|
Please
note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing.
It is merely a summary.
ICTY Weekly Press Briefing
Date: 09.02.2005
Time: 12.15
Registry and Chambers:
Jim Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers,
made the following statement:
Good afternoon,
First, you all will have noticed
that our numbers have swelled today and that is
because we are joined by a group of journalists
from Belgrade who are here on a working visit. I
would like to extend a warm welcome to them.
The members of the group, which
is accompanied by the Spokesperson and Registrar
for the Special Chamber, Sonja Prostran, and representatives
from the Belgrade War Crimes Prosecutors Office,
are here over a three-day period to familiarize
themselves with the Tribunal’s work and procedures.
During the visit they will be meeting representatives
from the different parts of the Tribunal. I understand
that Sonja will give you some more details of the
visit at the end of today’s briefings.
The Registrar, Hans Holthuis, is
in Arusha, Tanzania, this week to attend a meeting
with the Registrars of the ICTR, ICC, and the Special
Court for Sierra Leone to discuss areas of mutual
cooperation and the support given to the ICTY, ICTR
and the Special Court by the European Union.
There will be a hearing on the
Prosecutor’s Request of 2 September 2004 for referral
of the Ademi and Norac case to Croatia, pursuant
to Rule 11 bis, before the specially appointed Chamber
comprised of Judges Orie (presiding), Kwon and Parker,
on 17 February 2005 at 8.30 a.m. in Courtroom I.
The hearing will be held in the presence of the
Prosecution and Defence counsel, but without the
presence of the accused. The Chamber has invited
representatives of the Government of Croatia to
appear, as well as Professors Mirjan Damaska and
Davor Krapac, who have been invited as amici
curiae.
There will be no trials this Friday
as the Judges will be meeting in plenary session.
Office of the Prosecutor:
Florence Hartmann for the Office
of the Prosecutor made the following statement:
Good afternoon,
Ms. Del Ponte yesterday signed
the Prosecution motion under Rule 11 bis for referral
of the Vukovar case – against Mile Mrksic, Miroslav
Radic and Veselin Sljivancanin. The motion was submitted
this morning to the Chamber.
The Prosecution has suggested that the case, upon
the decision of the Judges, could be sent either
to Croatia because the crimes were committed on
its territory, or to Serbia as the place where the
accused were arrested and where a trial related
to the same crimes, Ovcara summary execution, is
on-going. As you know, the Prosecution can identify
and suggest for the case to be deferred to local
judiciary, but it is for the competency of the Judges
to order the deferral of cases.
So far, the Prosecution has submitted requests
for deferral in the following cases:
Norac and Ademi
Vladimir Kovacevic
Mejakic, Gruban, Stankovic, Fustar and Knezevic
Savo Todovic
Mitar Rasevic
Milan Lukic and Sredoje Lukic
Dragomir Milosevic
All the other ICTY cases should be tried in The
Hague before this Tribunal.
I wish to recall the words of the Prosecutor last
week when she said that 2005, this year,
it would be 10 years since Srebrenica, the Dayton/Accord
and the first indictments against Karadzic and Mladic
and that she could not imagine that we could commemorate
the genocide of the Srebrenica men and boys or celebrate
the Peace agreement without the accused in custody.
Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic
are not the only fugitives indicted for Srebrenica.
We also have Vinko Pandurevic, Ljubomir Borovcanin,
Drago Nikolic and Vujadin Popovic and we call on
the competent authorities to bring in, without delay,
those individuals in order for them to stand trial
in The Hague together with Ljubomir Beara, also
indicted for Srebrenica and awaiting trial in the
Detention Unit in Scheveningen.
Questions:
In answer to a question as to whether
the OTP had made a choice between Croatia and Serbia
for the Vukovar case to be deferred to, Hartmann
answered that arguments in favour of both places
could be found in the Prosecution’s motion. She
added that the arguments for either place were clear
but that there were other elements for the Judges
to consider.
A journalist noted that there seemed
to be a pattern in 11bis motions to request
the accused be sent back to the country where the
crime was committed. He wondered whether this was
OTP policy and whether the present motion was a
move away from this policy. Hartmann answered that
this had been the policy and that all other 11bis
requests, with the exception of Vladimir Kovacevic,
had indeed requested the accused be sent back to
the country where the crime had been committed.
She added that in the Vukovar case
there were other arguments to consider, namely that
there was already an ongoing trial for that particular
crime taking place in Serbia. Since the Prosecutor’s
Office always attempted to join trials dealing with
the same crime in the interests of the economy of
justice, this was an argument for deferring the
case to Serbia. She stressed that the Judges would
assess all the arguments in deciding where to defer
the case.
Landale reiterated that it was
for the Judges to decide on any request for deferral
under rule 11bis. He added that this normally
took some time. The Judges could request submissions
not only from the Prosecution and Defence, but could
also ask for clarification on a number of different
issues – legal, technical and otherwise – from the
state that was being considered.
Landale also confirmed that the
Ademi and Norac hearing scheduled for 17 February
2005 was the first 11bis hearing.
Documents:
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan
Milosevic
7 February 2005- Order On Admission
Of Documents (Including Exhibits Of Witnesses Kosta
Mihajlovic And Cedomir Popov) And Decision On Prosecution
Motion Regarding Exhibits And Other Practicalities
During The Defence Case
The Prosecutor v. Blagojevic
and Jokic
3 February 2005- Prosecution Motion
For Extension Of Time In Which To File The Prosecution
Notice Of Appeal
The Prosecutor v. Sefer Halilovic
7 February 2005- Decision On Defence
Motion For Striking Out Of Paragraphs In Prosecution
Pre-Trial Brief
7 February 2005 – Decision On Prosecution’s
Motion To Vary Its Rule 65ter Witness List
The Prosecutor v. Vladimir
Kovacevic
7 February 2005- Prosecutor’s Submission
Pursuant To Chamber’s Order Of 20 January 2005
7 February 2005- Prosecutor’s Re-Submission
Of Rule 11 bis Request Pursuant To Chamber’s Order
Of 20 January 2005
The Prosecutor v. Ademi and
Norac
2 February 2005- The Submission
On The Requset Of The Trial Chamber
7 February 2005- Prosecution’s
Further Submissions Pursuant To Chamber’s Order
Of 20 January 2005
*****
|
