01005706 Case File No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC E313 Chamber to ensure his counsel had access to the detention facilities on weekends.183 Thus, considering that the Chamber refused to give the Accused a “worthy, fair and composed question time”, the Accused “exercised the only right he ha[d] left, to remain silent until the closure of the ‘proceedings’ and to make a final statement after closing arguments”.184 Further, both KHIEU Samphan and NUON Chea indicated that they refused to submit to questioning at the conclusion of the hearing of evidence on the basis that their fair trial rights were violated throughout the proceedings.185 75. Pursuant to Internal Rules 85 and 90, the President, in consultation with the judges of the Trial Chamber, may decide on reasonable procedures for the statements or questioning of an accused so long as the rights of the accused are respected.186 76. The Chamber granted KHIEU Samphan’s request for prior notification of the documents the parties intended to use in questioning and to testify in half-day sessions. The Chamber, however, specifically indicated that it was unable to calculate how long the Accused would be able or willing to answer questions and therefore declined to place any further time limitations on questioning. Considering the length of the investigation and trial and the fact that the Accused was on notice of the charges against him throughout, the Chamber also denied KHIEU Samphan’s requests for a three week adjournment to prepare for questioning and notification of the topics and questions the other parties planned to canvas.187 77. In relation to the request for a list of topics or questions to be covered in questioning, the Chamber affirms its previous finding that the Accused was expected to know the case against him and the context of questioning, particularly by the 183 T. 9 July 2013, pp. 40-43; T. 13 June 2013, pp. 37-38; Submissions by Mr. KHIEU Samphan’s Defence regarding the Questioning of the Accused, E288/4, 5 July 2013, paras 11-22, 26-27, 38; Urgent Request by the Defence Team of Mr. KHIEU Samphan for an Immediate Stay or Proceedings, E275/2/1/1, 1 August 2013, paras 71-72, 75, 99. 184 Submissions by Mr. KHIEU Samphan’s Defence regarding the Questioning of the Accused, E288/4, 5 July 2013, para. 5, 23-24, 40; T. 9 July 2013, pp. 41, 42-43. 185 T. 9 July 2013, pp. 41, 42-43; T. 17 July 2013, pp. 67-68; Withdrawal of Notice of Intent pursuant to Internal Rule 90, E287/2, 30 July 2013, paras 3-4, 18. 186 See also, Seromba Appeal Judgement, paras 19-20; Blagojević and Jokić Appeal Judgement, paras 27-29. 187 Schedule for the Final Document and Other Hearings in Case 002/01, for the Questioning of the Accused and Response to Motions E263 and E288/1 (TC), E288/1/1, 17 June 2013, paras 8-9; T. 13 June 2013, pp. 26-27. Case 002/01, Judgement, 7 August 2014 - Public 39