CLEAN : Suu Kyi's lawyer: trial adjourned once again due to internet disruption

The transcript discusses the challenges of conducting video conferencing for legal hearings, particularly focusing on a case adjourned to April 1st. It highlights the political context where leaders face charges and questions the fairness of trials. The discussion includes legal principles regarding evidence admissibility, emphasizing that confessions under arrest cannot be used in court. The transcript concludes with an application to the court to avoid video conferencing for trials.

Why was the hearing adjourned to April 1st?

• Because it was a public holiday

• Due to technical issues with video conferencing

• To coincide with a significant political event

• As a strategic move by the defense

What is the main concern regarding the trials of the winning party leaders?

• The trials are being held in a foreign country

• The trials are being conducted in secret

• The defendants are not receiving fair trials

• The trials are being delayed indefinitely

According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, what is essential for defendants?

• The right to a fair trial

• Access to free legal representation

• The right to a public trial

• The right to choose their judge

What does the Evidence Act say about confessions made under arrest?

• They are admissible only in civil cases

• They are inadmissible as evidence

• They can be used if the defendant agrees

• They are always admissible in court

Why was it proposed that the trial should not be conducted via video conferencing?

• It compromises the fairness of the trial

• It is too expensive

• It is not technologically feasible

• It is against the law