1 Monday, 19 April 2004
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Madam Registrar, will you call
6 the case, please.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. Good afternoon, Your Honours.
8 This is the case number, IT-01-47-T, the Prosecutor versus Hadzihasanovic
9 and Kubura.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 Can we have the appearances for the Prosecution, please.
12 MR. WITHOPF: Good afternoon, Mr. President. Good afternoon,
13 Your Honours. Good afternoon, Counsel. For the Prosecution, Chester
14 Stamp, Ekkehard Withopf, and the case manager, Ruth Karper.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Withopf.
16 Can we have the appearances for the Defence, please.
17 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. President.
18 Good afternoon, Your Honours. Appearing on behalf of General Enver
19 Hadzihasanovic, Edina Residovic, lead counsel; Stephane Bourgon,
20 co-counsel; and Mirna Milanovic, legal assistant. Thank you.
21 MR. IBRISIMOVIC: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours.
22 Appearing on behalf of Mr. Kubura, Rodney Dixon, Fahrudin Ibrisimovic,
23 and Nermin Mulalic, legal assistant.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. The Chamber wishes
25 to greet all those present, representatives of the Prosecution, the
1 Defence counsel, the accused, as well as all the staff of this courtroom,
2 bearing especially in mind the interpreters.
3 We are resuming our hearings after several days' break, prior to
4 which we had three months of continuous hearings of witnesses. So after
5 a few days' break, we are resuming our work today.
6 I have been informed of a problem linked to the communication of
7 documents. And due to this, the witness planned for today cannot be
8 usefully heard. The Defence has been informed, and they have conveyed
9 their inability to proceed with the cross-examination. We have been
10 provided with a written motion. The the Prosecution has also responded
11 in writing, telling us that the request of the Defence meets with no
12 objection on their part. Under those conditions, the witness planned
13 will not be heard today. His testimony will be postponed to a later
15 The Chamber takes note of this problem, of course, and by an oral
16 ruling we grant the request, as well as the remarks made by the
17 Prosecution, who will delay the hearing of the witness to a later date.
18 I would like to know whether the problems raised in the motion
19 are still outstanding or are they about to be resolved.
20 Mr. Withopf, could you inform the Chamber about the difficulties
21 encountered by the Defence.
22 MR. WITHOPF: Mr. President, Your Honours, first I refer to the
23 filings you already mentioned in which the situation has been explained
24 to some extent.
25 The situation is as follows: Defence has been made available the
1 more than 2.200 documents stemming from ECMM last Thursday afternoon, and
2 Defence have been informed last Thursday afternoon that the documents are
3 available on the EDS, what's the electronic disclosure system. The EDS
4 is an Internet-based electronic disclosure system for digital material.
5 Using the EDS, the material can be securely searched, reviewed,
6 downloaded, and if necessary it can also be printed.
7 There are a number, a pretty high number of advantages in using
8 the EDS instead of providing Defence with CDs containing such materials,
9 and the advantages are as follows: EDS provides a greatly improved
10 search efficiency; the materials can be searched at once. If you get
11 CDs, you can obviously only search one CD after the other. Using the
12 EDS, it's simpler to track down what materials have been provided.
13 There's no data storage requirement for the Defence. The materials in
14 using EDS are available from any Internet-capable machine from everywhere
15 in the world. And most importantly, EDS is about 60 per cent faster than
16 any other search tool.
17 That means providing the materials in using EDS gave the Defence
18 the opportunity to search the materials as quick as possible, and it was
19 certainly provided early on, in comparison to the Prosecution printing
20 out about 10.000 or so pages of documents and to get it burned on CDs
21 would have taken at the very least the same time as loading the materials
22 into the EDS.
23 That means the materials are available to Defence since last
24 Thursday afternoon. They can search the materials since last Thursday
25 afternoon. The Prosecution understands that the today's witness had to
1 be cancelled but the Prosecution is of the view that all other witnesses
2 scheduled for the next two weeks should be heard as they are scheduled.
3 Thank you very much.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Withopf.
5 I turn now to Defence counsel for them to inform us of problems,
6 if any. According to my understanding, via the Internet it is possible
7 to gain access to the memory of the EDS system and through a code of
8 access which the Defence must have, the Defence can automatically have
9 access to those documents. And thanks to the search engine, by resorting
10 to the EDS system the Defence may have a list of all the documents
11 relating to a particular problem which is in the EDS memory; which means
12 that from any town anywhere, thanks to a computer or a telephone, one can
13 gain access to those documents and they can even be printed out if one
14 has a portable printer. So this allows the Defence counsel to work under
15 the best conditions, noting also that the search engine is very powerful
16 and is 60 per cent speedier than the CD-ROM system.
17 But as the Defence was informed about all this last Thursday, it
18 was impossible for them to prepare for today's witness. So I turn to the
19 Defence to hear their observations, if any. Mr. Bourgon.
20 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good
21 afternoon, Mr. President. In response to the matters raised by the
22 Chamber regarding the disclosure of documents coming from the ECMM, the
23 Defence would like to convey the following explanations: First of all,
24 Mr. President, the technical advantages of the EDS system that was put in
25 place almost six months ago are fully acknowledged by the Defence. It is
1 a system which in the medium term will certainly be effective and will
2 allow the Defence team to work more efficiently.
3 Having said that, however, Mr. President, there's a problem of
4 training in the use of this system. When the system was put in place
5 some six months ago - I don't have the exact date - it was accompanied by
6 a directive coming from the Tribunal regarding the use of this system.
7 Regarding the accused that I represent and for the accused Kubura, we
8 never use that system because when it was put in place, the disclosure of
9 documents was virtually completed and so the Prosecution did not resort
10 to this system earlier on in the disclosure of documents. Therefore, one
11 must have a code which we have to obtain here in The Hague which cannot
12 be obtained by telephone, fax or Internet. I obtained this code or
13 password the moment I was informed by the Prosecution that the EDS system
14 would be used, and I obtained this tool on Thursday, the 8th of April,
15 that is, the access code. And we immediately contacted informatics
16 experts, people who know much more than I do, and my knowledge is already
17 more advanced than some other people in the Defence team, and these
18 technicians immediately drew attention to certain problems in the use of
19 this system. So we engaged a person that we remunerated for this purpose
20 to help us in the use of this system more effectively and more
22 With our legal assistants and this person that we have hired for
23 this purpose and with the aid of the Tribunal, we have achieved excellent
24 cooperation and identified several problems regarding the use of this
25 system, problems that were resolved last week, that is on Thursday and
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Friday. However, from the standpoint of training personally, I am still
2 not capable of using this system, but it has to be someone else within
3 the Defence team.
4 Having said that, Mr. President, all the documents were put on
5 this system, the EDS system, at the end of the day Thursday. We
6 immediately tried to identify documents to burn them on a CD-ROM to be
7 able to use them, and to print them. This effort was completed Sunday
8 afternoon, that is, at the end of the afternoon yesterday; two people
9 worked full time from Thursday afternoon until Sunday afternoon.
10 Therefore, we are in possession of those documents only since yesterday
11 evening. There are more than 2.000 documents consisting of more than
12 8.000 pages.
13 I have already discussed the situation with my colleague from the
14 Prosecution, and he told me, "Why did you print those documents? You
15 could just search the system for them." There are two reasons for this,
16 Mr. President, the first being the question of training. But a more
17 important question is that an Internet system is not available to the
18 accused, who insist on seeing those documents. Therefore, we have to
19 print those documents. Furthermore, all these documents are in English,
20 and even to show them the most important ones it takes a lot of time to
21 go to the Detention Centre with an interpreter and to go through those
22 documents with the accused.
23 That is why, Mr. President, despite our full and positive
24 appreciation -- actually, we feel it's exaggerated to say that two days
25 was sufficient for us to acquaint ourselves with the document -- we have
1 to tell you today that we need a little more time - not much, but more -
2 to be ready to conduct the cross-examination of some witnesses.
3 In this connection, I would like to underline that my learned
4 friend from the Prosecution has really made a great effort when he
5 communicated to us the timetable for the witnesses for the next two
6 weeks, and my learned friend also identified some documents that may be
7 used by the Prosecution during the examination-in-chief. This certainly
8 facilitates our work, Mr. President, and we are very grateful for this
9 effort made by the Prosecution.
10 Nonetheless, when preparing the cross-examination, Mr. President,
11 it's not simply to challenge the documents produced by the Prosecution,
12 but to find within those 8 to 10 thousand pages documents that might be
13 used to properly represent and defend the interests of the two accused
14 before you at this trial. So it's much more than simply responding to
15 these documents that may be used by the Prosecution.
16 Having said all that, we are able to inform you regarding the
17 schedule proposed by the Prosecution. The witness planned for Tuesday,
18 the 20th of April - I won't mention the name, because we are not in
19 private session - but the witness planned for Tuesday is a local witness,
20 and therefore there's absolutely no problem in proceeding with that
21 witness. The witness planned for Wednesday, the 21st of April is a
22 witness coming from the UNPROFOR mission, and again with him -- with
23 regard to that witness, there's no problem.
24 I go on to Monday, the 26th of April. The witness planned for
25 that date is also a witness from the UN Protection Force, and we have no
1 difficulties in proceeding with that witness.
2 However, Mr. President, for the three other witnesses planned for
3 Thursday, the 22nd of April, Friday, the 23rd of April, and Thursday, the
4 23rd of April [as interpreted], we could cross-examine those witnesses
5 the following week. And so as not to waste any time, we suggest that we
6 take the dates planned for a discussion on the admissibility of documents
7 and to have that discussion this week. That would be the simplest
8 solution. But I understand that that could cause problems for my learned
9 friend regarding the dates planned for these witnesses. We have two
10 other solutions: The witness planned for Monday who is living in Great
11 Britain, perhaps we could have him heard this week.
12 In brief, we can proceed with the two witnesses, that is, the
13 witnesses for Thursday and Friday. We could do the same as we did for
14 Sir Martin Garrod, that is, have the examination-in-chief and then delay
15 the cross-examination. It is not the best solution. It may be the least
16 useful one for the Chamber and the Defence, but we are ready for every
17 compromise, the requirement being to have some additional time to be able
18 to review those 8 to 10 thousand pages of documents to be ready for the
20 In closing, Mr. President, I have to say in connection with the
21 Monitoring Mission documents, that as you know, Mr. President, this is a
22 situation that dates back to years. On multiple occasions we tried to
23 have those documents being disclosed to the Defence earlier on. However,
24 we are facing a difficult situation. We understand that there are many
25 reasons for this. But because those documents were given to us at the
1 last moment, we cannot jeopardise the rights of the accused. We have to
2 have enough time to fully grasp the gist of those documents.
3 Also, the witness planned for Friday of this week - the name of
4 that witness I think we can mention it, as he is not a protected
5 witness - it is Torbjorn Junhov. Regarding this witness, the witness has
6 a statement that has been disclosed to us from the 10th of October, 1997,
7 and in that statement the witness mentions 35 documents which were given
8 to the Prosecution when giving that statement. In a letter we requested
9 the disclosure of those documents pursuant to Rule 66(A)(ii). We didn't
10 receive those documents by January 2004, and we once again sent this list
11 to the Prosecution. But this time it wasn't in a letter but simply by
12 hand. And then in April, that is, on the 7th of April, we underlined
13 once again to the Prosecution that we still hadn't received the 35
14 documents that were mentioned in the statement of this witness. To this
15 day we still haven't received those documents.
16 Yesterday evening, having in our possession the ECMM documents,
17 we tried to find those 35 documents because some of them belonged to that
18 collection and we did a search on the EDS system and we found five
19 documents out of the 35. For the others, they are not ECMM documents,
20 but we still do not have them in our possession.
21 On the 15th of April, we received documents that may be used
22 during the examination-in-chief of this witness by the Prosecution.
23 Among those documents there are two that are on the list for the witness
24 Junhov. Those two documents are not in our possession and we were unable
25 to find them among the 2.200-something ECMM documents nor among the
1 documents we received from the Sarajevo collection or among the other
2 documents disclosed to us earlier on. For all these reasons,
3 Mr. President, we would request respectfully a rearrangement of the
4 schedule. We do not wish to waste a single day of hearing. We are ready
5 for every compromise, simply to have some additional time to review those
6 documents. Thank you, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Bourgon.
8 Do the other Defence counsel wish to comment? Mr. Dixon.
9 MR. DIXON: Thank you, Your Honours. As Mr. Bourgon has
10 indicated, this is a joint application on behalf of both accused. The
11 Defence team for Mr. Kubura is in a similar situation where, as a result
12 of the sheer volume of documents which we have to review, we do need
13 extra time in order to prepare for the cross-examination of these
14 witnesses, not because the Prosecution necessarily will rely on all of
15 those documents but because it is critical to our cross-examination in
16 order to present a full and proper defence. Thank you, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 Mr. Withopf, the Defence raises two important points. The
19 simplest one has to do with witness Junhov, who mentions 35 documents in
20 his written statement, and the Defence hasn't obtained those documents to
21 this day. They looked for them. They traced some, but a large number
22 are still missing. Therefore, this is a very specific problem, and it
23 would be normal for the Prosecution to be able to provide to the Defence
24 the missing documents before the hearing of that witness. That is the
25 first problem, which seems to me can be easily resolved.
1 The second problem is linked to the cross-examination by the
2 Defence upon reviewing the documents in the EDS system, and in this
3 connection the Defence is suggesting modifications in the order of the
4 witnesses and they have suggested several possibilities: One, which
5 would be supported by the Chamber of course, would be that the hearings
6 for the 27th and 28th planned for the admission of documents could be
7 held this week instead and two witnesses could be postponed to those
8 dates, which would allow the Defence to prepare properly.
9 It is now up to the Prosecution to tell us now, having learnt of
10 the objections of the Defence, what they could do with regard to the
11 problems linked to the access of these documents.
12 I wish to underline - and the Defence is quite right in that
13 respect - that if there are documents which are in English, they need to
14 have to translate them for the accused, that the accused have to convey
15 their opinion in their own language, and all this takes time. That is
16 quite obvious.
17 Mr. Withopf.
18 MR. WITHOPF: Let me briefly respond to the lengthy speech of my
19 learned colleague. I myself was given a presentation on the EDS system
20 last Friday. The EDS system is a pretty straightforward situation, and
21 it took me 45 minutes to understand it. That's as simple as it is.
22 In respect to the witnesses --
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Withopf, maybe you need 45
24 minutes, but maybe Defence counsel needs five times more. Maybe they're
25 not as skilled in computer technology as you are. So the Chamber is not
1 here to judge the abilities of either party. You tell us that you were
2 able to resolve the problem in 45 minutes. Perhaps Mr. Bourgon needs
3 five times more. But the Chamber cannot be a judge of the abilities of
4 the two parties regarding the understanding of this system, even though
5 there are -- one side may be more numerous than the other. But never
6 mind. Please continue.
7 MR. WITHOPF: If I may refer to Rule 68(B), Mr. President.
8 Rule 68(B) says that disclosure can be done in electronic format, and the
9 disclosure is done on the day the other party has been provided the
10 electronic copies of such documents. So I certainly oppose any
11 suggestion that the materials were only be made available today. They
12 were made available on Thursday last week.
13 The other observations in respect to the scheduling: I
14 understand that the witness for tomorrow shouldn't be a problem. I
15 understand that the witness who is scheduled for Wednesday shouldn't be a
16 problem. The witness who is scheduled for Thursday, I don't understand
17 the Defence request, but the witness who is scheduled for Thursday is not
18 an ECMM witness. This witness is a BritBat witness, and we heard a
19 number of BritBat witnesses without the Defence raising any objections.
20 So I certainly would oppose any suggestion to reschedule the witness who
21 is scheduled for Thursday this week.
22 The witness whose name has already been mentioned - namely,
23 Mr. Torbjorn Junhov - he is quite correctly an ECMM witness. In respect
24 to the documents, I can inform the Trial Chamber that they will certainly
25 be provided in time.
1 The witness who is scheduled for Monday, for today in a week, is
2 again a BritBat witness. And there's only one further ECMM witness next
4 Unfortunately - and I have explained this repeatedly - we are
5 talking about witnesses in pretty high positions. It is for a number of
6 obvious reasons not possible to let them come for examination-in-chief
7 and then tell them, "You have to come at whatever later point whenever
8 it's suitable again for the cross-examination." These witnesses are, in
9 their majority, army officers, still-serving army officers, dispersed all
10 over the world. And I'm not only talking about the costs which are
11 involved. It's just pretty difficult to schedule such witnesses on very
12 short notice.
13 The Prosecution, as repeatedly clarified, understands the
14 situation of the Defence, but it wishes to make the Defence and the
15 Chamber aware of the fact that rescheduling such witnesses will end up in
16 a very difficult situation in terms of the schedule as such, since it
17 would basically mess up the schedule for the next two weeks. And it will
18 certainly result in a situation as today, that there won't be witnesses
20 Therefore, the Prosecution certainly opposes rescheduling the
21 witness who is scheduled for Thursday this week, and I don't see any
22 problem why the witness who is scheduled for Thursday next week - that
23 means about 10 to 11 days from today - why he shouldn't be heard on
24 Thursday next week and also be cross-examined on Thursday next week.
25 Thank you very much, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I will give the floor to
2 Mr. Bourgon in a minute.
3 Regarding the witness for Wednesday, you are telling us that
4 there's no problem.
5 Mr. Bourgon, you heard the remarks by the Prosecution regarding
6 the witness for Thursday and next Monday who are from the British
7 Battalion, and therefore indeed there is no special need to link their
8 testimony with the EDS documents.
9 Regarding the witness for Thursday, the 28th of April, you have
10 more than ten days to prepare for him, so in the opinion of the
11 Prosecution it would be possible to hear this witness on the 29th of
13 Regarding witness Junhov, the Prosecution promises to give you
14 the documents.
15 Mr. Bourgon, what do you have to say?
16 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Very
17 quickly. Regarding Morsink for the 29th of April, there's no problem.
18 That's what I said. All we wanted was for that witness to be next week.
19 So there's no problem hearing Morsink on the 29th of April.
20 Regarding witness Chambers, he is not a BritBat witness, he's a
21 witness of the United Nations mission. He is a native of Great Britain.
22 He's a Briton. But he worked in the central command of the United
23 Nations in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This witness, Mr. President, he only
24 dealt with documents during his mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina. He had
25 access to all milinfosums. He had access to all the reports of the ECMM,
1 to the reports of each of the contingents. He collected those documents,
2 and he summarised them. Therefore, to prepare ourselves properly for the
3 cross-examination of this witness we believe that we need to consult all
4 the ECMM documents, and that is why his position is different from the
5 position of other witnesses. But we will be ready as of Monday. All we
6 are asking, Mr. President, is a couple of days.
7 Finally, for witness Junhov, this witness was planned for next
8 week anyway, so there shouldn't be any problem, as he was already planned
9 for the following week.
10 Regarding documents, my learned friend tells us that he will
11 provide them, but according to Rule 66(A)(ii) those documents are
12 normally disclosed at the very beginning. 66(A)(ii) says that a
13 statement of a witness who will be called, that statement is disclosed to
14 the Defence but it should be accompanied by all the documents given to
15 the Prosecution. And we have been waiting for those documents for a long
16 time. We don't need to mention the number of months.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 The advantage of this kind of adversarial system is to be able to
19 grasp fully the problem.
20 Regarding the witness for Thursday and Friday, the Defence tells
21 us that this witness in his mission with the UN had two roles: To
22 synthesise documents from the British Battalion, but also he had to
23 consult the reports of the European Monitors. Therefore, this witness is
24 not, contrary to what the Prosecution tells us, a BritBat witness but
25 someone whose duty was to deal with ECMM documents, which changes the
1 situation. And the Defence is suggesting that we postpone the hearing of
2 that witness to Monday, the 26th, which would allow the Defence to
3 prepare better for the cross-examination. And then the witness for
4 Monday, the 26th could then perhaps be moved to Friday, the 23rd, because
5 as he is from the British Battalion he may be able to do that or not - I
6 don't know - but from now until Friday you have several days to deal with
8 Mr. Withopf, regarding the witness Mr. Chambers for the 22nd and
9 23rd, you have taken note of the fact the Defence appears to link his
10 testimony to the documents of the ECMM and that, therefore, we have a
11 problem on our hands. If you stand by your position for Thursday, the
12 23rd [as interpreted], a solution could be for the examination-in-chief
13 to take place either on Thursday or on Friday and the cross-examination
14 would take place on Monday, the 26th. That also could be a possibility.
15 Mr. Withopf.
16 MR. WITHOPF: Again, Mr. President, Your Honours, at this point
17 in time I'm not in a position to inform you whether the witness Chambers,
18 who is a serving army officer, is in a position to stay over the weekend.
19 I will certainly make the respective inquiries.
20 In trying to reschedule the witness Hunter, we may face the very
21 same problem that the witness, for whatever special commitments, is not
22 in a position to come earlier on respective of the fact that the
23 Witnesses and Victims Unit needs five working days in advance to know in
24 the event witnesses have to be rescheduled.
25 The Prosecution will certainly make, as usual, all efforts to
1 accommodate the Defence wishes; however, I simultaneously wish to inform
2 both the Defence and the Trial Chamber that it may not be very likely
3 that these wishes can be accommodated, due to the fact that we are
4 talking about high-level British Army officers who may have other
5 commitments. But again, the Prosecution will make all efforts in order
6 to ensure a smooth running of the proceedings.
7 I also wish to raise the following issue: The Prosecution was
8 given till the 1st of June, 2004 to present its case. We meanwhile had a
9 number of days for which witnesses couldn't be heard for reasons the
10 Prosecution is not responsible for. I only wish to draw the attention of
11 the Trial Chamber already now to the fact that the Prosecution at some
12 point in time will certainly raise this issue in more in-depth, since
13 based on the today's oral motion it can already been foreseen that a
14 number of additional days cannot be used in the manner the Prosecution
15 wished and intended to use them. This is just an issue I wanted to raise
16 without going into more detail. Thank you very much.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Withopf, we understand you
18 will see whether it is possible for Mr. Chambers to remain the weekend
19 and whether Mr. Junhov could come the end of the week, Friday. So you
20 will let us know tomorrow, after tomorrow, what the possibilities are, as
21 you have already mentioned.
22 I would also like to inform the Prosecution that tomorrow's
23 witness -- about tomorrow's witness. You have a document where you say
24 that you expect to tender several documents. You have given references,
25 ERN references, but we haven't received the numbers of those documents in
1 comparison -- within the frameworks of your consolidated list. Could you
2 please indicate those documents, the numbers, compared to the
3 consolidated list, because you have not indicated them within the
4 frameworks of that list.
5 MR. WITHOPF: Unfortunately, I'm not in a position right now to
6 indicate the PT or PTW numbers; however, I understand the consolidated
7 exhibit list is available in electronic format. By just entering the
8 exhibit numbers into the list, they can be found within seconds. But I
9 certainly can provide the Trial Chamber with the PT and PTW numbers in
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you,
12 Mr. Withopf.
13 Well, has the Defence anything to raise at this point?
14 MR. BOURGON: [Interpretation] No observation.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Dixon.
16 MR. DIXON: Nothing further. Thank you, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Withopf, any further
19 MR. WITHOPF: No, not at this point in time. Thank you,
20 Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 I would like to adjourn for today. It was more or less a status
23 meeting. And I would like to invite you to come to the hearing tomorrow,
24 which is scheduled for 9.00 a.m.
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.03 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 20th day of
2 April, 2004, at 9.00 a.m.