veličina fonta

verzija za štampu

copyright

pošalji komentar

Djukic: Agreeing on evidence

Tuzla

07 October 2008  At the trial for the massacre in Kapija in Tuzla, the Trial Chamber says that it had still not rendered a decision concerning the custody termination motion filed by the Defence of Novak Djukic.

The Trial Chamber has still not rendered a decision concerning the custody termination motion, filed by the Defence of Novak Djukic, in which the Defence called on the Court to release him on bail.

"The Court is undertaking the appropriate checking. We shall render our decision once the checking has been completed," Trial Chamber Chairman Darko Samardzic said.

The State Prosecution considers that Djukic ordered the shelling of Tuzla on May 25, 1995, when 71 people were killed and more than 200 were wounded. In early September Djukic requested the Court to let him defend himself while at liberty, offering his apartment and a friend's apartment as a guarantee that he would appear at the court.

The former commander of the Ozren Tactical Group with the Republika Srpska Army, VRS, was arrested in early November 2007. He has been held under custody since then.

At the hearing held on October 7 the Prosecution intended to examine medical expert Vedo Tuco, who was supposed to speak about the cause of death and types of injuries found on the bodies of the victims, whose names are mentioned in the indictment.

"Considering the largeness and complexity of this case, the time, which has been made available to me, is extremely short. I would need a month or two to complete the task properly, in line with the technical and scientific standards," Tuco said.

The Trial Chamber proposed to the Prosecution and Defence to agree on the number of victims, whose cause of death is "not disputable", on the basis of the previous testimonies. This would reduce the number of documents to be considered by the court expert prior to making his findings.

It was also planned to present the Prosecution material evidence at this hearing but the presentation has been postponed until October 20. The Trial Chamber proposed to the two parties to "agree on which pieces of evidence can be considered disputable and non-disputable" in order to reduce the time needed for presentation of evidence.