Representatives of the prosecution, the defence and the Croatian government and amici curiae discussed the existence of legal and other conditions for the trial to be conducted in Croatia according to international standards.
The key role in the day-long debate was played by Professor Davor Krapac of the Zagreb School of Law, who argued in his capacity as an amicus curiae, or friend of the court, that Croatia had the necessary laws in place to take over the trial and that any possible shortcomings could be eliminated.
Ademi and Norac are charged with violations of humanitarian law committed during the 1993 Medak Pocket operation, and Croatia would try them under the 1993 criminal code that does not define command responsibility as the Hague tribunal does.
Members of the trial chamber, presided by Judge Alphonse Orie, expressed a series of concerns about possible acquittal, citing the fact that command responsibility was not punishable under the Croatian law, the impossibility of imposing cumulative convictions under the Croatian law, difficulties with ensuring witness protection and admissibility of evidence.
Krapac dispelled their concerns, saying that the Croatian criminal code of 1998 provided for the direct application of international law before a Croatian court, that in dealing with command responsibility Croatian laws should be "creatively interpreted", and that there were sufficient procedural mechanisms to avoid the risk of inadmissibility of evidence.
"The most important thing is that the conduct of the trial and the sentencing are in conformity with Croatian legislation and the rules of the Hague tribunal, and not whether the verdict will be a prison sentence or acquittal," Krapac told the judges.
The other amicus curiae, US Professor Mirjan Damaska, did not attend for health reasons.
The government representatives, Professor Zeljko Horvatic and Jaksa Muljacic, confirmed that the Croatian constitution provided for the direct application of international conventions, adding that the application of Article 28 of the Criminal Code and the Geneva Conventions was identical to the rules of the tribunal's Statute relating to command responsibility.
Prosecutor Kenneth Scott was ambivalent about the referral of the case, saying that the accused were high-level officers charged with grave crimes and that the prosecutors would like them to be tried in The Hague if the tribunal had the necessary resources and time.
The trial chamber may decide this way or that, Scott said, citing the position of Chief Prosecutor Carla del Ponte that there can be no referring of cases that would result in impunity.
On the other hand, speaking in favour of referring cases to national jurisdictions, Scott cited reports by del Ponte and ICTY President Theodor Meron to the United Nations and a report by the OSCE mission to Croatia, saying that the Croatian judiciary could successfully try a given number of tribunal cases, particularly in view of the additional training of judges that had been conducted.
Prosecutor Scott and Judges Orie, O-Gon Kwon and Kevin Parker underlined several times that the possible trial in Croatia would be overseen by the tribunal, which would be able to request at any point that the trial be transferred back to The Hague.
Ademi's defence lawyer Cedo Prodanovic said that all the necessary conditions had been met for the transfer of the trial, that "the Croatian judiciary is ready to come to grips with such a case" and that "there are all normative requirements in place to ensure a fair trial".
Norac's attorney Zeljko Olujic expressed confidence that the trial in Croatia would be "unbiassed, with the best prosecutors, judges and defence counsel", and told the judges that they could refer the case to Croatia "without any reserve".
After considering all the arguments and submissions, the trial chamber will either make a final decision or request additional information and will inform the parties accordingly, Judge Orie said.