We still haven’t been told about the date for the judgement in appeal. It’s been two years since the indictment, and almost one year since the first sentencing. Therefore our signing campaign is still going on.

On Friday 15 January 2010, Florence Hartmann's Defence has re-filed for the third time its Appeal Brief pursuant an Appeals Chamber's order.
 
An initial Appeal brief was filed by the Defence on 9 October 2009 but on the request of the Prosecutor the Appeals Chamber decided that despite over 100 errors in law and in facts identified in the first instance judgment of 14 September 2009, the Defence should constraint its arguments within 9000 words.
 
The Appeal Brief reduced to 9000 words was refiled on 20 November 2009. Once again on Mc Farlane's request contesting the words counting and the poor aspects of the footnotes , the Appeals Chamber ordered Hartmann's Defence to refile a shorter Appeal Brief by January 15, 2010.  
 
The Defence was left once again with the choice to keep all the grounds of Appeal and deal shortly with each of them or to cut some of the grounds and expand on others. The Defence has chosen between two evils to keep all the grounds and not to waive Ms Hartmann's rights to appeal errors of law or facts.
 
The consequence of such a choice is that that the very same Appeals Chambers that has requested to reduce the Defence Appeal dismisses later part of the grounds on technicallity under the excuse that the grounds were not expanded sufficiently.
 
This case has been a travesty in many ways since its beginning. Can any one still expect the judges to finally consider the matter dispassionately and objectively? However, JUSTICE requires it as it requires their integrity.