|
Please
note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing. It is merely
a summary.
ICTY Weekly
Press Briefing
Date:
04.12.2002
Time:
14:30
REGISTRY
AND CHAMBERS
Jim
Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers, made the following statement:
Good
afternoon,
First, you should
have received our press advisory informing you that on Wednesday 11 December
2002 at 3 p.m., the Appeals Chamber will render its Decision relating to the
‘Motion to Appeal the Trial Chamber’s "Decision on Motion on Behalf of Jonathan
Randal to set Aside Confidential Subpoena to Give Evidence"’ filed by the
defence for Jonathan Randal on 26 June 2002.
As most of you
will be aware, the sentencing hearing in the Plavsic case is scheduled to take
place on 16, 17 and the afternoon of 18 December. We predict that because of
the importance of the hearing and the high profile nature of some of the witnesses
who are due to testify there will be a high level of media interest. As a result,
we will be requiring all interested journalists to accredit themselves in the
usual way. Details as to how to obtain accreditation will be posted on our website
on Monday, 9 December.
The Tribunal is
pleased to be hosting a group of 11 Kosovo defence lawyers throughout this week.
This is the fourth visit of legal professionals from the province to the Tribunal,
organised in cooperation with the ICTY Outreach Programme.
The central aims
of the working visit are to provide the defence attorneys with a first-hand
opportunity to view on-going trials at the Tribunal, be provided with a comprehensive
introduction and overview of Tribunal procedures and to meet and discuss matters
of interest with senior Tribunal officials.
The visit has
been funded and organised by the American Bar Association - Central and East
European Law Initiative (ABA CEELI).
In terms of court
documents:
In the Prosecutor
v. Mile Mrksic:
On 28 November,
we received the "Defense Preliminary Motion".
In the Prosecutor
v. Radoslav Brdjanin:
On 28 November,
we received the "Response of Brdjanin to Submission on Behalf of Jonathan
Randal in Response to Ackerman Memo Filed With the Appeals Chamber and the Trial
Chamber on 7 October 2002".
In the Prosecutor
v. Pasko Ljubicic:
On 2 December,
we received the "Decision on Defence Request for Permission to Attend Funeral".
In the Prosecutor
v. Hadzihasanovic, Alagic, Kubura:
On 29 November,
we received the "Interlocutory Appeal on Decision on Joint Challenge To Jurisdiction
Authorities Cited -- Addendum".
In the Prosecutor
v. Milan Martic:
On 3 December,
we received the "Decision on the Appeal of the Defence Against Registry Decision
Dated 25 September 2002".
In the Prosecutor
v. Krajisnik:
On 28 November,
we received an "Order of the President" assigning the case to Trial Chamber
I, composed of Judges Liu, El Mahdi and Orie.
In the Prosecutor
v. Sainovic and Ojdanic:
On 29 November,
we received "General Dragoljub Ojdanic’s Preliminary Motion To Dismiss For
Lack of Jurisdiction: Joint Criminal Enterprise".
On the same day,
we received "General Dragoljub Ojdanic’s Preliminary Motion To Dismiss For
Lack of Jurisdiction: Kosovo".
In the Prosecutor
v. Dragan Nikolic:
On 29 November,
we received the "Defence Pre-Trial Brief". This is a lengthy document
and will only available on request.
In the Prosecutor
v. Miroslav Deronjic:
On 29 November,
we received the "Prosecution’s Amended Indictment Submission". This is
a lengthy document and will only available on request.
On the same day
we also received the "Prosecution’s General Reorganisation Table Submission
for the Amended Indictment". Again this is a lengthy document and will only
available on request.
In the Prosecutor
v. Blagojevic, Obrenovic, Jokic and Nikolic:
On 29 November,
we received the "Prosecution’s Response to Application For Leave To Appeal
the Trial Chamber’s Decision on Dragan Obrenovic’s Application For Provisional
Release and Request For Expedited Consideration".
Again on 29 November,
we received the "Prosecution’s Response To Application For Leave to Appeal
the Trial Chamber’s Second Decision on Vidoje Blagojevic’s Application For Provisional
Release".
Finally, a reminder
that tomorrow is a UN holiday.
Florence
Hartmann, Spokeswoman for the Office of the Prosecutor, made no statement.
Questions:
Asked to confirm
that Mr. Milosevic had refused to be examined by a psychiatrist and that the
Tribunal was in possession of the cardiologist’s report, Landale answered
in the positive to both questions. He made clear that the Trial Chamber had
the cardiologist’s report.
Leading on
from this, a journalist asked what the procedure would now be as Mr. Milosevic
had refused to see the psychologist. In answer, Landale made clear that the
request for a psychiatrist’s report had come from the Trial Chamber and was
not part of Mr. Milosevic’s defence. He stated that the Tribunal would not
force any accused to undergo such tests but stated that it would have been
beneficial for the Trial Chamber to have had such a report on Mr. Milosevic’s
mental state of health, especially as it was something that had originally
been raised by the Medical Officer at the Detention Unit. Landale added that
the Judges would now proceed on the evaluations and submissions already in
their possession.
Asked whether
there was any more information on the Plavsic hearing next week, specifically
in relation to possible high profile witnesses and whether the accused would
be present during the hearing, Landale stated that he would not add anything
more on that subject other than to stress that it would be a very significant
and important hearing.
Another journalist
pointed out that there were new reports coming in from the former Yugoslavia
of journalists covering the Tribunal having problems with Dutch visa and immigration
regulations. These problems had occurred on a number of occasions in the past.
The journalist added that when the Netherlands agreed to host the Tribunal,
it could have expected that journalists from the area would wish to come to
The Hague to cover the trials, adding that it could be argued that this was
a natural right of journalists from the former Yugoslavia and that the Dutch
authorities should make all necessary provisions to ensure that that can happen
without unnecessary complications. The journalist wondered if this was also
the opinion of the Tribunal and whether the Tribunal was aware of this problem.
He also inquired whether the Tribunal had contacted the Dutch authorities
about the problem. In answer, Landale stated that the Tribunal was aware of
the problem and was concerned about it and keen to find a resolution. He stated
that the issue had been taken up at a senior level with the Dutch authorities
and that it was in the interest of all parties to solve the problem as quickly
as possible. He underlined the fact the ICTY held public hearings and that
it was important for the population of the former Yugoslavia in particular
to be able to follow the proceedings. He added that part of the Tribunal’s
mandate was to contribute to the restoration and maintenance of peace in the
region and that access to the Tribunal by journalists was essential in facilitating
this.
In answer to
the final question as to whether Mr. Martic finally had a lawyer acceptable
to both the Tribunal and himself, Landale referred the media to a document
he had mentioned earlier in this briefing. He pointed out that it did not
deal with this question directly but did deal with the issue of indigency
and the provision of legal aid.
*****
|
