
13 we were given is a summary or a subsequent statement.
14 I contacted Mr. Terrier. He was able to give
15 me a portion of those documents more recently. I don't
16 know the date. But just so you know, I have that.
17 I'm still, however, concerned that there's
18 another aspect of these documents that we feel we
19 should obtain in order to make an intelligent
20 evaluation of whether or not the motions concerning the
21 form of the indictment are appropriate or not.
22 I want to add just one other thing which
23 touches on what we are doing. It doesn't necessarily
24 fall into your agenda, but it's very short, and I'm
25 going to seek the help of the Court. I have continued
1 originally as a temporary assignment Defence counsel,
2 and I still as of today continue as a temporary
3 assignment counsel. That is troublesome to the client
4 because he -- there's an expectation on his part that
5 he would like me to become permanent. He doesn't know
6 what to think of the fact that it's a temporary
7 assignment. And we would seek -- I have not filed a
8 formal motion, Your Honour, but we would like or we
9 would seek some kind of a ruling in regard to the
10 assignment of Defence counsel so that we can proceed.
11 I know that I may be overly technical, and I
12 know that eventually I suspect that the appropriate
13 assignment will be made, but we are now in my third
14 month, and again, as I say, I think for the client's
15 own certainty, it would be good to do that.
16 Again, I apologise for bringing it up a bit
17 outside your agenda, but since we're beginning to meet
18 each other, I thought I would bring it up now.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Kostic,
20 I'm afraid that the Chamber can, perhaps, not help you
21 very much in respect of an appointment of permanent
22 Defence counsel, because this is an issue that falls
23 within the jurisdiction of the Registry. And you
24 should raise that issue either with Ms. Dorothee De
25 Sampayo or Mr. Jean-Jacques Heintz, so that the
1 question can be solved. We can simply say, in support
2 of your concerns, that now we are really working
3 permanently on this case, and as early as possible
4 we've got to settle that question in order for us to be
5 able to work properly.
6 I would ask the registrar to take note of the
7 Trial Chamber's indications so that the Registry is
8 fully aware of our concerns as well.
9 However, there is another question, a series
10 of considerations that perhaps Mr. Terrier is in a
11 position to explain to us.
12 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Yes, Your
13 Honour. In order to answer Mr. Kostic and to confirm
14 what he just said before the Trial Chamber, I would say
15 that on the 5th of January we disclosed to the Defence
16 45 statements, which were the statements which the
17 Prosecutor had gathered in support of the indictment.
18 Subsequently, Mr. Kostic asked us for copies
19 of other documents, and we willingly complied with his
20 request, but that disclosure which then came is not
21 covered by Rule 66(A).
22 First of all, that is disclosure which is
23 being carried out kind of beforehand, pursuant to the
24 permanent obligations of Rule 68.
25 So, secondly, we satisfied the disclosure to
1 Mr. Kostic and, of course, we disclosed to them the
2 documents that he asked for.
3 Would you like me to go into more detail in
4 respect of the status of our work for preparing this
5 trial, or would you simply prefer -- well, I had
6 thought about speaking according to the agenda, as you
7 had set it out.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, I
9 think that would be better. Yes, it would be better.
10 If you allow me, I would prefer it to be that way. Of
11 course, there is some point where you can speak about
12 things that we have not included on the agenda. But
13 for the time being, if you allow, I would prefer to
14 follow the agenda that I set out. I think it would be
15 easier for me.
16 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Yes. No
17 problem, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Therefore,
19 what we can conclude to some extent is that the same
20 materials that the Confirming Judge was able to see in
21 order to confirm the indictment are the same as
22 Mr. Kostic received, and even more; the Prosecutor gave
23 other documents as well. We're clear on that for the
24 time being.
25 Mr. Terrier, I was now going to ask you
1 whether you transmitted to the Defence -- or what
2 measures have been taken in order to transmit copies of
3 witness statements that the Prosecutor has decided to
4 call and the sworn statements, or formal statements, as
5 mentioned in Rule 94 ter. I don't know whether this
6 was something that you wanted to talk about.
7 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Well, yes, it
8 is. It is. That is exactly what I planned to
10 In fact, what we did is the following:
11 The Tribunal will remember that the
12 indictment is made up of the following things: First
13 of all, there is a general count which has to do with
14 the campaign of terror which, according to the
15 Prosecution, was carried out against the civilian
16 population of Sarajevo. And in addition, in order to
17 prove that, we put forth a number of specific incidents
18 which occurred during the period covered by the
19 indictment. There are 32 of them as regards the
20 incidents which can be -- which can be ascribable to
21 snipers and six which can relate to shelling.
22 We also have almost completed -- we only have
23 a few -- we have some translation problems in order to
24 complete our work. We constituted a case file for each
25 of those incidents. It's not the Trial Chamber's case
1 file but specific case files for each of the incidents
2 that the Prosecution has to prove during these
3 proceedings at the Tribunal. Each of these case files
4 is made up of statements of eyewitnesses, statements of
5 victims, if they survived, medical certificates,
6 transcripts of investigations when the investigations
7 were carried out, and all other materials which will
8 allow the Judges and the Defence to know where things
9 happened, when things happened, and how things
11 Once all of this has been completed,
12 finalised, we plan to disclose these case files to the
13 Trial Chamber, but at the same time to the Defence as
14 well. And in that way, not only are we setting up and
15 helping in the pre-trial management of the case, but
16 also satisfying our obligations, at least partially our
17 obligations to disclose matters under paragraph 2 of
18 Rule 66.
19 Available to us -- I'm not saying that this
20 is the number of witnesses that we're going to call --
21 but we've got 180 witnesses, approximately.
22 Eighty-three of the witnesses deal with the incidents
23 that I just mentioned, and they are included in the
24 case files which will be communicate to the Judges and
25 to the Defence.
1 With regards to the others, we are now
2 reviewing which of the witnesses must absolutely be
3 called to the Trial Chamber, in its full bench, and
4 which are the ones that could be invited to submit
5 affidavits according to the procedures which will be
6 defined by the Trial Chamber, and who are the ones who,
7 if necessary, could be heard on the basis of Rule 71 of
8 the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Therefore, we are
9 now doing this work, and as soon as it is done, we
10 will, of course, be able to inform the Trial Chamber
12 It is very important for us, for the Trial
13 Chamber, and for the subsequent Status Conferences,
14 that once each of the incidents that been transmitted
15 in the case file, after having the time to review them
16 carefully, we have to be told which are the ones that
17 are considered as being proved and which are being
18 contested, and, in the end, what the Prosecutor is
19 going to have to prove according to the forms provided
20 for in the Rules of Procedure.
21 Therefore, we are at that stage, and of
22 course in order for this pre-trial management to be
23 conducted as quickly and effectively as important, it's
24 very important for us and for the Trial Chamber and for
25 the Defence that the Defence team be set up as quickly
1 as possible. We cannot remain as we are now, where
2 Mr. Kostic has his contract renewed from month to month
3 without being certain of his future, and this is not a
4 situation which is proper for the accused himself.
5 Therefore, this is where we are, and I hope
6 in that way the Prosecutor will make an effective
7 contribution to the pre-trial management and in
8 accordance with the desires expressed by the Trial
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
11 very much, Mr. Terrier. You have spoken about the
12 Defence team, which is a good thing, because we have to
13 think not only about Mr. Kostic but also about the
14 co-counsel, and I think that the Registry will take
15 care of that issue, because it is true that we really
16 must work on this case. And this is what the Trial
17 Chamber believes and, more specifically, what the
18 Pre-Trial Judge believes.
19 Mr. Terrier, if I understood you correctly,
20 in respect of the components of Rule 66(i)(a), will two
21 weeks, 15 days, be enough in order to complete that
23 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Fifteen days --
24 well, what we don't have yet for these case files are
25 the translations. That's never an easy problem in this
1 Tribunal, as Your Honours know. But we also need to
2 supplement them with maps. What we want is that the
3 Judges, the Defence, and the Prosecution, when they
4 open the case file, know exactly what happened during
5 that incident. And for this reason -- what we don't
6 have are those maps. Everything else has been put
8 I would also like to say that in certain
9 cases, if possible -- it won't always be possible, of
10 course, because places have changed -- but we would
11 like there to be photographs or photographic reports of
12 the situation, of the locations. Fifteen days is a
13 little short to me. Your Honour, if possible, I would
14 be obliged to have four weeks. Four weeks would be
15 more to my liking.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Perhaps we
17 could give you three weeks and with a week's grace
18 period. That would be a specific objective, three
19 weeks, and then we would permit, if you are not in a
20 position to do otherwise, one extra week. Would that
21 be all right?
22 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Well, we'll try
23 to do the best we can to do it in three weeks.
24 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
25 very much. I now set that time limit with the
2 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Excuse me, Your
3 Honour. There is still the translation problem. We
4 don't completely control that. You know that there's
5 moving that's now going on, and things are becoming a
6 bit more complicated and will be complicated in the
7 coming days and weeks. Perhaps we'll need that grace
8 period for the translation. But other than that, it
9 should be ready.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Well, in
11 any case, since we are now speaking about time limits
12 and we have a chapter devoted to the calendar, perhaps
13 we could go back to that at the proper moment, if you
14 agree with me.
15 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Thank you,
16 Mr. President.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you,
18 Mr. Terrier.
19 Let me now turn to the Defence. Mr. Kostic,
20 I don't know if you are in a position to answer a
21 question that we have. Are you going to file a request
22 to consult those materials covered under 66(B), and if
23 so, well, then, we'll see.
24 MR. KOSTIC: Your Honour, in regard to a
25 request under Rule 66(B), I would expect that we may be
1 able to file a request very quickly. In fact, I would
2 like to do that even within the two weeks' time
4 In addition, you should know, as long as
5 we're -- well, I'll keep it at that. I think that
6 we'll do that within the two weeks' period, Your
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Perhaps we
9 could continue, Mr. Kostic.
10 If you think that you're going to file a
11 request or motion, perhaps it would be better to
12 consult with the Prosecutor, with Mr. Terrier, about
13 that. I think that as a general rule, we're going to
14 adopt that procedure. Whenever there is a brief, the
15 parties have to consult in order to know whether or not
16 they can reach an agreement. If they do and if the
17 Trial Chamber recognises it, then it will. But if
18 there is an agreement that the Trial Chamber doesn't
19 have to know about, then we won't have a problem
21 So I think it would be better for Mr. Kostic
22 to consult the Prosecutor, and in any case, so that
23 things be clear, I'm going to ask Mr. Franck Terrier
24 whether he agrees to that procedure.
25 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Yes,
1 absolutely, Mr. President. I think that's the spirit
2 of Rule 66(B). Mr. Kostic merely has to send us a
3 letter, and we'll make ourselves available to him and
4 make available to him anything that we have, all
5 documents, books, photographs, et cetera, subject, of
6 course, to reciprocity provided by the Rules.
7 I wanted to clarify something. I was
8 wondering whether there might be something confused
9 here having to do with preliminary motions.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] No, nothing
11 to do with preliminary motions. No more confusion
13 Mr. Kostic, that is your answer. You can
14 consult with the Prosecutor about that possibility,
15 that you might want to use Rule 66(B), because this is
16 a request of the Defence. Therefore, you seem to be
17 going down the same road as Mr. Terrier. We'll work on
18 that together.
19 I was going to now move to point 2; that is,
20 the preliminary motions. Pursuant to 72(A), as you
21 know, Mr. Kostic, the 30-day time period for filing
22 preliminary motions runs from the date that the
23 exhibits -- the supporting material for the indictment
24 was communicated, and as you know, the date mentioned
25 here is the 5th of January. Thirty days, the 5th of
1 February, no preliminary motions have been filed to
2 date. Does the Defence confirm that it has not filed
3 preliminary motions, and does it have any comments to
4 make on that subject?
5 MR. KOSTIC: Your Honour, in regard to the
6 preliminary motions, there were two concerns; one I've
7 already talked about, which is the issue of my own
8 appointment, which you're familiar with, and I won't go
9 beyond that. As far as the other preliminary motions
10 that need to be raised, those will be filed perhaps as
11 early as this afternoon or tomorrow.
12 My only issue does go back, and I think that
13 that has to do with the issue that we talked about,
14 which is whether there's a feeling by the Defence that
15 we have been provided everything that we need to have
16 to argue the motion as to the jurisdictional issue,
17 which is the form of the indictment, without the
18 documents which I have talked about. I will file a
19 motion as to that jurisdictional issue. The problem,
20 of course, is that I have to, in arguing that motion
21 without the documentation, which I think I may or I may
22 not get in the next -- I think we're at two weeks, the
23 last time I heard. Those witness statements, I think,
24 are important.
25 What I would like to do, with the
1 exception -- the other motions will be filed today or
2 tomorrow. As far as the jurisdictional motion is
3 concerned, I'm going to be filing it, preserving our
4 right to add to it, and what I would like to do is to
5 have some additional time to do that once I receive the
6 materials from Mr. Terrier, because I think that it
7 again -- it's hard to respond.
8 The only thing I can do, Your Honour, and I
9 can do that within two weeks, is I can file -- in
10 addition to the jurisdictional motion, arguing what I'm
11 saying, and that is the inability to argue the
12 sufficiency of the indictment without the additional
13 documents, whether it's because of the statements or
14 out of context, but I can make that argument.
15 I hope I'm clear. If I'm not clear, I will
16 certainly be here to answer.
17 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] My question
18 is that the time period has already lapsed. There is
19 no time period, Mr. Kostic. The time period lapsed on
20 the 5th of February.
21 MR. KOSTIC: Your Honour, yes. The only
22 thing I can do is to file -- most of the motions -- I
23 can file a motion to extend and see if the Chamber
24 rules on it.
25 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Well, you
1 do your work. The Pre-Trial Judge or the Trial Chamber
2 needn't tell you what you're supposed to do.
3 But if you look at the Tribunal's case law
4 carefully in respect of preliminary motions, I think
5 that you will reach the conclusion that you have other
6 work to do. I don't know if you're going to file a
7 preliminary motion in order to call into question the
8 Tribunal's jurisdiction or the defects in the form of
9 the indictment. Perhaps I could invite you to review
10 the Tribunal's case law, and perhaps I could give you
11 another possibility. There might be other work to do.
12 In any case, if you file a motion, the Judges
13 will have to rule on it; that is true. But it is also
14 true that the time period for filing the preliminary
15 motions has already elapsed, and it elapsed on the 5th
16 of February. I ask you to reflect on this. I don't
17 want this to constitute pressure or any kind of
18 direction that the Defence has to take. The Defence
19 has to take its own decisions. But I want you to be
20 fully aware of what the situation is.
21 We're going to move now -- well, I don't want
22 to end that issue without giving the floor back to
23 Mr. Terrier. What is the position of the Prosecutor in
24 respect of this issue of the time period.
25 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
1 the Prosecutor must only refer to the rules of
2 procedure that you've mentioned, specifically the
3 provisions of Rule 72. If Mr. Kostic wanted an
4 extension of the time period, then he should have asked
5 it of the Trial Chamber within the proper time period.
6 He can't ask for an extension once that period for
7 doing so has been elapsed for a long time.
8 I have no further comments to make at this
9 time, Your Honour. Thank you very much.
10 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] As I said,
11 we're now going to move to the third subject of the
12 Pre-Trial Status Conference for the Prosecution,
13 pre-trial phase of the Prosecution. That is the issue
14 of consultation between the parties.
15 I think this is becoming part of our culture
16 here at the Tribunal, that is, the Trial Chambers and
17 specifically this Trial Chamber, to ask for good
18 cooperation between the parties, and I'm saying this to
19 you because the Chamber believes that the role of the
20 Defence is not a passive one, that is, one where it
21 puts itself into a position of waiting for what the
22 Prosecution is going to do. But the Prosecutor must
23 prove his accusations, and the Defence puts itself into
24 a passive attitude of waiting. I think that we must
25 really have a different vision of the situation. By
1 that I mean that the Defence must defend, and I say
2 this so that we can have proper justice. We've got
3 proper justice when somebody who makes an accusation
4 does that with somebody defending as well. The Defence
5 has an active role to play, an active defence in its
7 One doesn't ordinarily use this kind of
8 language in a courtroom, but I would say that
9 ordinarily in football, teams that are -- defensive
10 teams and those who only defend usually lose the
11 match. I think we've got to have this idea of active
12 defence in mind. That means that there must be
13 discussions between the parties, the parties have to
14 talk about the issues together.
15 So we have now reached, if I could say it
16 this way, the objectives of the pre-trial management.
17 We have to know -- and Mr. Terrier has already touched
18 on that issue -- we must know what are the points of
19 dispute and what are the points of agreement. What are
20 the points of fact and law in respect of litigious
21 questions and those for which there is an agreement.
22 Why do I say or ask that? Because if we know
23 which points are in disagreement, what are the points
24 being disputed in respect of fact and law, we'll have
25 defined the purpose of the trial. That is what I want
1 the parties to understand. That is, that there must be
2 exchanges, there must be discussions, you must work
4 Why do I say this? Well, at least so that we
5 can know where we stand in respect of agreements and
6 where we stand in respect of disagreements. And there
7 may be something else as well.
8 It may be that I don't agree with this
9 account of something on the whole but partially in
10 agreement; that is, I would agree that something
11 happened and I agree that these events happened, but I
12 do not agree, for instance, that my client was there or
13 was not at that place but rather in another place. All
14 of that can be the subject of discussions. Therefore,
15 we must start with that provision.
16 Let me give you another idea, the point of
17 view of cooperation between the parties. There is only
18 cooperation when there is the availability to be
19 cooperative. If I want to cooperate but the other
20 party doesn't want to, then it's ridiculous to continue
21 cooperating with somebody who doesn't want to
22 cooperate, and I'll defend myself as well. But if I
23 want to cooperate and the other party does as well,
24 well, that much the better, because that's what we
25 wanted from the very outset. This has to do with what
1 was enshrined as being the win/win strategy, because at
2 the end both parties cooperating with one another both
4 Another idea that I would like to indicate,
5 from a practical point of view -- what I'm saying here
6 are points of reference. But you are familiar with the
7 case, you are familiar with the situation. You can
8 find other ways of working. But let me give you this
9 way of looking at things:
10 To begin with, perhaps we should read
11 together the indictment and say, "Yes, I agree with
12 those." "No, I don't agree with that." "No, I don't
13 agree, or here perhaps I could admit to this part, but
14 the other part I can't accept." This is a practical
15 way of reaching agreements and understanding which are
16 the disagreements.
17 Another idea in this chapter or subchapter
18 having to do with consulting between the parties, the
19 Trial Chamber considers this procedure: Any motion
20 that a party wants to file must be discussed first with
21 the other party. If there's an agreement, fine, then
22 there's an agreement. If it's necessary that the Trial
23 Chamber render a decision, then you'll tell us. You
24 tell us, "I ask this. I spoke with the other party,
25 and there's an agreement." And then the Trial Chamber
1 would verify whether the agreement complies with the
2 Rules and principles or whether, to the contrary, if
3 one were to say, "I've discussed these things, but the
4 other party does not agree, and so I put this to the
5 finding of the Trial Chamber." And then the Trial
6 Chamber will essentially and always, as far as
7 possible, render oral decisions. This is a tradition
8 that I took from another case, that all motions were
9 filed orally and the decisions were rendered orally.
10 This goes more quickly for everybody.
11 Lastly, let me remind you that the written
12 conclusions on the points of agreement and disagreement
13 relating to questions of fact and law must be drafted
14 in accordance with the provisions of Rule 65 ter (H).
15 But we'll get to that later.
16 I would now like to have reactions in order
17 to close this subchapter relating to consultations
18 between the parties. I'd like to have the parties'
19 reactions now.
20 Mr. Franck Terrier, would you like to say
21 something to us? Do you agree with us or do you not
22 agree with us?
23 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] I completely
24 agree, Mr. President, with the general guidelines that
25 you have sketched out, and I think that this
1 corresponds to what we feel.
2 I think with regard to all these points, what
3 you have said is very useful and enables the Defence to
4 be completely informed, broadly informed, on what the
5 Prosecution is doing and the evidence that it relies
6 on. And we're going to communicate not only witness
7 statements, which we are bound to do through the Rules,
8 but also other documents as well, especially such as
9 plans, medical reports, and other documents of that
11 Once the Defence has been fully and
12 completely informed, I think that it will be able to
13 take an active part, and the Defence will be able to
14 tell us what it agrees with and accepts and if there is
15 anything it wishes to contest.
16 But I would like to assure the Chamber that
17 these relations will follow those guidelines, and I
18 hope that we will have as broad an agreement as
19 possible. Of course, it can never be absolutely
21 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you,
22 Mr. Terrier. I should like to thank you for those
24 Mr. Kostic.
25 MR. KOSTIC: I wish I could discuss with you
1 the philosophy about football, but maybe for some other
3 I think that I would be available to consult
4 and try to reach agreements in this case. What I think
5 you probably appreciate my situation at this time is I
6 know really very little about the case itself on the
7 basis of the fact that I only have the supporting
8 documents which were given to me, as you know. I do
9 not know -- in fact, today is the first day that I
10 heard the number of 180 witnesses that are potential
11 witnesses in this case. From the indictment I have a
12 general idea, perhaps, or I can attempt to analyse the
13 theory of the Prosecution as to why my client may be
14 potentially guilty -- charged and guilty of any or all
15 of these counts. But I'm really a little bit behind
16 the Prosecutor, probably some five or six years behind
17 him, in regard to this particular case, but the way I
18 like to practice law is to stay in contact with the
19 Prosecutor, meet with him, attempt to reach agreements
20 if we can, obviously consulting with Mr. Galic, because
21 as you can imagine, he's an integral part in any of
22 those discussions. And I think we can, where possible,
23 reach agreements. Where we can't, obviously we'll have
24 to do the best we can to present arguments to you, and
25 you'll have to rule.
1 So I think it's possible, yes.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
3 very much, Mr. Kostic.
4 Let us now move on to the fourth chapter of
5 the witness list of the Prosecutor.
6 As we know, Article 65 ter, and in view of
7 the philosophy of the Rules and not football now, we
8 have Rule 65 ter (i). So we have all this about the
9 pre-trial management. And if we look at (iv), a list
10 of witnesses stating the names and pseudonyms of each
11 witness. It is (a). I don't know whether I'm going to
12 go through all this and whether I'm going to take it
13 point by point or look at it in its entirety and have
14 your reactions after that, perhaps.
15 But if we look at (a), the name or pseudonym
16 of each witness in that particular Rule, and I think it
17 would be useful if the Prosecutor would furnish a list
18 of witnesses who would like protective measures and to
19 tell us what kind of protective measures he would like
20 to have. I think this would be very useful with regard
21 to the entire proceedings because this would enable us
22 to know in advance who the witness is, what protection
23 he or she is requiring and bring this to the attention
24 of the public and say a day in advance that there will
25 be a public hearing or not, because we have to respect
1 our public, of course, the public attending the
2 proceedings and the trial.
3 So if we have the name or pseudonym of each
4 witness, a complete list, and if protective measures
5 are required, if you could say so in advance, straight
6 away. So if there is an agreement reached on this
7 point beforehand, together with the Defence counsel,
8 then these protective measures will be accorded and
9 then we shall be able to state for each witness what
10 protective measures have been undertaken, whether they
11 are using a name or pseudonym, and all this can be
12 regulated before the actual start of the trial itself.
13 Perhaps I should refer to some of the other
14 points in the Rule, and (b) is a summary on the facts
15 on which each witness will testify. If the Prosecutor
16 is going to make a summary, I would like to draw the
17 Prosecution's attention to the following: In my
18 experience so far of the summaries that we have had to
19 date, we did indeed receive summaries, but they had
20 very little to do with (c), that is to say, the points
21 in the indictment as to which each witness will
22 testify, including specific references to counts and
23 relevant paragraphs in the indictment.
24 I know that this is not always the case, of
25 course, but I do feel that those summaries must be
1 compiled by the team presenting them, because if the
2 Prosecutor says to an investigator, "Give me a
3 summary," he is going to make a summary of the
4 statements, but perhaps that particular individual will
5 not be aware of the important points. Therefore, I
6 consider that a summary of facts really means what it
7 says: a summary of important facts, facts which are
8 important vis-à-vis the indictment.
9 Therefore, I think we ought to understand
10 points (b) and (c) of Rule 65 ter in an coordinated
12 Then we come to (d), which is the estimated
13 length of time required for each witness. I know that
14 it is very difficult to calculate in advance, because
15 there are many things that are outside our control.
16 But if we are able to estimate the length of time, that
17 would be a good time.
18 Having said that, I would like to go back to
19 a another little question, a point, which I think
20 Mr. Terrier mentioned a moment ago when he spoke about
21 Article 71 and the presiding officer, and I think this
22 had to do with the classification itself. I'm sure
23 that you will not be leading the Trial Chamber astray.
24 I think that all the points were important. So what is
25 the question actually?
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Fourmy
2 is drawing my attention to the fact that there was no
3 transcript in English.
4 Is there a problem?
5 THE COURT REPORTER: Something is wrong with
6 my cord. Everything is recorded, but it's not spitting
7 through yet.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] In any
9 case, is what we're saying being recorded, however?
10 THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We have
12 Mr. Kostic here, who is listening to the proceedings in
14 Are things all right now?
15 THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Fine. What
17 I was saying, I was speaking about what we could talk
18 about classifying witnesses, classification of
19 witnesses. As you know, the Trial Chamber can take a
20 decision to shorten the list of witnesses. I think the
21 Trial Chamber should not choose the Prosecution's or
22 the Defence's witness, but, rather, it's the party's
23 responsibility to get the information to the Chambers
24 so that they can shorten the list, if necessary. I
25 think this classification -- I know that Mr. Terrier is
1 familiar with that, that is, classifying witnesses as
2 important, more less important, and less important, and
3 then to choose those witnesses which are less important
4 and perhaps some who are more or less important in
5 order to hear their testimony through a presiding
7 Now we're only speaking about the general
8 outlines of the trial, and what I'm expecting from the
9 Prosecutor in this case -- don't answer me that all
10 witnesses are important, please, I do believe that --
11 but the question is to know which witnesses are the
12 ones who are going to come to testify and which are the
13 ones who are going to testify through a presiding
14 officer, because they also will continue to be
15 important. It's from that point of view of
16 organisation that I'm speaking, and I'm not going to go
17 into that question in any further detail.
18 The expert witnesses. Well, all right, I
19 think that either the Prosecution or the Defence is
20 familiar with 94 bis, and so I don't have to ask the
21 Prosecutor whether there is a great deal to report.
22 But it's simply to point out that this question has
23 been raised.
24 And before we move to the fifth subchapter, I
25 would like to give the parties an opportunity to react
1 to the list of the Prosecutor. Do you agree or do you
2 not agree?
3 Mr. Terrier.
4 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
5 the Prosecutor will try not to disappoint the Chamber.
6 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
7 very much.
8 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] My position is
9 the following: We have 180 witnesses who have been
10 identified as being able to provide useful information
11 to the Judges in this case. Naturally, all of these
12 witnesses are important, but not all of them have to
13 provide the information according to the same
14 procedure, the same ways. I was speaking about case
15 files dealing with specific incidents, either of
16 snipers or shelling. We have about 80 witnesses who
17 have to do with those incidents.
18 If it should happen that the Defence agrees
19 that these incidents did, in fact, take place,
20 according to the circumstances as presented by the
21 Prosecutor, it does not intend to contest that on such
22 and such a date, a shelling against the civilian
23 population happened and that this number of people died
24 at this place or at that time, while they were waiting
25 in line to get some water or they were at the market.
1 If of those incidents or if some of them are
2 not being challenged, then of course that witness will
3 not be heard before this Trial Chamber, that is, heard
4 by three Judges. But, of course, these are still
5 important witnesses.
6 In addition, and this is perhaps a specific
7 characteristic of this case, it is possible that we can
8 define categories of witnesses as being very specific,
9 very differentiated. We've got those witnesses who
10 were members of UNPROFOR, others who were civilian
11 officials, and others who were military officials.
12 There were journalists. There were dignitaries
13 representing the communities of Sarajevo. We can
14 differentiate things very easily in respect of those
15 different categories of witnesses and say that we make
16 proposals in this way; that is, to say that some of the
17 categories or some of the representatives of these
18 different witness categories have to be heard by all
19 three Judges; others can provide affidavits; and still
20 others, if the Trial Chamber agrees, can be heard
21 through a Presiding Officer. This, in my opinion, is a
22 procedure which would be perfectly acceptable to the
23 Defence insofar as the Defence is exercising all its
25 I know about the discussion on affidavits. I
1 know Mr. Kostic may object to the affidavit, and I do
2 understand that very easily. However, as regards
3 proceedings covered by 71, Mr. Kostic will be there in
4 order to cross-examine the witness, and, therefore, the
5 rights of the accused will be fully respected.
6 We are working in that way, and I hope that
7 it will satisfy the Chamber. We will make proposals as
8 to the list of witnesses of those that have to be heard
9 by all of the Judges and those that can be heard
10 through the 71 provisions.
11 But before we get to that point, I think it
12 would be a good thing for the Defence to tell us what
13 it agrees to and what it does not agree to so that we
14 will know what direction to take. Of course, it goes
15 without saying that many of the facts and circumstances
16 mentioned by the Prosecution, if they are challenged,
17 then the trial, of course, will be one in which more
18 witnesses are going to have to come, and that's just
19 how things go. That's just the rules of the game.
20 That should not constitute pressure on the Defence. In
21 any case, that's how we are working.
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
23 very much, Mr. Terrier.
24 Mr. Kostic, would you like to make any
25 comments, or do you have any reactions to what has just
1 been said in respect of the list of the Prosecutor's
2 witnesses, and specifically to what Mr. Terrier has
3 just said.
4 MR. KOSTIC: Your Honour, I think it might be
5 too early for me to have an opinion in regard to the
6 statement by the Prosecutor, because, as you know, as I
7 said before, I know very little about the case now.
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] We
9 understand very well, Mr. Kostic, but we do consider
10 you a party to your discussions, of course, and that is
11 precisely why I always ask for your opinions, and I am
12 very pleased to have you.
13 We can now move forward to the fifth
14 subchapter, if you like, and that is the list of
15 exhibits, that is to say, 65 ter (E)(i) or -- no, it is
16 (v) and it is what exhibits the Prosecutor intends to
17 offer. What I would like to say is that regard is we
18 have tried in another case, we have tried to do
19 something with some results. And in order to
20 distribute our time well, once again to prepare in
21 advance the list of exhibits. So that when we come to
22 the courtroom, the registrar should already know the
23 numbers, the exhibits have already been marked, so that
24 when the Prosecutor develops his arguments and brings
25 up an exhibit, he places it on the ELMO and everybody
1 will know which exhibit it is because it will have a
3 I think that this is something that we tried
4 to do. I don't know what the practice has been of
5 other Trial Chambers, but we have used it in our own
6 Trial Chamber, and I think that we had a great deal of
7 success with that and were able to save time. Because
8 if every time the Prosecutor presents an exhibit he has
9 to open a file, takes out a piece of paper, asks the
10 registrar to present it to the Defence counsel, to the
11 Judge and so on, and if we multiply this time by the
12 number of exhibits, we get an exorbitant figure and
13 loss of time. So I think it will be possible with the
14 registrar, who has this experience already, to go ahead
15 with this kind of practice.
16 I should like the two parties, the Defence
17 and the Prosecution, to organise the exhibits so that
18 they are ready for the trial and the testimony and can
19 be used straight away.
20 So I think that was the guiding light or idea
21 that I wanted to state with respect to this question,
22 but I'd like to hear your reactions.
23 Mr. Terrier.
24 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] We are aware of
25 the advantages of this practice, and of course we will
1 comply with it.
2 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
3 very much.
4 Mr. Kostic, you'll see how that is going to
5 work, and you'll conclude that things work well.
6 MR. KOSTIC: I agree with what you have just
7 said. Your colleague on the Bench, Judge Wald, know
8 how the practice is in the Federal Courts of the United
9 States, and what you have just said is exactly the way
10 they do it, so I have no problem with that.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Very well.
12 We are very pleased to hear that, because we were
13 convinced that we had discovered something and it
14 functioned very well. So we are going to use this
15 procedure as well.
16 This brings me to another question, and
17 perhaps there will be a lot of space to discuss this
18 opinion. Judicial notice.
19 If we look at Article 94, referring to
20 judicial notice, and it is divided into two parts, we
21 have facts of common knowledge, proof of facts of
22 common knowledge on the one part, and we also have
23 adjudicated facts or documentary evidence from other
24 proceedings of the Tribunal relating to matters at
25 issue in the current proceedings.
1 I don't think I can go further than that at
2 present because the parties will undertake exchanges,
3 of course, and will find either something to say with
4 regard to (A) or with regard to (B) of Article 94, and
5 we'll see possibilities in both, and indeed in going
6 further afield as well.
7 And I think that if we speak of
8 jurisprudence, we can also look at the practice that
9 was relevant to another case, where judicial notice was
10 brought up and where 583 pieces of fact came to light,
11 and the Chamber agreed on judicial notice on 470
12 facts -- pieces of evidence. I don't need to tell you
13 that this requires a great deal of time, a great deal
14 of money, and a great deal of witnesses and witness
16 So for the moment I wanted to give this to
17 the parties to consider, to look into all the
18 possibilities of utilising this judicial notice that
19 stands at their disposal: either proof of facts of
20 common knowledge or judicial notice of adjudicated
21 facts or documentary evidence from other proceedings.
22 I do not know whether you wish to react in this
24 Perhaps, Mr. Terrier, you would like to at
25 this point.
1 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] My first
2 reaction, since we're still not really quite sure about
3 what our position on judicial notice is, which is a
4 difficult one even theoretically, and about which
5 people might have different and conflicting opinions.
6 First of all, if we are, during our
7 discussions with the Defence, able to agree to a
8 certain number of facts, I think it would be very easy
9 for the Judges to take note of this, whether it be in
10 the form of a judicial notice, under Rule 94, or in
11 another form. It would, I hope, be a matter of facts
12 that took place within Sarajevo as part of that period
13 covered by the indictment.
14 There is another issue, which we think that
15 we must submit to this Trial Chamber's Judges, and that
16 is that some of the evidence was gathered by another
17 group in this Tribunal, although some of the Judges
18 here were part of that bench of Judges. As part of the
19 61 proceedings, which were carried out on the basis of
20 the indictment against Radovan Karadzic and Ratko
21 Mladic, during those 61 proceedings, which was not an
22 inter partes proceedings, the parties agreed that what
23 was in question was Sarajevo itself. And we wanted to
24 make sure that this evidence can be submitted as part
25 of these proceedings without necessarily having to have
1 those witnesses to be called back.
2 I think that would be useful and I think that
3 the rights of the Defence would be preserved insofar as
4 Mr. Kostic or another Defence representative could
5 discuss with both parties present about that evidence.
6 If Mr. Kostic wanted a witness to be called
7 back, of course the Trial Chamber would decide whether
8 it is appropriate or necessary. But in any case, the
9 rights of the Defence would be respected by open
10 discussion before the Judges in respect of the
11 validity, relevance, and scope of that evidence.
12 But I think about individuals, I'm thinking
13 about a representative of the civilian community in
14 Sarajevo, who spoke in one of these 61 proceedings
15 about the fact that there really was a siege, that
16 during that siege, he could speak about what the
17 population had experienced. And all of this goes back
18 to Count 1 of the indictment, that is, the complain of
19 terror against a civilian population.
20 There is that testimony, but there is other
21 testimony as well, and I'm essentially thinking about
22 those proceedings. Perhaps there are other procedures
23 and proceedings that can be used during which useful
24 and appropriate evidence was gathered. But I can't say
25 anything further about that right now.
1 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Kostic,
2 do you have any comments?
3 MR. KOSTIC: Your Honour, I think on a number
4 of the issues in regard to judicial notice I would like
5 to reserve some later opinion because I'm not sure what
6 all will come into play. But my understanding of the
7 Rule 61 hearing here some time ago is a little bit like
8 a football match but only one team played. It was not
9 a full match. And I think that would, of course,
10 bother me if anything of a judicial notice nature would
11 be then awarded as a category from that.
12 However -- however, I will certainly meet
13 with the Prosecutor, and if there is something within
14 any of those documents and/or statements that we could
15 potentially agree on, I would be prepared to do that.
16 I just had a reaction because of the nature of that
18 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I would
19 simply like to take advantage of this time to tell you
20 that in another case that the Trial Chamber is hearing,
21 the parties agreed that they would tender some of the
22 excerpts from the 61 hearing, that is, the Karadzic and
23 Mladic hearings. I'm only giving you that information
25 Before we leave -- well, in order to talk
1 about the second chapter of the Defence's participation
2 in pre-trial management and in respect of exhibits, I
3 know that this is a very open question and one which is
4 difficult to talk about. But the question I would like
5 to raise is the following: Among the documents and the
6 testimony, ordinarily we're able to establish some kind
7 of a relationship that a document has been presented
8 and is valid if it has been presented through a
9 witness. I don't know whether the parties want to
10 think about this possibility; that is, the documents
11 will be worth what they're worth; the testimony will be
12 worth what it's worth. And if there are no questions
13 about authenticity in respect of the document, why
14 present it always through a witness?
15 I throw that question out to you so that you
16 can think about it, because frequently we waste time
17 reading the documents when all of us know exactly how
18 to read, and the witness is reading for us. We know
19 how to read. But I know that this is a question which
20 may not be absolutely or equally shared from people
21 coming from two different legal systems, that is, the
22 common law and the civil law systems.
23 As you know, we have done away with them a
24 long time ago, in fact, the discussion about common and
25 civil law. We have our own Rules, we have our own case
1 law, and in the light of this and in the light of the
2 Tribunal's objectives and the principles of law,
3 couldn't we think about that? I throw that question
4 out to you for your reflection.
5 And now I move to the second chapter, that
6 is, the Defence participation in pre-trial management,
7 that is, Rule 65 ter (F). Perhaps Mr. Kostic is not in
8 a position to answer today, but as I said to you at the
9 outset, we would like to share with the parties some
10 ideas which could then be used.
11 Here is a question: Does the Defence plan to
12 put forth any alibi defence, pursuant to Rule 67?
13 I'll, first of all, ask all questions, and then
14 Mr. Kostic can tell us whether he is in a position to
15 answer today.
16 The other question, outside from the defence
17 of alibi, is Rule 65 ter, under paragraph (F); that
18 is, "(i) in general terms, the nature of the accused's
19 defence." At the end of the pre-trial stage, the
20 Defence must be prepared to tell us, in general terms,
21 what the nature of the accused's defence is. The
22 matters with which the accused takes issue in the
23 Prosecutor's pre-trial brief, and for each of these
24 points the reason why the accused takes issue, that is,
25 there are conclusions which can be reached after the
2 There is another point that I would like to
3 ask you to think about, that is, ask the Defence to
4 think about, that is, the accused testifying; yes or
5 no, and if yes, when? That is, we have already -- we
6 already have a practice here in this Tribunal,
7 according to which the accused who have decided to
8 testify in their own defence did so after the
9 preliminary statements of the Prosecution.
10 I can tell you that I have had the experience
11 of General Blaskic's case, and I was absolutely struck
12 by the fact that we heard almost three months of
13 testimony by General Blaskic, only to learn that he was
14 not challenging what the Prosecutor had tried to prove
15 over a great period of time, with a great many exhibits
16 and many witnesses; that is, there can be some
17 advantage, even for the accused, to testify in his own
18 defence at the beginning of the trial, but it is
19 something which Mr. Galic's Defence will have to
21 I would like to tell you that the Trial
22 Chamber will not bring any pressure to bear in that
23 respect, but we just wish to state the experience we
24 have had and which tells us that it is a good solution
25 and that we have already practised it. We have had
1 experience of the accused testifying immediately after
2 the opening statements by the Prosecution.
3 Well, there we have, Mr. Kostic, a series of
4 questions and guidelines for the Defence. I don't know
5 whether you wish to react now or not.
6 MR. KOSTIC: Of course I should react because
7 it is a Status Conference and it would be good to give
8 you my own thoughts about that, and partially they are
9 also based on some sort of natural instincts after many
10 years of practising criminal defence law. So I'm sort
11 of apologising ahead of time for those natural
13 As far as an alibi defence is concerned, of
14 course I do need to see all of the documents and the
15 accusations, and if, in fact, there is testimony,
16 statements of witnesses, which place Mr. Galic at a
17 certain location that he disputes.
18 Generally, I can tell you that to interpose
19 an alibi defence for some two and a half years of
20 alleged activity is difficult for me to perceive doing,
21 but there may be some potential for some shorter period
22 of time. That's based, again, on looking at the
23 discoveries, I call them discovery materials.
24 The other question that you've asked me is
25 probably a bit more interesting, and I know that you've
1 made some interesting comments about the common law and
2 the civil law, criminal procedure, whether or not
3 defendants or the accused testify in their own trials.
4 You know that I come from a system which has
5 certain guarantees and the right to remain silent, and
6 all of that. We generally, again, do like to see all
7 of the discovery materials before we discuss with a
8 client whether or not he wants to testify. There are
9 some issues also in regard to the Statute and the Rules
10 and regulations in the present system, something called
11 the presumption of innocence and the right to remain
13 So I have to analyse that in light of what
14 you have just said, and if there is a practice here
15 that I feel I have to follow, and which is, of course,
16 the Court's practice. As such, I have to adapt or
17 modify my natural reactions.
18 So having said that, I can still tell you
19 this: That I find, again, from some theoretical and
20 practice pointers, that I certainly would not like to
21 have a client testify before all of the Prosecution
22 case is finished, and then I have to make a decision
23 whether he is the first or the last witness. There are
24 pluses in that regard in both ways. I will keep in
25 mind your comments and certainly tell you well ahead of
2 I also think, Judge or Judges, as I deal with
3 the Prosecutor in identifying the points of agreement
4 and the points of dispute, obviously if my client's
5 going to testify, he would be aware of all of those
6 facts, and therefore I wouldn't want to have a client
7 testify for three days or three months who is going to
8 say that he agrees with some aspects of what the
9 Prosecutor has already introduced.
10 So keeping that in mind, I think that we can
11 do that. I think that in this kind of a Tribunal, with
12 the issues that we're dealing with, with the
13 accusations that we're dealing with, I would imagine
14 that -- I shouldn't say "imagine"; that's a bad word.
15 I would predict that a client would probably testify,
16 or most likely.
17 I'm trying to be as complete and as clear
18 with you this afternoon.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
20 very much, Mr. Kostic.
21 As I gave the floor to Mr. Kostic for
22 accusation matters, I now give the floor to
23 Mr. Terrier.
24 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
25 I just have one comment to make about what Mr. Kostic
1 said and what you said. I do understand Mr. Kostic's
2 position today, in light of the fact that he does not
3 yet know what exhibits and evidence the Prosecution
5 I would say that if it were to be that the
6 accused and Defence counsel's position were to be that
7 General Galic were to testify at the start of the
8 trial, after the opening statements, I think that the
9 possibility should be reserved to the Prosecution to
10 cross-examine after the testimony has been finished,
11 because I don't think it would be good to cross-examine
12 right at the beginning, before other evidence had been
13 presented to the full Chamber of Judges. That's my
14 only concern. If Mr. Kostic wants his client to
15 testify or not, that's his right, and the Prosecution
16 will simply take note of that.
17 But if the Defence wants Mr. Galic to testify
18 at the beginning or the end, I think the Prosecution
19 has no preferences to make. --
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Thank you
21 very much, Mr. Terrier. I specifically would like to
22 thank you for having recalled to me that in practice,
23 it is true that the accused testified at the start of
24 the trial but that the Prosecutor has the
25 cross-examination after other evidence has been
1 presented, and that's as you have just said and I thank
2 you very much for that, Mr. Terrier.
3 I myself, at this point, have a question,
4 because I see that we have now been working for an hour
5 and a half, and my question is: Shall we take a break
6 and then come back and continue work a little bit, for
7 another 15 minutes, or should be go directly to the end
8 and we would only have to work for another 15 minutes
9 or so.
10 Yes, we can continue. We're all working
11 together, solidarity, you see, because we've all worked
12 all day long. We're all tired, and that's why I thank
14 All right. Let's now move to a more
15 interesting chapter, that is, the calendar.
16 The purpose of the calendar that I'm going to
17 propose to you is to determine the -- to set the
18 pre-trial management as quickly as possible, according
19 to the matters that we've discussed with you today,
20 giving the parties the time needed in order to prepare
21 themselves, so that we can set the temporal conditions
22 for discussing the various issues and the time it's
23 going to take for people to meet.
24 In order to reach those objectives -- that
25 is, the calendar is a bit tight because we want to
1 finish as quickly as we can. Several dates have as
2 their purpose giving to the parties, even physically
3 speaking, time that they can meet in order to discuss
4 things, so we have to have dates and locations, because
5 it isn't possible to reach an agreement or to not reach
6 an agreement if people can't discuss things with one
7 another. In order to do so, there must be time and
8 there must be a location to do so.
9 Therefore, in respect of the calendar, the
10 first point, we will consider a working period of about
11 one month and a half for each of the parties to study
12 everything that's been discussed and all the directions
13 that have been given. Each of the parties can work,
14 and among other things, the parties can exchange
15 information with one another. If we consider one and a
16 half months, there are then four dates for Status
17 Conferences: The 30th of May, the 1st of June, the 5th
18 of June, and the 8th of June.
19 The purpose of this is to see where we stand
20 and possibly to start discussions going again between
21 the parties and to find the points for which there is
22 agreement and for which there is not agreement; that
23 is, you have a month and a half in order to work on all
24 of those questions, even exchanging information. And
25 then you would have two weeks at the Tribunal and you
1 would come to the first Status Conference and say,
2 "We're here. We've reached this agreement" or "We
3 haven't reached this agreement," and then we could
4 discuss matters and perhaps we would find other
5 alternatives. The parties would work, come back with
6 results, then we would review those results, and then
7 we could go back to certain questions that have not
8 been resolved.
9 That's what I mean when I say that we need
10 time and space to discuss matters. The work would be
11 done between the parties and the Pre-Trial Judge.
12 The third point regarding the calendar is the
13 10th of July, that particular date, for filing any
14 motions of the Prosecution, preliminary motions or
15 anything of that kind, by the Prosecution.
16 On the 24th of July, that would be the date
17 on filing the preliminary motions with respect to the
18 Defence, Defence preliminary motions.
19 The 1st of September would be the date for a
20 Pre-Trial Conference; that is to say, the Pre-Trial
21 Conference, because we might need other days as well.
22 In order to conclude -- the 1st of September is a fixed
23 date. The Pre-Trial Judge would like to have
24 concluded, by that date, all the preliminary
25 proceedings, and of course the other dates can be
2 I'm telling you this now because I have
3 sketched out this calendar with one particular
4 objective, and that is that we should finish our work
5 by the 1st of September. I have formed the habit of
6 working in that way. We must have an objective for our
7 work. So let's put that deadline as the 1st of
8 September. Once we have that date, we can look at the
9 proceedings that have taken place, and that is the date
10 by which we should have finished all our work. So this
11 is our objective, the 1st of September. That is our
13 What is important for us at the moment is to
14 say that this particular date, the 1st of September, is
15 the date by which we should have concluded all the
16 preliminary proceedings and stand trial-ready. If the
17 Chamber -- whether the Trial Chamber can go ahead or
18 not, that's another question. But I would like to have
19 all preliminary matters decided by the 1st of
20 September. That is the deadline.
21 May I have your reactions now, please.
22 Mr. Terrier, what do you have to say to that
23 calendar and those dates?
24 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
25 I have a question I would like to ask. Of course I do
1 I understand the Trial Chamber today cannot set a date
2 for the beginning of the trial, but could you give us
3 an approximate period? About how much time could
4 elapse once pre-trial matters have been completed?
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes. What
6 I can say -- well, I don't know if I can say it in
7 public -- what I can say is that we are trying to find
8 a solution possibly to resolve matters in respect of
9 what we call a queuing system, that there would be
10 trials that are ready, having the availability of the
11 Trial Chamber to start that trial.
12 My strategy now, that is, the Chamber's
13 strategy, is to have the case trial-ready. If the
14 Chamber is going to take it, that's another issue. But
15 if we are going to take up the case, I must tell you
16 that it cannot begin before January of 2001, and that's
17 being very optimistic. As you know, the Chamber is
18 simultaneously hearing two cases, and it may be that,
19 for exceptional reasons, one case must be stopped --
20 one never knows -- and then we could begin with Galic
21 if the case is trial-ready.
22 Those are the two reasons why we need to have
23 this case trial-ready, because the Trial Chamber might
24 have the possibility of starting the case or another
25 Chamber might be in a position to do so. These are the
2 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
3 I have another question to ask, which is connected with
4 the calendar.
5 As I was saying, we are going to define which
6 of the witnesses we believe could help justice through
7 61 hearings. It is not indicated under 61 -- or 71,
8 excuse me. It could be during the parallel judgements
9 or it could also be during the pre-trial phase, under
10 Rule 71. But in any case, nothing is contraindicative
11 that in Rule 71 -- but I was wondering whether this
12 trial, with the full bench of Judges, if it were to
13 begin, wouldn't it be possible that the Chamber could
14 decide, without waiting for that date, that time
15 period, and that as part of pre-trial management,
16 witnesses could be heard by one of the Trial Chamber's
17 Judges or a Presiding Officer before that time, as part
18 of the pre-trial phase.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Yes, I
20 think that's a possibility that we could consider,
21 although I myself -- I'm speaking for myself now -- I
22 would prefer to have the trial begin, and then at the
23 period where the Prosecution makes its case, to have
24 those witnesses called in to testify before Presiding
25 Officers, and the same thing would be for the Defence.
1 Once the exculpatory evidence has been presented, at
2 the same time we could have depositions through a
3 Presiding Officer.
4 But I think that can be discussed, and even
5 the parties could provide some thoughts about that. I
6 don't know what my colleagues' feelings are about that,
7 but we are open to that possibility. That's what I can
8 say now. Thank you.
9 Mr. Kostic, does this calendar suit you? We
10 know that you have many commitments and I know that at
11 least on two occasions we had to postpone Status
12 Conferences. We would very much like you to have the
13 chance to plan things, to programme your schedule,
14 because schedules are important so that people know
15 what they have to do. It's not a programme for the
16 Defence or for Mr. Kostic, but rather one which helps
17 us all to do our work properly.
18 Do you have any comments to make, or any
19 objections you would like to raise, Mr. Kostic?
20 MR. KOSTIC: As far as the date that you have
21 mentioned, which is June 8th as another Status
22 Conference, that is a date that is something that is
23 within my calendar; it's open. So that's a date that's
24 a good date.
25 As far as the case in general, in terms of
1 your expectations, it's very hard for me to give you an
3 As far as the September 1 date, I suppose
4 some of it depends on how extensive the discovery
5 materials are and the witnesses, the number of witness
6 statements that we would get, and so on.
7 If you're asking me for an opinion -- and
8 Judges usually don't, you know, in regard to scheduling
9 and so on; they have their own work and their own cases
10 to handle -- I would suggest that we would need an
11 extra 30 days, looking at this particular case, just
12 from what we've talked about today and what I know
13 about it so far, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I would
15 like to take advantage of what Mr. Kostic has just
16 said. This is a Chamber which exercises its authority
17 but not in an authoritarian manner. We always ask for
18 the opinion of the parties.
19 Likewise, in the way that I answered
20 Mr. Terrier, I would like to say that the calendar is
21 an instrument, is a working tool, and we are
22 available -- I'm speaking for myself as the Pre-Trial
23 Judge -- available to review the calendar if it's
24 necessary. I do prefer to stick to that calendar, that
25 is, the 1st of September. And once Mr. Kostic is in a
1 position to conclude that he really needs additional
2 time -- because I believe, Mr. Kostic, that perhaps
3 you're going to need time after the presentation of
4 exculpatory evidence by the Prosecutor -- if Mr. Kostic
5 or if Mr. Franck Terrier meet and agree that this
6 calendar is not good and has to be changed, then we
7 will. The parties merely have to indicate this to the
8 Pre-Trial Judge.
9 All right. We'll stay with that programme,
10 which has objectives for our work. But it's a working
11 instrument. We are not slaves to a programme; the
12 programme should be used to serve us. If it doesn't,
13 then we've got to change it, it's got to be discussed.
14 But I think for the time being we've got to have a
15 working plan, and this is what I want to leave in the
16 parties' hands.
17 Let me move now to the final chapter so that
18 we can really end our work. The interpreters are still
19 alive, I hope. Yes.
20 And now it's the issue of other questions.
21 Are there any other questions to be raised by the
22 parties, questions which we have not dealt with under
23 the points already discussed? Or is that all for the
24 time being?
25 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
1 very briefly.
2 Within the time period that you said at the
3 beginning of this hearing, we will disclose to the
4 Defence, and of course to the Trial Chamber, the case
5 files which were constituted for each of the incidents
6 mentioned in the indictment.
7 What we are requesting from the Trial Chamber
8 as an order -- but we intend to speak about this with
9 Mr. Kostic once this hearing is over; we're going to
10 have a discussion with him -- is, in a very traditional
11 way, to order protective measures for witnesses,
12 protective measures which are ordinarily the
13 prohibition for all parties to disclose these documents
14 to the press. The Chamber is very aware of those
16 In order to save some time, would the Trial
17 Chamber like us to make the request orally, and then we
18 can do it today? Or would the Trial Chamber prefer to
19 rule on the basis of a written submission? I put
20 myself in your hands for that decision.
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
23 Mr. Terrier, I think perhaps you could develop it now
24 orally, and then I can see with my colleagues whether
25 or not we're going to deal with the issue orally or if
1 it needs to be in writing.
2 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
3 the Prosecution's concern is the following: We're
4 going to disclose to the Defence a certain number of
5 witness statements as part of the case files on the
6 incidents that I have already spoken about and as part
7 of the general obligation for disclosure, provided for
8 under Rule 66.
9 What we would like, and of course I'm not
10 criticising the Defence in any way, but in all cases
11 which have been dealt with in this Tribunal, I believe,
12 or at least most of them, it must be clearly indicated
13 by the Judges that the Defence must not disclose to
14 third parties who are not authorised to communicate
15 those witness statements, or to the media. And it
16 should be made clear that if the Defence intends to
17 contact some of the witnesses whose names we have
18 identified to it, it not -- if necessary, the Trial
19 Chamber -- the witnesses, they should be so informed in
20 advance so that the witnesses, if necessary, would be
21 defended by somebody from the OTP, and that would be a
22 reciprocal arrangement; so that when we are given names
23 by the Defence, we would not be in contact with those
24 witnesses unless we have first notified that we are
25 doing so to the Defence. These are classical,
1 traditional measures that the Tribunal has already
2 granted in other cases.
3 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Kostic,
4 do you have any objections to that request, the request
5 that the Prosecutor has just made, or do you agree?
6 MR. KOSTIC: I'm not sure if I'm clear on
7 what he's asking for.
8 I understand that if witness statements and
9 names are given to the Defence that the Defence would
10 not give the same to the press. I don't have a problem
11 with that, if that's what he's asking. I find it a
12 little unusual, because they choose to have a Rule 61
13 in open hearing, where the whole world, including the
14 media, listen to these witnesses. But nevertheless, I
15 certainly can live with an order which would not give
16 those statements or the names of those witnesses to the
17 press. So if that's what he's asking for, I don't have
18 a problem.
19 As far as contacting those witnesses, I'm not
20 sure what -- and maybe I'm not picking up the
21 interpretation well enough. I oftentimes like to have
22 an investigator, or personally with an investigator, to
23 speak to a perspective witness, if that witness would
24 speak to me, obviously. It's their choice, I guess.
25 And if they would like to know ahead of time that I
1 wish to speak with that witness, I don't have that
3 So I'm not sure if I've covered everything
4 that they want, but that's my view.
5 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
6 Mr. Terrier, do you want to say something?
7 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Well, I want to
8 explain the Prosecution's position to Mr. Kostic.
9 What we want are three things, I'll be very
10 brief, and I'm going to add a fourth.
11 First, the Defence must not disclose to third
12 parties, who are not authorised -- that is, individuals
13 who are not part of the Defence team, who are not
14 counsel, chosen by General Galic, who are not
15 investigators chosen by the Defence team -- the names
16 of the witnesses, the addresses of the witnesses, or
17 the substance of their statements. This must remain
18 within the Defence team, only among those people who
19 are authorised to defend the accused General Galic.
20 That was the first measure.
21 The second is that we want the Defence not to
22 disclose to the media the names, addresses of the
23 witnesses, and the substance of their statements. And
24 Mr. Kostic said that that did not present any problems
25 to him.
1 The third measure that we're asking for is
2 that the Defence not be in contact with any witness
3 which is designated by the Prosecution without our
4 being first informed of that step; so that we, if
5 necessary, if that's the witness' wish, can be present
6 at the meeting. That measure, of course, is a
7 reciprocal one.
8 The final measure, perhaps this is just a
9 recall, is that were it to happen that Mr. Kostic or
10 another counsel were to withdraw from the Defence of
11 General Galic, a time period be allowed so that the
12 documents given to him be given back to the
13 Prosecution. I think that's a basic issue.
14 These are the three or four measures that we
15 are asking the Tribunal to order.
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Mr. Kostic,
17 have you understood?
18 MR. KOSTIC: I think Mr. Terrier --
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
20 MR. KOSTIC: Mr. Terrier talked about four
21 requests. I don't have a problem -- I think we can
22 certainly honour the first, the second, and the third.
23 In regard to the fourth, I think that my
24 duty, at least under the canons of ethics under which I
25 practise, that if I withdraw from a case, the file goes
1 to my successor, as opposed to the Prosecution. So I'm
2 telling the Court that that is a potential issue, and I
3 think that I certainly have no problem turning the file
4 over to my successor. So that's not a problem.
5 With that modification, I do not have a
6 problem with the requests of Mr. Terrier.
7 [Trial Chamber deliberates]
8 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation]
9 Fortunately, the Chamber is here, the full Chamber, and
10 the decision is to grant the request of the Prosecution
11 so that we can move quickly in respect of the
12 documents, but the Chamber -- well, this is an oral
13 decision, and the general terms are that we are going
14 to grant the request of the Prosecutor. But so that
15 things remain very clear, we are going to rendered a
16 written decision. So as regards the objective of
17 starting our work, you have the decision, and
18 subsequently we will rendered a written decision.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Judge Wald
21 has just drawn my attention to a particular aspect.
22 Mr. Kostic did not agree on the point of the request
23 having to do with giving back the documents to the
24 Prosecutor, but felt that they should be given back to
25 his successor.
1 I don't know whether Mr. Terrier wants to say
2 anything about that.
3 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Mr. President,
4 I would go back to what you have just said. It seems
5 to me that it might be more in compliance with the
6 Rules, in light of our disclosure obligations, for
7 Mr. Kostic, if that were to happen -- perhaps it won't
8 happen -- that he were to give us back the documents
9 and we would give them to his successor. If the
10 Chamber prefers that -- well, I know that the legal
11 practice in many countries is different. But if the
12 Chamber wants us to proceed differently, we will do
13 so. I simply rely on the discretion of the Trial
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I think
17 that we all agree on the first three points, and that's
18 been decided.
19 I believe that I understood the Prosecutor to
20 say that there would be a meeting with Mr. Kostic.
21 Perhaps you can discuss that issue and inform us of the
22 results of your discussion. Since this is something
23 which is not going to happen right now, and we hope
24 that it won't ever happen, from the point of view of
25 the practicality of the decision, you already have it
1 in oral form which allows you to work in order to
2 provide the documents. You're going to meet with
3 Mr. Kostic and you will give to us the results, even
4 through Mr. Olivier Fourmy, and you could sign the same
5 piece of paper, after which, in the written decision,
6 we will consider what you've said to us. Do you all
8 Mr. Kostic, is that agreeable to you.
9 MR. KOSTIC: Yes, sir.
10 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] Yes,
11 Mr. President.
12 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Those were
13 the questions that you wanted to raise.
14 I don't know whether Mr. Kostic wants to
15 raise anything else that was not on the agenda. Are
16 there any points that we have not yet dealt with?
17 MR. KOSTIC: Your Honour, the only thing that
18 I want to go back to, and only very briefly, because I
19 think the Prosecutor might have misunderstood me, has
20 to do with the issue of whether or not Mr. Galic would
21 testify and when. I think he was under the impression
22 that I may choose to have Mr. Galic -- perhaps, as one
23 of the options -- to have him testify in the beginning
24 or right after the opening statements. I think that he
25 misunderstood me, maybe.
1 What I said is he would either testify at the
2 beginning of the Defence case or at the end of the
3 Defence case, not before the Prosecution case. So I
4 just wanted to clarify that for the Prosecutor because
5 I thought maybe he misunderstood me.
6 Other than that, Your Honour, I have no other
7 questions or requests.
8 MR. TERRIER: [Interpretation] I understood
9 that, but I thought he might change his opinion during
10 the trial.
11 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] All right.
12 It's clear now, that is, Mr. Kostic's position is
13 clear. But of course Mr. Kostic can change his mind.
14 We've got a lot of time yet before the trial begins,
15 and this is something that Mr. Kostic will discuss with
16 General Galic.
17 Let me now turn to the last point on the
18 agenda, after a very long day. I turn to General
20 Would you rise, please, General Galic
21 [The accused stands]
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] I give you
23 the opportunity to speak to us about your detention
24 conditions and your medical condition.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I
1 wish to thank you for having given me some time today
2 as well to say a few words.
3 First of all, the condition of my health is
4 somewhat better than it was before. My leg is my
5 greatest problem, the one that was hurt during my
6 arrest. I'm working with a physical therapist now, and
7 whether we will succeed or not, that is to be seen. As
8 for the rest of my health problems, they are getting
9 better, more or less.
10 As far as the detention conditions are
11 concerned, they are quite fair. I think that the
12 transfer to this other building created a few problems,
13 but that's being worked out with the management.
14 However, there is another problem that should
15 be resolved as quickly as possible. We haven't got a
16 single TV programme in our language, and you know what
17 the situation is like. So I would appreciate it very
18 much if you could do something about this.
19 Mr. McFadden, the warden, has made every effort
20 conceivable. But this is one of the things that I
21 wished to draw your attention to.
22 As for the rest, in my opinion and judging by
23 everything I can see, I think that everything seems to
24 be all right, and I thank you.
25 However, with your permission, I would just
1 like to raise another question that has been tormenting
2 me, so to speak, and you have not raised it. Thank
4 I'm a bit concerned about this treatment of
5 my Defence, I mean, the status of Mr. Kostic. It's
6 been four months now. All of this is provisional; all
7 of this is temporary. He is on his own; he does not
8 have a team. I've been retired since 1994, so that is
9 my situation, I'm a retiree. And if he is my only
10 defence counsel, I must say that this has led me to
11 think about certain things that I would not like to
12 dwell on for very long here today.
13 That is this additional point that I wish to
14 make which causes great concern to me. After all, it
15 worries me more than anything else. Because what is
16 the point of all of this trial if I don't have a
17 Defence? Then I can just remain silent if I don't have
18 a proper Defence. Thank you.
19 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] You may be
21 [The accused sits down]
22 JUDGE RODRIGUES: [Interpretation] Madam
23 Registrar please take note of these comments and
24 transmit them to Madam Registrar.
25 I do hope that your leg continues to heal.
1 Very well. We have now reached the end of
2 the Status Conference, because I think we have really
3 reached the beginning of the work.
4 I thank everybody, specifically the
5 interpreters. As I said, we worked together all day
6 long, and we'll be seeing one another again tomorrow.
7 If somebody says that we don't work, I think we can
8 show that we do.
9 I wish the parties success in their work, and
10 if there are any questions, they should be raised, and
11 you can always contact me or Mr. Fourmy for any
12 questions that you might have. The Pre-Trial Judge may
13 even have meetings outside of this calendar, and even
14 in his own office. So he remains available, but things
15 have to be organised, because I spend more time in
16 court than, of course, I do in my office, and it would
17 be difficult for us to meet.
18 Continue your work, and I wish you all a good
20 --- Whereupon the Status Conference
21 adjourned at 6.10 p.m.