|
Please
note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing.
It is merely a summary.
ICTY Weekly Press Briefing
Date: 04.05.2005
Time: 12.15
Registry and Chambers:
Jim Landale, Spokesman for Registry and Chambers, made the
following statement:
Good afternoon,
Next Thursday, 12 May 2005, the
11 bis Referral Bench will hold a hearing
on the Prosecutor’s request to refer the case against
Mrksic, Sljivancanin and Radic to either Croatia
or Serbia and Montenegro starting at 9 a.m. in Courtroom
I. Representatives from both governments have been
invited to be present in court and to give oral
submissions. There will be a status conference in
this case on the same day at 2.30 p.m. in Courtroom
II.
As I announced last week, there
will also be an 11 bis hearing on the Prosecutor’s
request to refer the case against Gojko Jankovic
to Bosnia and Herzegovina also on 12 May, at 2.15
p.m. The Bench has also invited the Government of
Bosnia and Herzegovina to attend the hearing and
present oral submissions, should it wish to do so.
The Decision in the contempt case
against Beqa Beqaj will be rendered orally tomorrow
at 5 p.m. in Courtroom I. His trial opened last
Monday, 25 April 2005, and was completed this Monday.
A written Decision will be issued in due course.
We are also expecting a hearing
on the issue of Kosta Bulatovic’s contempt of the
Tribunal tomorrow in the course of the Milosevic
proceedings in Courtroom I.
Next Thursday 12 May, there will
be a hearing at 2.15 p.m. in Courtroom I on the
Prosecutor’s request refer the Rasevic and Todovic
cases to Bosnia and Herzegovina, pursuant to Rule
11 bis.
The further initial appearance
of Ljubomir Borovcanin has been scheduled for tomorrow
5 May at 2.15 p.m. in Courtroom III.
The further initial appearance
of Milorad Trbic has been scheduled for next Wednesday,
11 May at 2.15 p.m. in Courtroom I.
There will be status conferences
in The Prosecutor v. Mrksic, Radic and Slijvancanin
on Thursday 12 May at 2.30 p.m. in Courtroom
III; The Prosecutor v. Stanisic and Simatovic
on Friday 13 May at 2.30 p.m. in Courtroom I
(the accused are not required to be present); in
The Prosecutor v. Vladimir Lazarevic at 3.30
p.m. the same day also in Courtroom I; and in The
Prosecutor v. Milutinovic also on 13 May in
the same courtroom at approximately 4.30 p.m.
Office of the Prosecutor:
Jean-Daniel Ruch of the Office
of the Prosecutor made the following statement:
I want to say a few words about
the so-called Brijuni transcripts in Croatia. On
Monday, the relevant judicial authorities in Croatia
said that the transcripts were authentic. I wish
to confirm that we gave a copy of our transcripts
to the authorities in Zagreb for the purpose of
checking the audio tape that they found with the
paper version that we had filed and that we have
used in court on various occasions. Let me also
stress that contrary to what Gotovina’s lawyers
have pretended, the prosecution never had any doubt
about the authenticity of these transcripts.
Questions:
Referring to reports in the
Serbian media that Haradinaj had addressed a political
meeting of his party by telephone from the Detention
Unit (DU), a journalist asked for a comment given
the fact that in previous such instances measures
had been taken against other accused.
Landale first noted that he had
received more questions recently on this issue from
the media in Belgrade than on all of the Tribunal’s
various trials in its three courtrooms, the various
indictments the Tribunal had issued and the various
facts that had been established by the Tribunal.
Having said that, Landale continued,
it did appear that Haradinaj had indeed violated
the Rules of Detention. He said that Haradinaj had
been given a verbal reprimand on the issue. Haradinaj
had stated that he was unaware of the details of
the Rules of Detention and had promised not to repeat
the offence. He had been warned that any repetition
of the offence could lead to a modification of his
communications’ privileges, or their withdrawal.
Landale added that this was not
the first time that this had happened. Milosevic
had also been given a verbal reprimand the first
time he had violated the Rules and other individuals
had also been given verbal reprimands. He added
that he hoped there would be no repetition.
A journalist asked whether it was
believable that Haradinaj had not been aware of
the Rules considering such incidents had happened
in the past. In response, Landale stated that Haradinaj
had only recently arrived at the DU and on this
occasion, as with other accused who had violated
the Rules for the first time, he had been given
the benefit of the doubt. Landale stated that this
was a reasonable approach and added that Haradinaj
was now under no illusions that, should there be
a repetition, further action would be taken.
Documents:
The Prosecutor v. Slobodan
Milosevic
28 April 2005 – Prosecution’s Motion
For Order Directing The Defence To Immediately Provide
Additional Material From Defence Witness Dragan
Jasovic.
28 April 2005 – Prosecution’s Further
Submissions On The Recording Of The Use Of Time
During The Defence Case.
2 May 2005 – Prosecution’s Request
For extension Of Time Pursuant To Rule 127.
3 May 2005 – Order On Defence Motion
Seeking Reconsideration Of Order On Contempt Concerning
Witness Kosta Bulatovic And Alternatively Motion
Requesting Certification.
The Prosecutor v. Pavkovic
et al
28 April 2005 – Prosecution’s
Response To Lazarevic’s Preliminary Motion.
The Prosecutor v. Mrksic
et al
27 April 2005 – Submission Of The
Republic Of Croatia To The Court’s Decision For
Further Information In The Context Of The Prosecutor’s
Motion Under Rule 11 bis.
28 April 2005 – Prosecution’s
Further Submissions Pursuant To Chamber’s Decision
Of 15 April 2005.
28 April 2005 – Joint Further Information
By Defence Of The Accused In The Context Of The
OTP’s Motion Under Rule 11bis.
28 April 2005 – Submission Of Serbia
and Montenegro Pursuant To The Referral Bench’s
"Decision For Further Information In The Context
Of The Prosecutor’s Motion Under Rule 11bis" dated
15 April 2005. (104 pages EMAIL VERSION AVAILABLE)
The Prosecutor v. Rasevic
and Todovic
28 April 2005 – Todovic’s Defence
Response To Prosecution’s 11 bis Motion And Defence’s
Submission Of Further Information In Accordance
With The Referral Bench"s Decision of 14 April 2005
And In The Context Of The Prosecutor’s Motion Under
Rule 11bis.
28 April 2005 – Rasevic’s Defence
Response To Prosecution’s 11 bis Motion And Defence’s
Submission Of Further Information In Accordance
With The Referral Bench"s Decision of 14 April 2005
And In The Context Of The Prosecutor’s Motion Under
Rule 11bis.
28 April 2005 – Response By The
Government Of Bosnia and Herzegovina To Questions
Posed By The Referral Bench In Its Decision of 14
April 2005.
The Prosecutor v. Stanislav
Galic
28 April 2005 – Defence Reply To
Prosecution’s Request For Leave To File Consolidated
Further Response To Defence Replies Concerning Third
And Fourth Rule 115 Motions.
The Prosecutor v. Boskoski
and Tarculovski
28 April 2005 – Interim Decision
On Prosecution’s Motion For protective Measures
For Victims and Witnesses.
The Prosecutor v. Momcilo
Krajisnik
2 May 2005 – Submission Of Addendum
To Updated Statement Of Dr. Christian Nielsen.
*****
|
