1 Monday, 19 January 2009
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.16 p.m.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is the case
7 IT-95-5/18 -PT, The Prosecutor versus Radovan Karadzic.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Now good afternoon everyone.
9 Mr. Karadzic, do I take it that you today again intend to
10 represent yourself?
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your conclusion is absolutely
13 JUDGE BONOMY: I do that for two purposes: To make sure you can
14 hear my in a language you understand and also to make sure that
15 representation is made clear.
16 I want to deal with the status of a number of outstanding matters
17 before we get to anything that might be controversial.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I do understand you in my own
19 language. And I am at your disposal to ensure that this conference
20 proceeds smoothly.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
22 The first thing I want to mention is your application for
23 certification to appeal the decision on inspection and disclosure of
25 The Chamber has decided to grant that application, and the
1 written decision granting it will be filed this afternoon. I've just
2 signed it. It is here, and I will pass it forward so that arrangements
3 can made for that to be done.
4 The decision on that appeal could have a bearing on your motion
5 to interview a witness. You've submitted one motion relating to one
6 witness. And because the views of the Appeals Chamber may be of some
7 relevance to that issue, because you wish to interview the witness
8 particularly in relation to your preliminary point about jurisdiction and
9 the immunity undertaking you say you have, it seems to us that it would
10 be inappropriate for to us deal with that motion at this stage, and
11 therefore we will postpone consideration of that motion until your appeal
12 is dealt with. And therefore the sooner you tender, file the appeal and
13 get it resolved, the sooner we'll make progress on other matters.
14 You have made a motion challenging the decision of the registrar
15 in relation to your application for what you describe as adequate
16 facilities and equality of arms; in other words legal and investigatory
17 assistance. The Chamber has deliberated on that motion, and the decision
18 will probably be -- it certainly be filed this week. It will be probably
19 be filed tomorrow.
20 The longest outstanding matter so far is your original submission
21 about immunity which you combined with a reference to your first
22 appearance and which you filed on the 6th of August. It is not in the
23 form that you will now have been accustomed to as the form that is used
24 for filing documents here. And you have asked the Chamber to postpone
25 dealing with that until you can conclude your efforts to secure evidence
1 to support the motion.
2 Whatever happens here, today or in the next few weeks, you are
3 going to have an opportunity to challenge jurisdiction and to have a
4 decision taken on that at some point. It might be that your own
5 interests would be better served by withdrawing that application and
6 tendering another one, which might put the matter in more up-to-date
7 terms and set it out better for the purpose of advancing your argument.
8 I don't suggest you do that at the moment. It may be that you should
9 await the outcome of the appeal that will follow from the decision I
10 mentioned earlier. But you can take it that when you come to address
11 this issue, if it -- if indeed you come to address it ultimately, the
12 Chamber would be quite happy to accept a fresh submission rather than try
13 to use this one and amplify it in a way that doesn't necessarily explain
14 the case as clearly as you might otherwise do.
15 The next matter I wish to turn to is the question of the motion
16 to amend the indictment, and on that subject, I want to turn to the
17 Prosecution for clarification of certain issues before I hear your
18 submissions on that.
19 Now, can I have the appearances for the Prosecution, please.
20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, for the Prosecution senior
21 trial attorney Mr. Alan Tieger and myself, Hildegard Uertz-Retzlaff. And
22 I have stood up because I am the one dealing with disclosure issues, and
23 I thought that your question may relate to this.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes. Chamber notes that there was filed a notice
25 on the 14th of January stating that disclosure of material supporting the
1 motion to amend the indictment and the proposed amended indictment was
2 completed on the 14th of January.
3 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: That's correct, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: And that date is the one that triggers the time
5 that the accused has to respond to your motion.
6 Now, the period since the last Status Conference has been taken
7 up in this connection by the translation into B/C/S of a substantial
8 number of transcripts in English of proceedings in other cases.
9 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour, that's correct.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: What I'd like to know are two things. First of
11 all, how that material was actually disclosed to the accused; in other
12 words, was it done periodically during that period of weeks, or was it
13 done only when the whole exercise was concluded?
14 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Your Honour, we have disclosed the materials
15 in three batches. However all three batches were disclosed this month,
16 not in December because we will actually almost -- yeah, at times 20
17 language staff working on this, and we had to merge their results in
18 something useful for the accused. That's why we had three batches, one
19 on 7th January, one on the 12th of January, and one on the 14th.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Now in the overall context of the materials
21 supporting the motion and the proposed amended indictment, how
22 significant is this material?
23 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I assume you don't want to hear all the
24 details. I do have the schedule and the index, but what we can say in
25 the first batch that was about 1.900 pages. We have basically three
1 insider witnesses, materials, testimonies from three insiders amounting
2 to almost 1.000 pages. They are definitely very significant.
3 Then we have also in that first batch an overview witness for
4 Srebrenica. We have 14 crime-base witnesses and two witnesses who deal
5 with exhumations but the three insiders with the thousand pages are
6 definitely very significant.
7 In the second batch which is almost 2.000 pages, we have four
8 experts one military expert, two experts on historical and political
9 background and one expert dealing with destructions and their testimonies
10 in previous cases. That's also more than 1.000 pages. In addition in
11 this batch, there is one insider witness related to Srebrenica, and one
12 insider witness related to -- again to Srebrenica with structure
13 information and seven crime-base witnesses. And the third batch is only
14 roughly 700 pages. And again one insider but only 26 pages insider
15 Srebrenica, one insider related to structure of 80 pages, and one
16 military witness from the former JNA, and one international witness
17 related to hostage taking, and five crime-base witnesses. That is amount
18 that was provided as transcription of previous testimonies.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Do any of the experts that you referred to in the
20 second batch and the military witness in the third batch have a real
21 bearing on the issue of amendment of the indictment?
22 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I can't really answer that. Perhaps
23 Mr. Tieger can say that. I mean the military expert relates to the
24 Krajina, to the ARK, and that is not new. That is also in the first
1 The military expert -- the military witness that I just mentioned
2 in the third batch relates also to the previous cases related to the
3 Krajina. So it's also not a new -- a new project.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah.
5 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: None of them basically are. This one is
6 actually -- let me just check - even somewhat related to the original
7 indictment, the operating indictment.
8 So I can't really say that they have a bearing on the amendment.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: And going back then to the -- or going to the
10 question of insider witnesses and particularly the thousand pages or so
11 you referred to in the first batch, do they relate to new issues, or do
12 these also relate to issues which featured before?
13 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: These are actually witnesses that have
14 testified either in Krajisnik case or in the Srebrenica cases, so it's
15 also not -- not new. It is nothing related to the amendment.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. That was very helpful.
17 Now, Mr. Karadzic, in my view this is the most important issue in
18 the case at this stage. Progress has been hampered by the need to
19 translate such a vast volume of material, but we now have to determine a
20 time-scale for serious progress in the case.
21 Can I have any comments you wish to make in relation to the time
22 you consider you may require to adequately answer the motion to amend the
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
25 And I'd like to thank you especially for raising the question of
1 the rate, the tempo at which we're proceeding and the disclosure
2 procedure itself. I have received about 67 transcribed tapes from about
3 40 witnesses from about 30 cases. They have all been translated with the
4 exception of 23 tapes of some man called Theunens, those have not been
5 translated, and we're waiting fort translation to be finished.
6 However, the Defence will not be petty-minded in that respect,
7 and we will be in a position to respond on time for the request to amend
8 the indictment.
9 Now, what the Defence is more worried about is the vast material
10 which was not disclosed successively so that it can be studied one after
11 another, but it came in bulk sometime in the middle of this month, and
12 this will upset matters, and you felt that very well by the very fact
13 that you raised this issue yourself. But as a sign of goodwill, we're
14 not going to go into the fact that we need 23 Theunens tapes to be
15 translated, that we're still waiting for that. And I do believe that we
16 can respond to the request to amend the indictment within the time limit,
17 and I think that limit is the 28th of January.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Can you clarify the point about these
19 other tapes which I assume are not part of the supporting material.
20 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, you're right, Your Honour. This is
21 actually Rule 68(A)(ii), and it relates to a military expert. We have
22 provided the documentation as far as we have it, the reports and the
23 English transcripts. But for the production of the transcript in B/C/S,
24 that is not available yet.
25 So that is not related to the supporting material at all. And
1 bethought it's helpful for the accused to get materials for witnesses as
2 early as possible, even if the translations come -- the transcriptions
3 come later.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Karadzic, I'm grateful for explaining the
5 position so clearly and acknowledging your ability to deal with this by
6 responding by the 28th of January.
7 Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, or it may be Mr. Tieger to deal with this, I
8 don't know, but can you help me in -- from your experience of how
9 frequently the Prosecution appeared to you to seek to reply to responses
10 to motions to amend indictments?
11 MR. TIEGER: I'm certainly prepared to defer to
12 Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff on this Your Honour, but no, I couldn't claim to have
13 any handle on the frequency of that response.
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Can you help any further or ...
15 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: I -- I can't really answer that. I mean, we
16 always try to respond as soon as possible. We do not -- in most cases we
17 never use the 14 days that we usually have for responses, and therefore
18 we can deal it as fast as possible. It's hard to say in such an
19 important matter. Sometimes it is an important matter, then we may need
20 the 14 days; otherwise, not.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah. Well, I think in a situation like this, 14
22 days would be excessive. I think it should be easy to identify very
23 quickly whether a reply is necessary, and you as you know, you should
24 apply for authorisation to make a reply in advance and then the Chamber
25 could determine a time-limit for that, but I would hope that if any
1 question of replying arises, the whole exercise can be completed within
2 seven days. I can only give guidance on that at the moment because the
3 question hasn't actually become a real one. But should it do so, then
4 please note that that is the view that the Trial Chamber has.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to say thank you
6 for your efforts to speed things up and for initiating this to begin
7 with. And it suits me, and with respect to the substance, I'm quite in
8 favour of having the process speeded up but not at the expense of the
9 Defence of course.
10 Now, as far as disclosure is concerned, apart from the material
11 that has been translated, I would like to point out some of the concerns
12 that the Defence has at this point. The Trial Chamber on the 15th of
13 January of this year instructed the Prosecutor to provide a report every
14 30 days on how the progress made in disclosure. Unfortunately, that does
15 not instruct the Prosecutor to inform me about the exculpatory material,
16 the disclosure of which has been questioned by third parties. And I'd
17 like to inform you that the -- the Defence will ask you to give
18 certification for appeal to that, in the sense of having that element
19 included in the instructions given to the Prosecution with respect to
20 disclosure, and especially with respect to the agreement with Holbrooke
21 about immunity.
22 The Prosecution has not fulfilled all the instructions given by
23 the Trial Chamber in that respect. I received information that they have
24 nothing further to inform me about, which they would be duty-bound in the
25 line of duty to inform me of, but they have not provided me with the
1 transcript of the conversation between Louise Arbour with General
2 Wesley Clark. Neither have they disclosed all the information about the
3 interviews and conversations of the former president of Republika Srpska
4 Biljana Plavsic allegedly because those three people were not present at
5 the meeting with Holbrooke himself. However I'm afraid that the
6 Trial Chamber under estimates the corroborational value of all these
7 documents. That is to say the transcript undoubtedly exists, and we have
8 heard testimony about that the Prosecution staff. So it does exist, and
9 it is it very important as to support to what I am stating, what I am
10 claiming. And I hope that the Trial Chamber will not allow the
11 Prosecution to have any scope for creatively or to be lax in respect of
12 this question because all such matter is very important for the Defence.
13 So thank you for your suggestions to update the request with
14 respect to the Holbrooke agreement. I will hold consultations with my
15 legal advisors on that issue. I will probably do that very soon.
16 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
17 JUDGE BONOMY: You've raised matters relating to certain
18 documents which I need to have in front of me. If you'd give me a
19 moment, please.
20 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think I do have a letter from the
22 Prosecution that relates to this matter.
23 Do you have it, or should I ...
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Just give me a moment until I get the material I'm
25 looking for.
1 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] One of the letters came in on the
3 16th of January - that's the last letter - from Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff. It
4 was on the 16th. That was the notice of all those things that I have
5 been talking about.
6 I do have it here, if you want it.
7 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, if I could see the letter you're referring
9 to, Mr. Karadzic. Thank you.
10 What you're raising now is something I know nothing about. This
11 is correspondence between you and the Office of the Prosecution, in which
12 you do what you did -- quite rightly, do you what you before we made
13 decision on your last request to order the Prosecution to disclose
14 material. You apply to them for it. If they refuse it, then you can
15 come to the Trial Chamber and ask the Trial Chamber to make an order.
16 Now are you at the early stage as I see it here, and if you want
17 to follow this up with a motion, then that is a matter for you. But as I
18 read the answer, the statement is that the meeting that you are referring
19 to in 1996 was not attended by any of the three persons you referred to.
20 So on what basis you say that there is specific material in the hands of
21 the Prosecution in the form of a transcript is not clear to me.
22 But that's something you can raise, as I say, in a motion. For
23 the moment it doesn't change the position in relation to the order that I
24 have already mentioned, and having been given leave to appeal, you may
25 consider that your best course of action is to get the appeal resolved
1 and then deal with these other matters, in light of what the Appeals
2 Chamber decides.
3 I'll return the letter to you.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would nevertheless like to raise
5 a couple of important issues.
6 First of all the Defence is trying to deal with all the issues
7 without involving the Chamber. When we are unable to do that, then we
8 have it apply to the Chamber to do its job here. There are very
9 sensitive and dangerous things if the Prosecution fails to disclose what
10 is crucial for the Defence, and these are the materials whose disclosure
11 was banned by the third parties and materials which for some technical
12 reason such as for instance the transcript of the conversation between
13 Mrs. Arbour and General Clark cannot be disclosed because they did not
14 attend the meeting, then this is tantamount to efforts to obstruct the
16 This transcript exists, and Mrs. Florence Hartmann testified
17 about the fact that the Prosecution is in the possession of the
18 transcript. And in this transcript there are clear elements that
19 corroborate my arguments.
20 So even before I came here, before I raised this issue, before I
21 made this request and presented my view, a long, long time ago at the
22 time when Madam Arbour was the Chief Prosecutor, there were elements that
23 corroborated what I am saying. So I face a danger here of being
24 obstructed by the Prosecution on two highly sensitive issues.
25 JUDGE BONOMY: One thing, Mr. Karadzic, that you, I hope, have
1 learned from the decision we made on your application for disclosure is
2 that the more precise the application, the more likely it is to succeed;
3 and the more vague and general the application, the less likely it is to
5 Now, at the moment you are making submissions that are very
6 specific about a particular document that relates to a particular matter,
7 and if you wish to challenge the Prosecution's refusal to disclose
8 anything that relates to that, then the way to do it is to make a
9 specific application to the Trial Chamber. But, as I say, you may find
10 that doing so immediately may be a complicating factor and that timing
11 this properly may be to your advantage and that that sort of application
12 might better await the outcome of the appeal. That simply underlines the
13 importance of getting the appeal underway and resolved as quickly as
15 You did make a passing reference there to -- to the order that we
16 made on disclosure perhaps not dealing adequately with Rule 68, but the
17 order we made on 15th January does specifically include references to
18 Rule 68 and was simply reflecting the undertaking that the Prosecution
19 gave to continue their search for Rule 68 material.
20 Now, this arose in the context of looking at the amendment to the
22 Is there anything else you've got to say on the application to
23 amend the indictment?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, as regards Rule 68, what I
25 said had to do with the materials whose disclosure was not approved by a
1 third party. That's what I was talking about. And I would like --
2 well --
3 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ...
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The order that you made about the
5 30 day --
6 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ...
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As regards all the rest, I believe
8 that the Defence be able to file its response to the motion to amend the
9 indictment by the 28th of January.
10 Of course, this does not concern the preliminary ...
11 Also, as regards, you know, the transcript of the conversation,
12 that transcript exists. I did not know that I would have to -- because I
13 don't know what the Prosecution has. It would be proper for the
14 Prosecution to provide with me everything when I make a generalised
15 request. In order to be more specific in my requests, I would have to
16 have access to what the Prosecution has, and I think that with a view to
17 having a fair trial, I think that the Prosecution should be generous here
18 and to disclose everything and not to ask me to fire shots from a sniper
19 rifle in order to hit something that I'm not able to see at all because I
20 don't know what it is that they have. But I know this for a fact because
21 of what Mrs. Hartmann said, and I'm afraid that that would be tantamount
22 to efforts to cover up evidence, and that would really destroy all
23 credibility of this Tribunal and its proceedings.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: It sounds, Mr. Karadzic, as though you consider
25 this to be extremely important evidence for the point you want to make,
1 and that simply underlines what is I said earlier. Where you can make
2 specific applications, you should do so. I acknowledge that there are
3 certain circumstances in which you have to be vaguer than you would be
4 able to be in this case, and we take account of that in deciding what
5 orders we can make. But don't lose sight of the fact that a specific
6 application has the best prospect of success.
7 On the point you make about the Rule 68 material which may be the
8 subject of the need for authority from a third party, if such material
9 does exist, then the Prosecution has to consider carefully how it
10 proceeds, and there are circumstances in which their hands may be tied
11 because of the refusal of a third party to divulge material, and it
12 could, in fact, have a prejudicial effect on the Prosecution and force
13 them to take steps they wouldn't willingly take. So these are issues
14 that may yet have to be explored further.
15 But one final thought on this: Please never lose sight of the
16 fact that you can make application to other bodies and authorities and
17 states, other than simply the Prosecution for material. And if you
18 consider materials held by someone else, as well as by the Prosecution,
19 or indeed material which the Prosecution doesn't have, then it is open to
20 you make application to those other parties or states for that material.
21 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah, I'm reminded of your reference which I
23 didn't realize was to the same material, but on re-reading it, I see that
24 it is. You refer to -- in your reply to the Prosecution's response to
25 the motion for inspection and disclosure relating to the Holbrooke
1 agreement which is dated the 28th of November, you refer to an interview
2 with Florence Hartmann on the 11th of October, 2007. The other reference
3 is to a claim by Wesley Clark that if you were brought to justice, you
4 would allege a deal with Warren Christopher who presumably -- was he
5 Holbrooke's boss at the time? Is that Karadzic --
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ... The Hague.
8 Now what she says is that she has a transcript of the conversation, and
9 Wesley Clark did say exactly what I quoted in my book, and it's been
10 certified by those from the ICTY present at the meeting.
11 I'm not so sure that that makes it's quite as clear as you have
12 been suggesting. It's an allegation by Clark. It doesn't seem to go
13 further than that on the face of it. But you are right, that having made
14 that statement in your reply, you could read the Trial Chamber's decision
15 as extending to refusing that document, and therefore, you may consider
16 whether that also is an issue that you ought to focus in your appeal.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, well, you see it's like this.
18 That precise moment supports what I'm saying, General Wesley Clark wanted
19 to pre-empt my statement knowing that the agreement existed, and since
20 the American administration tried even during Dayton to obtain the
21 withdrawal of the indictment against me and General Mladic, and this is
22 something that Mr. Goldstone refused and said he would resign if that
23 happened, then those possibilities remained open to prevent my referring
24 to an agreement that existed.
25 Now, if we have dealt with issue, I would like to say something
1 about what awaits us, the Trial Chamber decisions and so forth. First of
2 all self-representation and the financing of my Defence under these
3 conditions. I don't want to say a single word against -- well, I have no
4 disagreements with any of the employees of the Registry. But we do have
5 a misunderstandings with the rules and regulations, and I think they do,
6 too, because the rules bind their hands. Perhaps it is it commendable
7 that the Tribunal is very flexible to changing the rules and regulations,
8 and procedure is often changed, and there have been almost 50 amendments
9 to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. But I do believe that rules
10 regarding the financing and paying of the Defence is less important than
11 procedural issues, and I think that there would be scope there to act
13 I'm a doctor, I'm a physician. Now as far as the facts go, I
14 know everything, and I'm quite convinced that everything will be done
15 well. However, if two sets of laws continental and common law procedure
16 intermingle, then I have to have a large team of associates and advisors,
17 and following my logics, as I'm representing myself, I would need more
18 money, more money than if I were represented by counsel, so I don't think
19 that is a good solution. On the other hand my investigators are being
20 asked in their filings and motions to explain what they spoke about with
21 their collocutors with respect to my Defence.
22 Now if that were the case, they were to disclose the strategy of
23 my Defence, so I would like the Registry -- I would like the
24 Trial Chamber to instruct the Registry to give up on claims of that kind.
25 If not, then we will have to ask the Trial Chamber once again not to
1 state their decisions about the contents of the discussions I have with
2 my associates and the people I speak to in the preparation of my Defence.
3 And we also expect a decision and resolution with respect to the talk
4 with Alexa Buha. He is not a witness -- he is a witness for the
5 agreement with Holbrooke, the number one negotiator on my behalf, a
6 representative the international community, not only the US
7 administration, so it is not a matter for this trial or of this trial, so
8 those are all impediments to my preparations for the trial, and I fear
9 they will lead to delays. I hope that there will not be any delays, but
10 the sooner we receive a full Defence team and complete equality of arms
11 and resources and facilities, the sooner we will be able to move forward
12 and provide an adequate Defence.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I note what you say, Mr. Karadzic, but as I
14 told you earlier, the Trial Chamber has deliberated on your motion
15 already in relation to the costs of the engagement of legal associates
16 and investigators, and that decision will be in your hands in the course
17 of this week. You will appreciate that there is Appeals Chamber
18 jurisprudence on the matter, and you will appreciate also that there is a
19 full Legal Aid scheme available if you chose to instruct counsel, and I
20 wanted to repeat the indication I gave you before, that subject obviously
21 to the agreement of counsel, there -- the Chamber is willing to
22 countenance a situation where you play an active role in conducting you
23 own Defence, albeit with counsel fully instructed to deal with matters of
25 You have so far set your face against that, and I respect your
1 right to do so. Whether it's wise is quite another matter.
2 Now, I want to move on, then, to any other issues that remain
3 outstanding, and the first of these is a Prosecution motion for judicial
4 notice of adjudicated facts.
5 Now, it seems to me that we're not in a position where we can
6 deal with that until the indictment is resolved.
7 Does the Prosecution accept that?
8 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: Yes, Your Honour. And, actually, in the
9 light of the circumstances in which we are at the moment in the trial, we
10 also have hold back other similar motions for other municipalities.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you. Well, the Chamber will take no action
12 on that motion for the moment.
13 Now that completes, I think, a review of the outstanding motions
14 in the case.
15 Mr. Karadzic, are there other separate issues that you wish to
16 raise at all?
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you for giving me that
19 Let me just add that, with respect to self-representation on my
20 part, I am afraid that it might appear as being pressure on me; that is
21 to say, if I accept to be represented, then payment will ensue at the
22 normal rate. If I represent myself, I'll be given little resources and
23 punished that way, which means that there cannot be any equality of arms,
24 if that is the case, equal chances between me and the opposite party.
25 On the other hand, I have to present something here that I tried
1 to solve without the Trial Chamber, but unfortunately I was unsuccessful
2 and it's this. On the 2nd of December last year at 3.00 in the after --
3 after midnight, 3.00 a.m., my family was stormed again by the
4 international forces in Bosnia, mostly NATO forces, with very ludicrous
5 arguments and insulting -- saying that they'd come to talk to my wife
6 about the mental health of another accused who was not my wife's patient
7 ever, and even had he been a patient of hers, would she have told them
8 anything, because it's a privileged doctor/patient relationship. But it
9 was quite wrong to bring up the mental health of anyone. It was quite
10 inappropriate. And because of this very distorted explanation, the fact
11 that they stormed my family, and this happened before, it was designed to
12 upset my Defence.
13 Now, we tried to resolve this issue without the -- this courtroom
14 and this Trial Chamber, and we asked the high representative to tell us
15 who issued those orders, and we had previously received information that
16 no searches or freezing of resources or assets what came from this
17 Prosecution or this Trial Chamber, which means that somebody is doing it
18 off their own bat, and these are Gestapo methods that are used to instill
19 fear into children. One of my grandchildren has his birthday on the 2nd
20 of December. The OHCR said that he had nothing to do with that and that
21 we should contact the responsible authorities.
22 Now, we don't know which authorities those are. Authorities that
23 control NATO in Bosnia-Herzegovina, NATO's action. It appears there is
24 no control whatsoever, and that NATO can do whatever it feels like doing
25 over there. And, to be quite honest, it is of lesser concern to me that
1 the world is under this kind of leadership and for -- reaching an abyss,
2 I'm more worried about my family, because they are in this no-win
4 So I have to establish who the civilian control of this military
5 force is and who it is who issued orders to have my apartment stormed in
6 that way, especially since I have been here.
7 So what are the reasons? What are the reasons that make them do
8 that, and what is the authority that enables them to storm into my
9 family's home at 3.00 in the morning?
10 Now, I think that that is quite --
11 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Karadzic,
12 let me stop you there.
13 Nothing in what you have said so far indicates any basis on which
14 I, as the Pre-Trial Judge in this case, could do anything. Before this
15 is a matter for this Tribunal, there has to be some indication of a
16 prima facie basis for saying that these actions stem from something that
17 is the responsibility of someone at this Tribunal.
18 Now, if you tell me the link, then I will consider whether I
19 ought to hear you further on it. But in the absence of establishing a
20 the prima facie basis for claiming a link, then it's beyond the authority
21 of this Tribunal to do anything about that, a matter in an independent
22 state. I can sympathize with you, but I don't think that it is within my
23 power to do anything about it.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] They acted pursuant to orders from
25 this Court in search of the two remained accused who are still at large.
1 So that's the basis of it all. They appeared over there in order to
2 talk, allegedly, to my wife about the mental health of those people. And
3 then, en passant, they tried to requisition documents that I found it
4 difficult to amass, relating to my assets and so on and so forth and with
5 respect to the registry's decision to provide financial resources to me.
6 So this is -- they refer to this Tribunal, because they are searching for
7 two men, two fugitives, and within the frameworks of their searches, they
8 found it necessary to attack my family.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Sorry, I had not made any connection in what you
10 said earlier and still see no connection in what you said earlier between
11 the Tribunal fugitives and this conduct.
12 What is your basis for saying that they were seeking to detain
13 other accused who were fugitives from justice here?
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] You're quite right. I can well
15 understand that you can't understand this. Nobody can. Nobody can
16 understand why they see fit to storm into my family's home, my wife and
17 my family. They weren't the forces of Bosnia-Herzegovina for me to deal
18 with them. They are international forces, forces of the international
19 community, primarily NATO. They came --
20 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ... what I'm
21 trying to see is what it is you're claiming is the link to the Tribunal.
22 Now, how -- what is your basis for saying this conduct has something to
23 do with the search for fugitives from here?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] That's what they said. That's
25 what they told my wife. They said that they had come seeking information
1 about those two men, pursuant to instructions from this Tribunal. That's
2 why they are searching for them. And they stormed into my house because
3 they --
4 JUDGE BONOMY: [Previous translation continues] ...
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- decided to do so.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Just one second. And you say these were NATO
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: And what communication have you had with NATO?
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] [Indiscernible] said that, their
12 JUDGE BONOMY: But what steps have you taken to complain to NATO?
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I didn't complain to NATO. I asked
14 the high representative of the international community, OHR, and his
15 office to see what all this is about, because they are a civilian power
16 in Bosnia-Herzegovina. They are civilian control of everything that is
17 happening over there, and NATO is under some sort of civilian control.
18 That is to be assumed, that NATO acts on the basis of that.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, you explained that -- that you were told
20 that it was not done on the authority of the high representative and that
21 he had no knowledge of it, from what you just said.
22 So is your next port of call not NATO headquarters in Brussels?
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't want to communicate with
24 the NATO pact but with its boss, the civilian authority. Who is the
25 civilian authority over and above NATO? Certainly they're not going to
1 accuse themselves, so I wish to take my troubles to the civilian
2 authority of NATO pact. If such an authority exists, I wish to refer to
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, at the moment, Mr. Karadzic, I doubt if
5 there is any action that can be taken from here. But if you consider
6 that there is a matter that can be identified as the responsibility of
7 any authority exercising or undertaking work related to this Tribunal,
8 then you should make a filing explaining what it is you're complaining
9 about, what you seek to be done, and attaching any documents that may
10 support the propositions that you advance.
11 But we're not going to make progress on this here, discussing it
12 in the courtroom. These are matters which are best dealt with in
14 Now, is there any other matter that you wish to raise with me?
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, not for the moment. But
16 this is a very important question for me, so that we can -- if we were
17 able to establish who the civilian authorities are, we'd ask them. Why
18 did not they do what -- represent the Tribunal [as interpreted].
19 Now, I think that I have gone through all the other matters. I
20 don't know what the Trial Chamber has decided with respect to the
21 equality the arms and the financing of my Defence, but development will
22 depend on that because I won't be able to retain prominent lawyers, very
23 prominent lawyers, and pay them by the hour unless I am given resources
24 to do that, and if I don't have their advice and counsel, then I really
25 will have to self-represent, and this will, of course, have an effect on
1 a fair trial, the semblance of a fair trial. And NATO is really the
2 great problem of the world, in general. But as far as I'm concerned now,
3 it is a problem for my family. That's the immediate problem, and it's a
4 world problem subsequently.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you very much.
6 Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff, any other matter you wish to deal with?
7 MS. UERTZ-RETZLAFF: No, Your Honour, nothing arises.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
9 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
10 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, it seems to me, Mr. Karadzic, that the team
11 you have at present assigned to you, to assist you, and you yourself, are
12 in a position, as you've indicated, to respond to the motion for
13 amendment by the 28th of January, and even if you feel that the decision
14 made about the resources available to you is not satisfactory, it's not
15 going to have any impact on the issue of the amendment procedure. It
16 will have an impact at a later stage.
17 So I anticipate the amendment procedure going according to the
18 plan indicated by you and by the Prosecution and by me in that
19 discussion. That would suggest that all the material necessary should be
20 in the hands of the Trial Chamber by the 4th of February.
21 I propose having another Status Conference around the time when I
22 expect that issue will be capable of being resolved. I can't fix a firm
23 time at the moment because of the court schedule, which is fully occupied
24 on paper, as I see it. We will need to make some arrangement to move a
25 case to fit in a Status Conference, but it will be around the 19th of
1 February. The target date will be the 19th of February.
2 That completes the work of the Status Conference. The Court now
4 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned at
5 3.22 p.m.