1 Thursday, April 29th, 1999
2 (Status Conference)
3 (Open session)
4 (The accused entered court)
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.29 p.m.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Will the registrar call the
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your
9 Honours. Case number IT-95-9-PT, the Prosecutor versus
10 Milan Simic, Miroslav Tadic, Stevan Todorovic, and Simo
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. May we have the
14 MR. NIEMANN: Good afternoon, Your Honours.
15 My name is Niemann, and I appear with my colleagues
16 Ms. Paterson, Ms. MacFadyen, Ms. Hayden and
17 Ms. Annink-Janvier, as the case manager, for the
18 Prosecution, if Your Honours please.
19 MR. BRASHICH: Good afternoon, Your Honours.
20 Dan Brashich for the accused Todorovic. Good
22 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, good afternoon.
23 Pantelic, Defence counsel for Mr. Miroslav Tadic.
24 MR. DE SAINT JUST: (Interpretation)
25 Mr. de Saint Just from the Paris bar for Miroslav
1 Tadic. Thank you.
2 MR. AVRAMOVIC: (Interpretation) I am
3 Mr. Branislav Avramovic for Mr. Milan Simic.
4 MR. PISAREVIC: (Interpretation) Good
5 afternoon, Your Honours. I'm Borislav Pisarevic for
6 Simo Zaric. Thank you.
7 MR. LAZAREVIC: (Interpretation) I am
8 Aleksandar Lazarevic, Your Honours, the legal assistant
9 of Mr. Pisarevic. Thank you.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: We have to ensure that the
11 accused are hearing the proceedings in a language which
12 they understand.
13 I call first on the accused Tadic. Are you
14 hearing the proceedings, Mr. Tadic?
15 THE ACCUSED TADIC: (Interpretation) Yes.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Mr. Todorovic?
17 THE ACCUSED TODOROVIC: (Interpretation) Yes,
18 Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: And Mr. Simo Zaric?
20 THE ACCUSED ZARIC: (Interpretation) Yes, Your
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: This is a Pre-Trial
23 Conference, and I will, at the outset, outline the
24 matters that we will consider today and the order in
25 which we will take them.
1 First, there is a motion by the Prosecution
2 for protective measures; secondly, there is a
3 Prosecution motion in respect of judicial notice;
4 thirdly, the question of status of disclosure of
5 witness statements; fourthly, Article 73 bis
6 requirements; fifth, the Defence Pre-Trial brief;
7 sixth, the trial date. There may be one or two other
8 matters to consider as well.
9 Before moving to the Prosecution motion for
10 protective measures, I should comment on the lateness
11 in starting the proceedings and to say that the Chamber
12 does not wish this to be a precedent for the trial.
13 The schedule time had been given and announced, and in
14 future, the Chamber expects that arrangements will be
15 made to ensure that we can start at the scheduled
17 In respect of the first matter that I
18 outlined, the Prosecution motion for protective
19 measures, we have had the motion, and I'll just inquire
20 from the Defence whether any Defence counsel have
21 anything to say in relation to the motion.
22 Yes, Mr. Brashich?
23 MR. BRASHICH: On behalf of the accused
24 Todorovic, we take no position.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.
1 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, the same
2 position is for Mr. Miroslav Tadic, as Mr. Brashich
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Pantelic.
5 MR. AVRAMOVIC: (Interpretation) Your Honours,
6 the Defence of Milan Simic takes the same position.
7 MR. PISAREVIC: (Interpretation) Your Honours,
8 the Defence of Simo Zaric also has the same position.
9 Thank you.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I think it only remains then
11 to inquire from the Prosecution whether they are
12 requesting either a closed session or an open session
13 with certain other protective measures, because that
14 matter was left open in the motion.
15 MR. NIEMANN: I'll ask my colleague,
16 Ms. Paterson, to address that. She's been dealing with
17 that part of the case, if Your Honours please.
18 MS. PATERSON: Your Honours, based on the
19 information currently available to us from our
20 conversations with all but one of the witnesses on the
21 list, we believe that they are willing to testify in
22 open session, but they may request that their faces be
23 disguised. There's one witness that we have not been
24 able to make recent contact with, so I'm not able to
25 state the position concerning that witness. It may be
1 that that witness, who is a sexual assault victim, may
2 want a closed session. But as far as we know, the vast
3 majority of them, we can go in open session but perhaps
4 with facial distortion.
5 (Trial Chamber confers)
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: The motion is granted in the
7 terms requested. But the question as to whether the
8 witness will testify in open or closed session will be
9 taken up immediately before the witness's testimony and
10 a determination made.
11 The next matter for consideration is the
12 Prosecution motion for judicial notice. The last time
13 when the Chamber was in session, this matter was left
14 in the following state: The Prosecution and the
15 Defence were to meet with a view to trying to agree on
16 certain facts in respect of which, up to that time,
17 there was no agreement.
18 May I hear from the Prosecution first?
19 MR. NIEMANN: If Your Honours please.
20 Your Honours, in relation to three of the
21 accused and their counsel, namely, the accused
22 Mr. Tadic, Mr. Todorovic (sic), and Mr. Zaric,
23 considerable progress has been made. The approach
24 taken, Your Honours, was to deal firstly with -- well,
25 firstly, there was a number of matters in the contested
1 facts or adjudicated facts motion which had been
2 agreed, and those matters went through and were
3 settled. Secondly, the Defence had made some proposed
4 amendments which the Prosecution considered, and a
5 large number of those were accepted. Finally, Your
6 Honours, there was a number of compromised proposals
7 put forward to the Defence, and, by agreement, a large
8 number of those were settled.
9 Your Honours, if I said "Mr. Todorovic" had
10 reached an agreement, I have misspoken. The three
11 accused through which we have reached agreement are the
12 accused Tadic, Simic, and Zaric.
13 In relation to the accused Mr. Todorovic, we
14 have been endeavouring to make contact with
15 Mr. Brashich since the last occasion, and, indeed, on
16 quite a number of occasions, attempts have been made to
17 telephone him. Messages have been left. We have
18 written him letters and faxes, but unfortunately we've
19 been unable to contact him or to arrange any meetings
20 with him. We are in the unfortunate position at the
21 moment that with respect to three of the accused, we
22 have substantial agreement on the adjudicated facts,
23 but with one of the accused, Todorovic, we simply don't
24 know what the position is.
25 That would become very awkward at trial, Your
1 Honours, because it would mean that in relation to
2 three of the accused, no evidence is required between
3 the three accused because they've agreed, but with
4 relation to one accused, Mr. Todorovic, unless some
5 sort of arrangement can be made, we would be leading
6 all the evidence in relation to that.
7 We're somewhat disappointed that we haven't
8 been able to achieve some sort of consensus on these
9 matters with Mr. Brashich, but all attempts to contact
10 him have failed on our part, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich?
12 MR. BRASHICH: With regard to the attempts of
13 being in contact with the Prosecution, I am sure that
14 this Court can take judicial notice of what is right
15 now happening in former Yugoslavia. I have been in the
16 unfortunate position of being under time constraints in
17 at least 21 cases where discovery cut-off schedules,
18 because of the bombing in Yugoslavia, had been cut off,
19 my ability to respond to prior outstanding orders. I
20 have apologised to the Prosecution this afternoon, but
21 it was, to a great extent, outside of my ability to
22 respond to all demands by various judges.
23 In addition, I have had two immediate members
24 of my family die in the last 30 days, so I have been
25 out of commission with regard to that.
1 With regards to the judicial notice requests,
2 I've gone over them, and, frankly, with a number of
3 them, I am mystified as to what, if anything, they have
4 to do with my client. Whether or not Austria-Hungary
5 annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908, I do not see
6 relevance with regard to the indictment which my client
7 stands accused of.
8 I will endeavour, if my co-counsel have
9 reached a consensus on these historical issues, I will
10 most certainly go along with the consensus that, in
11 1908, Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina.
12 (Trial Chamber confers)
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich, no doubt while
14 you are here, the Prosecution would be in a position to
15 take advantage of your presence and to carry out
16 consultations. The Chamber requires that that be
18 In any event, we will give both sides a
19 period of two weeks in which to present us with a list
20 of the agreed facts so that the Chamber will be in a
21 position to make a determination on this issue once and
22 for all.
23 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.
24 (Trial Chamber confers)
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: The next matter that we move
1 to is the status of --
2 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, excuse me. Can
3 I say a few words, please?
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Please go ahead.
5 MR. PANTELIC: On behalf of my colleagues, I
6 would like to inform this Trial Chamber that our
7 position is as follows because, unfortunately, our
8 distinguished colleague, Mr. Brashich, is not fully
9 aware and informed due to his personal problems and
10 circumstances. I would like to draw the attention of
11 this honourable Trial Chamber to the Prosecutor's
12 motion dated February the 10th, then to Defence
13 response of February 22nd. Following --
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: The 10th?
15 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Defence response, the 22nd.
17 MR. PANTELIC: Defence response on the 22nd.
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, yes.
19 MR. PANTELIC: Following the good spirit of
20 cooperation in previous parts of the proceedings, the
21 Prosecutor's Office and my colleagues and me, we were
22 able to open some discussions and to exchange some
23 proposed matters. However, I would like to outline
24 that we still stand very firmly in our relief requested
25 by our response of February 22nd. We consider these
1 facts not as adjudicated facts or facts of common
2 knowledge. Finally, the Prosecutor's Office agreed
3 with us in his letter dated April 27 that I will quote:
4 "Please be advised that the Prosecution
5 agrees to the following statements for the purposes
6 only of the above matter before the Trial Chamber
7 pursuant to Rule 73 bis of the Rules of Procedure and
8 Evidence of the Tribunal."
9 So to clarify, and I'm sure that my
10 distinguished colleague, Mr. Niemann, also would agree
11 with me, that only for the purposes of Rule 73 bis we
12 have some agreements because the spirit of cooperation
13 is our common interest, and procedural economy too.
14 So, please, with regard to our other reliefs,
15 we, as I said, absolutely we stand on a position that
16 these facts could not be adjudicated or facts of common
17 knowledge. Fortunately, following the reliefs and
18 rulings by this same Trial Chamber based on a motion
19 for judicial notice about the character in our
20 response, we are quite familiar about the categories
21 which kind of facts might be considered as adjudicated
22 facts or facts of common knowledge, so now we are
23 speaking strictly about the facts in terms of Rule 73.
24 In addition, after a very profound and very
25 detailed discussion and communication with the Office
1 of the Prosecutor, we found, after carefully reviewing
2 propositions provided to us by the Prosecutor, that
3 some of the paragraphs do not correspond to our
4 response. So for the judicial record, I would like to
5 outline as follows:
6 In Annex 1 of our response dated February
7 22nd, the Defence gave its statement of non-contested
8 matters of fact. In Chapter A, in Chapter B, with
9 paragraphs almost 60 and 68 or 65, I don't know, we
10 didn't find -- we didn't find some of these paragraphs
11 in the proposal of the Prosecutor. So maybe it's a
12 mistake in correspondence or whatever.
13 So for judicial record, the Defence would
14 like to outline that all paragraphs mentioned in its
15 response of 10th of February should be considered as a
16 non-contested matter of fact in terms of Rule 73.
17 In addition, we have noticed that some of the
18 proposed and discussed issues were not properly
19 mentioned in correspondence sent to us by the
20 Prosecutor, although we have agreed upon some facts and
21 we have discussed it in detail. This is paragraph
22 number 3 in your letter of yesterday about the
23 percentage of the statistics, et cetera. Probably it's
24 a typewriting mistake. And especially there is a
25 mistake in your paragraph (a)(16) speaking about the
1 nature and scope of the conflict in the former
2 Yugoslavia which the Defence, by its letter sent to the
3 Office of the Prosecutor, basically is changed, and now
4 we found actually genuine and basic terms that you
5 proposed in your motion.
6 So, in short, the Defence absolutely agree
7 with the dateline proposed by the Trial Chamber and
8 ordered by the Trial Chamber. In this time, we shall
9 do our best in, I would say, clarifying some technical
10 mistakes or correspondence mistakes, and we shall find
11 a way to inform the Trial Chamber, probably by joint
12 motion, with regard to these facts in a spirit of Rule
13 73 bis. Thank you very much, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. Does any other
15 counsel for the Defence wish to say anything on this
16 matter? If not, I shall just reiterate the ruling of
17 the Trial Chamber on this issue, which is that within
18 two weeks, the Prosecution and the Defence will present
19 the Chamber with a statement as to those facts in
20 respect of which there is agreement, and I would like
21 to assure Mr. Pantelic that the decision of the Chamber
22 will be reasoned and will, of course, take due account
23 of all the submissions that have been made, including
24 those made today.
25 We now move to the next matter, which is the
1 status of disclosure of witness statements, and I would
2 just ask Mr. Niemann to inform us as to the position.
3 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honours. We have
4 disclosed all statements of witnesses that we intend to
5 call in the proceedings both in the English language
6 and in the language of the accused.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does any counsel for the
8 Defence wish to make any comment or observation on
9 this? If not, let us seize the agreement and move on
10 to the next matter, which is Article 73 bis
12 The first matter is the pre-trial brief from
13 the Prosecution, which is at hand. The second matter,
14 as to admissions by the parties, that would be affected
15 by the question of judicial notice.
16 In respect of that, does any counsel wish to
17 say anything?
18 Yes, Mr. Niemann.
19 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour. I apprehend
20 that the admission and statement about other matters
21 not in dispute would largely be covered by the
22 adjudicated fact issue. I don't expect, Your Honours,
23 that it would cover every issue, and I would consider
24 that we may need also to address that as a separate
25 matter by way of perhaps the Prosecution putting to the
1 Defence questions as to which matters are in dispute
2 and which aren't. This is something which may assist
3 in reaching some sort of status on that so that we know
4 what's in dispute and what's not.
5 I think that the adjudicated facts motion
6 would cover most of it, but there may be other matters
7 which aren't resolved by that.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does any counsel for the
9 Defence wish to say anything on that?
10 Mr. Niemann, these other matters which may be
11 affected, which may be included but which are not
12 specifically covered by judicial notice, you are not in
13 a position now to comment on that?
14 MR. NIEMANN: No, Your Honours. The position
15 is that it is largely affected by the judicial notice
16 part of the process, and we only basically reached
17 agreement yesterday or the day before yesterday on that
18 question, so it's only come in very recently.
19 What I envisage is one would need to look at
20 the indictment and compare it with the facts which are
21 agreed and then determine what matters are still
22 outstanding, having looked at the indictment, to
23 determine what matters are in dispute and what matters
24 are not contested, and that's a process which we will
25 have to do once we reach agreement upon the question of
2 So it seems to me, Your Honours, that at
3 least with Mr. Brashich, we are in no position at this
4 stage to take into consideration any question of
5 facts. After we have our meeting with him, we can do
6 that. With the other accused, where we have made much
7 further progress, we're certainly much closer to being
8 able to do that.
9 (Trial Chamber confers)
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Brashich?
11 MR. BRASHICH: Unlike the issue of judicial
12 notice, the accused Todorovic has pleaded innocent in
13 this matter, and by the fact that he has pleaded
14 innocent in this particular matter, all of the factual
15 allegations in the indictment -- and I specify the
16 indictment -- have been put in play. So with regard to
17 that issue, I do not and cannot, at this particular
18 point in time, agree as to any facts which are alleged
19 in the indictment.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. We take note of that,
21 you join issue with -- with everything. I think the
22 best course for this is that at the end of the two
23 weeks that the Chamber has given in respect of judicial
24 notice, the Prosecution will then be in a position to
25 give us a statement as to the matters on which there is
2 MR. BRASHICH: Perhaps --
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann?
4 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honours. That's
5 certainly, I think, the best course, Your Honours.
6 Might I inquire through Your Honours whether
7 Mr. Brashich will be in The Hague next week because, I
8 mean, this is a process which will take some time. If
9 he doesn't intend to be here, I don't see us making
10 much progress, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Brashich?
12 MR. BRASHICH: My plans were to spend Friday,
13 tomorrow, and Saturday here in The Hague either with
14 consultations with the Prosecution and more
15 specifically in consultations with my client. I was
16 not aware that tomorrow is a legal holiday. I was made
17 aware of that when I arrived here today. If necessary,
18 within the next two weeks, I will come back and meet
19 with the Prosecutor.
20 But to go back to the issue at hand as I see
21 it, Your Honour, the Rule is somewhat unclear, and, of
22 course, I don't know whether or not it has been
23 discussed in any one of the decisions. Rule 73 bis
24 (B)(ii): "... admissions by the parties and a
25 statement of other matters which are not in dispute."
1 I take it that we are discussing this issue.
2 If the fact is that my client, Mr. Todorovic, was born
3 on such and such a date, yes, of course, we can have an
4 admission as to that particular fact. If we have a
5 request for an admission that Bosanski Samac is located
6 at a certain latitude and a certain longitude, I'm sure
7 that we can agree to that. But again I reiterate that
8 every factual allegation against my client, by the
9 entry of a not guilty plea, is put into play, and the
10 burden is upon the Prosecution to prove to the
11 satisfaction of this Trial Chamber the allegations.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann?
13 MR. NIEMANN: Your Honours, we're not
14 endeavouring to avoid our burden, we are merely trying
15 to comply with the Rules, and the Rules are drafted in
16 this way, whereas, as a pre-trial process, to endeavour
17 to eliminate any matters which need not be contested at
18 the trial.
19 Your Honours, it's encouraging to hear that
20 there are at least some matters that Mr. Brashich is
21 prepared to admit to, perhaps there are more, and I
22 believe that a meeting with him at some date over the
23 period of the next two weeks may be helpful in that
25 MR. BRASHICH: Again, Your Honour, perhaps
1 I'm misreading the Rule. The Rule specifically
2 authorises the Trial Chamber to order the Prosecutor,
3 not the Defence, to file an admission by the parties,
4 and there is no admission by my client, and a statement
5 of other matters that are not in dispute. It is the
6 Prosecution's burden, if the Court so finds, to direct
7 the Prosecution to do so. This is not a joint effort
8 the way I read the Rule.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: I think the Rule is
10 sufficiently clear on its face. For the Prosecution to
11 discharge the responsibility which the Chamber will
12 place on it, it will be necessary for the Prosecution
13 to be in communication with the Defence to ascertain
14 those matters in respect of which there can be
16 I would just like to reiterate that on this
17 matter, the Prosecutor should endeavour to meet with
18 Mr. Brashich and see to what extent they will be in a
19 position to discharge the duty that the Chamber has
20 placed on them within two weeks. I think they should
21 endeavour to take advantage of your presence here, and
22 it is a matter for you to say to the Prosecutor exactly
23 what you have said here. I really don't see that this
24 is a very complicated issue.
25 MR. BRASHICH: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: The next matter for
2 consideration is a statement of contested matters of
3 fact and law, which is the converse of the issue that
4 we just looked at.
5 Mr. Niemann, do you have anything to say on
7 MR. NIEMANN: No, Your Honours, other than
8 those matters which I have already put to you.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Does any counsel from the
10 Defence wish to say anything on that? We will move
12 We come now to Rule 73 bis (B)(iv):
13 "(iv) a list of witnesses the Prosecutor
14 intends to call with:
15 (a) the name or pseudonym of each
17 That has been complied with.
18 "(b) a summary of the facts on which each
19 witness will testify."
20 That has been complied with.
21 "(c) the points in the indictment as to
22 which each witness will testify."
23 That has been done in the Prosecutor's
24 pre-trial brief.
25 "(d) the estimated length of time
1 required for each witness."
2 That has been complied with.
3 The Chamber has some comments on the last
4 matter, but before making those comments, I just
5 inquire whether any counsel wish to say anything on any
6 of those four points.
7 Mr. Niemann, on the question of the estimated
8 length of time, you have, in fact, offered an estimate
9 as to the time that each witness will take.
10 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: And I imagine that
12 by aggregating those hours, one would arrive at an
13 estimate of the aggregate. Would you like to tell us
14 what that is?
15 MR. NIEMANN: Excuse me, Your Honours. Might
16 I consult, Your Honour?
17 I'm sorry, Your Honours. Your Honours, we
18 haven't actually ever sat down and added them up, but
19 our estimate was that it would take six to eight weeks
20 for the Prosecution witnesses to testify based on the
21 number of witnesses that we intend to call, that's the
22 60-odd witnesses, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I ask you whether the
24 estimate that you have given is confined to
25 examination-in-chief or whether it includes an estimate
1 as to cross-examination?
2 MR. NIEMANN: The estimate that we have
3 provided for in our summaries was an estimate of the
4 Prosecution time for testimony. The eight-week period
5 would be a period of time allowed for
6 cross-examination, but I am hesitant to be too certain
7 about this. I say this because, Your Honours, (a) we
8 don't know for sure just how long cross-examination is
9 going to take, and (b), when there is four accused, the
10 process of cross-examination is always much lengthier
11 than what you can reasonably estimate. So there is
12 some allowance in the eight-week period for
13 cross-examination, and we would endeavour to see if we
14 could complete it in that time, but I wouldn't want to
15 be held to that, Your Honours. It really is a matter
16 that the Defence would have to address and perhaps give
17 their estimate too.
18 To put it another way, I would imagine it
19 would take no more than six weeks in chief for the
20 Prosecution case to present its evidence, but that
21 wouldn't be allowing for cross-examination.
22 I don't know whether that's much assistance
23 to Your Honour, but my experience in these matters is
24 when there is multiple accused, the cross-examination
25 in some cases can be very lengthy, and, of course,
1 there is nothing the Prosecution can do about that.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you. My best
3 mathematics produce the following result: From the
4 witnesses that you have identified, there would be a
5 total of about 183 hours. That doesn't include the
6 witnesses that would take more than a day, of which
7 there are six. Four would take two days, in your
8 estimation; one, a day and a half; and one, one day.
9 In terms of the standards of this Tribunal,
10 this ought to be seen as a relatively short case, and
11 we should endeavour to ensure that it is as brief as
12 possible having, of course, regard to the interests of
14 The Chamber would encourage you, Mr. Niemann,
15 where you have witnesses who will be testifying for a
16 long time or, in any event, where witnesses testify to
17 a particular event, to consider whether there is a need
18 for repetition, and to the extent that that can be
19 avoided without prejudicing your case, we would
20 encourage you to take that approach.
21 There's one other matter on this question.
22 You haven't yet provided a sequence as to the
23 witnesses, the order in which they will testify.
24 MR. NIEMANN: No, Your Honour, that's true.
25 We can, of course, and will, of course, do that if Your
1 Honours wish us to do it. Our position on it depends a
2 bit on whether or not it's easier to bring some
3 witnesses from the former Yugoslavia, having a regard
4 to the current situation, or to take them from other
5 places. That's a matter which has been exercising our
6 minds in relation to that process. But if the trial
7 date is set and Your Honours wish for us to file an
8 order of witnesses at some period of time prior to
9 that, I'm sure that we can comply with that.
10 (Trial Chamber confers)
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann, the Chamber
12 considers that it is more than useful and it will
13 facilitate its work, not only its work but the work of
14 the Defence as well, to have filed a list as to the
15 sequence in which witnesses will give their testimony.
16 In this regard, the Chamber will require that this be
17 done no later than three weeks before the date that we
18 will set for trial.
19 MR. NIEMANN: Certainly, Your Honours.
20 There's no difficulty with that. The reason I raise
21 the difficulty is because Your Honours are aware of the
22 fact that the war at the moment has restricted movement
23 in the whole of Yugoslavia. It's not just in Serbia.
24 In fact, movement of people in and out, witnesses and
25 so forth, has become extremely difficult. That was the
1 reason why we hadn't settled on any matter. But
2 certainly three weeks would be adequate, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: The next matter for
4 consideration is the Prosecutor's list of exhibits, and
5 that has been filed. Is there any comment from any
6 Defence counsel on that?
7 I turn next to the Defence pre-trial brief.
8 The Chamber has considered this matter and will require
9 that the Defence pre-trial brief be filed by the end of
11 I turn next to the trial date. Having given
12 consideration to all the matters that we have discussed
13 and considered, the Chamber will set a date of June the
14 22nd as the commencement date, that's a Tuesday, until
15 the 14th of July for the first sittings. Thereafter,
16 the Chamber will determine the dates as it is
17 convenient. Note that June the 22nd is a Tuesday.
18 There is one other matter that we have to
19 consider. Mr. Niemann, the accused Blagoje Simic is
20 not present, and it seems likely that he will not be
21 present for trial, but he's on the indictment.
22 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: So I wish to inquire what
24 course the Prosecution intends to take in respect of
25 that matter.
1 MR. NIEMANN: Yes, Your Honour.
2 Your Honours, the course that was taken in
3 the Tadic case in relation to this was that -- he was
4 charged with another accused. The indictment in that
5 case wasn't amended. The indictment simply lay on
6 file. We proceeded with the Prosecution that Mr. Tadic
7 learned, and at the end of the day, there was no
8 finding, of course, in relation to the accused whose
9 name was Mr. Borovnica. That was the decision taken in
10 that case.
11 I have in mind that there was in other cases
12 an amendment made to the indictment so that the name of
13 the accused was removed and proceeded by separate
15 Your Honours appreciate that we must keep the
16 indictment alive. We simply can't ask you to dismiss
17 it in relation to that accused. It probably is tidier
18 to just allow the name to lay on file, for the
19 indictment to be alive in relation to that accused, and
20 for the trial will proceed against these accused. Your
21 Honours will be asked to make no finding in relation to
22 that accused.
23 I am in Your Honours' hands. If we have to
24 prepare a separate indictment, we will be pleased to do
25 that, but we would have to have two indictments.
1 (Trial Chamber confers)
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Niemann, we have given
3 consideration to this matter of Mr. Blagoje Simic, who
4 is not present and is not likely to be present. We
5 have considered the course that you have suggested of
6 leaving him on the indictment and then the Chamber not
7 making a finding in respect of him. The Chamber is not
8 in favour of that approach. The trial should proceed
9 without Mr. Blagoje Simic being on the indictment, and
10 the Prosecution must take the necessary measures to
11 ensure that he's not on the indictment.
12 MR. NIEMANN: Your Honours, in relation to
13 that, may I just mention something? If Your Honours
14 wish us to file another indictment, we can certainly
15 take steps to do that. Might we ask that we not be
16 required to do it until the morning of trial? I say
17 that because, A, it won't cause any prejudice to the
18 other accused, but, B, if this accused does, in fact,
19 turn up between now and that date, we don't want to be
20 in a position where we then have to seek a compound of
21 the indictment because we would have severed the
22 indictment. If Your Honours wish us to file a fresh
23 indictment, we can do it, but if we can just leave it
24 to the day of commencement of the trial, we would be
25 most grateful in that regard.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: There's no difficulty with
2 that. It can be done the day of the commencement of
3 the trial.
4 MR. NIEMANN: If Your Honours please.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: May I just return to the
6 dates set for trial? I had given the dates Tuesday,
7 June 22nd to the 14th of the July. That will be
8 affected by the meeting of the Plenary which is
9 scheduled for -- I'm just getting the dates of the
10 Plenary. The Plenary is the 30th of June to the 2nd of
11 July. On those dates, there will be no sittings.
12 Mr. Niemann?
13 MR. NIEMANN: I'm sorry, Your Honours. Your
14 Honours, there is one matter that we would wish to
15 raise in relation to a confidential witness. We would
16 ask if we could do it simply in private session. We're
17 not asking Your Honours to go into closed session but
18 that the sound be turned off to the public so we can
19 briefly just raise this matter, if we may.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
21 MR. NIEMANN: My colleague, Ms. Paterson,
22 will raise the matter, Your Honours.
23 (Private session)
13 Page 584 redacted – in private session
10 (Open session)
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: We're back in open session.
12 There being no other matters for consideration and
13 decision, we will adjourn.
14 --- Whereupon the Pre-Trial Conference
15 adjourned at 3.26 p.m.