Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 26657

 1                           Wednesday, 18 January 2012

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.

 5             THE REGISTRAR:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Good morning to

 6     everyone in and around the courtroom.

 7             This is case IT-08-91-T, the Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and

 8     Stojan Zupljanin.

 9             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Madam Registrar.

10             Good morning to everyone.  May we have the appearances, please.

11             MS. KORNER:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Joanna Korner,

12     Tom Hannis and Sebastiaan van Hooydonk for the Prosecution this morning.

13             MR. ZECEVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Slobodan Zecevic,

14     Slobodan Cvijetic, and Ms. Monika Marekova, appearing for

15     Stanisic Defence this morning.  Thank you.

16             MR. KRGOVIC:  Good morning, Your Honours.  Dragan Krgovic,

17     Aleksandar Aleksic, Marti Sleister, Gillian Kelly, and Olivia Oprea,

18     appearing for Zupljanin Defence.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

20             Well, the -- I notice that there was some oblique query as to the

21     provision in the rules for what was described to the parties as an

22     administrative hearing.  But, of course, it goes without saying that it

23     is a part of the inherent responsibility of any Court to seek to

24     efficiently manage its business and to the extent that the views of

25     counsel are of assistance in that management exercise, we convene this

Page 26658

 1     hearing.  Call it an administrative hearing or choose which term you wish

 2     but it is -- as I said, it arises out of the inherent responsibility of

 3     Courts to manage how it does its work.

 4             And we are grateful for the input of counsel in terms of the

 5     matters which they indicated through the legal officers they would wish

 6     us to -- seek to resolve today.

 7             And the first matter on the agenda which would have been

 8     circulated to you is that the Trial Chamber informs the parties that of

 9     the three motions of which it is currently seized, that is the

10     Prosecution motion to admit new material for the CHS; the

11     Stanisic Defence motion to tender into evidence documents received from

12     Bosnia-Herzegovina; and the Stanisic Defence motion seeking admission of

13     document 820D1.  The Chamber anticipates that these matters would be

14     dealt with in the course of this week and the week following.

15             The next item which we address is the joint submission by the

16     parties on documents with MFI status.  And let me say at the beginning

17     that we are grateful for the work that counsel have put into the joint

18     report, thus minimising such particular attention as the Chamber

19     otherwise themselves would have had to bring to the resolution of this.

20             On the 15th of December, the Chamber had requested the parties to

21     review the 53 documents on the trial record with MFI status to file a

22     joint submission.  The Chamber received a joint position informally by

23     way of e-mail on the 16th of January stating in essence that barring

24     16 documents, the parties have abandoned their requests for the admission

25     of 37 documents marked for identification.  The Trial Chamber directs the

Page 26659

 1     parties to file their respective notices to that effect containing the

 2     provisional exhibit number assigned to those 37 documents in relation to

 3     which they no longer request admission and directs the Registry to mark

 4     them not admitted.

 5             Of the remaining 16 documents, the following 12 documents are

 6     admitted into evidence, since the opposing party no longer objects to

 7     their admission: 1D66, 1D202, 1D369, 2D32, 2D39, 2D93, 2D94, P124, P1036,

 8     P2370, P2382, and P2405.

 9             Additionally, Exhibit P2405 is placed under seal.

10             Of the final four documents, the admission of 1D655 and 1D656 was

11     denied by the Chamber in its decision of the 15th of September of 2011,

12     wherein, at paragraph 21 it found that, and I quote:

13             "The Trial Chamber having previously admitted a representative

14     number of such documents will not receive further materials which are

15     repetitive, add nothing new and have limited or no probative value."

16             No new submissions meriting reconsiderations have been made

17     since, and hence, the decision stands.

18             Of the last two documents, P171, was shown to Aleksandar Krulj on

19     28th of October, 2009, although, at that point, the Prosecution did not

20     seek to have the document admitted.  And this is at page 2211 of the

21     transcript.  It was later put to Goran Macar, who was unable to speak to

22     the event narrated therein.  And P911 was also shown by the Prosecution

23     to two witnesses: Vitomir Zepinic and Goran Macar, neither of whom could

24     speak to the contents.  And the reference are to transcript pages 5820 of

25     the 29th January, 2010, and 23133, of the 11th of July, 2011.

Page 26660

 1             Considering that the Prosecution did not utilise the opportunity

 2     it had to seek the admission of these documents through the bar table

 3     motion it moved at the close of its case in-chief, the Chamber directs

 4     the Registry to mark these documents not admitted.

 5             I would now invite Judge Harhoff to deal with the next three

 6     items.

 7             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you --

 8             MS. KORNER:  Before you move on to the next topic, I wonder if

 9     Mr. Hannis certainly wishes to address you on those two documents if that

10     is at all possible.  In fact, the idea was that we were going to put in a

11     written motion, but I think Mr. Hannis wants to say something about that.

12             JUDGE HALL:  Yes, Mr. Hannis.

13             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you, Your Honours.

14             With regard to P171, which is the "Glas" newspaper article

15     reporting about Mico Stanisic being present in Trebinje on the

16     1st of April, it's the Prosecution's position that Mr. Krulj did confirm

17     that Mr. Stanisic was in Trebinje on that day.  Although he took issue

18     with the article insofar as it describes that event as being a review of

19     the special police and he claimed there were no special police or no

20     special police unit in Trebinje, he did not disagree with Mr. Stanisic

21     being present and having spoken about the formation of a new RS MUP on

22     that day.

23             It's the Prosecution position that that didn't become so

24     pertinent or relevant until during the Defence case, when the Prosecution

25     introduced the exhibit concerning the 1st of April dispatch from the

Page 26661

 1     joint MUP BiH which was signed by Mr. Delimustafic and all the other

 2     members of the joint BiH MUP, except for Mico Stanisic.  And it's our

 3     argument that this document is relevant because it helps explain, in

 4     part, why Mr. Stanisic would not have been present at the

 5     1st of April meeting, and signing of the document that was issued on the

 6     1st of April because, we say the evidence shows, he was in Trebinje on

 7     the 1st of April.  And that did not come up during the Prosecution's case

 8     and before the time we filed our bar table motion.  It was only during

 9     the Defence case.

10             With regard to P911, which is a state security report about the

11     events on the 2nd and 3rd of March, 1992, concerning the barricades that

12     were erected, Your Honours did note that that was shown to Mr. Zepinic

13     and Mr. Macar, but it was also shown to Dragan Andan, and Mr. Andan

14     confirmed that to the extent that he was aware of some of those events,

15     it was consistent with what he knew.  And in the written submission I

16     intended to make to Your Honours, I wanted to show that much of what is

17     contained in that report is also confirmed by intercepted telephone

18     conversations which are in evidence, and we think it corroborates those

19     conversations and those conversations corroborate the report itself.  And

20     I would like you to consider taking that as a document that sort of

21     completes the story about those events.  We think there is no issue that

22     it is authentic.  It was addressed to the Presidency and several

23     high-ranking members of the government.  And I would put more detail

24     about that in a written submission, but, at this point, that's what I

25     have to say.

Page 26662

 1             Thank you.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Procedurally, Mr. Hannis, the -- well, first of all,

 3     the -- although we would have heard everything would you have said,

 4     obviously it takes some time to digest this and put it into the -- get an

 5     understanding of it in the context of what has passed, having -- well,

 6     you have indicated that you intend to flesh this out in a written motion,

 7     so having regard to the decision that we announced earlier on the record,

 8     should this be treated procedurally as an application to reconsider that

 9     decision to the -- where we said earlier that they mark not admitted; or

10     should we revoke that decision as having been improvidently made.

11             Or how should we proceed?

12             MR. HANNIS:  Your Honours, I would request, perhaps, if you could

13     suspend your decision until I have an opportunity to file something in

14     writing, and I can do that by Friday if that's --

15             JUDGE HALL:  So ordered.

16             MR. HANNIS:  Thank you.

17             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, I'm aware of your decision that

19     you just gave, but does that mean that -- that the -- that the order --

20     or the decision on Exhibit 1D655 and 656 is also suspended until we would

21     have the opportunity to -- to address the -- if we choose to that, should

22     we be given the opportunity to file a written motion for reconsideration

23     of your decision or suspend your decision until you hear our position

24     on --

25             JUDGE HALL:  I think that would be the prudent course,

Page 26663

 1     Mr. Zecevic.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.  I understand.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  So, for the record, the like order of suspension is

 4     made in respect of the earlier -- the decision announced earlier in

 5     respect of 1D655 and 1D656.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, can I just ask for clarification on

 7     that.

 8             Given that Mr. Zecevic has already had these documents denied,

 9     whereas we hadn't applied for them before, would we still get an

10     opportunity to respond, and obviously Mr. Zecevic or Mr. Krgovic to our

11     motion likewise?

12             JUDGE HALL:  I would have thought that goes without saying.

13     Because when Mr. Zecevic rose, I thought he was going to ask for the

14     opportunity to respond and I already had my answer prepared that he --

15     that that would happen as a matter of course.

16             So correspondingly --

17             MS. KORNER:  Yes.  And, Your Honours, in the interests of

18     efficiency we are perfectly prepared to say that we will -- that the

19     responses should be within seven days of each others' filing of the

20     motions so that we can finally dispose of those matters.

21             JUDGE HALL:  Would it be too optimistic to ask for even an

22     abbreviated --

23             MS. KORNER:  Three days?

24             Your Honour, we're happy with 72 hours, three days.

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  72 hours is acceptable for us as well.

Page 26664

 1             JUDGE HALL:  So ordered.

 2                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 3             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, just to make sure, your motion would

 4     be a reconsideration motion, wouldn't it?

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Of course, Your Honours, yes.

 6             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you.

 8             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you.

 9             We have a few further issues to address.  One relating to the

10     video exhibits; one to the law library; and one to the status of the

11     transcripts of the testimony of Stevan Todorovic, and I shall address

12     these three points.

13             In relation to the video exhibits, the Chamber was informed on

14     15th of December, 2011, that some videos admitted into evidence were not

15     working properly.  The Chamber was to receive an update on this matter,

16     and we take it that there are no more outstanding issues between the

17     parties with regard to video exhibits admitted in this case.

18             Is this a correct understanding?  Can I ask the parties?

19             MR. ZECEVIC:  That is correct, Your Honours.

20             JUDGE HARHOFF:  And the Prosecution?

21             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I'm not sure what not working properly

22     means, whether it means not playable or whether there was some error in

23     the videos under the exhibit, because I'm not aware of any problems of

24     playing the videos.

25             But any issues that remain between the Defence and us and the

Page 26665

 1     Registry about what videos have been tendered, I believe are all

 2     resolved.  But I just wasn't clear on what you meant by "not working

 3     properly."

 4                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

 5             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honour, if I may be of assistance.  I believe

 6     Ms. Korner was not present at the time when this issue appeared, and,

 7     indeed, there was problems with the possibility of playing some videos.

 8     But everything has been resolved.  Yes.

 9             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Very well.  This is very comforting.  And I thank

10     the parties.

11             You see, the issue was that the information we got was that the

12     Chamber -- the videos weren't working properly and we never received any

13     further information so that's why we just wanted to --

14             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, that escaped my attention as well.  But

15     as Mr. Zecevic says it is all resolved, I won't go any further into it

16     either.

17             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Very well.  Thank you very much.

18             Let me move on to the next issue, the law library.

19             On 15th of December, 2011, the Chamber was informed that the

20     translations of eight documents contained in the law library had still

21     not been uploaded into e-court.  The Chamber was to receive an update on

22     this matter by the 13th of January, 2012.

23             And could I ask what the current situation and status of this

24     issue is?

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  May I address Your Honours?

Page 26666

 1             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Yes.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, the situation is as follows.  Out of

 3     eight, seven -- seven translations were received, five were uploaded,

 4     two are uploaded as we are speaking, because they were received

 5     yesterday.

 6             There is only one, I believe it is L84, which is still pending,

 7     and we have got the assurances from the CLSS that the translation of L84

 8     will be made available either today or tomorrow.  And immediately upon

 9     that it will be up loaded in the e-court.

10             Therefore, there is only one still pending, as we speak right

11     now, L84, and we intended to inform the Trial Chamber by -- and the

12     parties via e-mail that the matter has been ultimately resolved.

13             Thank you.

14             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.

15             MR. ZECEVIC:  I would like to thank the -- to

16     Mr. Sebastiaan van Hooydonk for his cooperation on this matter.  Thank

17     you.

18             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Thanks.  This is good to know that there is no

19     more issue pending regarding the law library.

20             Let me then address the third issue; namely, the status of the

21     transcripts of the testimony of Mr. Todorovic.

22             The Trial Chamber notes that the transcripts of

23     Mr. Stevan Todorovic in the Simic trial are currently admitted in this

24     case as public exhibits, 1D606, and 1D608 through 1D618.  However, some

25     of these transcripts contain matters which were discussed during closed

Page 26667

 1     or private sessions.  The Registrar is therefore directed to change the

 2     status of these exhibits from public to confidential.

 3             And, in the meantime, the Stanisic Defence is requested to upload

 4     public redacted versions of those transcripts not containing any private

 5     or closed session discussions and to inform the Registry and the Chamber

 6     accordingly.

 7             These public redacted versions are then to be become public

 8     exhibits, and the Registrar is requested to assign exhibit numbers to

 9     them and circulate a memo with the new numbers.  Therefore, both the

10     confidential and the public redacted versions of these exhibits will be

11     in evidence.

12             The parties are kindly requested to refer to the public redacted

13     versions of these exhibits in their final briefs as much as possible.

14             On a similar matter, the Trial Chamber notes that, pursuant to

15     the Trial Chamber's oral order of 15th December, 2011, the Prosecution

16     has now uploaded the public redacted versions of Predrag Radic's

17     testimony in the Krajisnik case.  These public redacted versions are to

18     be admitted into evidence and the Registrar is kindly invited to assign

19     exhibit numbers to the public redacted versions of Exhibits P2097, P2098,

20     and P2103 -- excuse me, 2100.

21             Ah, right.  So all together, let me repeat the numbers just in

22     case there's any misunderstanding.

23             It's P2097, P2098, P2100, and P2103; all together four documents.

24             Thank you.

25             MS. KORNER:  So Your Honour, just to confirm, it is the same as

Page 26668

 1     with the Todorovic transcripts; namely, there will be two versions, one

 2     redacted, one unredacted.

 3             JUDGE HARHOFF:  Indeed.

 4             MS. KORNER:  Thank you very much.

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you, Judge.

 6             Judge Delvoie.

 7             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.  I will address three further issues.

 8     First of all, rejoinder.

 9             Pursuant to Rule 85(A), the Chamber directs the Defence to file

10     their respective motions seeking to present evidence in rejoinder, if

11     any, by Wednesday, 25th of January, 2012.

12             Any immediate indication of both Defences' intentions are

13     welcome, of course.

14             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you, Your Honours.

15             There is a matter which I wanted to raise with Your Honours about

16     the -- the potential rejoinder case.

17             In December, immediately upon the decision of the Trial Chamber

18     to hear the rebuttal testimony of the witnesses, we requested

19     documentation from both Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Republic of Serbia;

20     namely, we requested the archives and specifically the orders of the

21     6th Motorised Brigade from Doboj in period January till May 1992.

22             Unfortunately, we -- we are still expecting to receive these

23     documents.  We -- we sent number of urgencies, as can you imagine,

24     because we wanted to have that before the witness comes.  Ultimately, we

25     decided to carry on the cross-examination without these -- these

Page 26669

 1     documents.

 2             However, the latest that I know is that we were told that

 3     probably this week we will receive the documentation from

 4     Republic of Serbia.  And we don't have any information from

 5     Bosnia-Herzegovina.  It's still pending.

 6             So if that -- if the -- if the documentation is, indeed,

 7     received, we will -- based on what we receive, we might be asking for --

 8     that -- that either some of the documents or perhaps a witness be called

 9     in a rejoinder case.

10             But that is as far as I can -- I can inform the Trial Chamber at

11     the moment.

12             What my concern is, Your Honours, is that in case we don't

13     receive these documents until the 25th, which is the deadline for our

14     motion, I would like to -- to ask for -- for the guidance from the

15     Trial Chamber.  Should we -- should we at that point request another time

16     for -- additional time for filing our motion for rejoinder or ...

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

19             JUDGE DELVOIE:  I think, Mr. Zecevic, that asking for a further

20     delay, a short further delay would the best course of action.  By the

21     25th of January.

22             MR. ZECEVIC:  I understand, Your Honours, and I appreciate.

23     Thank you very much.

24             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, may I just say something on -- on that?

25             Mr. Cvijetic -- actually, for safety's sake, Your Honours, can we

Page 26670

 1     just briefly go into private session, please.

 2             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

 3                           [Private session]

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 26671

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20                           [Open session]

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

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Thank you.

23             Time and length of final trial briefs.

24             The Chamber has decided to grant the parties four weeks from the

25     closing of the evidence to file their respective final briefs.  The

Page 26672

 1     Prosecution's final brief shall not exceed 100.000 words.  And the final

 2     briefs of the Defence will not exceed 60.000 words each.

 3             The closing arguments will be heard two weeks after the filing of

 4     the final briefs.

 5             Thank you.

 6             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, on -- on the last matter, the length,

 7     Your Honours, we have tried obviously to work out quite carefully how

 8     much we need.  Your Honours, we're very conscious of the fact that,

 9     particularly given the changes there have been in Chamber's staff, that

10     the more assistance that we can possibly give to the Trial Chamber and to

11     Chambers staff on how we put the case legally and factually may really

12     help them.

13             Your Honours, by comparison, can I put it this way.  In the

14     Perisic case, which had one accused, and no allegation of joint criminal

15     enterprise, they were given a word limit of 100.000 words.  We've got two

16     accused and allegations of joint criminal enterprise.  We would therefore

17     respectfully request that you grant us 175.000 words.  Which it works out

18     roughly, we think, at 400 pages.  Perisic, as I say was a hundred -- it

19     was 300 pages but which effectively amounts to 100.000 words, which is

20     perhaps one of the more recent final briefs.

21             As I say, obviously we can keep it within that limit but -- we

22     can keep it within any limit that Your Honours direct, but we think it

23     would be of more assistance if we can perhaps give some more information.

24             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, I have an application of our own

25     concerning the time envisaged and the length of the final briefs.

Page 26673

 1             Your Honours, we do not believe that four weeks is -- is enough

 2     time for -- for us to file our final brief after the close of evidence.

 3     The reasons are many, but basically it -- it is a fact that the charges

 4     against my client encompass 20 municipalities, five CSBs, and a huge

 5     number of SJBs; plus the MUP at the seat.

 6             In all fairness, I believe, due to the fact -- I understand that

 7     this is a joint trial, but the fact is that -- that the accused Zupljanin

 8     has got only eight municipalities or the Krajina municipalities in his

 9     indictment.  Therefore, it doesn't seem, at least to us with all due

10     respect, it doesn't seem right that the both -- both accused will have

11     the same amount of words for their final briefs, because, Your Honours,

12     we have to address another four CSBs, plus the MUP at the seat in our

13     final brief.

14             Therefore, we would -- we would kindly request that -- that --

15     that the Trial Chamber grants us at least 100.000 words for our final

16     brief, and we will kindly ask that the -- that the time will be extended

17     to six weeks after the close of the evidence for filing of final briefs.

18             Thank you very much.

19             JUDGE HALL:  Why six weeks, Mr. Zecevic?

20             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honours, we believe that -- that, after the

21     closing of the evidence, based on -- on the -- on the amount of material

22     which is available in this case, the exhibits and the transcripts, as

23     well as the number of people that we have for drafting the final brief,

24     we came to the conclusion that we would need at least six weeks.

25             We calculated that, and I want -- if Your Honours want me, I can

Page 26674

 1     go into detail and explain -- and explain the procedure.  But we have --

 2     we have --

 3             JUDGE HALL:  No, that wouldn't be necessary.  It's just that the

 4     Chamber, having indicated four weeks, we wanted a sense of why you -- you

 5     wanted to expand that by 50 per cent.  That's all.

 6             But I hear what you've said.

 7             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yeah.  And, Your Honours, if any of the Chamber

 8     witnesses will -- will appear eventually, it will also require a lot of

 9     preparation for us, plus the analysis of the testimonies of -- of these

10     witnesses at the very end, as an additional burden for us in -- in the

11     time when we are -- when our time is running for the filing of the final

12     brief.  And that is an additional reason why I think we -- our request is

13     a reasonable one to have six weeks for filing of the final brief.

14             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Mr. Zecevic, you do realise that the closing --

15     the closing of the evidence is potentially -- will potentially not be

16     before mid or end of April.  And, in the meantime, there will be not that

17     much of sitting weeks.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, I -- I appreciate Your Honours, Your Honours,

19     because I wasn't aware of the ...

20             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Just one moment, please.

21                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Well, let's -- let's be conservative and say

23     beginning of April.

24             Would that change your position?

25             MR. ZECEVIC:  Well, Your Honours, I wasn't aware of -- of the --

Page 26675

 1     of the time that you -- that was -- that was planned by the

 2     Trial Chamber.

 3             However, I must -- can I say this.  I appreciate that there is --

 4     there is a gap in the proceedings between, let's say, next week, and --

 5     so basically from the 1st of February until the -- until the coming of

 6     the witnesses -- until the testimony of the -- of the Chamber's

 7     witnesses.

 8             However, Your Honours, there are two matters which -- which are

 9     also pending.  There is our response to CHS POD, which is 200.000 words,

10     as I already announced to the Trial Chamber; and there is the preparation

11     for the -- for the -- for the Chamber witnesses.  Therefore, it -- it

12     does change, but I'm afraid that at this point in time, I would not be

13     able to say.  Perhaps, perhaps Your Honours is right, and then if we will

14     have four weeks after the full closing of the evidence somewhere in

15     April, that would enable us to finalise the final brief.  But, at this

16     point, Your Honours, I'm -- this is what I can, unfortunately, inform

17     Your Honours at this point.

18             Thank you.

19             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, may I, before Mr. Krgovic addresses

20     you, just support that for this reason.  I had forgotten about

21     Mr. Zecevic's mega-motion on the CHS.  And I agree with him, that the

22     preparation for Chamber's witnesses will occupy, obviously, lawyers'

23     time.  And unlike the Defence, I think we now have less lawyers working

24     because, as Your Honours know, two lawyers left shortly before Christmas.

25             So I may support Mr. Zecevic's application on this, that it be

Page 26676

 1     six weeks rather than four.  And I forgot to say, when I was addressing

 2     Your Honours on the length, that one of the matters we have to address in

 3     our final brief are the crimes in the municipalities, because none of

 4     them are stipulated to at all.  Otherwise, what would have been short

 5     sections on the municipalities need to be addressed now fully because of

 6     the -- the fact that we can't get agreement that they actually happened.

 7             But, on the six weeks, we would support Mr. Zecevic's

 8     application.

 9                           [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]

10             JUDGE HALL:  Mr. Krgovic, you were about to rise to say that you

11     didn't need the permitted 60.000 words in respect of your case.

12             MR. KRGOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours.  Unfortunately,

13     I will have to add on to what Ms. Korner said.

14             When it comes to the Zupljanin Defence and the word limit, just

15     like the Prosecutor, we need to deal with the databases in each

16     municipality.  The events for which my client is charged in each

17     municipality were quite debated at length during the trial, so we have to

18     deal with that in our final brief, in order to respond to the

19     Prosecutor's view of the crime base in each municipality.

20             In addition to that, we have to deal with general matters, such

21     as the joint criminal enterprise, and the general context.  So, that

22     means that, in addition to the charges that specifically pertain to

23     Mr. Zupljanin, we also have to deal with events in municipalities which

24     involve us more than Mr. Zupljanin [as interpreted] as well as the

25     context, and the events that led to these unfortunate events in Bosnia

Page 26677

 1     and Herzegovina.

 2             I will not ask for 100.000 words.  I think that 90.000 will be

 3     enough for us, Your Honours, based on the topics that have been covered

 4     so far.

 5             I fully support Mr. Zecevic and Ms. Korner when it comes to

 6     six weeks that are needed for preparing final brief after closing of

 7     evidence.

 8             JUDGE HALL:  Ms. Korner, I thought you were -- you didn't have

 9     anything to add in respect?

10             MS. KORNER:  No, thank you, Your Honour.

11             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

12                           [Trial Chamber confers]

13             JUDGE HALL:  We have seen from the e-mail traffic that there are

14     two matters and, indeed, Ms. Korner has already alluded to this orally in

15     court that she wishes to raise.  But there are any other brief matters

16     which counsel wish that the -- the context in which I'm asking that is

17     that we propose to rise now and return in an hour.  Because the -- we --

18     we -- we are going to consider what counsel have recently said about the

19     time-limits and the -- the word limits and the time for filing final

20     briefs.

21             We will discuss this over the break and return in an hour.

22             But are there any other matters other than the two issues to

23     which Ms. Korner has alerted us that counsel wish to raise before we

24     rise?

25             MS. KORNER:  Your Honours, I know that Mr. Zecevic also has a

Page 26678

 1     separate -- so there are, in fact, three or four matters between us to

 2     raise.

 3             But can I just mention in connection with the final brief and

 4     then the oral submissions.

 5             Practice seems to vary somewhat, but in many cases recently,

 6     particularly the leadership cases, there has been a final address by

 7     counsel on behalf of their respective sides, as it were, and then a

 8     separate hearing where, if the Judges have any matters that they wish

 9     us -- counsel on both sides specifically to address, either on the law or

10     factual matters, there's a separate hearing as opposed to, as it were,

11     questions being fired during the closing addresses.

12             We discussed this at our meeting about the MFI documents and I

13     think all three counsel would respectfully suggest that the better, more

14     helpful practice, if I can put it that way, is to have a separate

15     hearing, the Judges having provided through the legal officers any

16     questions or matters that they wish to have specifically addressed.

17     Because, obviously, final addresses are more of a general overall view

18     and, if I can put it that way, is more for the public to understand what

19     each side is saying.

20             And so I don't know whether Your Honours have considered that

21     matter, but we would respectfully suggest that should Your Honours have

22     any specific questions, that that would be the -- the more productive way

23     of dealing with it.

24             JUDGE HALL:  Well, I'm grateful for your explanation, Ms. Korner,

25     because I confess, that when I saw this inquiry, I was at a loss as to

Page 26679

 1     what it -- it intended to address.  I now understand.  Thank you.

 2             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honour, both of the matters which I wanted to

 3     raise with the Trial Chamber today are fairly short.  Perhaps I can -- if

 4     it pleases the Court I can do it right now --

 5             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.  Yes, please.

 6             MR. ZECEVIC:  Your Honour, the first matter, it is just the

 7     matter of -- actually, I would like the instruction from Trial Chamber

 8     or, actually, to check if I understood correctly.

 9             It is my understanding that -- that CHS POD time-frame for the

10     Defence response will be -- will be decided at the time when Your Honours

11     will decide on the pending OTP motion for adding some additional proof of

12     that.

13             Is my understanding correct on that point?

14             JUDGE HALL:  Well, logically, Mr. Zecevic, I think it must be so.

15     Because the -- it is only when you would have had the benefit of -- of

16     seeing the -- what the OTP is permitted to do, in terms of the decision,

17     that you would be able to formulate your own position.

18             MR. ZECEVIC:  Yes, that is correct, Your Honours.  I share that

19     view also, and I just wanted to clarify with Your Honours that I'm not

20     mistakenly taking -- taking a position which -- which is not the one

21     which the Trial Chamber is taking.

22             JUDGE DELVOIE:  But, if I may, Mr. Zecevic, that would not

23     prevent you from working on your answer, of course, for those sections

24     that are -- that are not subject to eventually any change due to the last

25     OTP motion?

Page 26680

 1             MR. ZECEVIC:  I can assure Your Honours that we are working

 2     around the clock on that.

 3             JUDGE HALL:  The second matter.

 4             MR. ZECEVIC:  Thank you very much.

 5             And the second matter, I believe we would need to go in a

 6     private session.

 7             JUDGE HALL:  Yes.

 8                           [Private session]

 9   (redacted)

10   (redacted)

11   (redacted)

12   (redacted)

13   (redacted)

14   (redacted)

15   (redacted)

16   (redacted)

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 26681











11 Pages 26681-26686 redacted. Private session.















Page 26687

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3                           [Open session]

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

 5             MS. KORNER:  Your Honour, I don't know if Your Honours are going

 6     to give any rulings on the matters that -- in relation to the final

 7     briefs.  If not, then I'm afraid that we need to go back into private

 8     session for the first, and, indeed, most of the matters I want to raise.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10             JUDGE DELVOIE:  On the final briefs, the Trial Chamber decided to

11     grant for the OTP 120.000 words; for the Stanisic Defence, 80.000 words;

12     and for the Zupljanin Defence, 60.000 words.

13             So, for the Zupljanin Defence, the first decision stays as it is.

14                           [Trial Chamber confers]

15             JUDGE DELVOIE:  Yeah.  And the -- the time after the close of the

16     evidence to prepare the final briefs stands for the moment, and we will

17     see what happens when we know about rejoinder and Chamber witnesses.

18             Thank you.

19             JUDGE HALL:  We will go into private session, as the last matter

20     Mr. Zecevic raised, before we hear from Ms. Korner.

21                           [Private session]

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)


Page 26688











11 Pages 26688-26723 redacted. Private session.















Page 26724

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8   (redacted)

 9   (redacted)

10                           [Open session]

11                           [Trial Chamber confers]

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

13             JUDGE HALL:  And we will return in 30 minutes to wrap up this

14     matter.  [Microphone not activated].

15                           --- Recess taken at 12.36 p.m.

16                           --- On resuming at 1.13 p.m.

17                           [Trial Chamber confers]

18             JUDGE HALL:  We have heard counsel for the Prosecution on the

19     oral application for reconsideration of our decision in respect of

20     three witnesses whom they had sought to call in rebuttal, and, having

21     heard nothing new and reminding ourselves and counsel that -- of the

22     standard that, for reconsideration, a clear error of reasoning has to be

23     demonstrated or the particular circumstances justify a reconsideration in

24     order to prevent an injustice, we are not persuaded that we should

25     reconsider our decision and our decision stands.

Page 26725

 1             Are there any other matters before we take the adjournment, which

 2     will be an adjournment sine die.

 3             MS. KORNER:  Well, Your Honours only this:  In part of his

 4     argument, Mr. Krgovic prayed in aid cross-examination that he had

 5     conducted of Mr. Radulovic, we've checked, and the cross-examination does

 6     not include the matters Mr. Krgovic said it did.

 7             Would that make any difference to Your Honours' ruling on our

 8     application?

 9             JUDGE HALL:  The short answer is no.

10             MS. KORNER:  Thank you.

11             Then, Your Honours, the only other matter is this.  Having looked

12     at the quantity of material in relation, in particular, to one potential

13     witness that Your Honours are thinking about, I said, rather

14     optimistically, I think we could get it to Your Honours by tomorrow.

15     Would Your Honours -- in fact, Your Honours gave us a dead-line of next

16     week but we're anxious to get it to you as soon as possible, but we would

17     hope to get it to you by Friday at the latest.

18             JUDGE HALL:  Thank you.

19             And if there are no other matters, we stand adjourned.

20                            --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.17 p.m.,

21                           sine die.