1 Thursday, 13 May 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.08 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
6 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case IT-08-91-T, the
7 Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
8 JUDGE HALL: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 Good morning to everyone. May we have the appearances, please.
10 MS. KORNER: Good morning, Your Honours. Joanna Korner assisted
11 by Crispian Smith, Case Manager, for the Prosecution.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning, Your Honours. Slobodan Zecevic,
13 Slobodan Cvijetic, and Eugene O'Sullivan appearing for Stanisic Defence
14 this morning. Thank you.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Good morning, Your Honours. For Zupljanin
16 Defence, Igor Pantelic and Dragan Krgovic.
17 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
18 Before we revert to closed session, there was an issue that came
19 up just at the adjournment yesterday. I'm wondering whether it's
20 something on which a ruling has to be made before we -- before we go into
21 closed session.
22 MS. KORNER: No. Your Honours. Can I tell Your Honours, I can
23 say this in open session. I spoke to the witness yesterday after we
24 adjourned. There was a misunderstanding. What he would like to have in
25 front of him is the document on which his evidence really, as far as the
1 Prosecution is concerned, is based. He had obviously been given a tour
2 of the court by VWS who told him the document would come up on the
3 screen, and what he actually wanted -- he wants to have a hard copy of
4 the document in front of him, and that -- I gave him a copy --
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: The document, is that his statement?
6 MS. KORNER: It's the document that I asked Your Honours to read.
7 It's an exhibit in this case, exactly. That one. He says if he was
8 going be asked question about it he would prefer to have a hard copy. I
9 gave him that yesterday. I had an unmarked copy which he took with him.
10 And the second matter that he wanted clarified, he wants it made
11 absolutely clear that is he not attending voluntarily, and I assured him
12 that will be made clear at the beginning of his evidence.
13 And can I say I gave that explanation to both of my friends
15 JUDGE HALL: Thank you.
16 So we go into closed session.
17 Sorry, something, Mr. Zecevic.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: Yeah, it's a small matter, Your Honours, but I
19 would just like to make the record straight in respect to the -- to our
20 conversation and exchanges yesterday about the adjudicated facts. Well,
21 Your Honours, there has been the first and the second motion which dealt
22 with the adjudicated facts between number 1 and 983, and it has been
23 decided on the 14th of December, 2007. In that respect, the -- the
24 Stanisic Defence agreed to 84 of these facts.
25 Now, from 25th of January, 2008, until the 21st of August, 2009
1 there were additional three motions for adjudicated facts, and the -- the
2 last, the fifth motion, from 21st August, 2009, ended with the number
3 1442 adjudicated facts, and this Trial Chamber decided on April 1st,
5 Now, there has been a suggestion yesterday that there was --
6 there was an offer made to the -- to the Defence in the course of the
7 pre-trial or immediately before the start of the trial on adjudicated
8 facts, an offer, and an invitation to agree to some of these facts, but
9 that is -- we -- we exchanged the -- the mails and we consulted with each
10 other, and it is not a fact. It has -- it hasn't been offered to the
11 Defence in the pre-trial phase. Only in December -- before the
12 December 2007 motion -- decision, and on that, we agreed to 84 facts.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: I'm not sure of whose offer you're talking.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Well --
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: Because I recall when I was the Pre-Trial Judge
18 that I invited the parties, collectively, to get together and seek
19 agreement on as many of the proposed adjudicated facts as possible. And
20 although I didn't check it, I would be inclined to believe that the
21 Defence counsels' were, in particular, invited to come forward with a
22 proposal as to how many of the adjudicated facts you could actually agree
23 to among the adjudicated facts that had been proposed by the time I was
24 the Pre-Trial Judge. And I think - but I cannot recall for sure - but I
25 think that the response both by you and by Mr. Pantelic was that the
1 general position was that you objected to all of them. But I may be
2 wrong. But -- but please correct me if I am.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: With all due respect, Your Honours, I don't think
4 you're wrong. I just think that the issue that we were talking about
5 were the crime base. That was the issue that Your Honour invited us to
6 find an agreement with the -- with the Prosecution. And we were talking
7 about the -- the -- the -- the crime base witnesses, in order, if we
8 can -- if we can stipulate to some of the facts and some of the crime
9 base which our friends from the Prosecutors are alleging. And I don't
10 think that we -- that we -- that we discussed any other adjudicated fact
11 or -- or -- or -- or have been offered by the Prosecution and -- or -- or
12 invited to -- to accept some of the adjudicated facts.
13 Because when you -- when your -- when Your Honour yesterday
14 pointed out the -- the ethnic composition according to the census of
15 1991, absolutely, we are not going to challenge that.
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: Then say so.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Well ... well, I believe, Your Honours, the parties
18 should -- should communicate on that, and it is our position that -- that
19 we should -- we should sit down with -- with our friends from the
20 Prosecution and -- yeah.
21 I see.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. I think enough has been said about
23 this matter. Let's just get on with --
24 MS. KORNER: Yes, can I just. Your Honours, what Your Honours
25 are referring to, and I -- on the 24th of August, before that, and as
1 Mr. Zecevic says, Your Honours invited us to try and agree the crime
2 base. We were asked to identify the perpetrators by the Defence. We did
3 so as far as we were able. We sent the Defence a list of the crimes
4 which formed the crime base in this indictment with the identified
5 perpetrators and asked for their agreement. We got a refusal from the
6 Defence for Zupljanin to agree this unless we dropped JCE, so we never
7 took the matter any further, and, indeed, I wrote a letter. And you were
8 told about it in the Status Conference on the 24th of August.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: Yes.
10 MS. KORNER: And we explained that to you.
11 JUDGE HARHOFF: Right. I think we should cut it here and take it
12 up at a later point.
13 Let's get on with the witness.
14 [Closed session]
11 Pages 10072-10199 redacted. Closed session.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 5.31 p.m.
23 to be reconvened on Friday, the 14th day of May,
24 2010, at 9.00 a.m.