13fpZ7l

• Listen carefully to the question asked and answer only that question, using
your own words. Do not let the questioner put words into your mouth.
• Take your time to think about the question and the answer you will give,
but do not take forever.
• Do not guess or speculate.
• Speak clearly for the record. Avoid gestures, as they cannot be recorded
on the transcript. In particular, movements of the head, hands or fingers,
do not assist the record.
• Be concise wdth your answers.
• Do not accept open-ended baits, like 'is that all', to keep talking, if you
have nothing more to add. Nor should you assume the obligation to fill
silences with words. Silences do not appear on the transcripts. It is
counsel's duty to ask the next question, to fill any silence.
• Do not be shy to seek clarification. If you do not understand the question
or any part of it, say so.
• Do not be afraid to correct an answer you have given—either immediately
or later on in the course of your testimony.
• Do not worry about the direction of the question. Just answer the question
accurately and tmthfully. But feel free to indicate any significant context
for the answer.
• Do not worry about the propriety of the question. It is the calling
counsel's and the court's responsibility to worry about that. In the absence
of an objection or a mling from the court against the question, just answer
it.
18. Alongside responsible focusing of the substance of the witness's testimony in
the relevant maimer, pieces of advice such as appear above are classic features of a
proper witness preparation session.
ICC-01/09-01/11-524 03-01-2013 28/44 NM T
19. It must also be observed that trials of intemational crimes have typically
involved accused persons who held the power of life and death over their victims at
times material to the judicial inquiry. The phenomenon is amply bome out in the
records of the Nuremberg tribunals, the Far East tribunals, the Eichmann trial, the
Intemational Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Intemational Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia, the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Extraordinary
Chamber in the Courts of Cambodia, etc. Allowance must then be made for the
incidence of at least some witnesses remaining in thrall to the overpowering awe of
the accused who will be in the courtroom during the testimony. Spontaneity is not a
reliable ally of justice in those circumstances. Spontaneity may indeed work a
mischief in the opposite direction. It should be an objective of witness preparation to
detect the possible existence of such an overpowering awe in a witness and to prepare
No. ICC-01/09-01/11 7/23 2 January 2013