|
Please
note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing.
It is merely a summary.
ICTY Weekly Press Briefing
Date: 20.04.2005
Time: 12.00
Registry and Chambers:
Jim Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers, made the
following statement:
Good afternoon,
Firstly, you will have seen that
in the Milosevic trial this morning, the Trial Chamber
charged witness Kosta Bulatovic with contempt of
court pursuant to Rule 77 for contumaciously refusing
to answer questions put to him by the Prosecution.
I will not make any further specific
comment on the ongoing contempt proceedings as they
are to resume in half an hour.
Last Friday, 15 April, the Tribunal’s
Outreach Programme was pleased to welcome a delegation
from Srebrenica. The visit was sponsored by IKV
(the Dutch NGO, "Inter-Church Peace Council") and
was part of a broader visit to town and city councils
of The Netherlands. Five people, including the Deputy
Mayor and four young people working on establishing
a youth centre in Srebrenica met with senior ICTY
staff and attended a court session.
As I mentioned last week, the trial
of Beqa Beqaj on charges of contempt, attempted
contempt, and incitement to contempt of the Tribunal
will commence this Monday 25 April at 2.15 p.m.
in Courtroom I. There will be a pre-trial conference
this Friday 22 April at 2.15 p.m. in Courtroom III.
The appeal hearing in The Prosecutor
v. Milan Babic has been scheduled for this Monday
25 April 2005, starting at 10 a.m. in Courtroom
III.
The appeal hearing in The Prosecutor
v. Miodrag Jokic has been scheduled for the
following day, 26 April, starting at 9.30 a.m. in
Courtroom III.
The further initial appearance
of Drago Nikolic has been scheduled for this afternoon
at 2.30 p.m. in Courtroom III.
There will be a status conference
in The Prosecutor v. Miroslav Bralo tomorrow
at 2.30 p.m. in Courtroom III.
Office of the Prosecutor:
Florence Hartmann for the Office
of the Prosecutor made the following statement:
I wish to recall that at the invitation of Luxembourg,
the Chief Prosecutor will be attending the EU working
group meeting set to evaluate Croatia's cooperation
with the ICTY, in Luxembourg on April 26, 2005.
Following the article in today's Globus about the
Croatian State Prosecutor, Mladen Bajic, let me
stress that we have trust in Bajic, we believe he
is a good professional and we have developed excellent
judicial cooperation with him. We never said that
he knows where Gotovina is. The article is wrong
and even the date mentioned is wrong.
Questions:
A journalist asked whether the
unspecified Decision in the Meakic case listed in
the documents list (attached to this Press Briefing)
was a Decision on the 11bis referral case.
Landale answered that this was not the case and
that there had not yet been any Decisions in any
of the 11bis referral cases.
A journalist asked for more information
on other contempt cases that had been raised before
the Tribunal. In response, Landale stated that his
office had, that morning, been working on a non-official
background paper on the issue of contempt cases
at the Tribunal, which he would be happy to share
with interested journalists in the course of the
day. Landale added that approximately nine people
had been accused of contempt at the Tribunal.
In response to a question as to
whether Haradinaj was back in the Detention Unit
following his provisional release, Landale responded
that he was. In response to a further question,
Landale stated as far as he was aware, Haradinaj
had complied with the conditions of his provisional
release.
A journalist asked whether the
Tribunal would participate in any of the upcoming
"manifestations" taking place in Belgrade, one of
which would mark the 10th anniversary
of the "liberation" of Srebrenica and another which
was due to remember the Armenian, Greek, Serbian,
Jewish and Roma victims of genocide.
Landale stated that, as far as
he knew, there was no intention on the part of the
President, the Judges or the Registrar to participate
in any way in a conference on the so-called "liberation"
of Srebrenica. He added that the Tribunal would
view any marking of the fall of the Srebrenica enclave
without full recognition of the genocide that was
perpetrated after its fall and without due recognition
of the thousands of victims, as a disgrace and not
something that the Tribunal would associate itself
with.
He added that any remembrance ceremony
for genocide, especially in Belgrade, should give
due recognition to the genocide following the fall
of Srebrenica and to the thousands of victims and
their families.
A journalist asked for reaction
to a statement by Mr. Milan Bulajic of the ‘Foundation
on Research of Genocide’ in Belgrade, that, having
studied documentation produced by the UN, and the
‘Serbian and Muslim armies’, he concluded that no
genocide was perpetrated in Srebrenica by the Bosnian
Serb Army (VRS). Landale responded that any statement
Mr. Bulajic allegedly made about there being no
genocide after the fall of the enclave of Srebrenica
flew in the face of the findings at the Tribunal,
both by a Trial Chamber and the Appeals Chamber.
In addition, Landale noted that
in the largest trial held at the Tribunal on the
issue of Srebrenica, the Krstic trial, General Krstic
himself, during his defence, did not challenge the
fact that thousands of unarmed Bosnian men and boys
had been murdered. Mr. Bulajic’s statement had therefore
no relation whatsoever to the truth.
Landale added that he hoped there
was now only a dwindling minority of individuals
who could stand up and say there had not been a
genocide perpetrated after the fall of Srebrenica.
Landale added that as far as he
knew, the Tribunal had not received invitations
to either of these events and that there was no
intention of attending, getting involved, supporting
or endorsing in any way such "manifestations" without
recognition of the victims of Srebrenica.
Hartmann added that the OTP and
the Chief Prosecutor shared this position and condemned
denial such as the report negating the genocide
in Srebrenica published on a front page of a newspaper
in Belgrade. She stated that all Judgements made
by the Tribunal, both from the Trial Chambers and
the Appeals Chamber, were available to everyone
to see. She hoped that other condemnations of such
a denial would be made in Serbia.
Documents:
The Prosecutor v. Mico Stanisic
19 April 2005 – Defence Motion
For Provisional Release.
The Prosecutor v. Tolimir
et al
19 April 2005 – Prosecution’s Response
To Request For Provisional Release For Accused Milan
Gvero.
18 April 2005 – Corrigendum To
Prosecution Notice Of Compliance Of Rule 66 (A)(ii).
The Prosecutor v. Savo Todovic
18 April 2005 – Guarantee By Republika
Srpska.
The Prosecutor v. Vinko Padurevic
18 April 2005 – Guarantee By Republika
Srpska.
The Prosecutor v. Mrksic
et al
19 April 2005 – Decision On Application
For Leave To Appeal.
The Prosecutor v. Pavkovic
et al
18 April 2005 – Decision On Defence
Request For Extension Of Time For The Response On
The Prosecution Motion For Joinder.
19 April 2005 – Defence Request
For Modification Of Decision On Defence Request
For Provisional Release.
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan
Milosevic
19 April 2005 – Order For Further
Medical Report On Health Of The Accused.
The Prosecutor v. Prlic et
al
18 April 2005 – Jadranko Prlic’s
Response To Prosecutor’s Motion For Judicial Notice
Of Adjudicated Facts And Request For Extention Of
Time To Specifically Address Each Of The Proposed
Adjudicated Facts Listed By The Prosecution To Be
Judicially Noticed.
18 April 2005 – Valentin Coric"s
Response To Prosecutor’s Motion For Judicial Notice
Of Adjudicated Facts And Request For Extention Of
Time To Specifically Address Each Of The Proposed
Adjudicated Facts Listed By The Prosecution To Be
Judicially Noticed.
18 April 2005 – Slobodan Praljak’s
Response To Prosecutor’s Motion For Judicial Notice
Of Adjudicated Facts And Request For Extention Of
Time To Specifically Address Each Of The Proposed
Adjudicated Facts Listed By The Prosecution To Be
Judicially Noticed.
18 April 2005 – Bruno Stojic’s
Response To Prosecutor’s Motion For Judicial Notice
Of Adjudicated Facts And Request For Extention Of
Time To Specifically Address Each Of The Proposed
Adjudicated Facts Listed By The Prosecution To Be
Judicially Noticed.
18 April 2005 – Berislav Pusic’s
Response To Prosecutor’s Motion For Judicial Notice
Of Adjudicated Facts And Request For Extention Of
Time To Specifically Address Each Of The Proposed
Adjudicated Facts Listed By The Prosecution To Be
Judicially Noticed.
The Prosecutor v. Mejakic
et al
18 April 2005 – Decision.
The Prosecutor v. Milan Martic
18 April 2005 – Prosecution Response
To Defense Motion For Recognizing As Validity Done
The Filing Of Defence Submissions Concerning The
Evidence Of Prosecution’s Expert Witness Renaud
Theunens: Request For Leave To File Reply To Defense
Notice Pursuant To Rule 94 bis of April 14 2005.
The Prosecutor v. Beqa Beqaj
18 April 2005 – Prosecutor’s Response
To Defence’s Motion To Re-Examine The Order terminating
The Provisional Release Of Beqa Beqaj.
The Prosecutor v. Milutinovic
et al
19 April 2005 – General Ojdanic’s
Ex parte Request To NATO And The States Pursuant
To Trial Chamber’s Decision Of 23 March 2005.
The Prosecutor v. Pasko Ljubicic
12 April 2005 – Prosecution’s Further
Submissions Concerning Provisional Release.
*****
|
