Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 1

1 Friday, 27 July 2001

2 [Sentencing Hearing]

3 [Open session]

4 [The accused entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 10.08 a.m.

6 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Let the registrar call the case.

7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Case number

8 IT-96-21-Tbis-R117, the Prosecutor versus Zdravko Mucic, Hazim Delic, Esad

9 Landzo.

10 JUDGE MAY: The appearances, please.

11 MR. STEWART: Good morning, Mr. President. James Stewart for the

12 Prosecutor. I'm assisted by Gina Butler.

13 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Morning, Your Honours. On behalf of Zdravko

14 Mucic, Tomislav Kuzmanovic and Howard Morrison.

15 MR. KARABDIC: Good morning, sirs. I am Salih Karabdic, lawyer

16 from Sarajevo. With me is my colleague, Thomas Moran, lawyer from

17 Houston. We represent Hazim Delic.

18 MS. SINATRA: Good morning, Your Honours. I'm Cynthia Sinatra,

19 and along with Peter Murphy, we represent Esad Landzo.

20 JUDGE MAY: As I think the parties have been told, there are only

21 two of us sitting today, the position being that Judge Fassi Fihri was

22 taken ill yesterday and is now in hospital. It is hoped that he is there

23 simply for observation, but result is that he's not here today.

24 Now, this is a hearing for sentence, sentence having been remitted

25 to this Trial Chamber after the hearing of an Appeals Chamber. We've

Page 2

1 considered the position, and our view at the moment is that it would not

2 be right for two of us to pass sentence and that that should be done by a

3 full Trial Chamber. But if anyone has any contrary views and wants to try

4 and persuade us otherwise, we'll of course hear them.

5 Prosecution perhaps first.

6 MR. STEWART: We certainly would have been prepared to proceed

7 today as you're constituted, but I've had some discussion with Defence

8 counsel, and I appreciate their position. We're entirely flexible. We're

9 aware of certain dates that are being suggested. Either one is acceptable

10 to us.

11 JUDGE MAY: Thank you. Yes.

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, we are of the same position, the

13 defendants are. We are prepared today, but in light of the fact that

14 Judge Fihri is not available, we would like the matter to be adjourned and

15 to set it at a mutually convenient date for all.

16 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Well, we'll consider a date in a moment.

17 Yes, Mr. Moran.

18 MR. MORAN: Your Honour, I think all the Defence agrees with what

19 Mr. Kuzmanovic says.

20 JUDGE MAY: If that's -- then we will adjourn the matter. It

21 remains to fix a date. There have been some dates already mooted.

22 The first possibility would be to do it next Wednesday, in the

23 hope that Judge Fassi Fihri would be well by then. That, of course, could

24 not be decided today. It will be subject to confirmation on Monday. So

25 that is one possibility.

Page 3

1 The next convenient date for the Trial Chamber would be Friday,

2 the 7th of September. Either of those dates are open for hearing.

3 Clearly, the sooner this matter is resolved, the better. We don't want to

4 go much beyond the recess, which ends at the end of August.

5 The Prosecution take no view about dates, Mr. Stewart, as I

6 understand it.

7 MR. STEWART: That's correct. Either one of those dates is

8 acceptable.

9 JUDGE MAY: Yes. Thank you. I don't know if there's a joint

10 Defence position as to dates, or are we going to have to decide between a

11 variety of offers?

12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, Tomislav Kuzmanovic again.

13 Mr. Moran and I have conflicts for next week. We are available on the

14 7th. However, there is some potential conflict that Ms. Sinatra and

15 Mr. Morrison may have on the 7th, and amongst us we talked about possibly

16 the 14th, which is the following Friday.

17 JUDGE MAY: Which is not available. So if we go beyond that, it

18 would be the 21st.

19 [Trial Chamber confers]

20 JUDGE MAY: Unless anyone wants to make any submissions about it,

21 Friday, the 21st, looks as though it's the first available date. I see

22 nodding.

23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Judge, the nodding means that we are all in

24 agreement.

25 JUDGE MAY: Very well. This hearing will be adjourned. We will

Page 4













13 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the English

14 and French transcript.












Page 5

1 sit again on Friday, the 21st, half past 9.00.

2 Yes, Ms. Sinatra.

3 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour. Before we adjourn today, we have

4 just one issue dealing with procedural and discovery matters before the

5 hearing that we would like to address, and we thought this might be the

6 perfect opportunity. I'd like to allow Professor Murphy to discuss that

7 with you at this moment, if that's possible. Thank you.

8 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, it's a very short matter and it arises

9 because Defence counsel are a little unsure of the procedure of the

10 Tribunal in this rather unusual situation where sentence is remitted to a

11 new Trial Chamber.

12 Your Honour, as Your Honours well know, in most jurisdictions, the

13 practice at this point would be for the Court to receive certain

14 presentencing reports. It's been about two and a half years since the

15 accused in this case were originally sentenced by the first Trial Chamber,

16 and of course one thing that's exercised our minds and which we did advert

17 to in our brief is the extent to which the Court might want to be informed

18 about the up-to-date status of the accused as they are now. And Your

19 Honour, having -- Defence counsel met and discussed this last night, and I

20 was given the dubious honour of being elected to raise the question,

21 simply by way of inquiry, as to whether the Court has received any

22 presentencing reports, and if so, whether the Defence counsel might be

23 supplied with copies of those.

24 JUDGE MAY: The answer is no. Our ruling has been that there

25 should be no further evidence, this simply being a matter of adjustment of

Page 6

1 sentences which was passed by the original Trial Chamber. And we've had

2 regard to what the Appeals Chamber has said, that this isn't a total

3 resentencing exercise; it is a matter of adjustment for the Trial Chamber,

4 and we have therefore rejected all motions suggesting that we should have

5 further evidence. If you want us to reconsider that, of course we'll hear

6 argument, but that's been the view to date. Are you asking for any

7 particular piece of evidence?

8 MR. MURPHY: No. Your Honour, in fact it wasn't our intention to

9 see - at least, I can't speak for all Defence counsel in this regard - it

10 certainly wasn't our intention on behalf of Landzo to adduce further

11 evidence. Our only concern was that we felt that possibly there might

12 have been reports generated through the administrative process here which

13 would be natural enough in most sentencing systems. It was just that we

14 were curious to know whether any such reports existed, and if so, whether

15 we might have access to them.

16 JUDGE MAY: The answer is: Not to the knowledge of the Trial

17 Chamber.

18 MR. MURPHY: I'm much obliged.

19 JUDGE MAY: If there are any such reports, we'll make inquiries,

20 and of course copies will be supplied.

21 MR. MURPHY: Your Honour, I'm much obliged. Thank you.

22 JUDGE MAY: The hearing is adjourned.

23 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 10.18 a.m.

24 to be reconvened on Friday, the 21st day of

25 September 2001, at 9.30 a.m.