See also: Independent study on best practices, including recommendations, to assist States in strengthening their domestic capacity to combat all aspects of impunity, by Professor Diane Orentlicher (E/CN.4/2004/88). B. Issues relating to trial management Equally important legal advances in procedural developments have been made to cope with the magnitude and unique challenges of these trials. 1. Admissibility of evidence. One of the biggest challenges for prosecutions of mass crimes is the volume of evidence. In general, international criminal courts have rejected technical approaches to evidence and have taken a flexible approach to admissibility. Evidence with probative value is generally admissible (including hearsay).63 Also, to speed up the trials, there is an increasing tendency to rely on written evidence in the place of oral testimony, including written witness statements, particularly when it relates to matters other than the direct role of the accused.64 2. Trial management. Due to the sheer size of these trials, they can be very difficult to manage effectively. ICTY and ICTR have developed an extensive practice of organizing pretrial hearings, including conferences to discuss the parties’ intentions. On occasion, judges have taken stringent measures, including limiting available court time or numbers of witnesses. Particular lessons may be drawn from the Milosevic case, which is one of the most ambitious trials attempted in modern times.65 That trial may also give insights into how to handle a trial that is the subject of intense political and media interest. 3. Considerations in conducting joint trials. Joint trials are a common feature in dealing with system crimes and are allowed where the acts of various accused form part of the same “transaction.”66 On the one hand, these may be considered advantageous in respect of judicial economy and not requiring witnesses to make repeated appearances. On the other, 63  earsay constitutes a statement, other than one made by the witness while testifying at trial, offered in evidence to prove the H truth of the matter asserted. Hearsay evidence is generally not admissible in common-law systems. 64 ICTY, Rules of Procedure and Evidence, rule 92 bis. Although these rules are not uncontroversial for the common lawyer, many of the technical approaches have developed in the context of jury trials, and judges do not need to be protected to the same extent. The rationale behind flexible rules of admission is that direct evidence is not easily available in these trials, and should not be excluded on purely technical grounds. (Civil-law systems, in any case, tend to take a more liberal approach to evidence.) 65 S ee, for example, a series of orders in the Milosevic trial dated 5 December 2001, 4 January 2002 and 11 January 2002, in which the ICTY Trial Chamber required the parties at the outset of the trial to provide extensive information on the number of anticipated witnesses and exhibits, the anticipated length of their respective cases, the status of disclosure, etc. The Trial Chamber used this information to impose strict limitations on the time afforded to the prosecution, although the trial has since been delayed repeatedly due to the health of the accused. 66 ICTY rule 48. 24