|
Please
note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing. It is merely
a summary.
ICTY
Weekly Press Briefing
Date: 28 November 2001
Time: 11:00 a.m.
REGISTRY
AND CHAMBERS
Jim Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers, made the following statement:
Most
of you will have the composition the new Chambers by now, but I will just run
through the assignment of cases for you.
The assignment
to the Martinovic and Naletilic case is composed of: Judge Liu (Presiding),
Judge Clarke and Judge Diarra.
The assignment to the Galic case is composed of: Judge Liu (Presiding), Judge
Elmahdi and Judge Orie.
The assignment to the Ademi case is composed of: Judge Liu (Presiding), Judge
Elmahdi and Judge Orie.
The assignment to the Strugar and Jokic case is composed of: Judge Liu (Presiding),
Judge Elmahdi and Judge Orie.
The assignment to the Ljubicic case is composed of: Judge Liu (Presiding),
Judge Elmahdi and Judge Orie.
The assignment to the Stakic case is composed of: Judge Schomburg, Presiding,
Judge Mumba, Judge Agius.
The assignment to the Krnojelac case is composed of: Judge Hunt (Presiding),
Judge Mumba and Judge Liu.
The assignment to the Vasiljevic case is composed of: Judge Hunt (Presiding),
Judge Janu and Judge Taya.
The assignment to the case against Blagoje Simic, Milan Simic, Tadic and Zaric
is composed of: Judge Mumba (Presiding), Judge Singh and Judge Williams.
The assignment to the Brdjanin and Talic case is composed of: Judge Schomburg
(Presiding), Judge Mumba and Judge Agius.
The assignment to the Nikolic case is composed of: Judge Schomburg (Presiding),
Judge Mumba and Judge Agius.
The assignment to the case against Obrenovic, Blagojevic and Jokic, is composed
of: Judge Schomburg (Presiding), Judge Mumba and Judge Agius.
The assignment to the case against Hadzihasanovic, Alagic and Kubura is composed
of: Judge Schomburg (Presiding), Judge Mumba and Judge Agius.
The assignment
to all three indictments against Slobodan Milosevic is composed of: Judge
May (Presiding), Judge Robinson and Judge Kwon.
The assignment
to the Krajisnik and Plavsic case is composed of: Judge May (Presiding), Judge
Robinson and Judge Kwon.
The assignment
to the Pedrag and Nenad Banovic case is composed of: Judge May (Presiding),
Judge Robinson and Judge Kwon.
In
the Appeals Chamber:
The assignment
to the Blaskic case is composed of: Judge Hunt (Presiding), Judge Güney,
Judge Gunawardana, Judge Pocar and Judge Meron.
The assignment
to the Kunarac and others case is composed of: Judge Jorda (Presiding), Judge
Shahabuddeen, Judge Güney, Judge Schomburg and Judge Meron.
The assignment
to the Kordic and Cerkez case is composed of: Judge Hunt, Judge Güney,
Judge Gunawardana, Judge Pocar and Judge Meron.
The assignment
to the Krstic case is composed of: Judge Hunt, Judge Shahabuddeen, Judge Güney,
Judge Gunawardana and Judge Pocar.
Next:
Following
last week’s briefing, there seems to be some confusion over the role of the
legal advisors that have been designated by the Trial Chamber in the Milosevic
case.
It
might be useful to give you some of the chronology that led up to the Trial
Chamber’s decision.
-The accused
had complained about the conditions under which he would be permitted to communicate
with legal advisors regarding his defence.
-Notification
was given by the Registry to the accused that such access would be permitted
for two persons of his choice.
-A request
from Milosevic was then received to see Mr. Ramsey Clark and Mr. John Livingston,
but did not specifically designate them as legal advisors.
- In light
of this, the Trial Chamber clarified that those people could visit as legal
advisors in a privileged setting.
-As to
the question as to why communication privileges are limited to two advisors,
it needs to be stressed that this is a measure based ‘on the good order
and administration of the Detention Unit’, which permits communication
access to two defence counsel for every accused.
-If Milosevic
wishes to meet with other lawyers on a privileged basis he would have to request
this from the Registry, who would then consider any such requests on their
merits.
To
be clear, Mr. Clark and Mr. Livingston are not defence counsel. Milosevic is
entitled to represent himself and he can receive legal advice in doing so.
A
motion hearing has been scheduled to hear oral submissions on the Prosecution’s
motion for joinder of the three indictments against Milosevic, which was filed
yesterday, 27 November.
We
received on 23 November an order from Trial Chamber III inviting the Registrar
to nominate Mr. Steven Kay, Mr. Branislav Tapuskovic and Mr. Michail Wladimiroff
as amici curiae for Milosevic’s Bosnia indictment. The Registrar issued
a decision yesterday, 27 November, designating the three as amici curiae
for that indictment.
We
have also received copies of the Prosecution’s pre-trial brief for Milosevic’s
Kosovo indictment. Copies of that will be available to you after this briefing.
And
for those of you who do not already have one, we have copies of Pavle Strugar’s
motion for provisional release, which was filed on 23 November.
Finally,
a few reminders:
Tomorrow there
will be a status conference in the Hadzihasanovic, Alagic and Kubura case at
2.30 p.m. in Courtroom III.
The initial appearance
for Pasko Ljubicic will be held this Friday, 30 November 2001 at 2.30 p.m. in
Courtroom I.
The Galic trial
is due to start next Monday, 3 December at 2.15 p.m. in Courtroom III. We will
be putting out a detailed background information sheet on that in the course
of this week.
And, the start
of the appeals hearings in the Kunarac and others case is due to start on Tuesday
4 December at 9.30 a.m. in Courtroom I.
You are of course
welcome to attend all of those hearings.
Graham Blewitt,
Deputy Prosecutor, made no statement.
QUESTIONS:
Asked whether
there was any information on the assignment of cases list concerning the Halilovic
case, Landale replied that he could see nothing on the list concerning the
Halilovic case. It might be that it has yet to be assigned, he added.
Asked why
the date of Monday 3 December had been set for the beginning of the Galic
case when there was still an appeal pending on the motion on the form of the
indictment, Landale replied that he had been informed that the trial would
start on Monday 3 December 2001. He would look into the issue, he added.
Asked to clarify
the confusion over the list of names (allegedly of people under investigation
by the OTP) circulating around Serbia and whether the list was authentic and
if so whether it came from the OTP and what its purpose was, Blewitt replied
that the list that was circulating and causing so much attention in Belgrade
had nothing to do with anything generated by the OTP. It was not one of the
OTP’s lists and the OTP saw it for the first time as it was reproduced in
the newspapers. He stated categorically that the list’s preparation and circulation
had nothing to do with any activities of the OTP. The OTP had no knowledge
of the list prior to it being circulated by the media, or where it came from.
It certainly had no relevance to the OTP’s investigations, he concluded.
Following
the Prosecutor’s address to the Security Council yesterday, during which she
made comments concerning General Mladic being in Serbia, the Federal Interior
Minister of Serbia allegedly reacted by saying that he was not aware of this
and that the Prosecutor should give more details. Asked for a reaction to
this, Blewitt replied that he could not reveal who, but the Prosecutor was
informed by a very reliable source in Belgrade that Mladic was being protected
by the FRY military in Serbia. The OTP was not aware of his actual location,
however, the information that he was being protected in Serbia and most probably
in Belgrade, but not exclusively in Belgrade was reliable, he concluded.
Asked whether
there was any information as to the whereabouts of Karadzic, Blewitt replied
that the OTP had no information, but he was believed to be still in the Republika
Srpska. The OTP did not rule out the possibility that he also traveled secretly
to Montenegro and perhaps even to Serbia. The OTP had no precise information
as to his location. However, if the OTP received this information it would
certainly be acting on it, he added.
Asked how
to understand the status of the various individuals whose names appeared in
the OTP pre-trial briefs, Blewitt replied that in more recent Milosevic indictments,
the status of individuals named was that of co-perpetrator. This was a departure
from earlier practice where co- perpetrators were not named in indictments.
With respect of those named in the Croatian and Bosnian indictments, individuals
named as co-perpetrators were suspects and they might or might not be ultimately
indicted, dependent on the progress of the investigations into those individuals.
This could be taken as a consequence of what he had just said, that those
individuals were in fact under investigation. As far as individuals named
in pre-trial briefs, he replied that he was not sufficiently familiar with
the contents of the various pre-trial briefs being referred to.
Asked, for
example, what status individuals such as Stretan Lukic and General Pavkovic
who were named in the pre-trial brief for Kosovo had, Blewitt replied that
in respect of the Kosovo indictment, had it been issued at a later point in
time, those individuals would have been named as members of the joint criminal
enterprise, hence put under the same status as other individuals in the other
indictments, he concluded.
*****
|
