Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 71

 1                          Thursday, 5 April 2007

 2                          [Status Conference]

 3                          [Open session]

 4                          [The appellant entered court]

 5                          --- Upon commencing at 8.03 a.m.

 6            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  A very good morning to everybody.  Behind the

 7    scenes, in particular when it's that early, but we read that we must have

 8    another Status Conference before Easter.

 9            May I ask you, Mr. Registrar, please call the case.

10            THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honour.  This is case number

11    IT-00-39-A, the Prosecutor versus Momcilo Krajisnik.

12            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you very much.  And may I ask the

13    appearances, please for the Prosecution first.

14            MS. DAHL:  May it please the Court I am Christine Dahl and with me

15    today is Shelagh McCall.

16            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you.

17            MR. NICHOLLS:  And I am Colin Nicholls for Mr. Krajisnik.

18            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Mr. Nicholls, and as usual we have as

19    interpreter  ...

20            MR. NICHOLLS:  Mr. Karganovic, Stefan Karganovic.

21            MR. KARGANOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours, Stefan Karganovic.

22            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  May I turn immediately to you, Mr. Krajisnik,

23    with two questions first.  Can you follow the proceedings in a language

24    you understand and at the same time do you have any complaints as regards

25    your health situation or the situation in the Detention Unit?

Page 72

 1            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I can follow the

 2    proceedings in my own language, and I don't have any complaints about my

 3    health situation or the situation in the Detention Unit.

 4            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you.  The number of motions and documents

 5    before the Appeals Chamber is increasing, so let's try not to forget

 6    anything and to have some order.

 7            First of all, let me say that I'm extremely grateful for both

 8    parties having brought submissions, Prosecution in relation to the

 9    question of self-representation on appeal.  Prosecution requested that the

10    Appeals Chamber substitute the attached brief in full.  That was the brief

11    of the 3rd of April, 2007.  This is so granted.

12            Then we also got the submissions by Mr. Nicholls on the question

13    of amici curiae or amicus curiae in the concrete case on the higher level.

14    I'm also grateful for this.

15            And then finally, admittedly a little bit out of surprise,

16    yesterday late in the evening I received a letter dated Monday, 2 April

17    2007, from Mr. Krajisnik himself where it reads in the subject, "Complaint

18    concerning self-representation."

19            Mr. Krajisnik, may I ask you, when did you send this letter to the

20    Registry?

21            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] On Monday I wrote the letter, and

22    I intended to give it to Mr. Karganovic to translate it, for you to

23    receive it translated.  In the Detention Unit they would not allow me to

24    do that, and they told me that I could send the letter directly to you.

25    The day before yesterday, i.e., on Tuesday, I gave the letter to somebody

Page 73

 1    to send it to you, and I fully expected that you would receive the letter

 2    on the same day, on Tuesday.

 3            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  I did not and I'm not quite sure whether the

 4    parties did.  We tried to do it by e-mail yesterday.  The one sent to

 5    Mr. Nicholls came back.  May I ask the registrar, please, to distribute

 6    copies of this letter dated Monday, the 2nd of April, 2007, in its English

 7    version to all participants.

 8            MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, I provided Mr. Nicholls a copy of this

 9    morning given that he's here from out of town.

10            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Okay.  Thank you for --

11            MR. NICHOLLS: [Microphone not activated]

12            THE INTERPRETER:  Microphone for the counsel, please.

13            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  I can see the party-driven system has also some

14    advantages, and thank you very much for this.  But to go into the details.

15            The question before us today and the same question was before us

16    already during the last Status Conference that we know unambiguously what

17    is your desire, to represent yourself, or to be represented by your

18    Defence team in an open way, or whether you would opt for Mr. Nicholls as

19    continued assigned counsel.

20            The last time I recall, you said that you would contact Mr. --

21    Professor Stojanovic from Belgrade to take over the appeals proceedings.

22    May I ask, in which way did you contact Professor Stojanovic?

23            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Immediately after the end of the

24    Status Conference, on several occasions I tried and finally managed to get

25    hold of Professor Stojanovic over the phone.  To my deep regret, he was

Page 74

 1    not able to come to The Hague, and he was not able to accept the role of

 2    the lead counsel in this case.

 3            In my letter, I have quoted his reasons for which he has decided

 4    not to be the lead counsel and while he accepted to be a member of my team

 5    should I decide to represent myself, I can give you those reasons briefly.

 6            The first reason is that after our last conversation which took

 7    place in March when he was willing to come and discuss the terms of him

 8    taking over the case, I had to call him after that and tell him that he

 9    couldn't come because this was not in compliance with the provisions laid

10    out by the Registry.  In the meantime, he has taken over some other

11    obligations because he's an a full-time professor.

12            The second reason why he couldn't be here even for one day is

13    twofold.  The first one is the fact that a his visa has expired, and the

14    second reason is that immediately prior to our conversation his mother had

15    a brain stroke and he has to look after her.

16            So, Your Honour, this would be my answer to your question.

17            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Let me ask you, did you request for a supervised

18    telephone call or was it an open phone call, an uncontrolled phone call?

19            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] The telephone conversation was an

20    uncontrolled phone call.  I didn't use the privileges of a supervised

21    call.  Truth be told, I -- it never even occurred to me to ask for a

22    privileged line with Mr. Stojanovic.

23            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  As we discuss the last time, you got the

24    specific allowance of to have a discussion unsupervised for about 15

25    minutes in the Detention Unit itself, but apparently you were allowed to

Page 75

 1    have an uncontrolled telephone call with a member, as you call it yourself

 2    in the letter, a member of your Defence team.

 3            So -- but in conclusion as regards Professor Stojanovic, he's

 4    unable to appear as your Defence right now; correct?

 5            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] This is correct.

 6            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Is it furthermore correct that then later on you

 7    tried to engage the services of Mr. Dejan Brasic also over the phone?

 8            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] A minor correction if I may,

 9    please.  When I arrived -- may I proceed, Your Honour?

10            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Yes, please.

11            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] When I arrived in the Detention

12    Unit, I received a decision by the Registry in English that the

13    Prosecution announced preventing Mr. Brasic from being engaged as my

14    Defence counsel.  I called him also in an uncontrolled manner, on an

15    uncontrolled line, and since I knew that he could not be engaged, I

16    expressed my regret for possibly having contributed to his fine by asking

17    for him to be my Defence counsel.  We finished this conversation with an

18    understanding that he could not act as my Defence counsel because of the

19    obstacles posed by the Registry.  And I repeat again, this conversation

20    was also an uncontrolled one.

21            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you.  But was it already clarified during

22    the last Status Conference that Mr. Brasic is not able for the reasons we

23    all know to be -- to appear before this Tribunal any longer?

24            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Yes.  Yes.  The Prosecution stated

25    that, and the decision on the -- serve to confirm that this was not

Page 76

 1    possible.  I understood it last time that a decision had been reached, but

 2    I did not receive it myself until a few days ago.

 3            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  I don't want to go into details of the

 4    background, why Mr. Brasic can't appear any longer.  It's a decision taken

 5    by the Registry and by a Trial Chamber as regards the fine.

 6            In conclusion, I have to ask you, Mr. Krajisnik, whenever you want

 7    to address the Chamber, please don't do it personally in addressing a

 8    letter to me myself but to the entire Chamber.  As it is custom in our

 9    Tribunal, let it be filed.  And you have also an assigned -- properly

10    assigned counsel, Mr. Nicholls, and Mr. Nicholls would take care of this

11    in order to avoid any delay.

12            However, having heard your submissions, I expect a report from the

13    Registrar no later than 12th of April on two issues.  First, how is it

14    possible that Mr. Krajisnik had contact with two members of his so-called

15    Defence team from the United Nations Detention Unit without any control,

16    without any monitoring.

17            And second, why is it that the letter arrived only by the end of

18    office hours yesterday, because having had the letter beforehand, I could

19    have taken the appropriate steps and prepared this Status Conference in a

20    totally different way.  This letter is extremely short, and I think within

21    10 or 15 minutes with the assistance of a translator I could at least have

22    got a gist of that, of what is included.  So I'm -- was only able to

23    respond or to think about the content of this letter late yesterday

24    evening.

25            So now we have the situation Mr. Dershowitz is not available.

Page 77

 1    Mr. Brasic can't defend you.  Professor Stojanovic, for at least the time

 2    being, is not - in part able, in part willing - to take over your defence.

 3            May I therefore ask you, and I think if I'm wrong please correct

 4    me, you know the conditions of self-representation as highlighted in all

 5    detail in the last Status Conference by Mr. Petrov to you.  Is it correct

 6    that you know all the conditions, or shall I repeat them?

 7            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] I would be grateful to you if you

 8    could go over these conditions again.  One thing still remains unclear to

 9    me, and this thing has to do with the remuneration of the Defence team.

10    I'm grateful, Your Honour.

11            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  I think it was made abundantly clear that in

12    this case, as things stand now, you have an assigned counsel and this

13    counsel is paid by the international taxpayer, if you would decide to

14    defend yourself, then it would really mean that you have to defend

15    yourself.  There would be no financial support from the side of the

16    Tribunal.  In particular, costs for legal advisors, investigators, and so

17    on will not be covered.

18            As regards the question of privileged access to confidential

19    information and to enjoy unsupervised visits, in particular -- and all the

20    other means emanating from the right to have uncontrolled visits by

21    counsel, the so-called counsel/client privilege, this has to be decided on

22    a case-by-case basis, and primarily this person would have to fulfil

23    certain criteria listed in the code of conduct for Defence counsel.  But

24    as I said in the beginning, the Tribunal will not tolerate so-called

25    undercover defence.  We fight or searching -- we are searching for the

Page 78

 1    truth and searching for justice by open means, with open weapons, and not

 2    in a disguised way.

 3            I think it's clear enough.  Defending yourself means at the same

 4    time if you would want to invoke this right and the -- of course the

 5    Appeals Chamber would have to decide on this, all the costs have to be

 6    borne by you yourself.

 7            And to be abundantly clear, today is the last opportunity after, I

 8    think, more than six months that you finally decide whether you request to

 9    represent yourself during appeal or not.  I'm not prepared to continue

10    with the same game we had with Mr. Alan Dershowitz and now with,

11    unfortunately, Professor Stojanovic, but we need an immediate and final

12    and, first of all, unequivocal decision on your part.

13            May I ask, do you have any further questions before you give a

14    clear answer to this clear question?

15            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in my letter I have

16    also concluded a request which I may explain with regard to

17    Mr. Dershowitz, and I'm going to give you a clear answer as regards my

18    self-representation.

19            At this moment, I wish to represent myself, and I cannot accept

20    Mr. Nicholls as representing me in this appeals case.

21            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Mr. Krajisnik, may I come back to the last

22    Status Conference of Monday, 26 March 2007.  In the English version of the

23    not official, not corrected transcript it reads at page 32, Mr. Krajisnik,

24    you said, I quote as from line 8:  "At the moment there are investigators

25    who were members of the first team, and there are certain items for which

Page 79

 1    we would have to engage two Defence lawyers who would analyse in

 2    professional terms the appeal.  I cannot do this myself, and it would be

 3    necessary for me to have the possibility of receiving e-mail for both the

 4    Defence lawyers and for the investigators."

 5            Then you continue -- end of this quote.  You continue on line 16:

 6    "I'm convinced that I can defend myself in more professional way than the

 7    team that I currently have could do, but I believe that the appeal

 8    procedure is specific, and I would need counsel's assistance to deal with

 9    this appeals procedure.  So when I'm defending myself, I would like to

10    have a very experienced lawyer as a member of the Defence team."

11            We are still in a situation -- end of quote.  We are still in the

12    situation that you, on the one hand, cite, claim, that you want to defend

13    yourself, but on the other hand, you claim that you need a Defence team

14    for these purposes, in particular, a very experienced lawyer as a member

15    of the Defence team, in particular with a view to the difficulties of the

16    appeals proceedings.

17            And you continue on page 33 of the same transcript, lines 2 to

18    4 -- or 1 to 4:  "There are three individuals, and in addition there would

19    be the investigators who have been working on the case so far.  That would

20    be my Defence team, the team that would assist me and with which I would

21    prepare for the appellate proceedings."

22            So do you believe that you are able to defend yourself, as you

23    stated in your letter, or do you believe that you have to rely on a

24    Defence team as you said, in particular, a "very experienced lawyer" for

25    your assistance?  What is correct?

Page 80

 1            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at this Tribunal and

 2    with the Judges and the lawyers, the problem is always the same.  The

 3    problem is that the freedom of expression -- one's freedom of expression

 4    is restricted.  My freedom of expression is restricted.

 5            I'll be very clear now.  I'm now stating that I want to represent

 6    myself.  I want to defend myself because I believe this is the best and

 7    most efficient way me to establish what the truth is.  I have already said

 8    that I cannot accept Mr. Nicholls as counsel.  I can provide you with an

 9    explanation but I would rather not do so.

10            As far as my statement is concerned, the statement I made last

11    time we had a Status Conference.  This case represents an enormous

12    workload and one person alone cannot deal with this workload.  Even if

13    other lawyers were involved this couldn't be done.  I believe that I need

14    a number of individuals to help me in these appellate proceedings, and if

15    I am to engage someone, in that case I would like to engage someone who is

16    professional, someone who can deal with the procedural matters here and

17    can help in drafting and submitting an appeal.  I don't want to involve

18    Mr. Dershowitz in this now, but I can explain to you what I had in mind

19    last time.  I can explain how my initial position has evolved a bit.  I'm

20    repeating that I believe that it would be far more efficient for me to

21    defend myself.  I can file an appeal.  I can become involved in the

22    appellate proceedings.  I just need the right conditions.  But without

23    such conditions I think it will be very difficult for me to work on my

24    appeal since there are so many factors of a restrictive nature.

25            That's all I have to say for the moment, Mr. -- Your Honour.  If

Page 81

 1    you have any questions, I can answer them, but I think that I'm in a

 2    position to represent myself.

 3            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  And before -- Sorry, before I give the floor to

 4    the Prosecution, I saw all the time you were about to be on your foot, I

 5    want to clarify that we can get rid of this letter of 2nd April.  Your

 6    last question clearly falls in the jurisdiction of the Registry, but I can

 7    already now tell you based on the experience of the past that the Registry

 8    would never assign Mr. Dershowitz and grant him in addition -- that you

 9    "grant him in addition to the funds provided by the Registrar which are

10    designated for covering attorney expenses and shall only be used for that

11    purposes to allow you to participate in the financing in -- of my defence

12    with my own funds.  These funds would be provided by loans, and donations

13    would cover additional activities which were not carried out during the

14    presentation of evidence ..."

15            You will get the final answer on this last part of your answer by

16    the Registry in due time.

17            But to make one thing abundantly clear, it is not possible to

18    claim that you want to defend yourself and, on the other hand, that you

19    want to have a Defence team somewhere behind the scenes.  But let me give

20    me now the floor to the Prosecution, please.

21            MS. DAHL:  Thank you, Your Honour.  The Prosecution's interest is

22    in ensuring that the fairness of the proceedings is not impaired.  I

23    wanted to interject that before Mr. Krajisnik was asked whether his

24    request to represent himself was unequivocal, and it seems to -- continues

25    to be the opposite, that is equivocal or conditional, that it would be

Page 82

 1    essential to that exercise of the right, if he has such, to make sure that

 2    he is fully informed of the dangers of self-representation.  Many

 3    commentators have observed that self-representation is at tension with the

 4    fairness of the appellate proceedings and that it is in effect a waiver of

 5    the fairness of the proceedings for the convicted person to exercise his

 6    self-representation rights.

 7            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you.  I can only -- speaking for the time

 8    being for myself as a Judge of the Bench, I can only repeat what I said

 9    the last time, that when you compare the situation in different countries

10    all over the world and before international tribunals, because of the

11    difficulties in principle and in particular in some countries on appeal,

12    there is no such right of self-representation, and I quoted already from

13    the Farhad decision of the United States Supreme Court, Judge Reinhardt

14    saying in stating in a concurring opinion that, "allowing on appeal an

15    appellant to represent himself would amount to a waiver of a fair trial."

16            You should also bear this, please, in mind before deciding.  But

17    one point concerned me in your last submission earlier this morning when

18    you said that you are deprived of your freedom of expression.  Could you

19    please elaborate a little bit on this?  And what has this to do with

20    yourself representation or being presented by Defence counsel?

21            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Well, in fact I want to actively

22    participate in my defence, even if I was represented by counsel, but at

23    this point in time, now that I'm defending myself, it's important for me

24    to have contact with individuals who will obtain certain documents for me.

25            I'm deeply surprised now, since I wouldn't have the right to

Page 83

 1    assistant of any kind from my investigators or from anyone else.  I'd have

 2    to defend myself by drafting my appeals brief in the Detention Unit.  If

 3    that's a fair trial -- well, I don't think it is.  I believed I needed a

 4    team who could assist me.

 5            And to go back to your question, Your Honour, I cannot now send a

 6    fax, for example, to have Mr. Karganovic translate something for me.  I

 7    have to go through a lawyer whom I don't recognise as my lawyer.

 8            Secondly, I have to receive CDs of documents that relate to

 9    sessions of an Assembly to see whether what was said was actually said, to

10    see whether the transcript was correct.  I can't obtain this material.  I

11    have to send something by mail, for example.  I have to receive a 7 or

12    800-page document, and this is not possible.  So none of these conditions

13    currently exist.  I don't have the conditions that would enable me to

14    communicate with individuals to communicate with them and to gather

15    evidence in order to draft my appeals brief.  Until this issue of

16    self-defence is solved, I'm told I can't do anything.  I have to

17    communicate with Mr. Nicholls.

18            I have to be quite frank.  On three occasions to date I saw Mr.

19    Nicholls very briefly.  I haven't seen, though, what submissions he has

20    made.  Being a polite person, I communicated with him to a certain extent,

21    but at this point in time there's nothing I can do.  I don't have a

22    judgement in the Serbian language, so I more or less have to try and

23    translate the judgement by frequently consulting a dictionary in order to

24    work on -- on the appeal.  But such are the Rules, and the Rules are

25    imposing restrictions on me.  It's not the individuals who are involved in

Page 84

 1    all this who are to blame.

 2            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Mr. Krajisnik, you didn't answer my question in

 3    how far you feel deprived of your right to self-expression.

 4            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] I cannot prepare my defence in

 5    good conditions.  That's what I want to say.  I didn't want to say that

 6    anyone was obstructing me or I wasn't trying to say that my rights had

 7    been violated.  That's the only thing.  That's it.

 8            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Isn't it correct that in your home country it is

 9    mandatory to have Defence counsel in a case like the one before us?

10            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] I am not familiar with those

11    details, but there is something that I do know, Your Honour.  In my home

12    country, the accused and counsel sit together, and they put questions

13    together, and they conduct the proceedings together.  I know about that.

14    And if this was the case here, things would be much better.

15            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  And in addition, am I correct in believing that

16    as in your country as in many other continental European countries you

17    have the right at the same time to have counsel and to put questions to

18    witnesses and to make statements other than those foreseen in our Rules

19    and procedure -- of Procedure and Evidence?  Is that correct?

20            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] There is certainly that

21    possibility but, Your Honour, there's one important factor in my homeland,

22    and a minute ago you said this wasn't possible here.  If I could engage

23    Mr. Dershowitz, if the Registry engaged him, all problems would be solved,

24    but it's obvious that Mr. Dershowitz is requesting certain conditions that

25    can't be met or that won't be met, and I would have to find additional

Page 85

 1    funds.  In my home country I could solve this, but I can't solve this

 2    problem here.

 3            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Okay.  I think we have discussed now everything,

 4    but I have not yet given the floor to Mr. Nicholls, and he should also

 5    have the right as an assigned counsel to make submissions.  I think based

 6    on your additional submission in writing on amicus curiae, we need not

 7    discuss this any further because I think the question of amicus curiae is

 8    finally litigated and this question is right for a decision, but I see the

 9    Prosecution again was faster than the Defence.  Please, the floor is

10    yours.

11            MS. DAHL:  Thank you, Your Honour.  I wish to make three points

12    and one housekeeping matter.

13            In listening to Mr. Krajisnik's elocution, it appears to me that

14    he has already described himself as self-represented.  It would appear

15    that that is premature and that perhaps it would be appropriate to remind

16    him that he is represented in this matter as it stands.

17            Second, there appears to be a misunderstanding.  If he were able

18    to retain his own lawyer and fund his own Defence team, he would have the

19    ability to manage their work himself subject to the detention centre rules

20    and the qualifications necessary for people to appear as retained counsel

21    in this Tribunal.

22            Finally, the statements May Mr. Krajisnik has made concerning the

23    nature of his relationship with Mr. Nicholls cause concern.  Those may be

24    appropriate subjects of investigation ex parte to the Prosecution if Mr.

25    Nicholls continues to represent Mr. Krajisnik.

Page 86

 1            As to the housekeeping matter, I wish to note a correction to the

 2    transcript at page 8, line 37 [sic] where I indicated that the

 3    Prosecution's interest is in ensuring that the fairness of the proceedings

 4    is not impaired.  Presently the transcript does not include the negative

 5    word "not."

 6            JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Thank you for this clarification, and may I ask

 7    those being responsible for the transcript to correct the transcript to

 8    this end.

 9            As regards to your first point that will be the final point to be

10    addressed after having heard Mr. Nicholls, but you're absolutely right.

11    Apart from those scenarios I highlighted, which are possible, which are

12    no-go's, there is the possibility to have Defence counsel based on own

13    funds or donations or own money if Mr. Krajisnik should be in possession

14    of the necessary financial means.  But I think it goes without saying that

15    Mr. Krajisnik is intelligent enough to know this.

16            But may I hear finally Mr. Nicholls, please.

17            MR. NICHOLLS:  Your Honour has before you Mr. Krajisnik's

18    application to represent himself, and at the same time his application

19    that he should have legal assistance, and he has indicated, apart from the

20    fact that he does not wish that assistance to be from me, he has indicated

21    that the assistance he wants is assistance on procedure and assisting --

22    assistance on the drafting of documents as a member of his team, as has

23    been described an undercover team.  That assistance Mr. Krajisnik is

24    seeking is not assistance which is within the remit of an assigned Defence

25    counsel or within the remit of a lead counsel.  Counsel has specific

Page 87

 1    responsibilities.  He has responsibilities as to what he himself does, and

 2    he has responsibility for his team.  He must also, in accordance with

 3    Article 10 of the code, he must ensure that he has an independence.  He

 4    forms the team.  It is his team which he controls for the benefit of

 5    Mr. Krajisnik.  What Mr. Krajisnik is seeking is that I should be, I and

 6    those assisting me, which he wishes to approve, should be part of his team

 7    and inevitably not really subject to his instructions but subject to his

 8    control.

 9            I have to say, and I have to make it clear for the benefit of the

10    Chamber and for the benefit of Mr. Krajisnik that that is not a role which

11    I envisage as one which I, as his Defence counsel, can fulfil.

12            Your Honour asked me on the last occasion, was I willing to work

13    with his team as he described it, and I indicated very clearly no, that I

14    could not do so for the very reasons which I have indicated to

15    Your Honour.  Your Honour has already indicated that matter of

16    [indiscernible] has been fully litigated in previous decisions of the

17    Chambers and also, of course, fully argued on the last occasion.  I cannot

18    think that I can add anything to that.  Your Honour asked me a question,

19    was amicus not a friend of the Court, effectively independent of the

20    defendant, and I feel bound to admit that in truth in reality that is the

21    position.  There are, of course, in the United States or in the United

22    Kingdom there are amicus briefs which are submitted.  They are amicus

23    briefs which are presented by persons other than the parties, although

24    they may in fact be in support of the parties.  And I think unless Your

25    Honour asks me to address any other issue, I can't really add anything at

Page 88

 1    this moment.  But I have to be really very clear about it, that if I am

 2    counsel I take the responsibility, and I have the control.  I cannot be

 3    subject to the control of the person I represent in the way in which is

 4    envisaged.  I cannot draft documents, that is, put into some formal shape

 5    documents which the client has drafted and which he wants to have

 6    presented in a suitable form to the Tribunal.  That, as I see it, is not

 7    the function of counsel.

 8            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you for these clear words, Mr. Nicholls,

 9    and I can only repeat that Defence means not only to have rights but also

10    obligations and, in your words, a responsibility both for the proper

11    defence but also in order to protect victims, witnesses, and other

12    protective measures ordered, say, under Rule 70 by this Tribunal.

13            So therefore, I first want to give you, Mr. Krajisnik, a last

14    chance.  You heard from the submissions of the Prosecution that the

15    Prosecution still believes that your submission is not unequivocal.  This

16    would be a prerequisite for a clear request for self-representation.  You

17    heard the words of Mr. Nicholls, the counsel assigned to you, and I have

18    to emphasise as the President said, properly assigned Defence counsel.  Do

19    you seek still a decision of the Appeals Chamber could -- on the first

20    question whether your request is unequivocal, and second, whether you are

21    entitled to represent yourself on appeal or it is for the entire Appeal

22    Chamber, of course, to decide this, whether the -- you can't waive your

23    right to have a fair trial.

24            What is your final request, please?

25            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] My position is absolutely clear.

Page 89

 1    I want to represent myself, and I believe that this would be far better.

 2    The trial would be a lot fairer than if I decided to select someone to

 3    represent me.

 4            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you, Mr. Krajisnik.  You may be seated.

 5            Then it remains with the status quo we have at present that

 6    properly assigned counsel to Mr. Krajisnik is and will be Mr. Nicholls

 7    until Appeals Chamber has decided on

 8    Mr. Krajisnik's request to represent himself and/or whether this request

 9    was unequivocal or not.

10            This also means that you, and I have to emphasise and I have to

11    kindly ask you to regard your position not as an amicus curiae but as a

12    properly assigned Defence counsel.  Having been compelled myself by my own

13    bar several times to defend a client against his wish, and this happens

14    relatively often, I know how difficult this is, but in the interest of

15    justice this sometimes is inevitable.

16            And it is really for you, Mr. Krajisnik, to make the best of it,

17    and I can only recommend to try to get a better contact to Mr. Nicholls,

18    because in the near future nothing will change -- will be changed until

19    the Appeals Chamber has spoken.

20            Let us now move to the pending motions.  Let's go, please, briefly

21    in private session.

22                          [Private session]

23  (redacted)

24  (redacted)

25  (redacted)

Page 90

 1  (redacted)

 2  (redacted)

 3  (redacted)

 4  (redacted)

 5  (redacted)

 6  (redacted)

 7  (redacted)

 8  (redacted)

 9  (redacted)

10  (redacted)

11  (redacted)

12                          [Open session]

13            THE REGISTRAR:  We're back in open session, Your Honours.

14            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you.  For reason that easy to understand,

15    we are confronted with a Defence motion for extension of time for filing

16    appellate brief pending translation of the judgement into the language of

17    the convicted person.  If I'm right, please correct me if it's not the

18    case.  You ask for 90 additional days?

19            MR. NICHOLLS:  Yes, it was, I think, yes.

20            JUDGE SCHOMBURG: May I hear the Prosecution on this?

21            MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, I believe the motion requested 75 days.

22    Our submission was that it is in the interests of justice to grant that;

23    however, we would request that it's limited to 30 days after receipt of

24    the judgement in Mr. Krajisnik's native language.

25            JUDGE SCHOMBURG: Okay.  This is not an oriental bazaar, and we

Page 91

 1    should stay in line of previous decisions, and I looked up previous

 2    decisions and indeed there were either 30 or 25 days granted.  The last

 3    time in another case I granted 25 days after filing of the B/C/S

 4    translation, bearing in the mind -- bearing in mind that the -- that

 5    Mr. Nicholls can work in the meantime on the main body of the appeal

 6    brief, and it is only to add something based on that what he hopefully

 7    gets as information.  I emphasise information, not instruction, from

 8    Mr. Krajisnik.

 9            So therefore it is hereby granted that the time for filing the

10    appellate brief is extended 25 days after filing of the B/C/S translation

11    of the judgement to Mr. Krajisnik.

12            It is therefore up to you, Mr. Nicholls, to continue with this.

13    The only point that strikes me is the pending motion to strike

14    Mr. Krajisnik's notice of appeal.  I think it would be a matter of

15    fairness, but of course I have to hear first the parties on this, whether

16    it wouldn't be wise if Mr. Nicholls would look into Mr. Krajisnik's own

17    notice of appeal and maybe file a consolidated version of his own notice

18    of appeal and Mr. Krajisnik's notice of appeal so that Mr. Krajisnik's

19    requests are also included in as far your -- your tactics and your ethical

20    obligations so allow.  It would have to be decided until when such a

21    consolidated version would be to be filed.

22            May I hear the Prosecution first on whether at all they would

23    accept this and, second, whether a time for such a consolidated version

24    of, say, of -- bearing in mind that we have Easter right now, to grant a

25    time a fortnight running from next Monday for such a consolidated version?

Page 92

 1    What is your opinion on this?

 2            MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, I wish to clarify that our motion directed

 3    at Mr. Krajisnik's notice of appeal was not a request to strike it so much

 4    as a request that the registrar not accept a filing from an individual

 5    while he is represented by counsel.  That position information the answer

 6    to your question, which is that we don't oppose an amended notice of

 7    appeal by counsel, but we remain firm in the position that one party, one

 8    document, and that we should not have a two-track appeal where the

 9    convicted person is taking his own matters himself while represented by

10    competent counsel as Mr. Nicholls.

11            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you.  I think it goes without saying into

12    we have only two parties in this system, but nevertheless we are

13    confronted with the difficulty situation that the Appeals Chamber has not

14    yet decided on -- finally on the question of self-representation or not

15    and is, therefore, in order not to waste time, Mr. Krajisnik himself and

16    Mr. Nicholls was allowed to file two separate notices of appeal, but as I

17    take it now from your submission, you don't see any obstacle that a

18    consolidated version will be filed.

19            Mr. Nicholls, would you be ready to do so?

20            MR. NICHOLLS:  Your Honour, we've always contemplated a

21    consolidated notice of appeal.  The only request that I would make is that

22    Your Honour should grant more time, rather, three weeks instead of two

23    weeks having regard to the difficulties of communication aunts fact that

24    the teams are in fact in different places.  When I say the teams are in

25    different places, the team is in London, Mr. Krajisnik is here, and there

Page 93

 1    are always the problems of communication which Your Honour is aware.

 2            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  And I take it that you will take the advantage

 3    of the interpretation services as you highlighted correctly during the

 4    last Status Conference of your colleague sitting behind you?

 5            MR. NICHOLLS:  Your Honour, maybe.  I say no more at the moment.

 6            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Okay.  But you will find ways and means to --

 7            MR. NICHOLLS:  There will be -- there will be interpretation.

 8            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Okay.  Let me think loudly.  Today we have 5

 9    April, and you are requesting three weeks.  That would bring us to 26, 27

10    of April.  In case that this does not cause any further delay, I think it

11    could be granted but let me hear -- first hear the Prosecution.

12            MS. DAHL:  We agree with the motion that there should be no

13    further extensions if this is granted to Mr. Nicholls, this further week.

14    The purpose of the notice of appeal of course is to allow the Prosecution

15    to begin to prepare its response, and we have been diligently doing that

16    in reliance on the extant notice of appeal.

17            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Yes.  I think this work was not in vain because

18    this will still form part of the notice of appeal.  It will be only

19    amended by adding maybe the one or other ground of appeal raised by

20    Mr. Krajisnik himself.

21            So, Mr. Nicholls, would it be convenient for you to accept on the

22    one hand that the appeals brief as such is due 25 days after filing of the

23    B/C/S translation of the judgement, and at the same time that a

24    consolidated version of both notices of appeal will be filed no later than

25    26 April 2007?

Page 94

 1            MR. NICHOLLS:  Your Honour, yes.

 2            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you so much.  May I ask what about other

 3    pending motions?  Maybe you know that I don't like unnecessary filings, so

 4    that we can dispose of any pending motions right now.

 5            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] Your Honour?

 6            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Would you please be seated.  You are represented

 7    properly by Defence counsel.  I'll give you the floor in the minute, even

 8    though this is not foreseen in -- in the Rules.

 9            I was asking you about other pending motions.  I think the motion

10    to strike will become moot as soon we have a consolidated version of --

11    from Mr. Nicholls; correct?

12            MS. DAHL:  Yes, Your Honour.

13            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you.  Then it -- please, and this is for

14    both parties, correct me if I'm wrong, we have before us the motion on

15    self-representation, and may I ask based on the current new situation do

16    you uphold your motion for becoming a permanent institution as amicus

17    curiae, Mr. Nicholls?  Because this was a motion filed by you in your own

18    capacity.

19            MR. NICHOLLS:  Your Honour, when I was faced with the situation

20    that Mr. Krajisnik did not accept me as his assigned counsel, I formed a

21    team and I filed a number of motions in order to protect his situation.

22    One was that I should no longer be assigned; two, that he should be

23    allowed to self-represent; and thirdly, that the Court -- the Chamber

24    should consider whether I and my team, as I described it, should be made

25    amicus.  I think during the last Status Conference it was clear

Page 95

 1    effectively that the position of amicus was so very different from the

 2    position of a Defence counsel and that the position of amicus did not

 3    include what Mr. Krajisnik was requesting.

 4            I have filed that motion that I and my team -- or that the Chamber

 5    should consider whether I and my team should be appointed amicus.  I -- I

 6    leave it -- in some ways I would like time to answer the question, because

 7    I want to preserve Mr. Krajisnik's position.  But at the same time, and

 8    may I just say frankly that I have an inclination not to pursue the motion

 9    for this reason, that I would not wish that I should be placed in a

10    position whereas an amicus, as not an amicus in the ordinary sense of the

11    term, I was required to give Mr. Krajisnik the assistance which he has

12    been requesting, that is in the drafting of documents and the like, which

13    I do not -- or submit is not the normal or proper function of an amicus.

14            So Your Honour asked me a direct question.  I've answered in a

15    rather roundabout way, but would Your Honour give me time to consider the

16    answer to the question whether the motion is pursued or not?  I can

17    give -- I can give an answer by the end of the weekend.

18            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  I -- as Easter is upcoming, I would say if you

19    do be kind enough to file your motion whether or not you want to withdraw

20    your motion to be assigned as amicus curiae no later than Friday next

21    week.

22            MR. NICHOLLS:  Thank you.

23            JUDGE SCHOMBURG:  Thank you so much.  I can looking forward to

24    this.  And I can only repeat that you are the assigned counsel.  You have

25    to work with your team, and everything falls in your own responsibility.

Page 96

 1            And furthermore, I have to ask the Registry to take the necessary

 2    steps that there are no contacts not foreseen in the Rules of Procedure

 3    and Evidence between Mr. Krajisnik and any counsel at all.  Of course it

 4    may be that there is a supervised visit by and friend, a member of the

 5    family, but this has nothing to do with defence or, as Mr. Krajisnik tends

 6    to call it, Defence team, because there is as things stand now no such

 7    Defence team of Mr. Krajisnik.

 8            Mr. Krajisnik, in all fairness, you wanted to say something.

 9    Please, you're allowed to do so right now.

10            THE APPELLANT: [Interpretation] If I may, I would like to provide

11    an explanation about your last order.  Last time you granted me the right

12    to replace my Defence counsel if I was of the opinion that the current

13    Defence counsel is not suitable.  How can I get in touch with any

14    prospective Defence counsel if I'm not allowed to make telephone calls?

15    That's my first question.

16            And the second thing I wish to say is this:  In order to avoid any

17    misunderstandings, I certainly wish to self-represent.  I'm saying this

18    because it arised from you -- it arose from your conclusion that there's a

19    doubt whether I really want to self-represent or not.

20            Second of all, just for the record, I am against and joint notice

21    of appeal or a consolidated notice of appeal, because I did not

22    participated in the notice of appeal prepared by Mr. Nicholls.  I received

23    it very late, and I have a lot of objections to it.  Again, to avoid any

24    misunderstandings, if Mr. Nicholls is appointed as amicus curiae, I don't

25    expect any favours of him.  When I asked him about his role, I just wanted

Page 97

 1    to see what this implied, and I was in favour of him in role as an amicus

 2    curiae if this is of some use for the Trial Chamber.  I don't want him to

 3    be a member of my team at the same time as an amicus curiae.

 4            I have to work on my appeal, and I have to get in touch with my

 5    Defence team.  Just for the record, Mr. Nicholls has not showed -- shown

 6    any willingness to contact me in this regard.  I have not had any contacts

 7    with him.

 8            MS. DAHL:  Your Honour, if -- if I may interject.  The Prosecution

 9    does not wish to be privy to matters of privilege between Mr. Krajisnik

10    and Mr. Nicholls that concern the nature of the representation or

11    Mr. Nicholls's or Mr. Krajisnik's objections thereto.

12            JUDGE SCHOMBURG: I think we had -- have litigated this matter in a

13    really exhaustive and extraordinary way.  You had already the privilege

14    for more than six months to request a counsel of your own choosing from

15    the lists of the Registrar, and unfortunately you did not decide until

16    today.  So therefore, I take it that it is a matter -- mission impossible

17    for you to find the appropriate counsel.  It is, therefore, that counsel

18    was assigned to you.  You will get hopefully in due time the decision of

19    the Appeals Chamber on your request of -- to represent yourself, but as

20    things stay now, I on a very personal note have to add I don't believe

21    that this Appeals Chamber will be in your hands, that you can control the

22    course of action of this appeal.  We have to grant you a fair trial,

23    meaning also an expeditious trial.  You are not the only one waiting for a

24    final decision, and therefore time has come to conclude this debate, and

25    if there is no other decision in the future, Mr. Nicholls will stay your

Page 98

 1    assigned counsel, and it's in your own interests to find a way of trust to

 2    Mr. Nicholls.  Otherwise, it will be detriment to your own interests.

 3            This concludes -- as I can see no other issues to be raised from

 4    any the parties, this concludes today's Status Conference.  You will get

 5    the necessary decisions, and I'm expecting a consolidated version of the

 6    notice of appeal and then later on the appeal on brief.

 7            It remains for me to wish you all some days of relief and a happy

 8    Easter to all of you in this courtroom and those assisting us behind the

 9    scenes.

10            Thank you very much.  The Status Conference stands adjourned.

11                          --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned

12                          at 9.26 a.m.