1 Friday, 28 February, 2003

2 [Open session]

3 [Motion Hearing]

4 [The accused entered court]

5 --- Upon commencing at 1.05 p.m.

6 JUDGE LIU: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case?

8 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. Good afternoon, Your Honour.

9 This is case number IT-03-66-PT, the Prosecutor versus Agim Murtezi and

10 others.

11 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. May I have the appearances,

12 please? For the Prosecution?

13 MR. CAYLEY: Yes, Your Honour, good afternoon, Your Honour. My

14 name is Andrew Cayley, I appear for the Prosecution with my colleague

15 Colin Black and my case manager, Hasan Younis. Thank you.

16 JUDGE LIU: And for the Defence?

17 MR. BOURGON: Good afternoon, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE LIU: Your microphone, please.

19 MR. BOURGON: Sorry, Your Honour, it won't happen again. Good

20 afternoon, Your Honour. I appear this afternoon on behalf of Mr. Agim

21 Murtezi. My name is Stephane Bourgon, counsel from Montreal, Canada.

22 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. When did you arrive here in The

23 Hague?

24 MR. BOURGON: I arrived here this morning, Your Honour.

25 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Mr. Murtezi would you please stand up?

1 Can you hear the proceedings in a language that you understand?

2 THE ACCUSED: [Microphone not activated] [Interpretation] Please

3 translate this into Albanian, I don't understand this.

4 JUDGE LIU: I mean -- I will repeat my question. Can you

5 understand the proceedings in a language that you understand?

6 THE ACCUSED: Yes, yes, translated into Albanian.

7 JUDGE LIU: Shall I repeat it again?

8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. Now you may continue but

9 please repeat it.

10 JUDGE LIU: Can you hear the proceedings in a language that you

11 understand?

12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, now I can.

13 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. You may sit down, please.

14 This is a hearing with a request of release of Mr. Murtezi from

15 the United Nations Detention Unit. On the 20th February, 2003, during the

16 initial appearance of the accused, Mr. Murtezi pleaded not guilty to seven

17 counts laid against him in the indictment. Defence counsel raised some

18 doubts about the true identify of the accused on the basis that a wrong

19 pseudonym was used in the indictment, implying that the person arrested

20 and detained may not be the individual referred to in the indictment.

21 Yesterday evening, this Trial Chamber was seized with the motion

22 filed by the Prosecution to withdraw the indictment against Mr. Murtezi

23 and requested that Mr. Murtezi be released from the United Nations

24 Detention Unit and returned to the province of Kosovo as soon as possible.

25 Just about two hours ago, I received urgent preliminary response to the

1 Prosecution's motion to withdraw the indictment against Agim Murtezi. In

2 this response, the Defence counsel for Mr. Murtezi requested of Trial

3 Chamber I, first to withdraw the indictment against Mr. Murtezi, 2, order

4 the immediate release of Mr. Murtezi, 3, to ensure the presence of the

5 representative of the host country at this hearing.

6 Since it is the Prosecution who filed the motion first, maybe I

7 could first turn to the Prosecution. Would you please brief me about the

8 motion and other related informations in this case? Yes, please.

9 MR. CAYLEY: Yes, Mr. President. I'm aware that there are travel

10 arrangements being urgently made so I will be very brief. This is an

11 application made to you pursuant to Rules 51 and 73 of the Rules of

12 Procedure and Evidence for the withdrawal of the seven counts in the

13 indictment of 24th January, 2003, against Agim Murtezi only, and to apply

14 for his immediate release back to his home in Kosovo.

15 I want to very briefly address you on four separate matters.

16 First of all I want to make some introductory comments to you about the

17 principles which guide the work of the Office of the Prosecutor.

18 The Prosecutor is required to investigate and present facts fairly

19 and impartially. On that basis there is a fundamental requirement that

20 all relevant facts are investigated and wherever possible made available

21 to the Court and to the Defence. These principles must be the guiding

22 lights by which the Prosecutor exercises her functions under the Statute.

23 These are the covenants under which I have done my best over the past week

24 to fulfil. The respect and continuance for the international rule of law

25 demands nothing less of me.

1 All that said, my position requires that I state publicly today

2 that I accept full responsibility for the conduct of this case and the

3 manner in which events have developed since confirmation.

4 The second matter I want to address you on is the a brief outline

5 of what has happened in this case and the principal reasons why this

6 application is being made. The Prosecution's application lays out in

7 summary form the chronology of events as they took place in this case. I

8 would only highlight to you the events which perhaps are the more

9 important.

10 When this indictment was laid before Judge El Mahdi on 27th of

11 January 2003 for confirmation, there was in my view sufficient evidence to

12 provide reasonable grounds for believing that Agim Murtezi had committed

13 the seven counts contained in the indictment.

14 After his arrest and interview with the Office of the Prosecutor,

15 on the 21st, 24th and 25th of February in which he made substantial

16 cooperation, I took the view that further inquiries were required both

17 here in The Hague and in Kosovo. The results of those further inquiries

18 and the examination of material recovered from Mr. Murtezi's house taken

19 together with his interview led me to conclude that there was a doubt as

20 to whether the man who sits before you today was the actor in the events

21 laid out in the indictment. Naturally, the ethical responsibilities of

22 the Office of the Prosecutor require me to advise the Court to exercise

23 the doubt that now exists in this man's favour and to request the

24 withdrawal of the charges against him and order his release immediately.

25 Thirdly, Your Honour, I want to make a few brief comments about

1 the conduct of Defence counsel in this case, Mr. Stephane Bourgon. The

2 primary function of Defence counsel in any case is to protect his client

3 from conviction; this is never an easy task even with the best defence.

4 Mr. Bourgon has acted throughout these days honourably, resolutely and

5 above all courageously in what was a grave and difficult situation for all

6 of us.

7 He should be commended upon his behaviour and his conduct, in my

8 view, should be seen as a model for other Defence lawyers when this

9 institution is looking to a just and speedy conclusion to all its

10 proceedings.

11 Lastly, Your Honour, let me emphasise: I apply that only the

12 indictment be withdrawn against this man before you, Agim Murtezi, born on

13 the 20th of February, 1956, in Lipjan in Kosovo. I have no doubt that the

14 events outlined in this indictment, that innocent and defence less people,

15 were imprisoned, beaten and murdered took place. And on those certain

16 facts, Your Honour, the Prosecutor will move forward with this indictment.

17 I thank you, Your Honour.

18 JUDGE LIU: Well, thank you very much. Here I have some questions

19 for you. The first one is what is the exact basis for your request to

20 withdraw the indictment against this individual in the courtroom? Is that

21 because of you don't have enough evidence or something else? Or is the

22 person is not the person who committed that crime? I couldn't see from

23 this point from your presentation and from your filings.

24 MR. CAYLEY: I can only say, Your Honour, that in my view, we do

25 not have sufficient evidence to justify the fact that Agim Murtezi is the

1 man referred to in the indictment.

2 JUDGE LIU: How many people in that area, so far as I know, bear

3 the same name or nickname?

4 MR. CAYLEY: The question of the nickname is a very difficult one.

5 I am aware, as a result of our further inquiries, that one individual has

6 this nickname. And I believe he is dead. There may be others with that

7 nickname. As far as the nickname -- as far as the actual name of Agim

8 Murtezi, I can only say that there are very few people that we can

9 discover who are actually called that in Kosovo but I would add that it is

10 the nickname that is actually very important in this instance, because

11 none of the witnesses were aware of the real name of this actor in the

12 events at the time that these events took place. They were only aware of

13 the nickname.

14 JUDGE LIU: Well, so you are pretty sure that this person in this

15 courtroom is the person you wanted in the indictment?

16 MR. CAYLEY: Based upon the evidence that existed on the 24th of

17 January of 2003, the answer to that question is yes.

18 JUDGE LIU: I see. But just because there is not enough evidence

19 at your hands that you request for the withdrawal of the indictment?

20 MR. CAYLEY: As matters have developed since the initial

21 appearance, I can state positively to you that I believe that there is a

22 considerable doubt as to whether this man that sits before you today is in

23 fact the actor in the events that are outlined in the indictment.

24 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. Now, may I turn to the Defence counsel?

25 Mr. Bourgon, do you have anything to say at this stage?

1 MR. BOURGON: Yes, Your Honour. I do have some submissions to

2 make in response to the motion which was filed by the Prosecution

3 requesting the withdrawal of the indictment. I have filed before you

4 urgently this morning a preliminary response which highlights these

5 submissions which I would like to make this afternoon. First I would like

6 to explain why this motion was filed at such a late moment, given that

7 this hearing was scheduled to take place at 1300 and the motion was filed

8 close to 12.00, a little more than one hour before it was due to be heard.

9 Following the interview of Mr. Murtezi with the representative of

10 the Prosecution, which ended on Tuesday, the 25th of July [sic] at

11 precisely 1.00 in the afternoon, at 1300 hours, I did have some

12 discussions with my colleague, Mr. Cayley, from the Office of the

13 Prosecutor, as to what would be the follow-up to this interview, and we

14 were -- and I was informed that we would most likely meet as soon as

15 possible, as soon as the office of the Prosecution would have had enough

16 time to verify the information provided by Mr. Murtezi during the

17 interview, and that in all likelihood this would not take place until this

18 week. I did get last night when I was in Montreal, Canada, a phone call

19 at -- which I got the message at 1700 hours or 5.00, which is of course

20 Hague time 11.00 at night and I took the first plane over and I arrived

21 this morning at 10.00. This is when the received for the first time the

22 Prosecution's motion which was filed this morning at 9.00. And I

23 responded as quick as I could before going to the detention unit and in

24 order to meet to Mr. Murtezi and explain to him what was happening this

25 morning.

1 This is at least to provide you with the background as to why my

2 response was filed at such a late time.

3 In terms of my submissions this afternoon, first of all I would

4 like to thank my colleague from the Office of the Prosecution for the nice

5 words he has said about the office of being a Defence counsel, in general,

6 and of course the words he has said about me more specifically. Indeed,

7 the situation we face today is an unusual situation and is one that pushes

8 a Defence counsel, in terms of -- to his or her inner limits in terms of

9 how quick and how he should proceed to make the proper representations in

10 full respect for the rights of the accused who appeared before you on 20

11 February. I opted for -- to move quickly and I must say today before you

12 that I must return the compliments which were given to me -- made about me

13 by Mr. Cayley simply because I did get the cooperation that I was

14 expecting from the office of the Prosecution, with such an unusual and

15 exceptional situation.

16 That being said, Mr. Murtezi appears before you today, and I do so

17 on his behalf, and of course we agree and Mr. Murtezi consents and

18 welcomes the motion by the Prosecution for the indictment to be withdrawn.

19 That being said, there are some issues with which Mr. Murtezi disagrees

20 with the submissions made by the Prosecution in its motion.

21 The first of these issues is the difference between having a doubt

22 as to whether there is an enough evidence to continue in a case and the

23 fact that information was provided by Mr. Murtezi to show that none of the

24 characteristics of a person, of an individual, described in the

25 indictment, which, according to the evidence that was given to me in the

1 indictment supporting material, there appears to be a person, there

2 appears to be an individual, who committed these acts. However, all the

3 information provided by Mr. Murtezi goes to show that he does not fit the

4 description of the person described in the indictment. Some would call

5 this a defence of alibi. I would argue before you, Your Honour, this

6 afternoon, that this goes beyond the defence of alibi. Alibi would be in

7 this case where you have a prison guard accused of having committed some

8 acts against some victims and the guard would say, "I was not at the

9 prison that day or that week, and I was not there. I was a guard. You

10 have the wrong person -- the right person, but I have an alibi." In this

11 case, and this was the basis for my deciding to proceed quickly, is that

12 we are beyond the defence of alibi. Whereas none of the characteristics

13 in the indictment fit the information provided by Mr. Murtezi to the

14 Prosecution.

15 In this respect, Mr. Murtezi maintains his claim that he is not

16 the person referred to in the indictment, and it will be important for my

17 following submission, which is whether the indictment should be withdrawn,

18 that is of course, if Your Honour grants the motion filed by the

19 Prosecution today, should the motion be withdrawn with prejudice to the

20 Prosecution or without prejudice to the Prosecution. And this is indeed a

21 major issue before you this afternoon.

22 Should the motion be granted without prejudice to the Prosecution,

23 this would give weight to the theory that there is not enough evidence to

24 continue with this case, as is explained in the Prosecution's motion, that

25 basically there is a lack of evidence. This would entitle the Prosecution

1 at some later stage to restart these procedures. What I put to you this

2 afternoon, Your Honour, is that Mr. Murtezi not being the man described in

3 the indictment, there is -- it is a difference, and the Prosecution should

4 not have the opportunity to come back again at him, given what my

5 colleague from the Prosecution just mentioned to you a few minutes ago,

6 that there are considerable doubts that the person appearing before you in

7 this courtroom today is indeed the man described in the indictment. If

8 that is the case, there are no grounds for a person to even become a

9 suspect, and this is the issue to try to summarise, whether we shall have

10 an indictment withdrawn with or without prejudice, without prejudice

11 amounts to having the accused remaining some kind of a suspect, although

12 in a limited manner.

13 My submission to you this afternoon, Your Honour, is that this

14 man, whom there are considerable doubts that he is the person even

15 referred to in the indictment, now referred to we are not even -- we have

16 not even entered into the description of the events or the alleged

17 wrongful acts committed by this person -- that person was arrested, with

18 force, with some degree of force, albeit as was -- as I submitted to you

19 during the initial appearance, Mr. Murtezi says that he was treated fairly

20 during the arrest, nevertheless we all know how an arrest by any police

21 force acting pursuant to an arrest warrant may pursue. He was arrested

22 with the necessary -- although minimum -- amount of force required. He

23 was brought to this Tribunal. He has been here now since the 18th of

24 February. We are today on the 28th of February. He has been here ten

25 days, in a country that is foreign to him. He has been detained ten days,

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Blank pages inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and

13 English transcripts. Pages 38 to 40.

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 and of course, he was the regime to which he was submitted in the

2 detention unit, although he was treated very well, and if you put the

3 question to him, he will gladly answer that he was treated very well at

4 the detention unit, nevertheless, he was detained, which is a violation of

5 his rights.

6 All this being said, I would just like to refer to you on the

7 question of prejudice or without prejudice, the only case I would like to

8 put before you today is the case of the Prosecution versus Barayagwiza a

9 case of interlocutory appeal before the International Tribunal for Rwanda.

10 This was disposed of by the Appeals Chamber in 1998, to be more precise n

11 November of 1998. All they this decision by the Appeals Chamber was later

12 modified because additional facts which were not available at trial --

13 during -- when the motion was heard, and that decision was later changed,

14 nevertheless the contents and the substance of the decision of the Appeals

15 Chamber with respect to prejudice or not prejudice to the Prosecution is

16 relevant to this case. One thing I must add, however, is that in that

17 case, of the Prosecution versus Barayagwiza, there had been, according to

18 the Appeals Chamber, blatant violations on a continuous basis of the

19 accused's rights. That is not the case we are talking about here. Here

20 we are talking of, to some extent, a case of mistaken identify. Again I

21 must admit before you today that within the material that was given to me

22 in the indictment supporting material, the Prosecution in this case did

23 act according to the mandate given to the Office of the Prosecutor, that

24 is to indict or present an indictment when they have sufficient material

25 to do so.

1 For all those reasons, and I would like to quickly go over some of

2 the facts of this case, to show that the indictment should be withdrawn

3 without prejudice to ensure that Mr. Murtezi will go back home to Kosovo

4 as a free man without having the possibility of a later indictment,

5 hanging over his head --

6 MR. CAYLEY: Excuse me, I do apologise, Mr. Bourgon. Just so the

7 record is clear, my learned colleague stated that the indictment should be

8 withdrawn "without prejudice" and I think he meant with prejudice.

9 MR. BOURGON: Sorry, yes, with prejudice. Thank you for bringing

10 this up.

11 With prejudice, meaning that the accused can go back to Kosovo as

12 a totally free man, as an innocent man, which he was before he was

13 arrested and which he should be today.

14 Just to quickly point out some of the facts of this case, to show

15 how the case proceeded, when he was initially arrested on the 17th of

16 February, Mr. Murtezi immediately claimed that he was not the right

17 person, that he was not the person who should be arrested for this case,

18 and requested at that time to make a statement. Rightfully, the

19 representative of the office of the Prosecution invited him, at least gave

20 him his rights and rightfully suggested that he should wait until he had

21 the benefit of legal counsel before making any such statements.

22 When arriving at the Tribunal, Mr. Murtezi had travelled with two

23 individuals who were his co-accused in this case. Upon meeting

24 Mr. Murtezi for the first time, he immediately informed me that he did not

25 know who the two other men arrested or who travelled with him from Kosovo

1 to The Hague, he did not know these men. I have verified this

2 information, and of course it is always very difficult to get some kind of

3 a statement from co-accused. Nevertheless, I did obtain from both my

4 counsel -- the counsels who represent the two co-accused in this case,

5 they have both assured me that both of these co-accused were ready to come

6 forward and to say that they did not know Mr. Murtezi and that they would

7 provide a statement to that effect. Due to my absence this week, I have

8 not been able to obtain both of these statements, but I do have one of

9 them, and this is the statement provided by the co-accused, Haradin Bala,

10 which I would like to file this afternoon. My colleague from the

11 Prosecution has received a copy before this hearing and I would like to

12 file this before you this afternoon. And I would like to read for the

13 record the statement goes as follows: To whom it may concern, I wish to

14 state that when I attended my initial appearance on 20 February, 2003, I

15 saw a man who was said to be Agim Murtezi, also known as Murrizi. Before

16 my arrest and transfer to the Hague I have never seen this man before. I

17 have no idea who he is. If this statement is useful, I give my permission

18 for it to be used. This statement is made without prejudice to my own

19 rights, including the right to remain silent, and the right not to give

20 evidence, which rights I do not waive or sorry I did not in any way

21 waive. I have made this statement after consultation with my counsel.

22 And this statement is signed Haradin Bala, accused in the above case.

23 I would like to file this statement before you this afternoon.

24 Now, when the information came to me that both co-accused did not

25 know Mr. Murtezi, and that Mr. Murtezi did not know both co-accused, I did

1 discuss this issue with the Prosecution, and of course, the Prosecution

2 answered or requested of me what weight or what -- how relevant these

3 statements were or would be, given that they would have no way to go back

4 at both of these co-accused to obtain the confirmation or to obtain more

5 details. My submission before you this afternoon, Mr. -- Your Honour, is

6 that both this statement and the promise to do the same by the second

7 co-accused in this case, put together with the information provided by

8 Mr. Murtezi, put together by the fact that there was no opportunity

9 whatsoever for any collusion of the three accused from the moment they

10 were arrested to the moment that these statements were made, added to the

11 fact that there was a problem with the nickname, which you rightfully

12 highlighted during the initial appearance when you asked the accused what

13 his nickname was and he answered Agim and not Murrizi, for all these

14 reasons, the fact that every time there was a first opportunity for

15 Mr. Murtezi to claim that he is not the person in the indictment, for all

16 those reasons, I put it to you, Your Honour, this afternoon, that the

17 indictment should be withdrawn with prejudice to the Prosecutor. Now,

18 with prejudice does not mean that there should be any type of a blame on

19 the Prosecution. We should not be mistaken on the words. With prejudice

20 to the Prosecutor does not mean that there is a blame, and I do not wish

21 for any type of blame to be put on the Prosecution for laying this

22 indictment, because as soon as they could, as soon as they were informed,

23 as soon as the new information came to light, they acted in a very

24 responsible manner and this is the reason we are here this afternoon.

25 This brings me to my last issue this afternoon, as to when

1 Mr. Murtezi can be released. Given the fact or should you grant the

2 motion filed by the Prosecution and withdraw the indictment against him

3 this afternoon, there are no reasons why he should spend any further time

4 in the detention unit, even if it is, as we know, detention on remand.

5 He should, as soon as possible, be flown back to Kosovo, to his family.

6 Should that be the case, I have some limited submissions I would like to

7 make which should take place if he is transported or allowed to travel

8 back to Kosovo at the earliest opportunity.

9 The first of these submissions is that earlier this week, I made a

10 press statement following the end of the interview with the Prosecution on

11 behalf of Mr. Murtezi. In this statement, there was information to the

12 effect that both co-accused in this case did not recognise Mr. Murtezi as

13 one of the accused. For some reason, this information was carried or

14 changed in the media to the point where in some media, it was alleged that

15 Mr. Murtezi claims not to be the one but knows who is the one, and this

16 was never the case throughout these proceedings since the beginning.

17 Mr. Murtezi has no idea who the person described in the indictment is. He

18 has no idea as to who the co-accused are, and he possesses little if any

19 information on the functioning of the Kosovo Liberation Army during the

20 time which are relevant to the indictment.

21 For all these reasons it is important that on record it must be

22 said that Mr. Murtezi is simply the wrong person who was arrested

23 concerning the acts alleged in the indictment.

24 Finally, of course, there is the issue of security to his family.

25 The proceedings and your decision this afternoon is likely to have

1 repercussions in Kosovo. In the media this week we have seen that the

2 situation following the arrests of Mr. Murtezi, of both his co-accused and

3 of a fourth individual at a later time have created quite some tense

4 situation in Kosovo. For that reason, as a minimum, the necessary

5 procedures must be put in place to ensure the security of Mr. Murtezi and

6 his immediate family as he goes back to Kosovo.

7 Thank you, Your Honour.

8 JUDGE LIU: Yes? You have to be very brief.

9 MR. CAYLEY: I will be.

10 JUDGE LIU: Because we are not debating these things.

11 MR. CAYLEY: I will be one minute, Your Honour.

12 JUDGE LIU: Yes.

13 MR. CAYLEY: It's on two issues. On the issue of the with

14 prejudice application, first of all, by the Defence, it's my submission,

15 Your Honour, that that request is inappropriate for four reasons. First

16 of all, this is the Prosecutor's application that is being made today for

17 the withdrawal of the indictment. It is not the application of the

18 Defence.

19 Secondly, and this goes to the case that was mentioned by my

20 learned friend, Barayagwiza case, there is no suggestion in this case, and

21 Mr. Bourgon has acknowledged that, that there has any improper conduct or

22 bad faith on the part of the Prosecutor. And indeed in the Barayagwiza

23 case it was concluded as Mr. Bourgon had stated that there had been a

24 blatant violation of the accused's rights. Mr. Bourgon has acknowledged

25 before you that there is no such suggestion in this case. The third

1 matter is that the Prosecutor's obligations under the Statute imposed upon

2 her by the Security Council cannot be fettered in this manner by such a

3 measure in these circumstances.

4 Fourthly, were the Court to grant such a punitive measure against

5 the Prosecutor on her own application, it would be a prospective measure,

6 looking forward, to an event that is not even taken place and may never

7 take place.

8 Lastly, in respect of the affidavits that are mentioned by my

9 learned friend, it is my submission that these are of extremely limited

10 value, in terms of weight. Of course they are relevant but the weight

11 which you attach to those particular pieces of evidence should be very

12 limited. The Prosecutor can make no inquiry as to the veracity, the

13 truth, of that evidence. It must just be accepted on its face value by

14 the Court and thus should have a limited value.

15 On the issue of security, a separate issue which my learned friend

16 now raises, whilst the Office of the Prosecutor cannot guarantee the

17 security of Mr. Murtezi, what can be done is that representations can be

18 made to the UN mission in Kosovo that he potentially is at risk and that

19 measures be put in place to ensure that his family and him are safe.

20 Thank you, Your Honour.

21 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.

22 Now to be extremely cautious, I would like to ask Mr. Murtezi some

23 personal questions, just for the sake of the record. Since those

24 questions touch upon his personal background and records, we will go to

25 the private session, if necessary. Shall we go to private session?

1 MR. BOURGON: Your Honour I would advise that we go into private

2 session, if only for, as a matter of precaution, in terms that if any

3 information should come out that would be of a private nature.

4 JUDGE LIU: Thank you. We will go to private session, please.

5 [Private session]

6 (Redacted)

7 (Redacted)

8 (Redacted)

9 (Redacted)

10 (Redacted)

11 (Redacted)

12 (Redacted)

13 (Redacted)

14 (Redacted)

15 (Redacted)

16 (Redacted)

17 (Redacted)

18 (Redacted)

19 (Redacted)

20 (Redacted)

21 (Redacted)

22 (Redacted)

23 (Redacted)

24 (Redacted)

25 (Redacted)

1 (Redacted)

2 (Redacted)

3 (Redacted)

4 (Redacted)

5 (Redacted)

6 (Redacted)

7 (Redacted)

8 (Redacted)

9 (Redacted)

10 (Redacted)

11 (Redacted)

12 (Redacted)

13 (Redacted)

14 (Redacted)

15 (Redacted)

16 (Redacted)

17 (Redacted)

18 (Redacted)

19 (Redacted)

20 (Redacted)

21 (Redacted)

22 (Redacted)

23 (Redacted)

24 (Redacted)

25 (Redacted)

1 (Redacted)

2 [Open session]

3 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Bourgon?

4 MR. BOURGON: I agree that we should go back to public session.

5 JUDGE LIU: Yes, thank you.

6 Well, I have considered the information provided by the

7 Prosecution and the Defence counsel during today's hearing. Doubts

8 persist as to the true identity of the perpetrator of the crime alleged in

9 the indictment. I also notice that both parties are not in dispute over

10 the withdrawal of the indictment against Mr. Murtezi and of his immediate

11 release from the United Nations Detention Unit and return to the Kosovo as

12 soon as possible.

13 I hereby order the indictment against Mr. Murtezi be withdrawn and

14 Mr. Murtezi be released immediately from the United Nations Detention

15 Unit. I don't think I am in the position to make a judgement on whether

16 this decision should be with prejudice to the Prosecution or without

17 prejudice to the Prosecution at this moment, because it involves a lot of

18 implications and different interpretations of that very word, and at this

19 moment, I don't have enough evidence to support any of the views expressed

20 by the parties, at this moment.

21 The Registrar will make all necessary arrangements to facilitate

22 Mr. Murtezi to return back to Kosovo as soon as possible.

23 The Prosecutor should file an amended indictment in this case

24 within seven days of this order.

25 A written order will be issued after this hearing in this aspect.

1 Mr. Murtezi, I apologise to you and after this hearing, you will

2 be free, and I wish you a pleasant journey back home and a reunion with

3 your family.

4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

5 JUDGE LIU: The case is adjourned.

6 --- Whereupon the Motion Hearing

7 adjourned at 1.54 p.m.

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25