1 Thursday, 8 December 2011
2 [Status Conference]
3 [Open session]
4 [The accused entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 4.56 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: We now continue this afternoon with the
7 Status Conference, where we had the Further Appearance a little bit
8 earlier. This is the fourth Status Conference in this case, and as with
9 the previous Status Conferences, any guidance and decisions that will be
10 announced have been deliberated and adopted by the Chamber as a whole.
11 The purpose of this and other Status Conferences is to monitor
12 the progress made with regard to pre-trial work and preparation for
13 trial. Like earlier Status Conferences, this one has been preceded by a
14 Rule 65 ter meeting, which was held earlier this week. We discussed at
15 that meeting certain pre-trial matters in more detail than this
16 Status Conference allows to do.
17 I will first deal with the pre-trial planning.
18 At the last Status Conference the Chamber reminded the parties of
19 the then upcoming dead-lines for their Rule 73 bis (D) submissions,
20 dead-lines which have now passed. To those in the public following these
21 proceedings, I will briefly explain that. Rule 73 bis (D) of the
22 Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence permits the Chamber to invite
23 the Prosecution to reduce the size of the indictment against the accused.
24 On the 18th of November, the Prosecution filed its submission on
25 reducing the indictment, and the Defence filed its response on the
1 25th of November. And at the last Status Conference the parties were
2 also reminded that the dead-line for their adjudicated facts motions was
3 seven days from the filing of the Chamber's decision on the
4 Rule 73 bis (D) submissions. The Chamber's decision was filed on the
5 2nd of December, and therefore the parties' adjudicated facts motions are
6 due on the 9th of December, that is, tomorrow.
7 What, therefore, remains at this stage of the proceedings mainly
8 includes the filing of the Prosecution's Rule 65 ter submissions and the
9 parties' pre-trial briefs. At the 8th of November 65 ter meeting, that
10 is, a month ago, the parties were informed that they should be preparing
11 these filings now and that they could expect the dead-lines for them to
12 be set for the beginning of next year.
13 The Chamber now sets the following deadlines. 10th of February
14 is the dead-line for the Prosecution's pre-trial brief and its
15 Rule 65 ter filings. The dead-line for the Defence's pre-trial brief
16 filing is hereby set for the 2nd of March, 2012.
17 Again, I will briefly explain to those in the gallery and
18 following these proceedings that Rule 65 ter (E) requires the
19 Pre-Trial Judge to order the Prosecution to file a pre-trial brief. That
20 includes a summary of the evidence the Prosecution intends to present, a
21 list of witnesses the Prosecution intends to call, and a list of exhibits
22 that it intends to offer at trial. Once the Prosecution has submitted
23 these items, the Defence is then required to submit its pre-trial brief.
24 Just to explain, that pre-trial brief is slightly different from
25 the Prosecution's pre-trial brief because it should include, in general
1 terms, the nature of the accused's defence; second, the matters which the
2 accused takes issue in the Prosecutor's pre-trial brief; and third, in
3 the case of each such matter, the reason why the accused takes issue with
5 The 10th of February, 2012, dead-line triggers certain other
6 Prosecution dead-lines. As already announced at the 6th of October
7 Status Conference, the Prosecution is reminded that the dead-line for its
8 Rule 66(A)(ii) disclosure is set for the same day as the filing of its
9 witness list, therefore, also the 10th of February, 2012.
10 Additionally, at the same 6th of October, 2011, second
11 Status Conference the Chamber set two Rule 68(i) disclosure dead-lines
12 distinct from the general dead-line. These two dead-lines are that the
13 Prosecution has 30 days from the filing of the Defence pre-trial brief
14 and 30 days from the filing of its witness list to complete its
15 Rule 68(i) disclosure related to these filings. The Chamber reminds the
16 Prosecution that it is instructed to file a notification when these
17 disclosures have been completed.
18 Finally, as I announced last month at the Status Conference, the
19 first Prosecution Rule 92 bis motion should be filed no later than one
20 week after the filing of the Prosecution's witness list. This means that
21 the first Rule 92 bis motion should be filed no later than the
22 17th of February, 2012. And this same dead-line, the
23 17th of February, 2012, also applies to the Prosecution's first
24 Rule 92 quater motion.
25 At the 5th of December 65 ter meeting, the Prosecution indicated
1 that it would be in a position to file its first Rule 92 bis and quater
2 motions even earlier, within one to two weeks of the adjudicated facts
3 motion being filed. The Chamber welcomes such filing by the Prosecution
4 of its first Rule 92 bis or quater motions within two weeks of the filing
5 of its adjudicated facts motion.
6 Finally, pursuant to Rules 73 bis (A) and 65 ter (E) and (F),
7 which require the Pre-Trial Conference not to be held any earlier than
8 six weeks after the filing of the Prosecution's pre-trial brief and not
9 earlier than three weeks after the filing of the -- no, less than three
10 weeks after the Pre-Trial Conference, the Chamber expects - I emphasize
11 that word at this moment - expects that it will schedule the
12 Pre-Trial Conference to be held on the 26th of March, 2012, and the
13 opening statements and statement of the accused, if any, on the
14 27th of March, 2012.
15 These are the plans as of now, and these last mentioned dates are
16 not yet finally set. However, they are the dates that the Chamber
17 expects and that the parties should therefore work towards.
18 I move on to my next item which is disclosure. On the
19 25th of November the Chamber received the Prosecution's third pre-trial
20 report, which included an update on the disclosure of materials to the
21 Defence. Additionally, at the 10th of November Status Conference, the
22 Defence was invited to make submissions on the Prosecution's proposed EDS
23 methods of disclosure, which it did on the 17th of November. The Chamber
24 received the Prosecution's response on the 2nd of December, and these
25 submissions were discussed at the 65 ter meeting on Monday and, in
1 particular, the steps taken to address the Defence concerns that were
2 outlined in the Prosecution's response. As stated at the 65 ter meeting,
3 the Chamber would be interested in hearing whether the Defence concerns
4 remain after taking into account these additional steps.
5 Therefore, Mr. Lukic, the Chamber invites you to file a reply to
6 the Prosecution's response and asks that you indicate therein whether and
7 to what extent the response alleviates any of the issues you originally
8 raised. Any reply should be filed by the 2nd [sic] of December. And
9 this will allow the Prosecution to address any continuing concerns raised
10 in the reply in its next pre-trial report.
11 Are there any questions or concerns in relation to what I have
12 said until now?
13 MR. GROOME: Not from the Prosecution, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Not from the Prosecution.
15 Mr. Lukic.
16 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, I'm not sure if I understood you
17 correctly regarding those opening statements for March 2012.
18 JUDGE ORIE: You did.
19 MR. LUKIC: I did?
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. LUKIC: Does it mean that the trial should start on those
22 dates? Or ...
23 JUDGE ORIE: As I said before, that the Chamber expects to
24 schedule it as I said. You know what that means.
25 MR. LUKIC: I'm afraid that we will not be ready to start trial
1 in March 2012, Your Honour. It's not possible for our team to finalise
2 all the work which is in front of us.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course the Chamber expects that a lot of
4 work has been -- will be finalised by dealing with the adjudicated facts
5 motions and by other matters. But as I said before, these are the plans
6 as they are now. They have not been carved in stone yet, these dates.
7 But, as I said before, the Chamber expects that the parties should work
8 towards these dates, and that should be your ultimate effort.
9 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Then I'd like to move on.
11 If you -- if, Mr. Mladic, you would like to consult with counsel,
12 do it by whispering - you speak the same language - and switch off your
13 microphone. Mr. Lukic, you have an opportunity to consult with your
15 [Defence counsel and Accused confer]
16 MR. LUKIC: Your Honour, if you allow, Mr. Mladic will address
17 something in regard of the schedule.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Mr. Mladic is represented by you. I would --
19 if there's anything you would like to raise, you're invited to do so.
20 And I might consider to give --
21 MR. LUKIC: I have --
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- Mr. Mladic an opportunity to add something to
23 that. What I do understand, that you say your schedule is too tight.
24 Now, I don't think that a Status Conference is the place where we could
25 discuss this further in detail, but it's clearly on the record that you
1 consider the schedule as envisaged by the Trial Chamber to be too tight.
2 Now, if you'd like to add in a few words, but we can't --
3 MR. LUKIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... just a few words --
4 JUDGE ORIE: -- have the whole of the debate on that. Just a few
5 words. Yes, please do so.
6 MR. LUKIC: And I have an instruction from my client that -- to
7 raise the issue of the team. As you know, our team is not complete --
8 JUDGE ORIE: That is on my agenda for a later stage --
9 MR. LUKIC: Okay.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- and to some extent in private session.
11 MR. LUKIC: Okay. Thank you. Then ...
12 [Defence counsel and Accused confer]
13 MR. LUKIC: If you would allow Mr. Mladic to say a few words.
14 JUDGE ORIE: A few words, Mr. Mladic, if you wish to do so,
15 although it's uncommon if represented by counsel that you address the
16 Chamber yourself. But I'll make an exception, if there's anything, but
17 could you please limit it to, really, two minutes and say -- focus very
18 much on the core of what you want to tell me.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. That's very kind of
20 you. I'll try and say something within the next two minutes, and I'm
21 starting now.
22 I heard what you said with regard to the schedule. It's very
23 dense. And maybe you are in a hurry; I'm not. For me, time is of no
24 consequence. I appreciate your plans and schedules; however,
25 irrespective of the fact that I have a lawyer who represents
1 him [as interpreted], and chapeau to him, but I have not been allowed to
2 complete my team. The Russian lawyer Mezyaev and the American lawyer
3 Dan Ivetic have not been allowed to join my team. You don't even allow
4 my friends and admirers from Russia to come and visit me, be it a male or
5 female scientist, a male or female doctor. I would like to thank you for
6 allowing doctors from the medical academy in Belgrade to come and visit.
7 They have planned to examine me over two days. And of all that I was
8 examined by a neuropsychiatrist, a pulmonologist. They examined me. I
9 was provided with their medical report, of the five of them, to say that
10 within the last period I lost 20 kilos. The other says I lost 24 kilos.
11 And the third says that I lost --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mladic, first of all, one of the reasons why
13 usually it's counsel who speaks is because he knows the rules better.
14 And as far as visits and medical care is concerned, he would have
15 addressed this matter primarily with the Registry because the Registrar
16 is responsible for the medical care unless it affects the trial
17 proceedings or the pre-trial proceedings, in which case, in an organised
18 way, the Chamber may be involved in the matter.
19 Further, your physical condition, medical part, will be dealt
20 with in a minute. So it is on my agenda. It has been discussed before.
21 And it's certainly something we'll address later this afternoon.
22 Thank you for keeping within the time-limits. I would then, at
23 this moment, move on to the adjudicated facts.
24 Mr. Groome, at the last Status Conference you asked whether, in
25 its Rule 65 ter witness list filing and the Rule 92 bis and the
1 Rule 92 ter motions, the Prosecution should indicate to which fact or
2 facts in the Prosecution's adjudicated facts motion the witness's
3 evidence relates.
4 The Chamber accepts this proposal; however, the Chamber
5 reiterates that the parties should not request that the Chamber take
6 judicial notice of those facts for which they intend to present other
7 evidence, for example, witness testimony. If the Prosecution files its
8 Rule 65 ter witness list before the Chamber renders its decision on the
9 adjudicated facts motion, the Prosecution should compose the list
10 assuming that the Chamber will take judicial notice of all the requested
11 facts. In the same way, there should be no Rule 92 bis and 92 ter
12 motions dealing with witnesses whose evidence is covered by the
13 adjudicated facts proposed in the Prosecution's adjudicated facts motion.
14 Should the Chamber ultimately decide not to take judicial notice
15 of certain facts, the Prosecution will have a possibility to supplement
16 its witness list and the relevant Rule 92 bis and Rule 92 ter motions
18 I add to this, Mr. Groome, that you also expressed some concerns
19 in relation to the case law on adjudicated facts and rebuttal evidence,
20 that is, a decision in the Lukic and Lukic case, and in that decision in
21 Lukic and Lukic case I think reference is made to the Karemera case, the
22 Appeals Chamber decision in the Karemera case. The Chamber is carefully
23 studying this at this moment and will consider how to respond, how to
24 deal with the concerns you have expressed.
25 MR. GROOME: Thank you, Your Honour. And in tomorrow's
1 adjudicated facts motion, the Prosecution will be setting out its
2 concerns and its understanding of the jurisprudence in greater detail.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that. We'll then read that tomorrow.
4 Any further matter in relation to the adjudicated facts? If not,
5 I'll move on, the next agenda item being presentation and tendering of
7 THE ACCUSED: [Microphone not activated]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, the same: If Mr. Mladic wants to consult
9 with you, then please inform me and so that you -- that I allow you to
10 consult with your client. And then, again, if he keeps his earphones on,
11 that usually has the result of speaking louder. So if you consult and if
12 you take your earphones off for a second, that usually lowers your voice.
13 MR. LUKIC: I think that Mr. Mladic, Your Honour, already
14 transferred to me what he had to say. And he said that he does not want
15 to be tried through adjudicated facts because everybody else's trial was
16 different, and it doesn't mean that the other accused would address any
17 issue properly, and that he wants to have the trial in which the truth
18 and the factual findings would be addressed specifically to him, and not
19 to somebody else, and then we have to apply somebody else's findings to
20 him. So that was the concern he wanted to raise.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Lukic, you're certainly fully aware and
22 you'll be able to explain to Mr. Mladic the details of the case law on
23 adjudicated facts, including that taking judicial notice of an
24 adjudicated fact does not necessarily mean that that fact cannot be
25 challenged anymore. But you also know that, whether or not to be tried
1 on the basis of adjudicated facts, Mr. Mladic will be tried on the basis
2 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence which are in line with the
3 Statute of this Tribunal. And as you know, adjudicated facts are covered
4 by a specific rule on that, and the case law developed since then is
5 mainly focusing on guaranteeing that the use of adjudicated facts, to
6 take judicial notice of adjudicated facts, does not amount to unfairness
7 of the trial.
8 And I take it that you will have an opportunity to explain this
9 to Mr. Mladic.
10 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Before I continue, Mr. Lukic, I was -- my attention
12 was drawn to the fact that I might not have been clear when I said that
13 the reply you are encouraged or invited to file to the Prosecution's
14 response in relation to the disclosure methods, that that reply should be
15 filed by the 22nd of December, whereas there was some concern that I
16 might have been understood to have said the 2nd of December. No, it was
17 the 22nd.
18 MR. LUKIC: I understood 22nd.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then there was no problem, but I'll then continue.
20 THE ACCUSED: [No interpretation]
21 JUDGE ORIE: If you want to consult with your client, Mr. Lukic,
22 please do so.
23 [Defence counsel and Accused confer]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic --
25 MR. LUKIC: We can continue, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Lukic.
2 We then continue with the presentation and tendering of evidence.
3 Mr. Groome, at the last Status Conference you asked whether the
4 Chamber's presentation and tendering of evidence guidance applies to
5 Rule 92 quater witnesses as to the preference for a statement over
6 transcript testimony. The Chamber informs you that the absolute
7 preference of the Chamber is to receive witness statements clearly
8 summarising the witness's testimony through Rule 92 bis and Rule 92 ter
9 applications and that this reference also applies to Rule 92 quater.
10 And I immediately add to this that the Chamber, of course, will
11 be more flexible with regard to Rule 92 quater witnesses and
12 Rule 92 quater motions as they deal with witnesses who are not available
13 to testify orally. And the Prosecution, therefore, may have very
14 limited, if any at all, possibility to make selections among the material
15 because it may be that the preferred material is not available. So,
16 therefore, the Chamber is not blind for the problems it may cause. But
17 when you are in a position to make your selections, then the preference
18 clearly stands.
19 So it is with this caveat that the guidance with regard to the
20 Rule 92 bis motions is also applicable to any Rule 92 quater motions. Is
21 that clear enough?
22 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then you also raised, Mr. Groome, a question as to
24 the relative flexibility of including no more than five to ten witnesses
25 in each Rule 92 bis application. This restriction serves the purpose of
1 not overburdening the Defence and the Chamber and will allow us to deal
2 with the Rule 92 bis motions expeditiously. However, the Chamber will
3 allow the parties to exceptionally depart from this rule if they submit
4 good reasons to do so. One good reason may be what you mentioned
5 already, Mr. Groome, that - you mentioned that at the last
6 Status Conference - namely, if there are more than ten witnesses dealing
7 with one particular topic, then of course we would consider whether 12 or
8 13 or 14 or even 16 would be appropriate under those circumstances. But
9 you are invited, if you wish to do so, to submit good reasons for such a
11 MR. GROOME: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Then finally, in the -- in paragraph 22 of the
13 Prosecution's third pre-trial report, the Prosecution notes that the
14 parties are in agreement on a number of matters related to the
15 presentation and tendering of evidence. However, the Chamber has already
16 issued its guidance on those matters referred to in this paragraph 22.
17 And I add to this that should the parties consider that exceptions from
18 the guidance are necessary for certain witnesses, they should make
19 specific submissions with regard to those, clearly setting out the
20 reasons why the Chamber should exceptionally allow to depart from its
22 Again, nothing is carved in stone forever. It's for good
23 reasons, for good cause shown, that we will consider to allow the parties
24 not to follow strictly the guidance. This about the presentation and the
25 tendering of evidence.
1 I now move on to my next agenda item which is questions from the
2 parties and other miscellaneous matters.
3 On the 16th of November, the Chamber ordered an expert medical
4 examination of Mr. Mladic pursuant to Rule 74 bis of the Tribunal's
5 Rules. The Chamber received the expert report on the 6th of December and
6 has carefully reviewed it. Based on the information contained in the
7 expert report, the Chamber sees no need at this time to order any further
8 expert medical examinations or to take any other steps in this regard.
9 As I previously mentioned, the Chamber received two reports from
10 the United Nations Detention Unit medical staff, those of the 10th and of
11 the 22nd of November. These reports were prepared for the purpose of
12 informing the Chamber as to Mr. Mladic's ability to attend a
13 Further Appearance. In advance of today's Further Appearance and
14 Status Conference, the Chamber received two additional medical reports,
15 filed on the 25th of November and the 2nd of December. These reports
16 indicated that Mr. Mladic was well enough to attend today's proceedings.
17 With the Further Appearance now having taken place, the Chamber requests
18 that the Registry please discontinue the preparation and filing of these
19 reporting medical officers -- of reports as a routine matter. Of course,
20 if need be, we'll further consider to request such a reporting medical
21 officer report.
22 Finally, the Chamber notes that the report of the
23 25th of November indicates that in the opinion of the medical officer
24 there is no health-related reason Mr. Mladic cannot wear handcuffs during
25 transport, except for those times when he is walking just on his own. As
1 I have previously stated, the issue of Mr. Mladic being handcuffed during
2 transport is a matter for the Registry and for those responsible for that
4 Therefore, should you, Mr. Lukic, want to pursue this issue on
5 behalf of Mr. Mladic, then you should raise this matter directly with the
7 I would like to briefly move into private session.
8 [Private session]
11 Pages 141-144 redacted. Private session.
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I received a message, Mr. Lukic, only a second ago,
16 that is, the issue of the import of electronic material to the
17 United Nations Detention Unit. I'm provided with a -- it's found on
18 pages 122 and following of the transcript of the 65 ter meeting, and I
19 just read to you what information I received at this very moment.
20 "In this regard, please note that the Registry has identified
21 solutions to this issue. OLAD will speak with Mr. Lukic to advise him of
22 available options for import of electronic material. We expect to have
23 this issue resolved successfully without the need for Mr. Lukic to
24 formally seize the Chamber of this request, as he indicated during the
25 65 ter meeting," and the reference is made to transcript page 125,
1 lines 1 and 2.
2 This was the message we received from the Registry. I take it
3 that you'll further discuss what the solution in the eyes of the Registry
4 would be, and of course I hope that this is an acceptable solution for
5 all parties.
6 MR. LUKIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then there is one other matter, which is the -- on
8 the 7th of December the Prosecution has filed a motion, the urgent
9 Prosecution submission to exceed word limit, requesting that it be
10 allowed to exceed the word limit in its adjudicated facts motion due
11 tomorrow, the 9th of December. The request was granted that same day,
12 Mr. Lukic, and it was communicated by Chamber staff in an informal
13 communication to the parties.
14 Therefore, I hereby put on the record that the Prosecution's
15 request to exceed the word limit in its adjudicated facts motion was
16 granted on the 7th of December.
17 I have no further matters on my agenda. Could I invite the
18 parties and/or the accused, you, Mr. Mladic, to address the Chamber on
19 any additional matters. Legal and procedural matters preferably to be
20 raised by counsel; other matters, if need be, to be raised by Mr. Mladic.
21 Mr. Groome.
22 MR. GROOME: Your Honour, I have one matter I would like to raise
23 with the Chamber.
24 On the 2nd of December, 2011, the Chamber entered its decision
25 pursuant to 73 bis (D). Part of the -- that decision included an order
1 to the Prosecution to re-file its victim lists, which it had previously
2 filed on the 1st of November, 2011. As the Chamber is well aware, the
3 Prosecution has made substantial reductions to many parts of its case
4 except the Srebrenica portion of the case. It does not anticipate that
5 there will be any material change to the victim lists with respect to the
6 Srebrenica portion. That list of victims of Srebrenica comprises over
7 950 pages, and the Prosecution is requesting that it be -- or the
8 Chamber's order be varied to allow the Prosecution to incorporate, by
9 reference, the victim lists of the Srebrenica victims that have -- has
10 already been filed on the 1st of November, 2011.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will consider your request, Mr. Groome.
12 Mr. Lukic, any need to respond to this request?
13 MR. LUKIC: No, Your Honour. We don't object.
14 JUDGE ORIE: You do not object. That's on the record.
15 We'll consider your request. And we might use an informal
16 communication to inform the parties about the decision so as not to
17 obstruct the further progress to be made. And if so, it will be formally
18 put on the record at a later stage.
19 That was the only issue you wanted to raise, Mr. Groome?
20 MR. GROOME: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Lukic, any matter you would like to raise?
22 MR. LUKIC: Again, the only issue I would raise again, and
23 reiterate it, is that envisaged schedule for the beginning of the trial.
24 I know you told us that it's not engraved in the stone, but our team is
25 absolutely not prepared to proceed with the trial at -- not even close to
1 those dead-lines.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That is on the record as well.
3 MR. LUKIC: Thank you.
4 And Mr. Mladic would like to address you shortly, please.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. LUKIC: If you can allow him.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Mladic, I invited the parties but also you.
8 Is there any matter you would like to raise? And I expect that any legal
9 matter to be raised, that that would be done through Mr. Lukic, but if
10 there's any other matter, please proceed.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Judge. Concerning this
12 complex trial and this monstrous indictment, I have three issues to
13 raise. One, I don't understand what obstacles we are talking about, what
14 kind of barricades - if I can put it that way - to the consolidation of
15 my Defence team. I will ask Mr. Lukic to explain that to me tomorrow so
16 that I can be on top of things.
17 JUDGE ORIE: We dealt with this matter in private session.
18 That's -- if you would now continue with your second point, then there's
19 no problem; but if you would further expand on it, then we should go into
20 private session again. But if you have -- if the -- if you wanted to
21 convey the message that you'll further discuss it with Mr. Lukic, who
22 will certainly be able to inform you further, then we can remain in open
24 Your second point, please, Mr. Mladic.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
1 Two, I have to say I'm sorry for every innocent person that got
2 killed on any side in any ethnic community in the former Yugoslavia. I
3 regret every victim on all sides and I insist that Lukic explain to me
4 tomorrow. I want every victim's name, not only victims of Srebrenica,
5 but in all the 196 municipalities, I want to know their name and
6 surname - whether they're Orthodox, Serb; Muslim; or Catholics, Croat -
7 where they were born, when, in which unit they served, and whether they
8 participated in the war or not. I want to know that because I want to
9 vow to all the innocent people who got killed on every force -- on every
10 side of the world. That war was not my wish or the wish of my state.
11 Still today there are barricades around Kosovska Mitrovica. I'm
12 following that. And for the sake of the truth and justice, I never want
13 to hear the word "war" again, let alone see it repeated. And you will
14 judge as your conscience tells you. I will appreciate it if I could
15 speak to my lawyers about this tomorrow at greater length.
16 Thank you for letting me raise these two matters.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Mladic, you raised two issues, the one was
18 what you'd like to know in terms of details of the identities of victims.
19 Mr. Lukic will certainly be able to tell you exactly to what extent the
20 Prosecution is obliged to give details and what kind of details of
21 victims. We have had cases before this Tribunal where victims were
22 sometimes unidentified but were nevertheless considered to be victims.
23 That's one.
24 The second one, your personal feelings about -- about innocent
25 victims, as you said, I think those are best addressed in filings and in
1 the later trial proceedings rather than at a Status Conference, which is
2 focusing, rather, on practical matters of progress. But even having said
3 this, what you said is on the record at this moment and is part of the
4 transcript of this Status Conference, but you'll certainly seek advice of
5 Mr. Lukic whether you should bring these matters preferably at
6 Status Conferences. I would be inclined to say that that's not the most
7 appropriate moment, or, rather, to do that in further filings and further
8 submissions at trial or in pre-trial briefs, for example.
9 Any other matter? Then --
10 MR. LUKIC: Nothing else, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: -- if there's nothing else, then this concludes our
12 Status Conference. The next Rule 65 ter meeting will be held on the
13 16th of January, 2012, and the next Status Conference is scheduled for
14 the 19th of January, 2012. And I further remind the parties that the
15 next progress report on agreed facts is due on the 6th of January, 2012,
16 as is the Prosecution's next pre-trial report.
17 We therefore adjourn until the 19th of January, 2012, courtroom
18 and exact time to be communicated by the Registry at a later stage.
19 We stand adjourned.
20 --- Whereupon the Status Conference adjourned
21 at 6.04 p.m.