1 Thursday, 2 April 2009
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 3.08 p.m.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case
7 number IT-95-5/18-PT, the Prosecutor versus Radovan Karadzic.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
9 Good afternoon, everyone.
10 Mr. Karadzic, can you confirm to me, first of all, again that you
11 continue to represent yourself.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
14 Can I now have appearances for the Prosecution, please.
15 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Mr. President. Good afternoon, Mr. President,
16 Your Honours. Alan Tieger; Ann Sutherland; and case manager, Iain Reid,
17 for the Prosecution.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
19 Since the last Status Conference and the intimation of pleas on
20 behalf of the accused following the amendment of the indictment, there
21 has been ongoing Chambers business in relation to a large number of
22 issues in the case and there has been one Rule 65 ter meeting at which
23 all three Judges of the Pre-Trial Chamber presided. Certain matters
24 discussed at that meeting will be the subject of further discussion and
25 possibly decision in the course of this meeting -- this hearing today.
1 The first item that I would like to deal with, Mr. Karadzic, is
2 the question of your -- what you describe as your legal team. Because it
3 may be that a discussion here this afternoon would be beneficial in
4 clarifying possible misunderstandings about what is available to you and
5 how to go about ensuring that what is available is in fact made
6 available. And for that reason I've asked that a member of the Registry
7 from OLAD should be present, and Mr. Ambach is in court.
8 You will recollect that a decision was made about the way in
9 which Rule 68 material is disclosed to you, and you have made an
10 application for certification to appeal that decision. However, you will
11 also recollect that part of the decision encouraged both you and OLAD to
12 discuss further the arrangements for access to the electronic disclosure
13 system. I understood that following that decision efforts would be made
14 by both you and OLAD to try to resolve this, but I also understand now
15 that you may not have made any further application for additional staff
16 to have access to the electronic disclosure system.
17 Now, can you explain to me your position on that, what steps you
18 intend to take to try to improve the availability of access.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, My Lord, for putting
20 this item on the agenda. I had intended to raise the issue as well. I
21 received your decision, and I indeed do wish to appeal that decision.
22 But in the meantime I had sent a request to the Registry for access for
23 three legal interns assisting my legal team to have access to
24 electronic -- access to the electronic disclosure system. Today I was
25 supposed to find out whether they would be working pro bono, they have
1 been working pro bono throughout, but I don't know whether they will --
2 their expenses will be covered. I received that only today. The mailmen
3 really like me a lot. Just before this Status Conference, or rather,
4 before each and every Status Conference we have I get loads of material
5 from the OTP and from the Registry, and I really cannot look at all the
6 things that we're supposed to deal with at these Status Conferences. I
7 will appeal if I'm given certification to do so, but in the meantime I
8 would like a larger number of the members of my team to have access to
9 electronic disclosure.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: What I'm now going to do is ask Mr. Ambach if he
11 will explain to us what the understanding of OLAD is as to the
12 application you've made and to explain to us also what decision, if any,
13 has been made on any application you have made. Please listen carefully
14 to what he says because I do believe there is some misunderstanding in
15 the communications occurring here, and it's important that rather than
16 have written communications passing back and forward to no good purpose
17 that we get this resolved if possible today.
18 Now, Mr. Ambach, can you assist us, please.
19 MR. AMBACH: Thank you, Your Honour. We have indeed received a
20 request of the 16th of March from the accused; however, this request is
21 confusing to the Registry to an extent in that the accused requested the
22 designation of current legal interns as members of his Defence team. It
23 is the position of OLAD, of the Registry, that it does not assign any
24 pro bono associates to the accused. The Registry merely notes the fact
25 that the accused has retained a pro bono legal associate.
1 Now, with regard to the request of the 16th of March, it was not
2 and it is not clear to the Registry whether the accused seeks the
3 assignment of the persons named in the request pursuant to the
4 remuneration scheme or whether it -- whether the accused rather seeks the
5 acknowledgement of the above Defence team members as pro bono legal
6 associates. I hope that this clarifies to an extent.
7 JUDGE BONOMY: How many persons were involved, Mr. Ambach, in
8 this application?
9 MR. AMBACH: Your Honour, the accused requested the assignment of
10 three persons who are currently serving as legal interns of the accused.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Karadzic, there are two issues here. There's
12 the question of whether someone is assigned to you as a legal associate
13 which has the effect that that person is remunerated to some extent; and
14 separately, there is the question of whether anyone, whether remunerated
15 or not, has access to confidential material and therefore is authorised
16 to have unrestricted access to the electronic disclosure system. Now,
17 when you made this application, was it directed to the question of
18 assignment so that they would receive payment, or was it directed to the
19 question of allowing them to access the electronic disclosure system?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As for my entire team consisting of
21 eight persons who are supposed to assist me and to be remunerated by the
22 Registry, well, I haven't set up that team yet. There's only three so
23 far, one is a researcher and two are legal associates. They can stay
24 here only three days a month. That is to say that I have no possibility
25 whatsoever of preparing an effective defence and of making sure on my
1 part that these proceedings are fair and proper. I am asking for these
2 associates to be approved one by one because I cannot make the request
3 for all eight at the same time because I want them to deal with different
4 fields, say civil law, et cetera. So I would want to have them all
5 approved one by one so I know what fields I have approved as it were.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: I want to interrupt you because I don't think
7 you're addressing the question I asked you. The question is: When you
8 made this application relating to three people, was that for them to be
9 assigned as part of your team so that they get paid, or was it so that
10 they would have access to the electronic disclosure system? Please
11 address that question, then we'll turn to any wider issues that arrive.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The latter. On the basis of your
13 decision I asked that documents be submitted to me only with the numbers
14 marked in keeping with Rule 65. I asked for these three persons who have
15 already been working pro bono to have access to the electronic system so
16 that they could have these documents submitted to me.
17 If you allow me, I also wanted to say that I'm pleased actually
18 that you want to establish how the defence preparations are getting along
19 because they are not really getting along very well at all as if there
20 were some omissions on my part, whereas the case is different. It seems
21 that somebody else is trying to prove that I cannot represent myself. I
22 can represent myself but if no obstacles are placed in my path.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Mr. Ambach, considering what's just been
24 said, that this was meant to be an application for access to the
25 electronic disclosure system -- I'm sorry --
1 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry to interrupt, Your Honour, but it may be
2 timely. I just wanted to note that I was advised shortly before coming
3 into court this afternoon that OTP had been contacted about access to the
5 the Court know because it seems part of the ongoing discussion and
6 ongoing process, and we indicated no objection and would do whatever --
7 would fulfil whatever part of the process is within our province.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you, Mr. Tieger.
9 Now, Mr. Ambach, can you now tell us what the communication sent
10 by OLAD in response to this application was.
11 MR. AMBACH: Yes, Your Honour. In fact, the Registry asked the
12 accused specifically to clarify upon the question of whether the
13 assignment of a legal associate or of legal associates was requested or
14 whether it was rather meant as a notification that the persons named in
15 his request would be retained from now on as pro bono legal associates
16 connected, with request that these persons be granted access to EDS.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: And is that the communication that he would
18 receive today?
19 MR. AMBACH: That is exactly the communication that he received
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, you've had the answer to that, which is it's
22 the latter. In light of that, do you require any further information
23 about this?
24 MR. AMBACH: No, Your Honours. The Registry is of course
25 grateful to the accused if he provides the Registry with the
1 curriculum vitae of the persons that the accused has decided to retain as
2 his pro bono legal associates; however, there are no further requirements
3 on the side of the Registry when it comes to the Registry noting the fact
4 that the accused has retained pro bono legal associates.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
6 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Ambach, will the decision on access be made
8 without receiving the CDs -- the CVs, sorry?
9 MR. AMBACH: Yes, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE BONOMY: And can we, therefore, invite you to make a more
11 or less immediate decision, in other words, within the next 24 hours,
12 please, on this application so that the matter can be resolved as soon as
14 MR. AMBACH: Yes, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
16 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, Mr. Karadzic, so far as your application for
18 certification to appeal the decision that we've had some discussion about
19 just now and which has led in fact to this application which I expect is
20 likely to be successful and successful fairly quickly, but the decision
21 is not in our hands and it will be intimated to you by the Registry
22 tomorrow. But in light of all the circumstances and our earlier
23 consideration of your application, the Chamber has decided to refuse you
24 certification to appeal that decision. The issue is whether the
25 combination of the means by which the Prosecution disclose exculpatory
1 material to the accused and the facilities available to him to gain
2 access to the material has resulted in a failure by the Prosecution to
3 implement its disclosure obligation under Rule 68. Since that issue,
4 particularly the question of the facilities for access, is the subject of
5 ongoing consideration by the Registrar, neither leg of the test for
6 certification is met. Even if the test was met, the Chamber would
7 exercise its discretion to refuse to certify the proposed appeal. If
8 you're dissatisfied with the final determination of the Registrar, you
9 can raise the matter before the Chamber afresh, but then you would be
10 raising it on the basis of the facts prevailing at that stage.
11 Now I would like you to raise any other matters you wish to raise
12 in connection with your -- the establishment of your legal team so that
13 we can make sure that anything that's outstanding is dealt with quickly.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I wished to say that I
15 have given up on my request to have all material disclosed to me in hard
16 copy, on paper. I've agreed to electronic disclosure. I have a room
17 full of CDs and I'm sort of dealing with it, but this is an additional
18 impediment. In view of this vast amount of material and also the
19 magnitude of these proceedings, this is going to be a far greater trial
20 than any other trial before it. I asked to have a certain number of
21 experts allocated to me and that they be paid not like supplementary
22 staff but in accordance with the seriousness of the work that they do.
23 I'm not asking for any kind of advantage because I represent myself.
24 However, I do not want to have additional obstacles placed in my path
25 because I'm representing myself. If they were to be paid like normal
1 lawyers are paid, then I could give them assignments as to what all the
2 things are that they're supposed to do for me. My investigators even
3 have to say what they are discussing with potential witnesses. Their
4 travel expenses are not paid for. My top-notch experts, my advisors, can
5 be here only three days a month, and finally it's only two of them plus
6 an investigator that have been appointed out of the possible eight. I'm
7 waiting to deal with all of this one by one. You have a motion in
8 respect of one of them, Mr. Sladojevic who was indispensable for me, he
9 lives here, he speaks the Dutch language, so it will be easier for him to
10 prepare for this. I assure you that the proceedings have already taken a
11 very risky path, and it is not very regular either. When am I going to
12 deal with all of this material? You should have been at the 65 ter
13 meeting and hear the OTP how they complained that they do not have enough
14 resources, et cetera, et cetera. And can you imagine what it's like for
15 me? I have to deal with this same material that they have been compiling
16 and presenting. I have to study it here; I have to defend myself here.
17 So there is this inequality of arms, and it is such -- and the
18 disproportion is so vast that regularity as such is brought into
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, you've now explained, as you have done
21 before, what you see as an unfair element in the system. What you fail
22 to reflect in what you've said is that there is a perfectly inadequate
23 system of legal aid for full representation for you which you have chosen
24 not to take advantage of, and that of course is aimed at giving you
25 equality of arms with the Prosecution. What you have chosen to do is
1 represent yourself because you claim you can do that. And you are being
2 given what is exceptional in legal systems throughout the world, and that
3 is additional facilities at the expense of this Tribunal to assist you in
4 your venture to represent yourself. Now, quite rightly, you identify
5 that there are limitations on that, and these limitations are recognised
6 and have been there for some time throughout your period here. You have
7 outstanding an appeal against the Chamber's decision in relation to this
8 issue, and I can appreciate your frustration at the time that legal
9 proceedings tend to take. But at the same time, you must recognise your
10 obligation to prepare for the possibility that your appeal will be
11 unsuccessful. And it is, I think, surprising to us that you have not
12 made any further applications other than for Mr. Sladojevic to be
13 assigned in this way. And unless you make applications, then it won't be
14 possible for the Registry to deal with any. You tell us that we can
15 expect another four applications on top of him, but these have not yet
16 arrived. What is the reason for that?
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] At the moment when I see what I
18 have at my disposal, I will decide who the other four are going to be. I
19 cannot make up my team with just minor players. I have all the best
20 players. I have to see what's been approved in order to see how I'm
21 going to go next. I'm not asking for any concessions. The fact that I'm
22 representing myself and I'm not a lawyer is a handicap, but I don't want
23 to have any other handicaps. I've seen here how people defended
24 themselves as objects of the trials, and I'm not going to allow that.
25 The truth cannot be heard if somebody who was there and who knows
1 everything does not represent it before the Trial Chamber. I cannot
2 accept any other representation but my own. I have to represent myself.
3 I have to have a team, and I have to have the equality of arms. I have
4 to have the same thing as the Prosecution does, vast funds and everything
6 Later on I will tell you what the Prosecution is currently doing
7 in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and at this moment I cannot even dream of
8 attempting to do any such thing. That's why it is indispensable for me
9 to have the appointment of those who I have applied for. When I see what
10 has been approved and when I see what is still missing, then I will make
11 my decision on the other four.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: You have made reference there to not wanting to be
13 considered an object of the proceedings, and that reference I understand.
14 I understand why you might feel yourself to be in that position. But I
15 think I would be failing in my duty, you having raised the matter, if I
16 were not to point out to you that throughout your time here this Bench
17 has expressed its willingness to consider a situation in which albeit you
18 are represented by counsel, you yourself are also permitted to play an
19 active part in your own defence. The Bench has expressed throughout its
20 willingness to be flexible in the arrangements it makes for the conduct
21 of your trial, and you have steadfastly refused to consider that. Now,
22 that is your privilege, and I don't criticise you for it. I simply
23 intend to ensure that the whole story is portrayed in any discussion we
24 have on this subject.
25 It's also important not to ignore the fact that you have had a
1 significant number of pro bono legally qualified personnel providing
2 assistance to you to the point that the submissions made by you have been
3 many; they have been helpful; they have been instructive. So the picture
4 that the Chamber has is one of an accused person at the moment doing a
5 pretty good job of representing himself on legal challenges. However, we
6 remain conscious of the size of the case, the volume of material, the
7 difficulty for an individual in that situation to prepare adequately and
8 conduct his own defence. But you know also that the Trial Chamber
9 recognises that there are disadvantages, too, that go with
10 self-representation. And that road having been chosen, then there may be
11 certain difficulties that we all have to address as best we can as we
12 proceed through the trial.
13 Now, it seems, Mr. Karadzic, that there's no more we can do at
14 this stage today on the question of the composition of your legal team,
15 but we will be prepared to return to that issue at any future
16 Status Conference should you consider it appropriate to raise it again.
17 And what I'd like to move to now is a very specific issue again and that
18 is the preliminary motion challenging the jurisdiction of the Tribunal on
19 the basis of the agreement you say that you had from a representative of
20 the United States, Mr. Holbrooke, that you would not be prosecuted.
21 The Chamber is quite happy to suspend the running of any
22 time-limit for that motion until the appeal that relates to it which has
23 been outstanding for some time is determined. And therefore, we will
24 issue an order in writing at the appropriate stage when we are in a
25 position to do so about the time you have to submit such a motion.
1 Can I take it that what you intend to do is withdraw the initial
2 motion that you made when you were first detained and appeared here and
3 to submit an entirely fresh motion, focusing the issue on the basis of
4 the situation as it can now be presented?
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Just briefly I would
6 like to respond to your first question. I'm very grateful to you for
7 taking this into account, and I would like to ask you to take under
8 advisement that I will always represent myself. You mentioning the
9 possibility that this might change only encourages the Registry and gives
10 them a false hope that I will accept counsel. That will not happen.
11 You are right, I am going to withdraw my August 2008 motion and
12 replace it by a new one when my investigators complete the
13 investigations. You have -- may have seen in your times that we have
14 received very convincing data about new witnesses in the state department
15 in the United States and elsewhere, and when that investigation is over a
16 new motion will be filed which will be much more precise. When I say
17 "Holbrooke," I can imply that he represented the United States, but there
18 is also proof that he acted on behalf of the entire international
19 community, and the evidence to that effect cannot be challenged. And I'm
20 very grateful to you with regard to the running of the time-limit.
21 I also would like to thank all the professors and interns who are
22 assisting me in providing you with a clear picture of the legal aspects
23 of the proceedings so far.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: I think you're right that your challenge can be
25 characterised on the basis that it was an agreement that you claim was
1 made on behalf of more than the United States, but just how specific that
2 can be stated remains to be seen if it is of course relevant at all.
3 What we will do is consider what we should do in relation to the
4 existing motion.
5 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you for clarifying the position,
7 Mr. Karadzic. We will regard the motion of the 6th of August now as
8 withdrawn, and we will suspend meanwhile the running of the time-limit
9 for submitting a jurisdictional challenge based on the Holbrooke
10 agreement, and we will issue in due course a further order specifying
11 when that jurisdictional challenge has to be submitted to us.
12 I want to turn now to the Prosecution on the question of
13 disclosure, and the disclosure I have in mind initially is that in terms
14 of Rule 66(A)(ii), which is the disclosure of statements of proposed
15 witnesses for the trial. Now, Mr. Tieger, one of the things that will be
16 done following today's meeting is the establishment and publication to
17 the parties of a work-plan for the remainder of the pre-trial phase of
18 this case. And into that work-plan we intend to insert a date for
19 disclosure in terms of Rule 66(A)(ii) and may even be able to make an
20 order this afternoon.
21 Can you tell me the state of preparedness for full disclosure of
22 these statements at this stage?
23 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, I can't relate more I think than was
24 discussed at the 65 ter Conference. I appreciate the fact that this is
25 an opportunity to make that information generally public. I think as the
1 Court is aware, the categories of witnesses have been broken down to some
2 extent in terms of internationals, crime base, et cetera. The disclosure
3 of the internationals as related at the 65 ter Conference is basically
4 complete. I think the Court was also made aware that with respect to the
5 additional witnesses, including the large number of crime base witnesses,
6 that remains to be done for the most part and that hasn't changed to an
7 appreciable extent since the 65 ter Conference.
8 I don't know if the Court is asking for some specific additional
9 information beyond that, but I assume that my response generally covers
10 the Court's inquiry.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: If we were to specify the 30th April for
12 disclosure of statements, would that present a problem?
13 MR. TIEGER: I think, Your Honour, it would -- I would ask for an
14 additional week I think, but I -- I'm not -- I mean, I don't feel I'm in
15 a position to resist the Court on that. Obviously, if that order was
16 made we would bend every effort toward fulfilling it and would expect to
17 do so. Based on my discussions, I think the additional week would
18 represent a somewhat more realistic dead-line for the personnel involved.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
20 Mr. Karadzic, what I'm asking about is the disclosure to you of
21 all the statements of witnesses that the Prosecution intend to lead. The
22 Chamber had in mind prior to coming on to the Bench today the end of
23 April as a date by which that we should order disclosure of these to you.
24 The Prosecution ask for another week beyond that. Do you have any
25 comment to make?
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] By the magnitude and the number of
2 witnesses, this is going to be a huge process. The Prosecution have
3 announced 26 expert witnesses, for them I have not received satisfactory
4 material. And this also refers to your decision about my knowledge of
5 English. I can control what I speak because I chose the English
6 vocabulary. But what others are saying what I'm supposed to read that
7 was written by others, I can't control this. So your impression that my
8 English is good is deceptive. I have to employ five to ten interpreters
9 and translators and ask for the Registry -- for the translations to be
10 paid. This is another problem with expert witnesses and their
11 testimonies and statements in the previous cases.
12 The second thing that is not acceptable on my part when it comes
13 to expert witnesses is that I have to pick and choose from various
14 reports and various testimonies they've provided so far and find things
15 that may be relative to myself. This is an additional effort on my part.
16 I suggest that the Prosecutor should be ordered to submit consolidated
17 expert reports in the form that would be specifically relative to
18 myself --
19 JUDGE BONOMY: I will come to the expert reports. I'm looking
20 generally at - I should have made it clear - statements of other
21 witnesses. The experts fall under a different rule, and we'll come to
22 them specifically in the course of the discussion. So far as the other
23 witnesses are concerned, and you've heard them described as falling into
24 various categories, but the two mentioned were international witnesses
25 and those who are witnesses to the actual commission of the crimes that
1 you are alleged to be responsible for, it's the disclosure of these
2 statements, and the suggested date is about the 7th of May. Now, do you
3 have anything to say on that?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] First of all, I've been informed
5 that 80 out of over 400 witnesses as crime-base witnesses have been
6 disclosed, but I've never been told which witnesses are those. I've
7 received hundred and thousands of pages. Now I have to guess which
8 witnesses have actually been disclosed. I'm asked to be provided a
9 specification as to which of those witnesses, and I have not received any
10 disclosure for the remainder of the witnesses. I will need a lot of
11 time, a lot of resources to deal with that vast material. I have to
12 investigate the witnesses, the events that they are testifying about. So
13 you can only imagine how difficult this is going to be. I'm asking for
14 this to happen as soon as possible, and then I'm asking for sufficient
15 time to be able to study all those statements.
16 You saw at the 65 ter Conference that the representative of the
17 OTP even mentioned Croatia as the crime place -- base. Please, this is
18 the first time I hear that I should be tried for something that was
19 happening in Croatia. This is incredible. After eight months having
20 been in detention I hear this for the first time. When is it that I'm
21 finally going to hear what is it that I'm being charged with without any
22 extensions, without making this monstrous proceedings even bigger and
23 even lengthier.
24 JUDGE BONOMY: No doubt I'll be corrected if I'm wrong, but I
25 think the mention of Croatia was to explain to you that the parts of a
1 report that related to Croatia would not be part of the case against you.
2 There are two items arising from what you've said that I will
3 seek to clarify. The first is your reference to interpreters or
4 translators. I know that the facility is available to you to have
5 language assistants if you wish to make use of it. Are you saying that
6 you have already sought to have an interpretation facility?
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No. In keeping with your previous
8 decision, I expected to be submitted testimonies and transcripts that are
9 relative to me in the Serbian language. And in that case I would not
10 have asked for interpreters and translators. Since you have changed the
11 decision, I have to do what the OTP should have done. I have to employ
12 people to translate things for me or to transcribe things from the audio
13 tapes. I have already seen major mistakes and changes when it comes, for
14 example, to Mladic's request for people to be disarmed and it has been
15 translated as Mladic's request for them to surrender. These are major
16 discrepancies. I should not be dealing with English statements made on
17 the part of other people. If I am certified to appeal that, I will
18 appeal this because it would be much easier for the OTP to order for the
19 transcription to be made from the Serbian original than for me to decide
20 the essence of the translated sentences.
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Can I be clear on this. The mistake that you've
22 referred to just now, is that in the translation from Serbian to English,
23 or from English to Serbian?
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] This is a translation from Serbian
25 into English. This is the translation of an intercept or a document
1 where Mladic is quoted as telling them that they have to disarm, whereas
2 it should have been for them to surrender, and these are two completely
3 different things. The meaning should have been that they should throw
4 their weapons and leave the area, disarm themselves and leave the area.
5 That was the meaning of Mladic's words, and this has been misinterpreted.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Of course that particular problem which is an
7 example of the sort of problem that can occasionally arise in an
8 environment where language has to be translated, that has nothing to do
9 with the question of whether things should be translated into Serbian as
10 you, I'm sure, appreciate.
11 Now, can I ask Mr. Tieger to clarify one thing. Mr. Karadzic
12 makes a point that a lot of statements have already been disclosed, but
13 the actual witness list may relate to only a limited number of these and
14 he may not be aware of which. Is that the position, that he will not at
15 this stage know which of the crime-base statements disclosed are going to
16 be or do relate to the witnesses who will give evidence?
17 MR. TIEGER: The -- well, let me -- I see Ms. Sutherland is about
18 to perhaps elucidate this further. My understanding is -- I'm sorry.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Just one moment.
20 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
22 MR. TIEGER: Well, I'm certainly open to any kind of
23 clarification of this issue, but it seems to me there really is not much
24 room for that kind of problem to arise for the following reasons. Number
25 one, with respect - let me focus on the crime-base witnesses for a
1 moment - we will be disclosing them pursuant to Rule 66(A)(ii) and
2 indicating as such, meaning they are persons intended to be called as
3 witnesses, so they will be specifically identified as such in the nature
4 of the disclosure. Number two, my understanding is that the index that
5 accompanies the materials bears the identification or name of the
6 witness, so that kind of comparison could be made if there was some sort
7 of confusion about whether or not the witness was intended to be on the
8 list. And finally, I believe that it -- to the extent that a witness's
9 statement might be disclosed pursuant to Rule 68, that would be disclosed
10 on EDS
11 under Rule 66(A)(ii) as witness statements are disclosed on CD. So I
12 think there are a number of safe-guards that would prevent that kind of
14 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah, I understand that. I think the accused's
15 position was there's 80 of them, as he understands it, already disclosed
16 but not perhaps formally under 66(A)(ii), but effectively disclosed
17 because you've been going through an ongoing disclosure process. And up
18 until now it would not be possible for him to identify which of the many
19 witness statements relate to people who will actually give evidence in
20 court. I appreciate you will clarify it. All I wanted to know was
21 whether at this point in time it's impossible for him to tell which
22 statements that he has already received in one form or another relate to
23 people who will actually be witnesses.
24 MR. TIEGER: With respect to the crime base, I believe that would
25 be correct.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: And the Chamber is minded to grant your
2 application for disclosure by the -- a week after the 30th. I don't know
3 what day of the week the 7th of May is, but whatever the appropriate date
4 is around that time. But if you hold off until then identifying who the
5 witnesses actually are, then there's nothing the accused can do meanwhile
6 with the material which has already been disclosed, as I say, in one form
7 or another. So what we were going to do was ask you whether you could
8 provide that additional information as soon as possible so that the -- so
9 that the material which is disclosed already can be utilised. I'm
10 conscious of the fact that the order for your 65 ter list might even be
11 later, although that remains to be determined. So all I'm looking for is
12 the application of some common sense in the disclosure process so that
13 it's not all lumped on the accused on the last day.
14 MR. TIEGER: No, I understood the Court's request in that light,
15 and I think there was an indication already at the 65 ter Conference that
16 we intended to disclose seriatim rather than wait for the final dead-line
17 and disclose them all in one lump. So that would certainly be the case.
18 I don't know that -- I guess I can check to see whether any disclosure
19 has been made to date of witnesses intended to be on the list or who --
20 who we will determine during the course of the upcoming period should be
21 on the list, and therefore advise the accused as soon as possible that he
22 already has that material. But I understand the Court's concern which is
23 to get -- as soon as we have the information to get the information to
24 the accused as soon as we can, rather than wait for an upcoming dead-line
25 to do that.
1 JUDGE BONOMY: I think it's reasonable to make the observation at
2 this stage, the general observation, that in dealing with a case
3 involving a self-represented accused, the Court behaves differently from
4 the way in which it would behave in relation to a case where a counsel
5 appears. And I think the Prosecution has to do the same and, in a sense,
6 provide assistance to the accused above and beyond what would be done in
7 the case of a represented accused. And the reason for that is purely
8 practical, that the system in general will function less efficiently and,
9 indeed, could inhibit a fair and expeditious trial if exceptional
10 arrangements were not taken in a situation like this. So we're asking
11 that you do your utmost to stagger the presentation of material so that
12 it's coming as soon as possible and identify as clearly as possible what
13 that material relates to in his case.
14 MR. TIEGER: Understood, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
16 Well, it means -- that means that we can, I think, consider what
17 order to make now in relation to Rule 66(A)(ii).
18 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE BONOMY: So we will grant the -- or appoint the date
20 suggested by the Prosecution, that is, the 7th of May, for disclosure of
21 all statements of all witnesses other than experts, which we'll deal with
23 Mr. Ambach, we don't really need to detain you, I think, any
24 longer. If anything arises that requires assistance from your
25 department, then we'll contact you, but you're now free to leave, and
1 we're extremely grateful to you for being here and assisting us this
3 MR. AMBACH: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: I now want to deal with expert witnesses. And,
5 Mr. Karadzic, you have some submissions to make, so it might be as well
6 if we hear from you first of all.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to say that I'm not
8 intimidated by this number of 26 experts, expert witnesses that is. But
9 I shall state my views on that when my own experts study all the
10 material, all the documentation, that is to say the CVs of these expert
11 witnesses and also their findings. This is truly work for experts, so my
12 own attitude will be based on the positions taken by my own experts once
13 they've studied the entire material involved. What is very important for
14 me is that I am faced with this ocean of material, and I have to deal
15 with bits and pieces that I have to pick and choose. There is nothing
16 consolidated, nothing that I am specifically charged with. It would have
17 been a lot easier in that case; this way it's going to take a lot longer
18 because I will probably call the same number of witnesses, and I will ask
19 for their work to be paid, both in terms of analysis and in preparing my
20 defence and for actually testifying for my defence. So it is important
21 to receive consolidated material that pertains to me specifically so that
22 I do not have to guess what has to do with me.
23 As for language and translation, once again, please take this
24 seriously. I kindly ask you to do that. I'm not asking for anything
25 special. Your Excellency, you put it right, translation can be a
1 problem, but the OTP can transcribe Serbo-Croatian audio material. With
2 all due respect for Your Excellencies and your respective countries, but
3 please look at what the situation is. NATO waged war against us; NATO
4 arrested me; NATO wanted to do other bad, serious things against me. All
5 three of your countries are NATO members, and now I even have to deal
6 with the language of the NATO countries. I have to defend myself in a
7 NATO-country language. There are many elements, therefore, indicating
8 that this trial cannot be fair from any point of view. I'm trying to
9 make things look better than they actually do, and of course I'm trying
10 to help myself as well in the process. However, I'm going to state my
11 views on the experts once I've received all the material, hopefully
12 translated into the Serbian language, and their testimony too. Then I
13 would like my own experts to have some time to study this material, and
14 then they will advise me, and then I will take my position as to what I
15 feel the expertise of the 26 experts is like.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, that was divided into two parts,
17 Mr. Karadzic. You've obviously got something off your chest, and perhaps
18 that's just as well. But you can take it from me here and now that your
19 submissions in this Court will be confined to what is relevant to what we
20 have to consider and decide. Now please bear that in mind, and don't
21 let's have any issues that go to the personal involvement of a Bench
22 which is properly constituted consisting of Judges who come here on a
23 totally impartial basis to do the job that's been assigned to them by the
24 United Nations. Let that be an end of the political grand-standing, and
25 let us concentrate on the issues in the trial.
1 And there you do have a point, because this is a very large
2 number of experts to be handled. But it would be irresponsible, I would
3 suggest to you, just to draw down the blinds and say, I'm going to do
4 nothing about this until my experts have studied the matter. Because
5 these experts fall into a very large number of different categories, and
6 some of them on reflection may turn out to be not very controversial.
7 Now, are you indicating that you're not prepared to look at the material
8 relating to expert evidence objectively to see if in fact it is in
9 dispute? Does it in the end of the day matter whether at the top of an
10 autopsy report about someone who undoubtedly is very dead the name
11 "Radovan Karadzic" appears? Plainly, it doesn't matter. So what we
12 would ask you to do is bring common sense to bear on this issue and try
13 to identify the expert material that really needs to be challenged. And
14 that may be most of these reports in the end of the day, but I doubt very
15 much if it's all of them.
16 Now, is your position that no matter what time you are allocated
17 to consider these reports at this stage won't matter, you'll just take a
18 broad approach and challenge every one on every possible basis?
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Most probably I am not going to
20 oppose any one of these experts appearing. However, I think that I am
21 going to challenge their findings in their entirety or in part, and I'll
22 do that on the basis of the knowledge and advice provided by my experts
23 and my advisors. As for credibility, as for competence, as for
24 eligibility, I'll leave that for the courtroom; however, I have to say
25 that I'm not concerned nor intimidated by the number of these experts,
1 except that I will have to have an equal number of experts. Of course I
2 will be dealing with this, but I won't be able to give my final word on
3 the basis of that. As for my final word on the experts and their
4 findings, it is indispensable for my experts to give me advice as to what
5 I'm supposed to do.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Our concern, though, has to be at the moment with
7 following the Rules, and these Rules allow you to do two things in
8 relation to expert evidence. You can either accept it or
9 cross-examine -- seek to cross-examine the witness, that's number one;
10 and the second thing is you can challenge the qualifications of the
11 witness as an expert or the relevance of the statement or report of the
12 witness. Now, the normal rule would give you 30 days in which to decide
13 your position, that's 30 days from the time at which the report is
14 formally disclosed to you, and the Prosecution have been going through
15 the exercise of formally disclosing these by filing a notice to that
17 What I'm trying to establish is whether 30 days is the right
18 period of time to allow you to take your stand, to indicate to us what
19 your position will be in relation to these experts. Now, do you have any
20 comment on that, whether the passage of time will make any difference to
21 the position you will take at this stage, the pre-trial stage, of the
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If that is the time given to me to
24 present my stand or my position, I think that will be sufficient for just
25 presenting my position; however, after that I hope that I will have
1 enough time to respond. Just taking a stand, well, yes, that could be
2 done within the provided time-frame.
3 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE BONOMY: There may be some misunderstanding here. There's
5 no question of you having to respond to an expert's statement. The
6 issues for you to address are set out in Rule 94 bis(B), and within
7 30 days of the filing of the notice which has been occurring in relation
8 to each of these experts, you have to say whether you want the witness to
9 attend for cross-examination and also say whether you challenge the
10 qualifications of the expert of the relevance of the report. That's all
11 you have to do at this stage. As far as responding is concerned, your
12 own experts will in due course give whatever evidence you seek to lead
13 from them, but that's well down the line, as you know, that's a long way
15 So even though it is a long way away, it's, I think, unrealistic
16 not to try to assess which of these ought really to be the subject of
17 challenge and whether the evidence in the case on issues such as
18 pathology and other related forensic issues is genuinely in dispute or
19 whether we can find a way of dealing with that without spending valuable
20 time in court on it. The danger of paying attention in court to
21 unnecessary cross-examination of witnesses is that it diverts attention
22 from the really crucial issues in the case, and the parties themselves
23 may not effectively present their case properly if they get diverted into
24 issues which are immaterial.
25 So we remain hopeful that you will see in some of these reports
1 material that you don't really want to challenge, that you can accept,
2 and try to concentrate on the ones which you plainly -- I can see now
3 some that you're plainly going to want to challenge. So what we'll do is
4 simply note that no order is being made in relation to the operation of
5 Rule 94 bis, which means that your time-limit for filing your notice in
6 relation to each of the experts is 30 days from the date on which the
7 Prosecution filed their notice.
8 I now turn to the Prosecution to clarify when this process will
9 be completed. At the 65 ter Conference the position was a bit
10 unsatisfactory, and I hope that the situation may have changed a little.
11 MR. TIEGER: Well, Your Honour, it did change a bit, but I
12 suspect with regard to the -- what I consider to be the one -- well, the
13 relative handful of problematic prospective disclosures, I'm not sure the
14 situation has changed. It -- I understood -- I mean, there are a number
15 of disclosures, and I can go through them one by one, but I think the
16 Court was made aware of those during the course of the 65 ter Conference.
17 The bulk of the disclosures will be made on or before the end of this
18 month. There were, as I mentioned, a handful that I understood and that
19 were related to the Court as being anticipated for May, one in particular
20 that was anticipated for the end of May that the Court expressed concern
21 about. My first question therefore would be: Does the Court wish me to
22 go through these individually or address myself to the disclosures that
23 are anticipated for May?
24 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, the one that was for the end of May was
25 Mark Thompson, but I understood that was changed to the end of April by
1 the Prosecution.
2 MR. TIEGER: That's correct. Yes, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE BONOMY: So what was the other one for the end of May?
4 MR. TIEGER: I believe --
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Oh yeah, sorry, do we -- is it number 26 on the
7 MR. TIEGER: That's correct, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: The Rule 70 witness. Now, his name can now be
9 disclosed, can it?
10 MR. TIEGER: Yes.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: That's Mr. Butler.
12 MR. TIEGER: Correct.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: And there are previous documents -- previous
14 reports done by him and all that was outstanding was some new addendum?
15 MR. TIEGER: That's right.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, does that relate to matters on which no other
17 expert will give evidence?
18 MR. TIEGER: Yes.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: And why is it going to take to the 31st of May to
20 make that available?
21 MR. TIEGER: That matter has been broached with the expert as I
22 understand it. Certainly more than willing -- first of all, I'm more
23 than willing to again raise the Court's concerns and see if the schedule
24 can be modified in any way. But I can tell the Court that we express our
25 strong interest in the earliest possible completion date. I believe that
1 was understood by Mr. Butler, and I can only relate the nature of his
2 schedule and the nature of the effort involved led him to conclude that
3 he wouldn't be in a position to complete the report before that time.
4 Now, what I can relate by way of some modest consolation in that
5 regard is that we've disclosed the other reports related to Mr. Butler.
6 This will be supplemental information. I think that it would be
7 relatively -- and I obviously use the term guardedly, and then easy to
8 absorb in the wake of an understanding of and a necessary review of the
9 other reports upon which the Prosecution relies which were prepared by
10 Mr. Butler previously.
11 JUDGE BONOMY: One other matter that Mr. Karadzic has raised and
12 which the Trial Chamber raised at the 65 ter Conference was the use of
13 reports which relate to other accused and from which parts may have to be
14 redacted for the purpose of this or at least ignored for the purpose of
15 this case. And following on that, in one instance at least, there was
16 notification of a change of position and that Riedlmayer's report would
17 be reviewed and one prepared for the purpose of this case.
18 MR. TIEGER: That's correct, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, is it going to take time to prepare it, or is
20 that instantly available?
21 MR. TIEGER: No, that will take some time, and that's another
22 matter that would be ready by the end of the month.
23 JUDGE BONOMY: Now, are there any others where that's being done?
24 MR. TIEGER: Yes, but no -- no other anticipated reports that are
25 different from what was related at the time of the 65 ter. And what I
1 mean by that is I think the understanding at the time of the 65 ter
2 Conference was that the Prosecution would rely on the previously
3 submitted reports by Mr. Riedlmayer. That has given way to the
4 anticipation of a new -- entirely new report, case-specific report, which
5 will be ready by the end of the month. With the exception of that
6 change, the positions related at the 65 ter with respect to the
7 submission of reports remains the same. Some dates have changed, I
8 should indicate that, and that is the anticipated submission date for the
9 Theunens report, which was the end of the month, and I believe was ended
10 as the end of the month --
11 JUDGE BONOMY: Yeah.
12 MR. TIEGER: -- is now the middle of the month, April 15th. And
13 the Phillips report is roughly the same, although a little earlier,
14 anticipated for the 11th of this month.
15 JUDGE BONOMY: There is one for which the date has already passed
16 which I don't think we have. Is that --
17 MR. TIEGER: Ms. Hanson's report; correct. And that is
18 anticipated for April 9th.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: And I think the one -- yeah, the other two late --
20 very late dates were Thompson propaganda, we mentioned it a moment ago.
21 It doesn't seem a subject you would expect to take all this time to write
23 MR. TIEGER: When you say the late date, I mean, you're talking
24 about the --
25 JUDGE BONOMY: That's the end of April.
1 MR. TIEGER: Yes, that's right.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: That's still quite some time. This date has been
3 in this list for some time. That one can't be hurried along?
4 MR. TIEGER: Well, as I indicated before, I will be more than
5 happy to recontact Mr. Thompson to see if that's possible, certainly at a
6 minimum to relate the Court's interest in the earliest possible
7 submission date, and we'll do that as quickly as possible. But I
8 believe -- I mean, I hope and I do believe that that interest was
9 conveyed before, and I would expect that the projected date was arrived
10 at with that understanding, that is, the understanding that we hope to
11 get it as soon as possible.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
13 Mr. Karadzic, is there anything further you want to say on the
14 dates for submitting the expert reports, bearing in mind now that all the
15 dates proposed are in the month of April with the exception of one -- oh,
16 and one other that needs to be clarified. Sorry, Mr. Tieger, is there a
17 date for number 25?
18 MR. TIEGER: Yeah, I believe there were two others that were --
19 JUDGE BONOMY: Oh, yes, van der Weijden.
20 MR. TIEGER: Yeah, I think --
21 JUDGE BONOMY: And Torkildsen.
22 MR. TIEGER: Right. Torkildsen was raised at the 65 ter. I know
23 that's a matter that Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff has been in contact with the
24 expert on, has -- again, has pushed for the earliest possible date. I
25 don't believe based on the witness's schedule and the amount of material
1 he anticipates reviewing that it would be realistic for me to suggest
2 that further contact with the expert will accelerate the date. I'm not
3 refusing to do so, but I am aware of the efforts that were made
4 previously to move this process forward, and I think the realities of the
5 situation are that that's the -- that that remains a realistic date.
6 With respect to -- I'm trying to use the numbers which are not on
7 this particular list, if you will bear with me a moment. Number 24
8 General Vegh.
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.
10 MR. TIEGER: I think Ms. Uertz-Retzlaff related his particular
11 circumstances at the 65 ter.
12 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.
13 MR. TIEGER: The submission of the report from number 23,
14 Mr. Van der Weijden, that date occurs because, as I understand it, the
15 expert is away from his home, out of his home country, will not be
16 returning until roughly that date, and requires some specific materials
17 in order to complete the process. So it's purely a matter of logistics,
18 unfortunately, as I understand it.
19 JUDGE BONOMY: And 25, I don't -- there's no date there.
20 MR. TIEGER: I think -- Your Honour, that notice was filed
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Ah, okay. Yeah. In fact, I have it noted.
23 Sorry, it's my mistake.
24 Now, Mr. Karadzic, is there anything that you would wish to
25 submit in relation to the dates by which these reports should be
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As far as I'm concerned, the sooner
3 the better. I will be in a position to comply with my obligations within
4 the 30-days' dead-line if the Registry provides me with everything that I
5 need. For 26 experts I should take at least one day for each of them and
6 decide what to do with them. That's a very tall order, but I will be
7 able to comply if everything else is in place, if I don't have any
8 problems with nominating my assistants, and if I have the funds for my
9 26 experts. And in that sense, I believe that we will be able to respond
10 and that you will be satisfied with our response. We are not going to
11 create any further problems.
12 I would like to ask one more thing, if I orally challenge one of
13 the experts or their findings, does that mean that I have exhausted my
14 right to challenge that same expert in the courtroom? If that be the
15 case, then I would like to reserve my right to challenge the expert in
16 the courtroom.
17 JUDGE BONOMY: I don't think I follow what you've just said. If
18 you orally challenge the expert -- you mean you want to do it now?
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, no. Your proposal was for us
20 to leave as little as possible for the courtroom, and rather to submit
21 written submissions within the 30 days and state what I'm going to do
22 with the expert, whether I'm going to challenge that expert or not. My
23 question was this: If I challenge the expert before the trial in a
24 written form, does that mean that I have relinquished my right on
25 challenging that same expert during the process?
1 JUDGE BONOMY: No, I've obviously not made this clear to you.
2 All that you're being required to do under the Rule is state whether you
3 wish to challenge the expert or not, and the actual challenge will take
4 place in the courtroom. You don't need to say at this stage the basis
5 for the challenge or anything of that nature. That doesn't mean to say
6 that it would be wise not to try to limit the challenge the more time you
7 have and the more familiar you are with the material. There may be only
8 certain things you want to challenge, and it would be helpful later
9 before we get to the witness to know whether you have reduced the area
10 that you wish to challenge him on. All that you must declare at this
11 stage is whether you wish to cross-examine him. And you must also
12 declare whether you are challenging his qualifications or the relevance
13 of his statement, and for that you really should say on what basis you
14 challenge the qualifications that the relevance of his statement. That's
15 rather different. You need to give a basis for that challenge. But as
16 far as cross-examining him in court, you just need to state you intention
17 to do so.
18 We will have to have a break at some stage for purposes related
19 to the recording of the proceedings and now seem an appropriate time to
20 have that break, so we will break for ...
21 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE BONOMY: We'll adjourn just now and resume at 5.00. I
23 don't expect that the hearing will last much more than half an hour after
25 --- Recess taken at 4.34 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 5.02 p.m.
2 JUDGE BONOMY: The Chamber will require the Prosecution to file
3 the expert witness statements and reports in accordance with the
4 anticipated dates as now amended. So going quickly through the
5 list - and please correct me if I inaccurately state any of these
6 dates - Brunborg, the 9th of April; Donia, the 15th of April; Hanson, the
7 9th of April; Philipps, the 11th of April; Tabeau, the 9th of April and
8 the 1st of May, two different reports; Theunens, the 15th of April;
9 Thompson, the 30th of April; Torkildsen, the 7th of May; Treanor, the
10 30th of April; van der Weijden, the 15th of May; Vegh, the 7th of May;
11 and Butler, the 31st of May.
12 Now, Mr. Tieger, the accused pointed out that the form in which
13 these reports are presented could be a source of difficulty. And the
14 Chamber without having yet had the opportunity of studying any of them in
15 sufficient detail was concerned at the 65 ter Conference that the
16 recycling of previous reports could create potential difficulty. We
17 simply invite the Prosecution to look carefully at any situation where
18 they might be able to improve the presentation in a way that will make it
19 more easily understood by the accused. We note that steps have already
20 been taken in relation to Nielsen to alert him to parts which are not
21 going to be referred to, albeit they are in the report from the past.
22 And as long as the position is clear, then there will be no problem for
23 either him or the Bench. But we are concerned that there may be some
24 where it's rather a complex exercise to identify what relates to
25 Mr. Karadzic's case and what relates only to other cases. So please be
1 alert to ensuring that any such difficulty is resolved before the reports
2 are filed.
3 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
5 We still await your interim pre-trial brief, but we do have in
6 mind a date for submission of your final brief with a view to triggering
7 other aspects of Rule 65 ter, and the date that we are considering is the
8 18th of May. Do you see that as a problem?
9 MR. TIEGER: Well, Your Honour, obviously not so I can respond
10 with -- immediately to that. I think we anticipated some aspects at or
11 around that time. If the Court could give me just a moment at least to
12 speak with Ms. Sutherland and Mr. Reid, I would appreciate it very much.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes.
14 [Prosecution counsel confer]
15 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, could I ask for one nuanced version of
16 that, and that would be to stagger the actual disclosure of the 65 ter
17 exhibit list one week later, so that would mean the brief and the list of
18 documents on the 18th but the actual disclosure a week later. Combining
19 all those on the same day is an enormously complex logistical exercise,
20 and I think in the long run this would result in fewer potential
22 JUDGE BONOMY: Do I take it from that that the bulk of exhibits
23 are not yet disclosed in any form?
24 [Prosecution counsel confer]
25 MR. TIEGER: The bulk I would say no. I mean, a large number of
1 exhibits have been disclosed, but it would be not more than 50 per cent,
3 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you.
4 Mr. Karadzic, do you wish to make any comment on the date that
5 the Chamber should fix for the Prosecution to file its final trial brief
6 and the list of witnesses and exhibits?
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I've already said that I do not
8 object to the dead-lines being pushed, but not limitlessly. If I were on
9 provisional release, I would not care. I would like the trial to start
10 as soon as possible but still to be given time to prepare. If I remain
11 in detention, they should speed things along; however, I'm not going to
12 object to their request to be given enough time. I also have to say that
13 I may also need more than 30 days to decide about my own attitude towards
14 their experts. I'm not going to be able to deal with one expert a day,
15 and I will not be able to say after such short period what I am going to
16 do with these experts. I'm talking about the 30-day limit according to
17 Rule 94 bis.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: That's a different position from the one you took
19 earlier. Are you asking us to reconsider the decision we've already
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to say that I am not
22 sure that I will have everything at the disposal that I might need. I'm
23 talking about the funds to pay my experts, all the team members
24 appointed, all the 26 experts. These are my reservations that I have
25 regard to the possibilities to prepare my defence. I'm not objecting to
1 the extension of the dead-lines for the OTP, but I am asking for the same
2 allowances to be given to me. The Registry - and I must repeat - is
3 creating further problems for me as a result of the time they're taking
4 with the appointment of my team members.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, we're continually straying into other
6 territory. I'll try and take things in some sort of logical order. Just
7 give me a moment to clarify one thing.
8 [Pre-Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
9 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, we are prepared to reconsider the decision
10 we made earlier, and we will grant additional time and specify what that
11 is in a written order following this hearing. It may be along the lines
12 of giving you effectively for the ones which are either already disclosed
13 or about to be something like six weeks to respond, but for the later
14 ones it will probably retain the 30-day dead-line so that the work can be
15 properly programmed. You should bear in mind, though, that in one case
16 at least the 30 days are almost over, that you've had disclosure in the
17 course of March in, I think, three cases, and that time has already been
18 running according to the Rules, but we will extend that as well so that
19 any misunderstanding is removed, and we will do that in the terms of a
20 written order.
21 The matter you last raised in what you've just said was to
22 complain again about the way the Registry's treating your attempts to
23 build your team. Now, we've been over that today already, and it's clear
24 that you have not submitted applications for all the members of the team
25 you want, and you say that that is because you're not in a position yet
1 to judge the situation. Now, that's not the fault of the Registry as I
2 understand it. I thought you were saying that that depended upon the
3 outcome of the appeal, and if you were successful then there might be a
4 different financial arrangement available. I didn't understand it to be
5 a matter of Registry conduct.
6 Now, what is it you're complaining about in the conduct of the
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The problem lays in the fact that
9 the three that have already been appointed, the two legal advisors, the
10 highest rank, and the investigator are the people that I was waiting for
11 a long time. And in the meantime one of them has been challenged for a
12 long time quite unjustifiably. And then Mr. Sladojevic, who can be of
13 much assistance to me given all the restrictions that I am facing has
14 been turned down for reasons that are not understandable to me because of
15 the conflict of interest. I have filed my appeal against all the
16 decisions, and my problem is this: I can't provide a whole list because
17 I don't know who will be turned down. It may happen that I may not be
18 able to compose my whole team. If they were to deal with my requests
19 promptly, I will be able to file my requests accordingly. It is in my
20 best interests to have a good team and to have it as soon as possible. I
21 know that there have been some personnel changes in the Registry, but
22 that should not have any impact on me.
23 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE BONOMY: My understanding, Mr. Karadzic, is that there are
25 no applications pending before the Registry. They've dealt with
1 everything. And we've dealt with the one for access to the EDS earlier
2 this afternoon. So which application are you saying the Registry are
3 not -- are sitting on at the moment?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] There are no requests pending. I
5 am waiting for the appeal in the case of the appointment of
6 Mr. Sladojevic. That is the pending request. If Mr. Sladojevic is
7 turned down, then I have to file different proposals. I have to ask for
8 new people, and that is the essence of the matter. If Sladojevic,
9 however, is appointed, then I have room to nominate other people; if not,
10 then I have to find another person who is fluent in English, maybe even
11 in Dutch, who will be here all the time, somebody who will fit in
12 Sladojevic's shoes.
13 JUDGE BONOMY: We've already been giving thought to your case in
14 relation to Sladojevic, and it presents certain problems for the
15 Trial Chamber. The decision on assignment is one for the Registry, and
16 there are limited circumstances in which the Trial Chamber can interfere
17 with that decision. But we will deal with it and make a decision very
18 quickly. I hope you'll have that decision next week. We understand why
19 someone like Mr. Sladojevic is a good choice of -- or has a range of
20 qualifications that are particularly appropriate for your case, but his
21 involvement in other cases does present an issue that has to be carefully
22 considered. And we have to address that and the Registry approach to
23 that before we can make a final decision, but we will do it very quickly
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I believe that his
1 participation in other cases are now over with the sentences having been
2 passed, so that deals with all the possible problems. So this is not
3 just my caprice. I need to have an advisor on a daily basis who will
4 help me, and the Registry's only paying for their stay in The Hague for
5 three days. It's not good enough for my defence to be successful.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: Please understand, though, that there is a
7 difference between the situation where you simply yourself appoint
8 someone and bear full responsibility for that person, including payment,
9 and the situation where a public authority has to give a stamp of
10 approval to that person's role and different considerations apply. But
11 we will have regard to these and, as I say, give you a decision as soon
12 as possible. And that will be quickly, it will be in the course of next
14 Now, the final matter, the matter on which we embarked upon this
15 exchange, relates to the time-limit for the pre-trial brief and of course
16 the lists of witnesses. And we note that you do not take objection to
17 the dates proposed by the Prosecution in light of our indication of the
18 18th of May. So we will order the final pre-trial brief and list of
19 witnesses and list of exhibits to be filed by the Prosecution on or
20 before the 18th of May. And the copies of the exhibits not so far served
21 on you to be served on or before the 25th of May. But again, that will
22 be the subject of the written order which will follow this hearing.
23 That written order will also contain other relevant dates as part
24 of a work-plan setting out the timetable for the remaining aspects of the
25 pre-trial phase of the case. There are a number of motions now before
1 the Trial Chamber for determination. In some we have responses, and in
2 others we do not yet have responses. We are addressing the ones that we
3 can address, and you can expect decisions in these fairly soon. One of
4 the motions that we have a response to now is that in relation to -- is
5 the first motion of the Prosecution in relation to adjudicated facts.
6 Now, Mr. Tieger, the response of the accused is to say that even
7 if the Trial Chamber does decide to take judicial notice of adjudicated
8 facts, he will nevertheless bring evidence to rebut these. Now, in light
9 of that statement, is the Prosecution likely to simply tender the
10 evidence in any event even if the Trial Chamber does decide to take
11 notice of the adjudicated facts?
12 MR. TIEGER: When you say - and I seek a bit of clarification on
13 the question, Your Honour - when you say "tender the evidence," do you
14 mean in addition to the -- should the Trial Chamber rule favourable on
15 the --
16 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes --
17 MR. TIEGER: -- motion or adjudicated facts -- with the -- in
18 light of the circumstances you just outlined, would the Prosecution then
19 produce the witnesses in any event?
20 JUDGE BONOMY: Yes, because on the basis that these are simply
21 presumptions and not established facts at that stage.
22 MR. TIEGER: I would say that depends -- well, first of all, I --
23 the -- we would not act in disregard of the fact that the motion for
24 adjudicated facts had been ruled on favourably, so it would play a role
25 in our determination of the witnesses to be called. The -- and the
1 determination of whether or not witnesses would have to be called at all
2 with respect to the particular areas addressed by the adjudicated facts
3 would depend, I would think, on some foreshadowing of whether or not the
4 Prosecution would be allowed leeway in rebuttal to address issues raised
5 by the accused and by the Defence in response to the adjudicated facts.
6 JUDGE BONOMY: One way then of focusing this issue is for you in
7 the pre-trial brief to mention the adjudicated facts and their place in
8 your scheme of the case which might lead to the Trial Chamber
9 requiring -- in fact, the Rules would then require the accused in his
10 pre-trial brief to specify those with which he takes issue. But you'll
11 understand our concern that a great deal of time could be consumed in
12 addressing the question of adjudicated facts, and it would be time ill
13 spent if in the end of the day the issues were simply reconsidered on the
14 basis of evidence.
15 MR. TIEGER: And I understand the Court's position. And I saw
16 that that matter was addressed to some extent or raised in the context of
17 the 65 ter. And that seems to me to be a matter that is advanced by the
18 type of discussion the Court has raised now, that is, what are the
19 Prosecution's intentions with respect to the issues embraced by the 65 --
20 by the adjudicated facts submission and for the Prosecution for its part
21 to know what the lay of the land might be should those matters be
22 challenged. As I say, I certainly understand the Court's position. If
23 everybody's putting -- and we've already put tremendous effort into the
24 adjudicated facts motion with the expectation that it can have a positive
25 effect on the expeditious nature of the trial. So that has been our
1 intention. Obviously we have to consider the factors the court
2 mentioned, but it seems to me there is a way through that thicket if
3 there's proper communication, first of all beginning with the approach
4 the Court just suggested.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Well, I think that you should give this a thought
6 prior to the next Status Conference because the first motion perhaps
7 doesn't present so many problems, but the second one would because of its
8 size. By the time of the next Status Conference, we may know what the
9 response to that motion is, and we can then perhaps address this in a
10 more informed way. So I think you should have in mind the possibility
11 that the accused would be expected to challenge specifically and give
12 reasons for challenging those facts which he does not accept insofar as
13 they are set out specifically in the pre-trial brief.
14 MR. TIEGER: And I'd only add one additional matter, Your Honour,
15 and that is, again having reviewed the 65 ter Conference transcript and
16 seeing that this matter was raised and that the question was raised about
17 other cases in which adjudicated facts had been presented, I went back
18 and looked at some of those cases, and the adjudicated facts submissions
19 and rulings have been on motions that were quite extensive and detailed.
20 JUDGE BONOMY: I think the trouble is that none of these cases
21 have reached their conclusion yet, and therefore it remains to be seen
22 how effective these early decisions were, much as they are to be
24 MR. TIEGER: No, I do understand, Your Honour.
25 [Pre-Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
1 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Karadzic, you've heard that discussion about
2 the Prosecution motions to have the Chamber take judicial notice of
3 adjudicated facts. Is there anything on that subject that you wish to
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] The number of facts that the
6 Prosecution refer to in their first motion is an enormous one, but I have
7 already responded. I'm going to respond to the other motion once I've
8 received it; however, I have not received it. I wish to say, though,
9 that I do not wish to assist the OTP in any way. I am going to challenge
10 everything. I am going to adduce evidence. We can only agree perhaps on
11 whether it was sunny on a particular day or rainy. Everything else is
12 going to be challenged, starting with joint criminal enterprise and
13 everything that happened on the ground. Everything is controversial.
14 Everything is going to be challenged and the Prosecution should be aware
15 of that. We are going to challenge everything.
16 JUDGE BONOMY: There are matters, though, which don't necessarily
17 go to the root of the case against you, that -- but are important as
18 background for a proper understanding of the events that occurred. And
19 some of them may relate to dates, for example, of events which you don't
20 dispute. Have you not considered whether there are elements in there
21 that don't really require to be challenged?
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] For the time being, I only have in
23 mind the weather; that I'm not going to challenge, but we'll see how
24 things evolve over time. If it's sunny, I'm not going to challenge that.
25 I will agree that it was sunny, yes.
1 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Tieger, that exhausts the matters I have for
3 consideration. Is there anything else you wish to raise?
4 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour. No, there's not.
5 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Karadzic, is there anything else you wish to
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, yes. One of the
8 most important questions is that in Bosnia-Herzegovina the OTP is
9 carrying out certain actions that would have caused such an effect in
10 your countries that perhaps this case would be dropped altogether. In
11 addition to what happened on the 2nd of December, this is now the second
12 time - and now we even have this on paper, we have tangible evidence, and
13 we have persons who we can now recognise as working on behalf of the
14 OTP - they are conducting searches, assaults, completely illegal actions
15 against the homes of my immediate or extended family as they search for
16 documents that are important for my case. This involves many different
18 First of all, I am here now, and there is no reason whatsoever to
19 disturb my family or my friends; secondly, I am in the process of
20 collecting evidence. If somebody wishes to seize that evidence from my
21 family or friends who are collecting this for me, that means an
22 obstruction of my defence. I know that you said once that you wonder
23 what the Trial Chamber has to do with that; however, now there is written
24 evidence of what the Prosecution has been doing. This is yet another
25 link in this endless chain of irregularities on behalf of the OTP. I ask
1 the Chamber to order the OTP and the authorities in Bosnia-Herzegovina
2 that they stop with all these searches for my evidence, to stop
3 approaching my family and friends, and stop approaching my potential
4 witnesses, even more so because these actions can actually be taken as
5 intimidation of my potential witnesses. This is something that the
6 Trial Chamber truly has to deal with because the Trial Chamber is in
7 charge of the regularity of these proceedings.
8 JUDGE BONOMY: What is the written evidence that you say is
9 available of -- to substantiate this?
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, those who carried out
11 investigations left warrants that were given to them by the Office of the
12 Prosecutor of Bosnia-Herzegovina working on orders from the Prosecutors
13 here, collecting documents that will be used in the proceedings against
14 me in this Tribunal. They were looking for this in the apartment of my
15 sister-in-law this time, and the persons that are referred to as
16 investigators are those who are immediately responsible to this OTP, and
17 we know them from before. I cannot believe that they haven't got all the
18 documents that they are looking for. They are looking for the archives
19 of Republika Srpska. On the basis of what did they indict me if they
20 don't have all those documents already? On the basis of what have I been
21 indicted in the first place? This looks like nervous gunmen who first
22 shoot and then ask questions. In my view, the Prosecution is totally
23 unprepared, and I am footing the bill and the Defence. The regularity of
24 these proceedings is being infringed upon. I really don't get nervous
25 all that easily, but they are causing me pain by terrorising my family
1 and my friends.
2 Excellencies, hundreds of people there are jeopardised because of
3 me. Leave aside my family. Hundreds of my friends to this day do not
4 have personal documents, they don't have the right to travel, and now
5 everyone has seen how I lived in Belgrade, and I really don't want to
6 behave like a person from folklore of our people. I did not really have
7 others supporting me. I lived on my own, and hundreds of people suffered
8 a great deal because of me. To this day they have been denied all their
9 rights. And in the meantime they continue searching for my potential
10 documents and material -- documents and witnesses. That is
11 impermissible. I think that the case would have been thrown out of court
12 in many Western countries because of all these omissions and
13 transgressions on the part of the Prosecution.
14 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Karadzic, what you have said does not contain
16 any specific complaint of misconduct that we could have regard to or take
17 any action in relation to. Indeed, you are not even directly the victim
18 of any of the conduct that you describe. There are others, you say, that
19 are affected. Well, it's a matter that they may choose to raise in the
20 appropriate quarters. If you were to come into possession of any
21 document indicating illegal conduct, then that's something you can draw
22 to you are attention. If you have any other specific evidence of illegal
23 conduct that you think we might have jurisdiction in relation to because
24 it would interfere with the interests of justice here, then again that is
25 something you can draw that to our attention. But in the absence of any
1 specific complaint that would fall within our jurisdiction, there is no
2 action we can take.
3 Now, is there any other matter you wish to raise with us?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I just have to clarify this. The
5 OTP is instructing the authorities in -- of Bosnia-Herzegovina to search
6 for evidence and documents that could be used against me in the homes of
7 my family members. I am going to give you a copy of that search warrant
8 and what it is that they're looking for. That is intimidation of my
9 witnesses. That jeopardises my defence. It is a matter that this
10 Trial Chamber is supposed to deal with. This is an attempt to seize what
11 I may have collected so far as evidence. It doesn't have to do with my
12 sister-in-law or my friends; it has to do with me. They are suffering,
13 but I am suffering too. And also in the process my collection of
14 evidence is being jeopardised.
15 I kindly ask that you order that these persons and documents be
16 protected. They do not have the right to barge into people's homes and
17 collect documents that they may use against me. They cannot do this in
18 this stage. I am here now. Now I have the right to collect evidence for
19 my defence and to disclose this if I decide to do so. I can file a
20 motion to have the case dismissed as such because my rights are being
22 [Pre-Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE BONOMY: The points that you make in a very general way do
24 not on the face of it indicate illegal conduct. You say that you are in
25 possession of a document. If you wish to invite the Chamber to take any
1 action, you will have to submit a written motion indicating in what
2 respect you consider that there is illegal conduct occurring that amounts
3 to an interference with the interests of justice and invite us to take
4 action on that. But from what you've said, it does not at first sight
5 appear as if that test will be met; however, we'll leave it to you to
6 decide whether to submit the matter with a written motion.
7 Now, is there any other issue that you wish to raise?
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I wanted to deal with it briefly,
9 that is why I asked for it orally, to have this order issued to them,
10 that they stop impeding my defence. However, it is with pleasure that
11 I'm going to file this motion, explaining what it is that they are asking
12 from my family. And I understand that in this way they are obstructing
13 my defence; they are also disturbing the life of my family; and also
14 they're trying to take away documents that may be used here in court by
15 me and my defence. That is the most important matter that I wanted to
16 deal with here and now in addition to all the other irregularities that
17 threatened the possibility of a fair trial.
18 JUDGE BONOMY: Thank you for your submissions and your
19 assistance. And thank you to the Prosecution also for their submissions
20 and assistance. We anticipate that there should be another
21 Status Conference roughly four weeks from now and tentatively indicate
22 that that will be on the 6th of May. There will be a Scheduling Order in
23 due course specifying the time and confirming the date.
24 That brings this Status Conference to a conclusion. The court is
25 now adjourned.
1 --- Whereupon the Status Conference
2 adjourned at 5.50 p.m.