Desember,
19, 2004
Canal Danube – Black Sea: Danube
Summit 2004 took place
The Danube Summit 2004 took place on December
10-11, 2004 in Vienna, Austria. It was organized by Greenpeace,
WWF, OKOBURO, Global 2000. The NGO representatives of 10 countries
of the Danube basin took part at this Summit. The Summit was organized
under the aegis of the International Commission for the Protection
of the Danube River (ICPDR) on the eve of the 7th Ministerial
Meeting that was held on December 13-14, 2004 in Vienna.
Participants of the Summit prepared Resolution For a Living Danube
that they have present to the Danube ministers. Particularly in
this resolution the participants call on the Ukrainian government
to stop the ongoing destruction of the Ukrainian Danube delta
and to restore the damage that has already been done.
November, 19, 2004
Canal Danube-Black Sea: the decision
of the Kiev Ñommercial Ñourt
The last hearing of the Kiev Ñommercial Ñourt
on EPL suit challenging the conclusion of environmental
expertiza of the canal Danube – Black Sea building project through
Bystre mouth, I-st phase, took place on the 28th of October 2004.
The court announced the decision, dismissing the EPL
suit.
This decision was foreseen and based on the decision, made by
the Supreme Commercial Court of Ukraine on challenging the conclusion
of the environmental expertiza on the TEA of Investments of the
Danube-Black Sea deep-water navigation canal construction.
Thus, the court actually rewrote the ruling of the Supreme Commercial
Court of Ukraine in its decision; even solved the question on
law violation that the parties did not claim in this court proceeding.
The court applied the provisions of the Instruction on realization
the environmental expertiza that lost validity in February 2004.
Also the court did not take into consideration our evidences of
violations by the defendant of the law on environmental expertiza
conduction.
EPL has appealed the decision of the Kiev Commercial
Court by to the Appeal Commercial Court of Kiev region.
October, 27, 2004
The judges continue to ignore the law and
environment
On October 21, 2004 the Supreme Commercial Court heard the cassation of EPL on the Kiev Appeal Commercial Court ruling regarding challenging the conclusion of the environmental expertiza on the TEA of Investments of the Danube-Black Sea deep-water navigation canal construction on the Ukrainian Part of the Danube Delta of July 10, 2003.
The Supreme Commercial Court stated that the cassation and the court proceedings are senseless, as the canal has been already constructed. The Court did not take into consideration, that the Appeal Court and the Ministry violated the law and our rights, which are supposed to be the main argument in decision making on this case.
The Supreme Commercial Court made the decision to dismiss the cassation appeal. Thus, the decision of the Appeal Court is left in force, as well as the appealed conclusion of the environmental expertiza.
EPL is planning to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court of Ukraine.
We hope that the Supreme Court of Ukraine will be independent and politically neutral, unlike the Appeal and the Supreme Commercial Courts.
October, 18, 2004
Danube-Black Sea canal: the visit
of the Joint Fact-finding Mission of the European Commission and
International Conventions on the “Bystroe canal”
The visit of the Mission to Ukraine took place on
October 6-8, 2004. The visit was caused by the increasing international
attention to the construction of a deep-water navigation canal
in the Bystroe arm. The international community is concerned by
the lack of comprehensive and independent environmental impact
assessment.
EPL representative, Olga Melen, met with
the members of the Mission during their meeting with NGOs, where
she handed to the Mission the EPL memorandum,
giving our comments on the letter of the Ministry of Environment
of Ukraine, presented to the European Commission.
The Mission will prepare a report on the results of
their visit to Ukraine.
October, 15, 2004
Danube Case: another legal and
reasonable decision
The hearing of the Supreme Commercial Court of Ukraine
on the withdrawal of the straits and internal ponds from the Danube
Biosphere Reserve took place on October 6, 2004.
During 20 minutes of court hearing the parties presented
their arguments and demands. Judges decided to make a decision
after several irrelevant and unclear questions of judge Ylitsky
to the Kilijska region council that filed cassation appeal.
The appeal of the Kilijska region council was dismissed
and the previous court decisions was left in force. Thus, the Supreme
Commercial Court legalized withdrawal of lands and nullification
of the State Act on permanent land use, issued to the Danube Biosphere
Reserve.
The final decision, although, will take by the Supreme
Court of Ukraine.
October, 15, 2004
Danube Case: new judges appear
The hearing of Kiev Ñommercial Ñourt on EPL
suit challenging the environmental expertiza of the canal Danube
– Black Sea building project through Bystre mouth, I-st phase took
place on the 5th of October, 2004.
The hearing of the case was started from the beginning,
as SE ”Delta Lotzman” has been involved into the case as the second
defendant and the full bench was appointed.
The case will be considered by the full bench according
to the decision of the head of the court, on the request of the
judge O.M.Korotun. Such a step of the judge, according to her,
was made due to the complexity of the case and nationwide importance
of the canal construction.
As the new judges need to study materials of the case,
the case hearing was scheduled on the 28th of October 2004.
September, 30, 2004
The Sixth
Annual Meeting of the REPIN has been held
The Sixth Annual Meeting of the EECCA Regulatory Environmental
Programme Implementation Network (REPIN) took place in Yerevan
(Armenia) on September 26-28, 2004. The Network’s mission is to
enable environmental authorities and other stakeholders in EECCA
countries to provide protection of the environment and human health
by developing and implementing effective environmental policies
and legislation.
The meeting agenda included, inter alia, the discussion
of the Integrated Environmental Permitting Guidelines for EECCA
Countries. The analysis of the conditions and recommendations for
a step-by-step introduction of an integrated environmental permitting
system for specific manufacturing sectors in Ukraine were presented.
EPL (Natalia Andursevych, international
affairs officer) presented results of the conducted feasibility
study of the implementation of the Environmental Performance
Rating and Information Disclosure Program in Ukraine. This rating
system might be implemented in Lviv oblast as a pilot project
already starting from the next year.
September, 15, 2004
Council
of Europe says Ukraine violated Bern Convention
Expert from Convention on the conservation of
European wildlife and natural habitats (Bern convention) Mr.Herve
Lethier issued his report concerning
shipping canal in the Bystroe arm.
Official visit of Danube delta took place from 22-25 July, 2004 in the presence
of the head of Council of Europe Natural Heritage and Biological Diversity
Division.
Expert points out the absence of economic evaluation and analysis (including
alternatives), any risk studies, absence of precise data on expected affects
of the works and the prevention and compensation measures envisaged, reminding
about the conclusion of UNESCO/Ramsar on inadequate impact study. Thus the
option of developing Bystre canal was taken without ecological costs being
incorporated or economic analysis of the project.
The adverse affect of the project was listed as affect on species, particularly
birds, natural habitats, delta landscapes and natural processes and river dynamics.
It was strongly recommended to examine alternative solutions if greater depth
thinking in the long term and follow the recommendations of UNESCO/Ramsar report.
By the way, report declared the Bystre arm variant as the worst solution.
August, 13, 2004
Danube
Commission concerned about canal construction by Ukraine. We
received the response from
the International commission for the protection of the Danube
river (ICPDR) on our notification. Commission confirmed its concerns
about the canal building project and the possible environmental
effects it may have both in the Danube river and the Black Sea
ecosystem.
The provisions of the Danube River Protection Convention require exchange of
information on planned activities. For this reason, in December, 2003 at the
ordinary meeting of ICPDR passed a resolution,
expressing concern about this project and requesting information from Ukraine
about the possible environmental impacts.
In early June, ICPDR again send Ukraine a letter requesting to stop the dredging
until international review and discussion of the environmental impacts, as
required by the Danube River Protection Convention will take place. In mid
July, ICPDR President Catherine Day (representing the European Commission at
the same time) and Philip Weller ICPDR Executive Secretary held a meeting with
the Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine about this issue. It was agreed at that
meeting that information about the project and the environmental impacts would
be made available to the ICPDR for expert review. Some documents have been
provided to both the ICPDR and to the European Commission. The ICPDR asked
again for the project to be halted until these documents would be assessed.
This didn’t happen.
The assessment of the documents by the ICPDR Secretariat revealed that they
were not sufficient to evaluate the environmental impacts and to meet provisions
of information exchange under the Danube Convention. Second written communication
requesting additional information had been sent to Ukraine.
The ICPDR states that Ukraine failed to fully meet the information exchange
obligations under the Danube River Protection Convention. For this reason,
this question will be discussed during the Standing Working Group meeting of
ICPDR in September, 2004.
On August, 5, 2004
The hearing
of Kiev commercial court on EPL suit challenging the
environmental expertiza of the canal Danube – Black Sea building
project through Bystre mouth, I-st phase took place. The representatives
of the defendant – the Ministry of Environmental Protection of
Ukraine and the representative of the third party - “Delta Lotzman”
were present.
In our suit we asked court, besides declaring expertise decision invalid, to
give us the EIA documentation, that now is kept by “Delta-Lotzman”. Thus, the
court decided to involve “Delta-Lotzman” as second defendant and the consideration
of the case will start again at next hearing scheduled at October 5, 2004, as
the judge takes holidays.
Its worth noting, that the judge tried to postpone hearing of the case until
the Supreme commercial court decides our second appeal concerning challenging
of ecological expertiza of TEG of investments. The hearing of this appeal is
scheduled on October, 21, 2004.
Probably, the Supreme commercial court decision will precede the decision of
Kiev commercial court concerning expertiza of building project and will play
a decisive role for our case.
July
30, 2004
The case Danube – Black Sea: next hearing on ecological expertiza
Next hearing of the EPL suit against the
Ministry of Environmental Protection of Ukraine challenging the
conclusion of the state environmental expertiza ¹191 of the canal
Danube – Black Sea building project is scheduled by the Kiev Commercial
Court on August 5, 2004.
The court involved State Enterprise “Delta-Lotsman” as a third party intervener
for defendant. However, “Delta-Lotsman” asked court to consider the case in
their absence.
Danube-Black
Sea canal: Courts reluctant to take decisions.
On June 29, 2004, the Kyiv Commercial court heard
the case against the EIA of the canal Danube – Black Sea project.
It was the second court hearing, and the court did not take any
decision yet, despite the ongoing construction of the canal by
the Ministry of Transport.
On June 30, 2004, the High Commercial Court
of Ukraine heard the case on the withdrawal of the waters from
the Danube Biosphere Reserve. This is the “second appeal” court.
As no decision was taken it seems that the court is waiting for
the political solution of the problem.
EPL
has issued two publications on the European Union Environmental
Law.
In June 2004 EPL has issued two new publications:
-
European Union Environmental Law. Mykievych M., Andrusevych
N., Budyakova T. Textbook. – Lviv, 2004. – 256 p. (in Ukrainian);
- Compendium of the EU Legal Acts in the Field of
Environmental Protection. – Lviv, 2004. - 192 p. (in Ukrainian).
The presentation of these publications was held
on June 30, 2004, in the library of EPL.
The publications were issued in the framework of
the project “Promoting EU Environmental Law in Ukraine” with
the financial support of European Commission and in collaboration
with European Law Department of Faculty of International Relations
of the Ivan Franko Lviv National University. The project aims
to promote teaching European Environmental Law in the universities
in Ukraine, to facilitate learning of European Environmental
Law by university students, to raise the awareness of the non-governmental
organizations in Ukraine on European Environmental Law issues,
to promote research on European Environmental Law in Ukraine.
The description of these publications you
can find in the section “Our
Publications”
European
environmental ministers discuss the Danube – Black Sea issue.
EPL
expressed it concerns about construction of the Danube – Black
Sea canal during the Third Meeting of the Parties of the Convention
on Environmental Impact Assessment (Espoo Convention), held in
Cavtat, Croatia, June 2-4, 2004.
At the High Level segment of the Meeting, Andriy Andrusevych,
EPL Executive Director, stressed that ‘the latest example that
brought attention of the whole European environmental community
was construction by the Government of Ukraine of a navigable canal
in the Ukrainian part of the Danube River Delta. The construction
planning lacked any transboundary assessment and public participation’.
Just a few days before the 3rd Meeting of the Parties
Romania filed with the Implementation Committee of the Convention
an official complaint against Ukraine on the canal issue.
The
Compliance Committee of the Aarhus Convention is considering
the violation by Ukraine of the citizens’ rights in the process
of the canal Danube – Black Sea construction.
Upon the communication from
EPL, the Compliance Committee of the Aarhus Convention initiated
official consideration of the violations by Ukraine of the citizens’
environmental rights in the process of planning and construction
of the canal Danube – Black Sea. At its last meeting the Committee
decided to send a letter to the Government of Ukraine requesting
to comment on this matter.
The
case Danube – Black Sea: appeal on the conclusion of the state
environmental expertiza ¹191 of the canal Danube – Black Sea
building project.
The first hearing of the EPL appeal to the
Ministry of Environmental Protection of Ukraine, scheduled by the
Kiev Commercial Court on May 25, 2004, did not take place due to
the defendant’s failure to appear. The representative of the Ministry
of Environment in this case is Mamula A.M., who is at the same
time a representative of the Ministry of Transport.
We have filed the addition to the claim, giving grounds
for the illegality of the conclusion of the state environmental
expertiza ¹191 of the canal Danube – Black Sea building project
and requesting the court to invalidate it. We argue that in the
process of the expertiza conduction the defendant failed to comply
with the principles of objectivity, scientific validity, publicity,
complexity, considering public opinion. The assessment of the canal
construction impact on the fishery and birds has not been conducted
either.
The Ministry of Environment failed to ensure both
the appropriate public information on the expertiza process, and
the opportunity for the public to participate in the decision-making,
violating our right to participation in the process of the expertiza
conduction.
The next court hearing is scheduled on June
15, 2004.
The
hearing of the D. Skrylnikov’s appeal on illegal acts of the
President of Ukraine.
On June 10, 2004, at 12:30 am the Kiev Appeal court
will hear the appeal by the citizen Skrylnikov D.V. on the decision
of the Kiev local court of the Pecherskiy district regarding the
illegal acts of the President of Ukraine. D.V. Skrylnikov demands
the invalidation of Decree of the President of Ukraine, that has
amended the President’s Decree “On creation of the Danube Biosphere
Reserve” – the case on the withdrawal of the straits and internal
ponds. (The additional information on this complaint you can find
in the news archive).
The reseeding hearings, scheduled on April 19
and May 17 did not take place due to the absence of the representatives
of the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine and the illness of the
judge.
On
May 15 - 20, 2004 the 14th Annual Meeting of the Environmental
Law Alliance Worldwide (E-LAW) took place in the Carpathian
Mountains of Western Ukraine.
For the first time in E-LAW history the meeting has
been held in Europe. 40 lawyers from 15 countries, from as far
away as Swaziland in southern Africa and Chile in South America
participated in the meeting.
The aim of the meeting was to establish the close cooperation and mutual assistance
between environmental public interest lawyers from around the world in environmental
problems solving and finding ways of inproving the state of enviroment, as
well as to break the isolation of public interest advocates they face in
their work. The participants gained a unique opportunity to meet and work
together on solving common problems they face in protecting the environment
and environmental rights.
During the meeting the participants presented the
results of their work, exchanged their best experiences pursing
environmental public interest law, discussed joined projects and
cases, enlisted the support, received legal and scientific assistance
and resources for their current work from the colleagues from other
countries.
The Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (E-LAW) gives public interest lawyers
and scientists around the world the skills and resources they need to protect
the environment through law. Grassroots lawyers from 10 countries founded E-LAW
in 1989. Now more than 300 grassroots lawyers and scientists in 60 countries
call on the E-LAW network for critical legal and scientific tools.
On May 20-21, 2004
the 9th International meeting of the Environmental Law Association
of Central and Eastern Europe and the Newly Independent States
(GUTA Association) took place in the Carpathian Mountains of
Western Ukraine.
The participants of the meeting shred the successful
experiences in their cases and implemented projects, discussed
joined projects and the future cooperation prospects in the light
of the European Union enlargement and the participation of the
Association in the international processes.
Association was created as a result of the many years
GUTA process, which consists of the annual conferences of the public
interest environmental lawyers of the Central/Eastern Europe, Caucasus
and Central Asia. The first conference was organized in 1995 in
the small Carpathian village GUTA. From the name of this village
originated the name of the organization. GUTA process is important
for the development and support of collaboration and mutual help
among the environmental lawyers of our region.
We express our thankfulness for the support
of these meetings:
Trust
for Mutual Understanding http://www.tmuny.org/
IUCN http://www.iucn.org/
Weeden
Foundation http://www.weedenfdn.org/
MacArthur
Foundation http://www.macfound.org/
Stock
Company "Êîìá³íàò Ïðèäí³ïðîâñüêèé", Çëàãîäà™ http://www.zlagoda.dp.ua/
Mineral
Water “Êí³ñåëü÷àíêà”
On
April, 19, 2004, the Ministry of Environment of Ukraine approved
environmental expertiza Conclusion
¹191 Regarding the Building project of Construction of
the Danube-Black Sea Deep-Water Navigation Canal on the Ukrainian
Part of the Danube Delta-Stage I, through Bystre mouth. By
this conclusion the Ministry gave positive evaluation of the
building project and declared its realization environmentally
acceptable.. The scientific ecological-expert evaluation of
the building project, done by Kharkiv National University Named
After Karazin, was the basis and integral part of the conclusion
N191.
On
May, 14, 2004, Charitable Foundation “EPL” filed
an emergency complaint to the International Commission for
the Protection of Danube river on
violation of the Convention on Cooperation for the Protection
and Sustainable Use of the Danube River by Ukraine. (Full
version of the document)
The construction of canal in Bystre mouth and navigation in the Ukrainian part
of Danube river will inevitably be accompanied by the shipping accidents, resulting
in pollution of waters by oil, pesticides, other harmful substances, municipal
and sewage wastes, introduction of alien species. Transboundary impact of canal
construction is evident and apparent.
Ukraine failed to take measures to ensure efficient water quality protection
and sustainable water use, prevent transboundary impacts and to take into account
possible influences of the canal planning building on water resources and the
conservation of ecological resources of the Danube River, which constitute
the violation of art.5, 6 of the Convention.
Thus, we asked the commission to convene an extraordinary meeting of the Parties
of the Convention, report on the issue concerning the implementation of this
Convention by Ukraine, and consider elaboration of recommendations or decisions
to stop the violation of the convention by Ukraine.
EPL additionally presented information concerning
the Ramsar Convention Secretariat concerns, sent to Ukraine's President L.
Kuchma, about the Government's project to build a navigable waterway through
the Ukrainian part of the Danube Delta and WWF critics on these plans of Ukraine.
On
March 22, 2004, Charitable Foundation “EPL” filed
the suit to court against the Ministry of Environment of Ukraine.
EPL alleged the violation of it’s right to information
and right to participate in the process of environmental expertiza
of the building project of the canal Danube-Black sea by the
Ministry.
Business court of Kiev city scheduled the court hearing
on May, 25, 2004.
On
May 6, 2004, Charitable Foundation “EPL” filed a
complaint to the Compliance Committee of the Convention on
Access to Information, Public Participation
in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental
Matters (Aarhus convention).
We alleged the violation of Aarhus convention provisions
by Ukraine in the decision-making processregarding the construction
of navigation canal Danube-Black sea through
the territory of UNESCODanube biosphere reserve.
In particular, the Ministry of Environment of Ukraine during the state environmental
expertizaregarding the TEA of Investments of construction of the Danube-Black
Sea deep-water navigation canalviolated the right of the public to participate
in environmental decision-making. This rightconstitute of timely and adequate
informing of the public of the proposed decision, provision of theaccess of
the public to information relevant to the decision-making process, collecting
of
publicopinion and due account of the outcome of public participation in the
decision.
The Ministry failed to perform the aforementioned requirements and violated
Aarhus convention, thuswe asked the Committee, inter alia, make recommendation
to Ukraine
regarding the implementation ofthe Convention. (Full
text document)
The
Supreme Commercial Court of Ukraine scheduled the hearing of
the cassation appeal of Kilijska region council on
the ruling of Commercial Court of Odessa oblast on June, 30,
2004. The council considers the nullification of the State
act on the right to permanent land use, issued to Danube Biosphere
Reserve soundless and illegal.
On
April 26, 2004 , EPL sent a Letter of Emergency Notification
to the Secretariat of the Convention on the Migratory Species and
African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement. We
urged the Secretariat to undertake an immediate investigation
with regards
to the planned construction of the canal by Ukraine. O ur
action seeks to protect Slender-billed Curlew ( Numenius tenuirostris )
, a critically endangered species that is estimated to have
declined in number to as few as 50 individuals. (doc
80 Kb)
Three judges with presiding judge
Lvov B., during 40 minutes considered the arguments of the plaintiff
and the defendant and invalidated the ruling of local commercial
court of Kiev.
The ruling of the local commercial
court of Kiev established violation of the right of EPL
to participate in the state ecological expertise by the Ministry,
violation of the legislation on state ecological expertise by the
Ministry, absence of the names of experts in expertise decision,
absence of clear evaluation of the EIA documentation by the Ministry
(positive or negative), and absence of the determination of the
conformity of the planned activity with national legislation.
We are going to appeal the appellate
court ruling as soon as we receive the full version of it.
We
celebrate our 10th anniversary on March 24, 2004.
March 29, 2004
Successes, experience and significant
growth of EPL sum up these ten years. We express our
gratitude to all whom worked with us, supported and inspired us on the road
of environmental protection and achievement of the rule of law in Ukraine.
Canal
Danube- Black Sea: the court decision on the case regarding
the complaint of the citizen D. Skrylnikov on the Decree
of the President of Ukraine
January 30, 2004
On January 12, 2004 the the Kiev local
court of the Pecherskiy district has rendered a decision to dismiss
the complaint of the citizen D. Skrylnikov on the invalidation
of Decree of the President of Ukraine, that has amended the President’s
Decree “On creation of the Danube Biosphere Reserve”. (The additional
information on this complaint you can find in the news archive).
The judge has stated, that “with regard
to the nature of the changes to the Decree of 10.08.1998, the court
does not consider that any changes have been made to the borders,
category or status of the Danube Biosphere Reserve”.
The court practically omitted the
issue of compliance with the legislation during the adoption of
the challenged Decree. The court has based it decision on the verbal
explanations of the Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Transport
regarding the so called “editorial correction” of the Decree, that
has not been confirmed by any profess.
The judge does not consider
the adoption of the challenged Decree to be violating rights
or legitimate interests of the claimant. Although, the claimant
believes, that conservation of the Danube Biosphere Reserve –
the Nature Protection Fund territory, unique not only for Ukraine
but for Europe in general, – preservation of quality and integrity
of its territory, as well as conservation of its biodiversity,
are the important issues for every citizen and for him particularly.
Therefore, Â. Skrylnikov persists in stating that his rights
and legitimate interests are violated by adoption of this Decree
(the aim of which is to assist in settling the issue of Danube-Black
Sea canal construction, literally, the future usage of the valuable
territories of nature in the economic purposes), and is going
to appeal the court decision.
Canal Danube- Black Sea: on the January 27, 2004 took place the regular court hearing of the Commercial Court of Kyiv regarding the EPL appeal on the environmental expertiza conclusion
January 29, 2004
The defendant (the Ministry of Environment Protection of Ukraine) has been represented by A. Mamula, lawyer of the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine. The Minister of Environment Protection of Ukraine S. Polyakov has signed his power of attorney personally. Mr. Mamula continued denying the violation of the Law of Ukraine “On the Environmental Expertiza” by the environmental expertiza conclusion. He persisted that the requirements of this law regarding the conduction of the environmental expertiza are not applicable to the state environmental expertiza.
Answering the questions of the judge, on how the Ministry of Environment considers the environmental expertiza conclusion, the Head of the Ministry Department of Environmental Audit, Expertiza and Insurance, S. Kalynovskiy, stated, that the conclusion is positive under the condition of zoning change. We expressed to the court our objections, that, despite the fact that the zoning has not been changed, the Project of canal construction has already been submitted for the environmental expertiza to the Ministry of Environmnent and the Statement of activity's environmental impact was already announced in the newspaper “Holos Ukrainy”. Mr. Kalynovskiy replied that, despite the submission of the documents, the environmental expertiza would only begin after the zoning changes.
The defendant, in the support of his arguments, informed the court about the international experts conclusions approving the canal construction, and provided the copy of the conclusions to the judge. By the “experts conclusions” he meant the decisions of the experts, invited by the Ministry of Transport to the conference in Odessa. These conclusions are not official. Only the conclusions of the UNESCO and Ramsar experts, officially invited to Ukraine by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and the Ministry of Environment Protection of Ukraine, are official. These experts have already expressed their disapproval of the canal construction through the Bystre mouth. These conclusions will be soon available on the UNESCO website.
The court has announced a break till the February 10, 2004.
