1 Wednesday, 5 November 2003
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.19 p.m.
6 JUDGE LIU: Call the case, please, Mr. Court Deputy.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is Case Number
8 IT-02-60-T, the Prosecutor versus Vidoje Blagojevic and Dragan Jokic.
9 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.
10 Good afternoon, witness, can you hear me?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
12 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters are not able to hear the
14 JUDGE LIU: Would you please make the solemn declaration in
15 accordance with that paper.
16 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters are still not able to hear the
18 We can hear the witness now.
19 JUDGE LIU: Yes. I'm sorry, Witness, we have some technical
20 problems. Would you please make your solemn declaration again for the
21 sake of the record.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
23 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
24 WITNESS: WITNESS P-118
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. You may sit down, please.
2 Yes, Mr. Waespi.
3 MR. WAESPI: Good afternoon, Mr. President.
4 Examined by Mr. Waespi:
5 Q. If the witness could please be shown a piece of paper. And if he
6 could confirm that this is his name.
7 A. Yes, that is my first name and last name.
8 Q. Thank you. Please, obviously don't mention your name in the
9 course of this testimony, and I will not do so as well and nobody in the
10 courtroom. So I will just call you witness or sir.
11 Just two preliminary questions in open session. What's your
13 A. I'm a Bosniak by nationality.
14 Q. And in which country are you currently living?
15 A. I'm living in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
16 MR. WAESPI: Your Honours, if we could move into private session
17 just for three questions to his background.
18 JUDGE LIU: Yes, we'll go to private session, please.
19 [Private session]
12 Page 3940 – redacted – private session.
19 [Open session]
20 JUDGE LIU: Now we are in open session.
21 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. And you just stated that --
6 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
7 JUDGE LIU: Your microphone.
8 MR. WAESPI: Thank you very much.
9 Q. You just stated that you were concerned with intercepted messages,
10 so in your words the purpose of this unit was what?
11 A. I will try to explain it briefly. We were aware that we -- that
12 the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina at the time, nor us, had any
13 sophisticated equipment in order to perform our jobs with any level of
14 quality. So we believed if we used a larger number of devices, almost
15 amateur devices, we would achieve better results. And that is why we also
16 started this work in order to gather intelligence, data, related to our
17 service. This location was convenient, it was favourable, and that is why
18 we went and began to work at that location. All the more so because we
19 did not have any rear units or other units which could offer logistical
20 support for us, and this is why we came to this facility where the army
21 was already located, a unit of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
22 Q. Now, can you tell us, Witness, whom were you monitoring?
23 A. Our primary objective was to try from civilian structures, because
24 we are a civilian intelligence service, to acquire intelligence data which
25 would relate to our sphere of work. But when we went out to this
1 location, we were actually able to see that all of this was
2 interconnected, so that practically we gathered all of the intelligence
3 information which was of interest and we passed that on to our superiors.
4 Q. And can you tell us whom exactly, whose lines of communication you
5 were monitoring.
6 A. Yes. We monitored the so-called radio relay links in the
7 possession of the Army of Republika Srpska at the time. As far as I know
8 they were classical army communications. Since they also lacked civilian
9 telephone communications, they relied also on a certain number of civilian
10 telephone lines, so that these routes then enabled us to hear many people
11 from the civilian structures. So our objective was to intercept these
12 communications, frequencies. There was also a lower frequency. These
13 were UKT connections, which were used in the police service, also the
14 army -- in army communications, then there were also conversations from
15 hand-operated telephones, wireless telephones, ultra short wave
16 connections, which were also possible -- and it was possible to pick them
17 up in certain environments. So I think this is a sufficient explanation
18 of our work.
19 Q. Within the VRS, were you focusing on specific units?
20 A. We often searched the frequency spectrums which the enemy forces
21 used for their operations. After this searching, we made a selection and
22 then we decided which frequency would be covered thoroughly and monitored.
23 Since there was an army unit there, we had an agreement with them not to
24 cover the same tasks. So in these searches, I can't remember the dates,
25 we also found a frequency which was directly connected to the Main Staff
1 of the Army of Republika Srpska. Besides that frequency, we -- when we
2 had time and room and if the frequency was inactive in the sense that
3 there were no conversations ongoing, then we would also monitor some other
4 frequencies and monitor some other conversations.
5 Q. Sir, do you know did the VRS also have anti-electronic warfare
7 A. Yes. The army of Republika Srpska had such units and they also
8 inherited all the technical equipment from the former JNA that they had
9 used. I know that they had these devices. Unfortunately we did not have
10 such devices and we had to convert some other devices into devices which
11 would be compatible and from which we could monitor these conversations.
12 Q. Now, did the VRS realise that their communications were being
13 intercepted by you?
14 A. Often from their conversations we were aware that they knew that
15 we were doing this, but from some conversations that we heard from their
16 top leaders and after some clumsy transmissions via radio at that time, we
17 heard comments that we were actually receiving this from some states,
18 which were actually passing this on to us. So that would be the answer.
19 Q. Can you also intercept encrypted lines?
20 A. Yes, you can intercept everything on those frequencies, but it's a
21 question of what could be decoded and what could not. We intercepted
22 everything, open lines, we would pick that up. The encrypted lines we
23 would try to decipher. Some things were not encrypted in the classical
24 sense. They were encrypted by transferring certain terms or substituting
25 certain terms, so we tried to do it in that way as well.
1 Q. Let me ask you: Why did the participants to these communications
2 not use coded language or communications? Why did they talk in openness?
3 A. We often heard them asking, "Is this a secure conversation, secure
4 line?" And if somebody was not really an expert in that would say, "Yes,
5 it's a secure line." In other cases they would say, "Well, it's not
6 secure," and then they would say, "Well, hopefully they're not listening
7 to us." And then they would carry on with what they were saying. Another
8 case was that they truly, I think in the second half of 1995 -- excuse me,
9 I don't know the exact date, I have it written down somewhere. They used
10 so-called encrypted telephones which could actually code speech. So then
11 they would sometimes say, well, let's go to a secure line and then they
12 would move to that line. But it's a part of the human nature to say
13 something to the effect of, "Well, hopefully they're not listening to us
14 now," and then they would still go ahead and say what they wanted to say.
20 (redacted) In order not
21 to repeat myself, it's good that we had the logistics, we had food, we had
22 security. So we were able to just devote ourselves to our actual work.
5 Q. And when you say "town," which town do you mean?
6 A. Tuzla.
7 Q. Now, you mentioned a couple of times that the army was up on that
8 hill as well. Did you share the same building or were you separate?
9 A. There is only one building in that location, and that is a former
10 JNA building. And it's quite convenient or suitable for that kind of
11 work. We got only one room in which we worked, ate, and slept.
12 Q. Now, briefly turning to technical equipment and I'm going to show
13 you a couple of pictures later, you and the army, did you basically use
14 the same type of equipment or was it different?
15 A. It was mainly the same equipment. Actually, there was several
16 people who made these combinations first, and then we would just multiply
17 these combinations. I mentioned it wasn't sophisticated equipment that we
18 were using. It was practically amateur equipment. And it's practically
19 the same as the ones the army used, perhaps it was a little bit newer or a
20 little bit older, but it was the same.
21 Q. Now, sir, you said a while ago that there was some coordination
22 between you and the army unit, a location of frequency if I understood you
23 correctly. Can you tell us a little bit more, but still as brief as you
24 can, about the type of coordination, exchange of information, if that
25 happened, you had experienced.
1 A. We saw that there was a lot of work to do up there during our
2 surveillance or reconnaissance. We saw that there were a lot of
3 frequencies on that so-called RRU-800. And each frequency had 24
4 channels. So if we were to cover that in the best possible manner, we
5 should have had the same amount of devices. Since we didn't have the
6 appropriate number of equipment or staff, we tried to agree amongst
7 ourselves that we should not be doing the same tasks, and the data that we
8 received should be exchanged, mutually, so that both sides would receive
9 the total amount of information. So all the information that I received I
10 passed on to the army, and all the information, hopefully, the army passed
11 back to me. And then we would pass this information on to our centres.
12 Q. Thank you, Witness. I would like now to go into the procedures
13 you and your unit used when listening to conversations. Can you please
14 tell the Judges what you did once you had I guess your headphones on. Can
15 you tell us step by step the procedures you and your unit used.
16 A. We had a room in which we had three different combinations of
17 equipment that we used. You had two people manning the equipment, and
18 those people would be listening. One of the devices was for the duty
19 officer in case there was a conversation on the frequency of the Main
20 Staff of Republika Srpska. If there was a conversation on that frequency,
21 it would immediately be recorded. As for the other combinations, we
22 monitored, or rather, the machine was scanning conversations. And as soon
23 as we heard someone talk, we would stop right there and start recording
24 the conversation.
25 In time, we concluded that certain channels on these frequencies
1 corresponded with certain meanings, or rather, certain people. So these
2 channels would be watched with special attention. And if there was
3 nothing else happening on the other frequencies of channels, we would
4 listen to that specific channel and wait for a conversation to start. As
5 soon as a conversation began, we would start the reel-to-reel recorder,
6 the UHER, and we would tape record the conversation. Following the
7 recording of the conversation, every conversation proved to be
8 particularly crucial or containing urgent priority information, we would
9 use a different, another UHER machine we had there, a reel-to-reel
10 recorder which we used to reproduce the conversations. We would play the
11 conversation back. We would transcribe it on to a computer, after which
12 we sent this to our centre. If it was no urgent conversation, we would
13 just mark it, adding the date, time, and frequency of the conversation,
14 after which -- on the UHER there is a counter which measures the length of
15 the reel of the tape. It has numbers to measure that. You have the
16 beginning and the end which made it easier for us to play back the
18 Q. You said that you would record it and also put it into a computer.
19 Did you also transcribe it on to a piece of paper?
20 A. Yes. Normally if something was urgent and if the recording was a
21 good-quality recording, if the sound was clear, we would immediately start
22 transferring information into a computer. If we realised that it would
23 entail a certain amount of effort to play back, we would take everything
24 down on a piece of paper which we later used to transcribe everything into
25 a computer.
1 Q. What happened to these pieces of paper? Were they preserved?
2 A. We only preserved a certain number of those. Whenever we went to
3 a different location near the building where we burned those papers, or
4 rather, documents, we would go there and burn them.
5 Q. Did you use notebooks of any kind to record these intercepted
7 A. Yes, we did. I had a notebook, we called it notebook. It was a
8 leather-bound black notebook. For a while we used this to register the
9 frequencies that we found during our searches. It was also used to note
10 down certain procedures in setting the radio devices. Furthermore, it was
11 used to record all the conversations that had been played back encrypted
12 and forwarded according to the numbers that we had determined. There was
13 yet another notebook which I don't have with me here that was also used
14 for monitoring electronic surveillance. It was very much like the first
16 Q. How about the contents of the communication? Would you also have
17 a notebook in which you recorded the same information, I believe you said,
18 was put into the computer?
19 A. No. We had no notebook to reproduce that, because reproduce is
20 the term we used to play back the conversations. We reproduced these
21 conversations on some pieces of paper, those that we had at the time,
22 because we had a shortage of paper to use for writing. We didn't have
23 enough blank paper, so we often used other kinds of paper. This would
24 entail a lengthy explanation, however the answer is no, we didn't take
25 that down into notebooks.
1 Q. Do you know whether the army, whom you said were located at the
2 same place, used notebooks?
3 A. I do remember that they had some kind of notebooks, and sometimes
4 I envied them for that. They did have notebooks. I know that I saw
6 Q. Now, you said that you would write the information down on a piece
7 of paper. Can you tell us what exactly you wrote down on that piece of
8 paper and eventually on the computer.
9 A. Yes. The moment we caught the beginning of a conversation we
10 would immediately write down the date and time of the beginning of the
11 conversation. We would also record the frequency, the channel being used,
12 as well as the participants. On the basis of these elements, we later put
13 together some kind of heading containing all this information that we'd
14 previously written down on a piece of paper. If you look at those, you
15 will see that dates, such and such time, such and such these people took
16 part in a conversation that was recorded. So this contained elements that
17 we established at the very beginning of a conversation. Probably you
18 would have a list of participants, or rather, at the end of the
19 conversation you had a list of people processing the conversation.
20 Q. Now, can you tell us the time that elapses between listening to a
21 conversation and putting it into the computer.
22 A. It very much depended. As I said before, if the information was
23 urgent, the rule was to process them immediately, to reproduce them
24 immediately, and forward them immediately. These conversations were
25 bearer marks saying very urgent. As for other information that the
1 operator on the spot did not think was urgent, could wait for other
2 information to be collected, to be gathered, and for the army also to
3 bring their own information, their own material, to be forwarded to our
4 centre. So then all these would be sent in one batch, but there was no
5 specific time at which we forwarded this.
6 Q. You said earlier and you just repeated that that you would send
7 these messages, I think you said, to a centre. Can you explain what
8 centre that is and how you did that sending process.
9 A. All the information that we obtained up there was forwarded to a
10 centre. The centre, what I call the centre, is the seat of my company,
11 but to make it clearer, the seat was in Tuzla and there was several ways
12 to send the information on, to pass it on. At one time, I can't say which
13 time precisely now, I had no communications equipment. And in that period
14 I used the military communications system. They would forward information
15 to the seat of their company, and then the communications operator, the
16 signalsman there, would call my operator from the communications centre in
17 Tuzla who would then go there to collect this information on a floppy.
18 This is how it worked for a while throughout a certain period of time.
19 Whenever I could, I used my own communications equipment to do this.
20 Sometimes you would have a technical problem or a glitch, but you never
21 had problems on both at the same time, my system and the military system,
22 so we were always able at every single point in time to pass the
23 information on to the centre.
24 Q. And how was that done in normal times? I think you said you -- at
25 times you had to use the military communications system. How did your
1 system work, if it worked?
2 A. For some time, I was able to send my reports via an ultra short
3 wave system through the radio modem using an ultra short wave frequency
4 that was there, that was available. We had a direct link to Tuzla. Later
5 on I obtained a telephone modem because I did have a telephone line, which
6 made it possible to step up the level of secrecy. This was a more
7 protected medium and the speed of transfer was much higher, so this was a
8 more modern type of equipment.
9 Q. And would you send that information --
10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel, please.
11 MR. WAESPI: I'm sorry.
12 Q. Would you send that information open to Tuzla or did you treat it
13 in one way or the other?
14 A. I forgot to say this: Every single piece of information had to be
15 encrypted first of all. Those that we sent through the military system
16 were encoded using our own encryption programme that had been devised by
17 our company and we were free to use it. This was an encryption programme.
18 As soon as you had an encrypted file, this file would have a specific
20 Q. Now, you say an "encrypted file," did you send each message,
21 intercepted message, on its own through this encryption process or did you
22 have a file, as I understand it, in which several messages were collected
24 A. There were cases of both. Sometimes you had a file containing a
25 single report, whereas at other times you had files containing 12, 13, or
1 more reports. It depended. If it was an urgent message, a message
2 classified as very urgent, this would normally be passed on immediately
3 and the file would contain only one report. Sometimes we collected
4 reports and then sent them together encrypted.
5 Q. Before we go to specific exhibits, let me ask you a couple of
6 general questions. Did your unit make efforts to be accurate in
7 transcribing what you listened to, and if so, how do you do that?
8 A. Yes. The most important thing was the authenticity of information
9 and timely information, that's what they taught us back in our company.
10 It was very important for the message to be thoroughly authentic. It
11 sometimes happened that there was certain sections of the conversation
12 that we couldn't hear clearly due to background noise. There was several
13 factors affecting this, how good the propagation was, the atmosphere.
14 Most of the conversations were reproduced exactly as we heard them. If
15 there was something that we weren't certain about, we would just put dots.
16 The dots meant that this particular section of the conversation was not
18 Q. Now, you said that it was very important that the message be
19 authentic. Why was it important for you?
20 A. Well, I assumed because of its usefulness. It would have been
21 very dangerous and very damaging if we wrote down something that was not
22 accurate. And probably the army monitoring the movement of units would
23 have been tempted to alarm certain units that were not supposed to be
24 alarmed and we could have had people doing things they were not
25 necessarily supposed to be doing. That's why it was crucial for every
1 piece of information to be authentic. And if there was some kind of
2 deficiency that was inherent in a message, this had to be made very clear.
3 Q. Talking about the participants of these conversations, were you
4 able to identify the speakers?
5 A. There were several ways in which we were able to identify the
6 speakers, but sometimes for different reasons we couldn't. Very often we
7 were in a position to hear people introducing themselves at the beginning
8 of the conversation. One of the participants would say, my name is so and
9 so, can I please speak to so and so. So that's how we obtained
10 information on their identities. And sometimes after a longer period of
11 time listening to some participants, we found ourselves in a situation
12 where we were able to identify their voices. Sometimes it was also the
13 case that we monitored other frequencies that were also being tapped into
14 by the military. And sometimes we called up the military because they
15 were only doing that, and then we would ask them who is this talking on
16 this frequency, and then they would say, well, that's, you know, who. And
17 they would say X and Y, they would use X and Y as a code for these
18 persons. Sometimes they would use their own recordings to identify those
19 people, and sometimes when we were able to identify the participants, we
20 would send information back to them calling participants X and Y. For
21 instance, at that point in time it was less important who did what. What
22 was more important was the operation itself, what was being done, and what
23 was happening. That's why we didn't really put an enormous effort into
24 tracking specific participants down. If someone was away for some time we
25 didn't really pay attention to that. What really mattered was the content
1 of their conversation.
2 Q. We will later see examples when you identified speakers. If you
3 couldn't identify a speaker, how would you mark the participants? You may
4 have mentioned it before.
5 A. Yes. In that case the participants in a conversation would be
6 given names X and Y, which meant unidentified speakers. Sometimes you had
7 speakers whose identity was known and sometimes they were unidentified.
8 Sometimes you would hear a voice and you would know immediately who it was
9 and sometimes you didn't. So depending on a specific case, there were
10 different combinations.
11 Q. Now, you have on one side the cases when you identified the
12 speakers by name, on the other side you had X and Y. Now, how sure were
13 you when you, in fact, identified the speakers and put their name on
14 paper, on computer. Can you tell us the degree of certainty?
15 MS. SINATRA: Your Honour.
16 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
17 MS. SINATRA: I'm sorry I'm going to have to object. That calls
18 for speculation. He may be able to answer in his mind how accurate his
19 voice identification was, but he can't answer for any other intercepts in
20 his unit there -- intercepters.
21 JUDGE LIU: Well, we just want to hear what the witness is going
22 to tell us. That is his view --
23 MS. SINATRA: Of his own personal voice identification --
24 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
25 MS. SINATRA: -- procedures.
1 JUDGE LIU: Yes, of course.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, yes. Personally I worked in
3 the way I have just described. If I was 100 per cent certain, I would put
4 a name to the voice. What I expressly told my subordinates was not to
5 speculate about names because it didn't matter. It was not essential for
6 us at the time who was doing what. What really mattered was what was
7 being done and what the result of that action would be. It was important
8 and determined the developments that followed, but for us it didn't
9 matter. We insisted on names being 100 per cent certain. If we couldn't
10 put a name to a voice, well what could we do about that? We knew there
11 were certain channels used by a specific person, but if we could not
12 identify the person, we would just put an X. Sometimes there was a
13 courier on a certain frequency. Sometimes it was someone's secretary. So
14 whoever it was, if we couldn't pin him down with 100 per cent certainty,
15 we would just put an X.
16 MR. WAESPI:
17 Q. Thank you, sir. I would like you to be shown two exhibits, 319
18 and 320. And if it could be put on the ELMO. Do you recognise this
20 A. Yes. You have two devices here.
21 Q. Can you explain to the Judges what these devices were used for.
22 A. Yes, I can. The rather large device, which we can see in this
23 photo, at the back has a small box called "converter." This small is put
24 together by hand. It was not professionally manufactured, so it received
25 a signal from the antenna, and here the signal was converted into a
1 different kind of signal which would then enter the radio device, carrying
2 24 different frequencies and distributing these 24 frequencies, or rather,
3 separating these 24 different frequencies. These 24 frequencies, or
4 channels, meant 24 different phones, telephone sets. You can't see it in
5 this picture, but there is a cable which would bring the signal from this
6 device and transfer it to the UHER recording device. This other piece of
7 equipment on the right-hand side of the picture was used for different
8 purposes, for different types of frequency, for different types of
9 conversation. It could receive the signal directly from the antenna and
10 we would then hear the signal using this device. We used this device to
11 transfer the signal to a recording device and get the sound -- the signal
13 Q. Thank you very much, Witness. If you could have a look at the
14 next exhibit, 320, and explain to the Court what this is.
15 A. This is the UHER reel-to-reel recorder that we used.
16 Q. So that was used when you listened to a specific intercept, you
17 would press one of these buttons. That's the procedure you followed?
18 A. When we listened or monitored, we would press the second one from
19 left to right, and the second one from right to left. I hope that my
20 memory is clear.
21 Q. Thank you, Witness. I think the exhibits can be returned. And
22 while this is being done, can you tell us, sir, what happened to the
23 tapes, these reel-to-reel tapes.
24 A. In the early days at Okresanica, there were a smaller number of
25 interesting conversations, but when we had interesting conversations, we
1 would tape record them and then occasionally take them to our centre. We
2 physically went there and took the tapes. As soon as there was an
3 increasing number of interesting conversations, we would record these
4 interesting conversations on one tape, all of them, which we would then
5 occasionally take to the centre. The tape was packed in some sort of
6 wrapping containing a slip of paper, which contained a date. And there
7 was a reading from the counter locating the different conversations in the
8 tape and their participants. I clearly remember that we sent such tapes
9 back to the centre.
10 Q. Now let me turn to what you have called --
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 MR. WAESPI: I apologise again.
13 Q. Sir, I would like to turn now to the cooperation between you and
14 the army. And you said that you would exchange information mutually, I
15 think was your word. Now, can you tell us briefly what happened when your
16 unit received information from the army, intercepts which have been
17 listened by the army; how did you process that?
18 A. Whenever we received processed conversations from the army,
19 usually on a floppy disk, we would put the floppy into your computer. We
20 would open the document. They had their own heading, a large heading,
21 taking up quite a lot of space on the page. We would just delete this and
22 insert our own number and date. We would just copy the date. We would
23 also note that this was received from the PEB unit of the 2nd Corps. I
24 think that's what we would usually add. A sentence, all in all, which
25 specified we had received the document from the military and that it was
1 not ours.
2 Q. And again, once you had received this information, did you keep it
3 for yourself or did you also send it to the centre, as you had indicated
4 earlier about your own intercepts?
5 A. Yes. We would encrypt it in the same way that we encrypted our
6 own files and then pass this on to our centre.
7 Q. Thank you, Witness.
8 MR. WAESPI: Your Honours, I have concluded the first part, more
9 general. We'll now go into a couple of specific exhibits. So if the
10 witness could now be shown Exhibit P347. And it should be the original.
11 Q. Now, let me ask you first, sir, did you spend some time with me
12 and my investigators in my office and go over a bundle of intercepts?
13 A. Yes, we were together and I did look at those intercepts.
14 Q. Now, the document in front of you, do you recognise this document?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, I see there are some markings on it. Can you explain -- or
17 let me ask you first. Did you make these markings?
18 A. What's written in pencil was written by me. I actually circled
19 the number and I wrote what is written in ink.
20 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Ms. Sinatra.
21 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour. I have to object to the
22 foundation. The witness was asked if he's seen this document before, but
23 this document was not a product of his. He simply put markings on it.
24 Could for the record we please know what is the source of this document?
25 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Mr. Waespi, ask some questions to lay some
1 foundations for that document.
2 MR. WAESPI:
3 Q. Witness, do you know who compiled the information on that
5 A. I didn't understand. Perhaps you mean who typed it all? Do I
6 know that? Is that what you mean?
7 Q. No. Do you know who showed you the document?
8 A. Yes. You showed me the document.
9 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, this is Exhibit P311, and you'll find
10 it in the first of the two intercept binders, which you have been given.
11 And it's simply an index, as you see from the title, of radio and
12 telephone communications. We are not saying that this information has
13 been compiled by the witness, as he just said, but he made, as he
14 explained, reference to these entries.
15 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Ms. Sinatra.
16 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour, I'm sorry, but --
17 JUDGE LIU: Your microphone.
18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
19 MS. SINATRA: I'm sorry but P311 has not been admitted into
20 evidence. The index has not been proven to be authentic. We still don't
21 know whose creation this was. They've referred that it was part of an
22 Exhibit 311 that has not been admitted into evidence. I think an
23 appropriate question is to ask this witness if he knows who was the source
24 of the document.
25 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if I can briefly respond.
1 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
2 MR. WAESPI: The witness doesn't testify at this point about the
3 accuracy or the contents of this document. He's just marking each line of
4 them and will answer if asked what type of information he has entered in
5 relation to each of these entries. It doesn't go to the content at all of
6 this document, but he can testify what the markings are which he added.
7 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Karnavas.
8 MR. KARNAVAS: Thank you, Your Honour. Just for the record, P311
9 is an English version, and I take it that -- from looking at it, it seems
10 to coincide with P347, which is also the same English version but with
11 some markings which I understand the gentleman entered. I don't have a
12 B/C/S version and only assume that the gentleman is fluent in English and
13 was able to look at both the English and the B/C/S version in order to
14 comment on this. I'm not sufficiently satisfied with the foundation laid,
15 because it seems that now we're trying to get all of these -- a bundle of
16 intercepts in without a proper foundation. So perhaps Mr. Waespi could
17 just explain a little bit how this document was generated and then what
18 exactly they did before they go into the specific markings. That might
19 give us some indication or some comfort that the gentleman is sufficiently
20 qualified to discuss these matters. And I would like to know whether he
21 reads English and whether he's made a comparison between the English
22 version and the B/C/S version, because as I indicated, we don't have an
23 index in B/C/S, unless one was provided to us and simply we have misplaced
25 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Waespi. I think you know that P311 is just
1 an index to the intercepted radio and telephone communications. What we
2 want to know is that who prepared this index, whether there is any B/C/S
3 versions of that index.
4 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, as you see, the index is a
5 compilation, basically an assistance to Your Honours, in going through
6 each single intercept which is added to the list. And you see that the
7 users correspond to the people who are mentioned as the participants of
8 each intercept and the summary is briefly the main key parts of the actual
9 intercept. So if you flip through your binder and go to the first exhibit
10 on the tab 25th of June, 1995, you'll see Exhibit 170, and you'll see the
11 users and a brief summary of what the intercept is all about. And I can
12 ask the witness whether he has seen each of these single intercepts, to
13 which he later added remarks on this exhibit.
14 JUDGE LIU: You didn't answer my question. My question is that
15 who prepared that index?
16 MR. WAESPI: I apologise.
17 JUDGE LIU: And are there any B/C/S versions for that index?
18 These are two very simple questions.
19 MR. WAESPI: Yes, I apologise, Mr. President. It's an internal
20 product by the OTP. And second, there is no B/C/S version, but we'll be
21 happy to provide a B/C/S version, because, as you know, the intercepts are
22 in B/C/S. So it would be very easy to transfer the dates and the names of
23 the users and the summary into B/C/S, and that can be done certainly
24 shortly, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
1 Yes, Mr. Karnavas.
2 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, we're just about out of time, and
3 perhaps if we could get together -- if we could take our break now and
4 then we could confer with the Prosecutor, we might be able to find some
5 accommodating position with respect to this. But I'm afraid, short of
6 that, given the answers that I've just heard, I'm not sufficiently
7 satisfied that a foundation can be laid. Because again, unless the
8 gentleman looked at each and every one of these, both in the B/C/S version
9 and in the English version, then the marks that he's making on this
10 particular document, in essence, you know, are suspect. And I'm not
11 suggesting that they're inaccurate in any way, but -- so what I would
12 propose, Your Honour, that we take our break at this point. I think it's
13 just about time, and I would be more than happy to meet with the
14 Prosecutor to see if we can find a way to help in this situation.
15 JUDGE LIU: Well, yes, that may be a good idea. So we'll break
16 until 5 minutes to 4.00.
17 --- Recess taken at 3.27 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 3.55 p.m.
19 JUDGE LIU: Well, I believe that during the break the problem is
20 solved. Mr. Waespi, you may proceed.
21 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. We had indeed a discussion
22 and got 50 per cent approval. So with your permission, I will ask the
23 witness a few questions.
24 JUDGE LIU: Yes, please.
25 MR. WAESPI:
1 Q. Witness, you have indicated that you met with me and the
2 investigators in my office.
3 A. That's right.
4 Q. And that you were shown this exhibit, which is lying on your desk.
5 A. That's right.
6 Q. Now, have you seen each single intercept to which your markings
7 relate to in my office?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. And our discussion, was it translated from B/C/S into English and
10 vice versa?
11 A. Yes, it was translated. My handwriting is actually the result of
12 my familiarity with these reproduced messages.
13 Q. And was it explained to you what the tabs, the headings mean, the
14 tab, date, time, source, users, and indeed the summary?
15 A. Yes, yes.
16 Q. Now, in relation to all these intercepts which you were shown and
17 which you have marked on this exhibit, can you confirm that these were all
18 exhibits that were processed by your unit in summer and autumn 1995?
19 A. All the ones in question were done by my unit, processed by my
20 unit, except one, if I remember rightly. But that one conversation which
21 I marked here with this name of the crypto file is one that was passed on
22 along my communications system to my centre. So that is why I was able to
23 do that.
24 Q. Now, we'll come to that later, but can you tell the Judges briefly
25 what the markings are which you added on the piece of paper, and if you
1 could just explain it on the first marking which relates to tab 173.
2 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Ms. Sinatra.
3 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour. I hate to object again. We did
4 not come to an agreement over the use of this document. The witness has a
5 notebook which has his original handwriting and his original markings that
6 represent what he remembers and knew and reflected about each one of these
7 intercepts in question. This is just layering on layering without a
8 foundation of information. This is work product from the OTP. The
9 witness's markings may represent 11 out of hundreds of intercepts that
10 represent extraneous information, that, in our opinion, the Prosecutor is
11 trying to back door the information with the summaries to the Trial
12 Chamber at this point. I know that the intercepts have not been ruled on
13 admissible or not admissible, but let's say we skip this one. It's
14 still -- could be admitted into evidence. It's an improper use of work
15 product of the OTP. And yesterday when we tried to introduce the work
16 product of the OTP into evidence, D38, which was an information report, it
17 was not admitted. I think it's an improper foundation. The man has
18 marked markings on something that has been produced by whom he has not
19 testified to. He hasn't said who it's been produced by. He doesn't know.
20 And he has his original document here from which he can testify.
21 JUDGE LIU: Well, Ms. Sinatra, I believe that this document is
22 just to facilitate the proceedings and prepared by the Prosecution. It
23 is different from D38. As we ruled yesterday that D38 is kind of proving
24 information which has no evidential value to this court, because we had
25 already heard that witness yesterday. But this one is just an index of
1 all the information. Of course Defence counsel has the right to refer to
2 the original copies of those intercepts in their cross-examination, but to
3 facilitate our work, let us use this index as the basis. And during the
4 proceedings, you may raise any objections you feel -- you deem suitable.
5 MS. SINATRA: And, Your Honour, we might not have any objection to
6 the assistance of the OTP with an index list. It's their hearsay
7 summaries that offend the process at the moment.
8 JUDGE LIU: Well, I think you know only when we go through all
9 those intercepts at a later stage could we know whether this index is
10 correctly reflected in the contents. It's too early for us to make any
11 rulings on this aspect. So with your cooperation, Ms. Sinatra, we'll let
12 the Prosecution move on.
13 MS. SINATRA: I will cooperate.
14 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.
15 Mr. Waespi.
16 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. Much obliged.
17 Q. In relation to the first marking on the first page of this
18 document, that's the fourth entry from above, intercept 173, does that
19 relate to an intercept which you have also seen in my office?
20 A. Yes, I saw this intercept. This was on the 28th of October, 2003.
21 Based on the elements that have been provided here, the date of the
22 intercept is the one that is stated here, so are the participants stated.
23 And based on my familiarity with the original document which contained the
24 number under which it is registered in the diary that I have, I managed to
25 also convince the Prosecutor that we did generate this document, that it
1 was encrypted in my computer or the computer of my service, that the
2 computer itself during the encryption process determined the eight-digit
3 number that you see. That number has its meaning. And this number below
4 it is the time at which the document was passed on to my centre. So if
5 you permit me now to explain this eight-digit number, you will see that it
6 is a conversation which was conducted on the 10th of July. The first
7 three numbers indicate that it was on the 10th of July. Five indicates
8 the year, 1995. 00 and 16 means the time when the document was encrypted.
9 So it was encrypted on the 10th of July, 1995, at 0016 hours. Underneath
10 I see a number indicating that it was passed on to the centre at 0030
12 Q. Thank you, Witness. If we could, please, show to you Prosecution
13 Exhibit 173, and in fact it's /B, the B/C/S version, which would be shown
14 to the witness and /A would be the English translation.
15 MR. WAESPI: And, Your Honours, this comes out of the first binder
16 of the two intercept binders under tab 9th July, if you flip through P173.
17 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
18 MR. WAESPI:
19 Q. Now, Witness, this is a two-page document. Perhaps if it could be
20 placed on to the ELMO. Do you recognise this document?
21 A. Yes. This is a document which was generated in my section.
22 Q. Now, can you tell us why you can tell that.
23 A. I can tell based on the characteristic heading, indicating that it
24 is my service; it has a date, it has a number which is also in the
25 notebook where all the intercepts are recorded; and there are the elements
1 that I mentioned before, if you recall, which are actually those parts
2 which we noted down before the start of every conversation. So at the top
3 we have on the above-mentioned date, we have the frequency, the channel,
4 the time, and we also have the participants in the conversation. So these
5 are all the elements that I talked about earlier. Based on these
6 elements, we formed the sentence which is more or less characteristic for
7 each of our reports. At the end of the conversation, there are the
8 signatures of the people who carried out this task. The first person is
9 the person who recorded the conversation, and the second person is the
10 person who reproduced this conversation or transcribed it.
11 Q. Thank you, Witness. Now, if we could go back to Exhibit P347,
12 which I believe is still on your desk. Now, can you explain us - I think
13 you did already, but just to confirm it - the way you can determine that
14 this specific intercept has been sent to your centre in Tuzla. And if the
15 witness could be given his notebook and also Exhibit 348, which is a
16 five-page copy out of this notebook.
17 A. Excuse me, could you please repeat the question again for me.
18 Q. Yes. I'm sorry, Witness. If you could determine the time, the
19 actual time this intercept has been sent to your centre in Tuzla. I
20 believe you said it already, you explained it using the exhibit, but I
21 would just like you to tell the Court how you were able to do that.
22 A. Could you please just give the document back to me that I had
23 earlier so that I could determine this based on the number. I need the
25 Q. Yes. If P173/B could be given back to the witness. And if it
1 could be placed on the ELMO.
2 A. Yes. I could most easily determine it based on the number,
3 because in the diary which is an official document, in fact, from that
4 time, they are arranged according to the numbers, the reports in question.
5 So I will find report 526 in the diary.
6 Q. And this would be number 526 which appears on the third line of
7 Prosecution Exhibit P173.
8 A. I have this document written down here under number 526. It has
9 been turned into an encrypted file on the 10th of July 1995 at 0016 hours
10 and passed on at 0030 hours.
11 Q. Thank you very much. If you could now refer to the five copies
12 which have been placed on your desk. If you could find the same page.
13 And perhaps with a marker --
14 A. I have just found it.
15 Q. -- indicate for the record which the numbers are. And if this
16 could be placed on to the ELMO, please. So these green markings
17 correspond to what you have put down in Exhibit 347 for every single
18 intercept. Is that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Ms. Sinatra.
21 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour. I do have to object to this line
22 of questioning, because from the testimony of the witness before, he
23 stated he received documents from the army unit next to him. He would cut
24 and paste the top of the heading off of the BiH army document and replace
25 it with their document. Then they sent it to their encryption room and it
1 was sent on to Tuzla, to their headquarters. What this represents is this
2 witness does not have personal knowledge of the intercept or the
3 recordings of the intercept, because there's no way that we know which
4 ones he just cut and paste from the army.
5 JUDGE LIU: Well, I think this is a question for you to ask during
6 your cross-examination. If you are not clear with certain points, you
7 have the full right to ask this witness at a later stage.
8 MS. SINATRA: Thank you.
9 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
10 You may proceed, Mr. Waespi.
11 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Q. If the exhibit could be returned and Prosecution Exhibit 192 could
13 be given to the witness, please.
14 MR. WAESPI: And, Your Honours, this is again from the first
15 binder, tab 12th July, Exhibit 192/B for the witness and /A the English
17 Q. And my question for the witness would be: Do you recognise this
19 A. Yes, I recognise it even though it's a bad copy.
20 Q. Could it be placed on the ELMO. Now, why do you recognise the
21 exhibit? What are the elements, just briefly?
22 A. In this specific case, I can't see the heading. I can't see what
23 the number up is up there. The format of the document is the format that
24 we used, and if you look at the signature, there are persons whom I
1 MR. WAESPI: Your Honours, if we briefly could go into private
3 JUDGE LIU: Yes, we'll go to private session, please.
4 [Private session]
21 [Open session]
22 MR. WAESPI:
23 Q. Now, I'm particularly interested in the first conversation, and
24 I'm just reading two or three lines of it.
25 X: Go ahead, General.
1 M: Have these buses and trucks left?
2 X: They have.
3 M: When?
4 X: Ten minutes ago.
5 M: Good, excellent, continue to monitor the situation. Don't
6 let small groups of them sneak in. They have all capitulated
7 and surrendered and we'll evacuate them all, those who want to
8 and those who don't want to.
9 X: I understand, General.
10 Witness, focusing on this particular conversation, there are a
11 number of initials that go down on the left-hand side indicating the
12 participants in the conversation. Now, you talked about that in general
13 terms before the break. Specifically, what does "M" stand for and "X"?
14 A. I can see that this is a conversation between General Mladic and
15 an unidentified male person. You see in the brackets following General
16 Mladic's name the letter M. So this is why the letter M stands for
17 General Mladic, in order to make the typing itself easier. The male
18 person is X. So every time the male person spoke, we put an X there. We
19 didn't know who the person was and that's why we called the person, person
20 X, unidentified.
21 Q. Now, General Mladic, he didn't introduce himself or was referred
22 to by the other participant. How were you able to determine that this was
23 General Mladic speaking?
24 A. He was a person who was very much in the public eye. And
25 secondly, we monitored very closely the channel on which he usually spoke.
1 We all were very familiar with his voice, and I don't think we could have
2 mistaken his voice for someone else's voice.
3 Q. Thank you very much. I think we can return this exhibit, please.
4 If the witness could be shown Prosecution Exhibit 232/D, please. C would
5 be the English, Your Honours, and this is again in the first binder, 14th
6 July. And the witness should also be provided with the three previous
7 pages to this page. In fact, the first page would then be Exhibit 231/D.
8 So four pages. The first page Prosecution Exhibit 231/D and the last one,
10 Just to make sure that the witness has received all four pages.
11 Is that correct?
12 Now, Witness, could you again look at the document and tell us
13 what this is.
14 A. This is a document generated by the PEB of the 2nd Corps, a
15 document generated by the military. In these cases, when we obtained a
16 reproduced conversation from them on a floppy, we would just delete their
17 large heading. Their heading would usually take up a lot of space. If
18 you look at some of the originals, it usually took up as much as one-third
19 of the page. In this place we would insert our own number and the date we
20 obtained the conversation. And as you can see, we added a note saying
21 that this conversation was taken over from the BAB of the 2nd Corps, in
22 order to keep the two separate, the documents generated by us and those
23 generated by the military. In addition to that, at the very beginning of
24 the reproduction, their documents never contained the sentence that you
25 almost always find in your documents, using the same elements, the ones
1 you can see here. They have the channel, frequency, and time of
2 conversation, as well as the participant without the usual sentence that
3 we added to the heading. So based on all these elements, I can conclude
4 that this is a document that was obtained from the PEB of the 2nd Corps.
5 Q. Can you determine the date?
6 A. By looking in the notebook and locating the number, I could
7 identify the date when this document was encrypted and sent on. If I look
8 under 626 -- can I just have a moment, please. 626, yes, I can see it. I
9 see that this document was encrypted and crypted on the 15th of July,
10 1995, at 0037 hours and passed on to my centre at 0040 hours.
11 Q. Thank you, Witness. If you could now flip to Prosecution Exhibit,
12 and you have it there, 232/D. Now, can you also determine encryption and
13 sending off to the centre of this document, please.
14 A. Based on the elements that I have before me now, I could not
15 determine that. There is no number. This is obviously only a section of
16 an entire file. This is part of the file.
17 Q. Now, looking at all these four pages together, do they contain the
18 same file or are they different parts of the file?
19 A. This is one file. This is one file. It bears a number. And we
20 received it on a floppy in this form. This is an original. The only
21 thing missing is the heading used by the PEB of the 2nd Corps.
22 Q. So this last conversation we just talked about would have been
23 encrypted when, according to your judgment?
24 A. If I look now I see that the last conversation is actually the
25 last conversation of the document marked 626. It was generated, as I read
1 a moment ago, that's when it was generated. It was encrypted. So it's
2 just one file we're talking about.
3 Q. Thank you very much, Witness. If the exhibit could be returned
4 and we move to the next and, in fact, last exhibit and that would be
5 Prosecution Exhibit 249/B.
6 MR. WAESPI: And Your Honours, that's the second binder for the
7 first time, tab 16th July, Exhibit number 249. And in fact, we do have
8 now, thanks to the Defence, an English translation, and that would be
9 D73/1, although we don't need it for this witness right now.
10 Q. Now, Witness, do you recognise this document?
11 A. Yes. This is a document that was generated by my section.
12 Q. Now, can you tell us whether it was also forwarded to your
13 superior unit, and if so, when. And just to clarify, I'm particularly
14 interested in the last conversation on that page, that's your number 655.
15 A. I can have a look in the notebook. 655 -- I mean, I have this
16 conversation here. It was encrypted in my unit, in my section, on the
17 16th of July, 1995, at 2004 hours and it was forwarded at 2007 hours. I
18 see that it was encrypted on the 16th of July, 1995, at 1204 hours and
19 registered at 1207 hours. This is an obvious mistake in the way the
20 document was typed, because the conversation was conducted at 1005 hours,
21 and it's only logical that it was encrypted at 1204 hours and forwarded at
22 1207 hours. It's not the computer making the mistake. Probably it's a
23 mistake generated by the man who typed the heading.
24 Q. Now, can you tell us something about the date which you see on
25 this document.
1 A. What I see is the 17th of July, 1995. As I said, if I compare
2 this to the time at which the file was encrypted, it is obvious that the
3 person who typed it up made a mistake. This is just one file we're
4 looking at, so we see that of the following documents refer to this date,
5 so there's the same mistake being repeated on a number of occasions within
6 the same file.
7 Q. Now, if you could turn to the next page and next exhibit, indeed.
8 This is P249/D. It's just the following exhibit in the same intercept
9 file. And again, thanks to the Defence. Defence Exhibit D74/1 will be an
10 English translation of this file.
11 Now, can you look at this document and tell us what it is.
12 A. Yes. It's quite obvious now. We passed our document on to the
13 military and then just above our heading, they added their own large
14 heading. You can see for yourselves, I was talking about a large heading
15 a moment ago, which we tried to avoid. We would delete it because we had
16 to type these documents out and the heading would normally take up to a
17 third of the page, and this heading meant nothing to us.
18 Q. Now, can you make a comment on the date of this specific page.
19 A. Yes. As far as I've noticed, this is the same. The date -- you
20 can see for yourselves. The military heading contains the correct date,
21 the 16th of July, 1995, when this was done and forwarded to them. We made
22 a mistake further down, but they simply passed over our mistake and
23 inserted the corrected date, which as we saw in the encrypted file is the
24 16th of July.
25 Q. Thank you very much, Witness. Now, to conclude, if we could go
1 back to Exhibit P347, please. Now, you indicated earlier that there was
2 one document -- one intercepted conversation which you couldn't determine.
3 And I would like you to refer to page 16 of this document. And it's the
4 line -- the third from above the number 298. Page 16, 298. And I would
5 like you to have a look at the exhibit 298, please.
6 And while we are doing that, I see that there is no numbers on the
7 date in this exhibit. Can you tell us why you weren't able to determine
8 when it was encrypted, this specific intercept. And if the usher could
9 please show to the witness Prosecution Exhibit 298/B.
10 MR. WAESPI: And this, Your Honours, would be again the second
11 binder, 25th of July. And it would be helpful if a version could be put
12 on to the ELMO, please.
13 Q. My first question: Do you recognise this document?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. Now, can you tell us if this document was sent to your centre in
17 A. Based on the elements that I have in front of me, I cannot
18 determine that. The only comment I can offer is that this is obviously a
19 part of a military file. I can see that there is a prior conversation
20 that was done by the army. So probably when we gave them the floppy they
21 just pasted our conversation into their file and sent it off. In order
22 for me to be able to determine when it was encrypted, I should have its
23 file number. This should be the original copy of the document that we
24 sent from our own communications centre. Based on that number, I could
25 determine that. As things are, I can't determine anything.
1 Q. But you can say that this was a document which was processed by
2 your unit?
3 A. Yes. The other conversation beginning on a certain frequency and
4 a given channel at a certain time, that is one of our documents. That's
5 our document.
6 Q. And the last point on page 14 of Prosecution Exhibit 317 -- 347
7 page 14. The second to last entry from the bottom is 284. And I see a
8 question mark there at the second number. Page 14 of this document number
9 284, question mark. Can you explain that to the Judges, please.
10 A. I could try to explain if you give me the document back to see the
11 file number. This will help me to trace it in the notebook and see why I
12 added 1930 hours there -- well, I don't think I was certain about the
13 specific time when this document was forwarded to my centre.
14 Q. If the witness could be shown Exhibit 284, then.
15 A. 19, 18 of July, 19 -- 09, 62 -- yes, yes, I have it. That's it.
16 There were several files that were being forwarded at the same time. In
17 my logbook, in this notebook, it's quite illegible, but what it probably
18 means is 1930 hours, so I can't be certain, however, since it's unclear.
19 Q. Thank you. Just to summarise, for all these exhibits which you
20 were able to see in my office, bar the two examples we mentioned, you were
21 able to determine the exact date and time it was encrypted in your
22 computer and sent to your centre in Tuzla?
23 A. Yes. That's correct. I am not able to determine anything without
24 looking at the actual document. Based on the number, I can trace it back
25 to my notebook and tell you the exact time when it was encrypted and sent
2 Q. That's what you have done while we were sitting together in my
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. WAESPI: I have no further questions, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE LIU: Well, thank you.
7 Any cross-examination, Mr. Karnavas?
8 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, I just have a few questions.
9 JUDGE LIU: Yes, please. And if you want to move to the front,
10 please do it.
11 Cross-examined by Mr. Karnavas:
12 Q. Good afternoon, sir.
13 A. Good afternoon.
24 Q. And though you were in essence working independently, there were
25 occasions when you would share material.
1 A. Not just occasionally. We exchanged all the conversations or
2 shared all the conversations from time to time.
3 Q. Thank you. Now, I understand that your procedure was slightly
4 different from theirs in that you did not have notebooks as they did.
5 A. The procedure was the same. When I say "the same," what I mean is
6 that this is a procedure that you must follow if you're in that line of
7 work. It's just that we didn't have our own notebooks where we copied the
8 conversations. We had loose papers.
9 Q. I understand, sir. However, nothing prevented you from collecting
10 those loose sheets of paper so that today, perhaps, we could look at the
11 handwritten notes and compare them with the type-written notes that were
12 then encrypted and sent off?
13 A. You're quite right, however, back in 1994 we didn't know that one
14 day there would be a Tribunal. Secondly, and this is what decided us, we
15 worked in a location that was a remote location far from any settled
16 areas. It wasn't sufficiently secure. What we were taught in your line
17 of work was: If something wasn't sufficiently secured, you had to burn it
18 after you'd passed it on because otherwise all the information would have
19 been given away.
20 Q. Fair enough. Now, because -- I take it during that period there
21 was also a shortage of tapes, and so the tapes had to be recycled, in
22 other words, used over and over again?
23 A. There were cases like that. Sometimes we believed that certain
24 conversations were not particularly relevant and there was no need to
25 preserve those. So we would just rewind the tape and tape over those
1 conversations. However, whenever we had something that we thought was
2 particularly relevant, we would copy all these conversations on a single
3 tape. And once the tape was full, it was forwarded.
4 Q. And I guess, could I just describe those as sort of the best of
5 the intercepts? Let me clarify it. The ones that you would copy would be
6 the ones that you had screened and deemed to be sort of the best of the
7 messages that you had listened to?
8 A. Yes. We would assess what was interesting, because we are
9 qualified to make that assessment and to tell our superiors, that is, we
10 had the full freedom to make such an assessment.
11 Q. Now, can I conclude that part of your job was also to make an
12 analysis of the messages, or were you merely capable because of your
13 experience to screen out what was basically relevant and what was not
15 A. We didn't make any analysis of the classic type, but in our
16 diaries, we would write down the frequency and the channel which would be
17 particularly interesting. We would describe to the people who would
18 follow us that such and such a person appeared there, that they should pay
19 attention to him, that in the previous period there were such and such
20 conversations, and that they should strictly take care of that channel.
21 Especially when the other two people came, then several hours would be
22 spent on explaining what had happened over the past few days so that we
23 could direct them in some way. But then some of the conversations would
24 also be recorded in the notebook.
25 Q. All right. Now, when -- listening in on a conversation, did you
1 ever use the pause button where, for instance, part of the conversation
2 was not terribly interesting or relevant? Did you ever do that?
3 A. If I were to use the pause, then I would stop at a moment when I
4 had heard enough to write that down. If it wasn't interesting enough, I
5 would press pause, but I would let it pass.
6 Q. So I take it that the machine that you were using, when you used
7 pause, it actually stopped the tape as opposed to allow you to continue
8 listening to the conversation, and then the pause not recording what was
9 actually being said?
10 A. You are asking me something else now. I understood that you were
11 asking me during the reproduction process of the conversation, not during
12 the taping process. This is what I understood you to be asking me. When
13 I'm reproducing the conversation, when I'm writing it down, then I would
14 press pause to write down what I remembered. Then I would depress pause
15 again and continue, then I would press again right down. When recording
16 there's no reason for me to press the pause button, although if I deemed
17 the conversation that I had just recorded not to be interesting, then I
18 could play back the tape or I would continue to record another
19 conversation, and then later when there was time, I could rewind the tape
20 back to the beginning.
21 Q. All right. Let me rephrase my question and thank you for
22 clarifying the point. But it's my understanding with the recording
23 devices as the one that you and your colleagues from the army were using,
24 even though you would press the pause button, it would merely stop the
25 recording process but would still allow the listener to hear the
1 conversation, thus allowing the listener to discriminate what he wanted to
2 record or not record.
3 A. Excellent. Yes, that's how it was. Because if we were to stop
4 recording on the UHER, we were listening to it at the same time over the
5 radio device that had already decoded the signal, and then it would be
6 recorded but we would hear it. So if a man was talking to his girlfriend,
7 we would not record that, of course.
8 Q. Okay. All right. Precisely, that's the point I wanted to make.
9 And thank you. Now, my next question, it has to do with a particular word
10 that you used and I want to make sure that I totally understand what you
11 meant. You indicated on direct examination that you wanted to make sure
12 that what you were transcribing was authentic. That was the word that you
14 A. We strived for the ideal, not because of the participants, I said
15 they were not important to us. Very often we didn't know those people,
16 but because of the events. The events that were ongoing were very
17 important to us. So we would try with all our might for the document to
18 be authentic so that the people who were analysing this document when it
19 got to them, there is no dilemma. We were not allowed to speculate.
20 Q. Okay. Well, I guess in English that word may have a different
21 connotation. So my question is: Are you suggesting what you were trying
22 to do is be accurate on what you heard in transcribing?
23 A. We were accurate. If we heard it, we wrote it down. If we did
24 not hear it, we would put down three points. If we heard it, we would put
25 an X. If we didn't hear it, we would put a Y. If we heard something but
1 we were not sure of what we heard, then we would put a question mark in
3 Q. And I ask the question because if, for instance, we're speaking
4 about a particular person's voice, there might be an occasion where you
5 would say this is the authentic voice of that individual versus this is an
6 accurate version of what we heard. Do you see the distinction that I'm
7 trying to make?
8 A. Yes, I understand. I will try to explain. If I am on such and
9 such a frequency and on such and such a channel I know that only you would
10 pick up or somebody close to you, and then you would pick up the phone. I
11 know your voice. I already know that you're there. So if you respond, I
12 know that it is you. I know that no one else would respond to your mobile
13 telephone. But if the courier picked up the telephone, and I don't know
14 who he is, and in the conversation he would say he is a courier, then I
15 would put down that he is was a courier. I wouldn't know his name, but I
16 know that he picked up the phone from the office of Mladic. I know that,
17 so I can tell my superiors that that is what it was definitely.
18 Q. Okay. Thank you. One last question regarding this area. And I'm
19 going to use a term which I believe perhaps is more accurate than the one
20 that some of us use here in court, the raw tape, the tape itself that was
21 the original, the one that was actually being used by you, so if we could
22 use the term "raw tape." As far as I understand, you do not have any of
23 those raw tapes in your possession at this moment as we speak regarding
24 the intercepts that we're discussing here today?
25 A. I first have to inform you that I'm no longer doing these tasks
1 and I no longer have them in my possession. But had I at that time passed
2 on any raw tape, as you term it, yes, I did. But then it became a problem
3 because of the quantity of the tapes, and then we made an effort to
4 transfer all of those raw tapes to one tape, because we had a problem with
5 paper. But of course we also had a problem with tapes, a shortage of
7 Q. Thank you. Now, if I could switch over to another topic with
8 respect to the particular notebook that you've been discussing here
9 earlier. Was it only you filling in this notebook or were your colleagues
10 filling it in as well when, for instance, you might have been resting or
11 off shift?
12 A. Yes, it was an official document which contained the elements
13 which were there, and these elements were entered by each operator who
14 would pass on the data, who participated in the processing of each
15 document. When he completed the job, he would receive confirmation that
16 the document was received at the destination, and then amongst the
17 elements that were noted down in the notebook would say report, such and
18 such, encrypted as such and such, was passed on at such and such a time.
19 I did fill in several such reports, but I did the least number of them.
20 Q. And you were asked to look at one particular exhibit which is
21 number 249, and that is the one that we seem to have some discrepancy with
22 respect to the date. Do you recall that one?
23 A. Yes. I think that I do remember it, and I think that it has a
24 military heading, and it's dated 16th of July, if I can remember it well.
25 And then underneath it is our date, the 17th of July. I don't know if you
1 can see it.
2 Q. Yes, sir, I can see it. Thank you. In your particular version of
3 it, the one that was generated by your outfit, typed out, it seems to also
4 indicate on the first one, which would be 652, it would -- it starts with:
5 "On the day in question." If we could provide you with a copy of it,
6 perhaps it would help you.
7 A. Yes, thank you.
8 MR. KARNAVAS: If the gentleman could be shown 249/B. And I'm
9 referring to in the English version, I'll refer to the Defence Exhibit
10 which is D73/1.
11 Q. Now, sir, if you could look at that, it seems that there are
12 several intercepts and you've numbered them from 652 to 655. Do you see
14 A. Yes, I see it very well.
15 Q. And if we look at the ones starting with 652, it begins with
16 the -- by stating: "On the day in question," and it goes on to give us
17 the frequency and the channel and the hour. Is that correct?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And then if we were to go all the way to 655, we see the phrase:
20 "The same day on the same frequency," and it says the channel and so on.
21 Do you see that?
22 A. Yes, I do.
23 Q. Now, you don't -- I take it you were not the one that had actually
24 taken down this message?
25 A. I did not generate this text.
1 Q. And I believe I heard you earlier indicating that you did not type
2 out the text either. You didn't -- well, you didn't receive it. What I
3 meant in my first question, and forgive me for being inarticulate, you did
4 not receive it, write it out. And my next question is: You didn't type
5 it out either. Is that correct?
6 A. I didn't understand you now.
7 Q. Okay. Let me break it down. Sitting here today, do you know
8 whether you were the individual listening in on this conversation and then
9 taking it down and writing it out before it was actually typed?
10 A. I did not do this, this that I'm looking at now.
11 Q. Okay. Well, let me make sure that I understand it correctly.
12 Does the same person who listens in on the conversation and then writes it
13 down on the pieces of paper that you've indicated, is that normally the
14 same person that would then have it typed and encrypted before it goes
16 A. It's not usually, but that is not a rule. Below at the end of the
17 text you have two people who are signed. The first person, I explained
18 that before, is the person who recorded the document. The second person
19 is the person who reproduced the document. Who sent it out, you can
20 usually tell by the signature. We didn't record that separately, but you
21 could tell by the handwriting, because there were only four people there.
22 Q. All right. But in looking at this particular document now today
23 that you have in front of you, can you tell us -- can you identify -- you
24 don't need to mention the person's name, but can you identify the
25 individual that actually listened in to the conversation?
1 A. Yes, I can. The person who listened and recorded this
2 conversation is the first person. The second person reproduced this
4 Q. And you can identify from looking at this piece of paper who those
5 individuals are?
6 A. When I see a signature, I can tell who it is, because they signed
7 in code. Their signatures are encrypted, but by their handwriting, I know
8 who they are.
9 Q. All right. But do you see their signatures on this document? I
10 guess that's what I'm asking you. There is some writing on the document.
11 And what I'm asking you, and you don't have to identify the individuals,
12 but looking at the document, this what we have, can you tell us whether
13 you know who those two individuals are?
14 A. Very well, of course. I do, I know.
15 Q. Okay. Thank you. Now, other than this notebook that you have, is
16 there any other material that you can share with us that would give us --
17 that would tell us exactly when this message was received and when it was
18 encrypted and sent out?
19 A. There is only one other way in which I could convince you, and
20 that is if I checked back at my firm, whether they still have the coded
21 files in code form under this number. I know when all of these files are
22 decoded, they keep the same file name. So when you look at the decoded
23 file, which I know exists in the service, then you would determine that
24 that is indeed it. So this is the only other way to do it. But at the
25 moment it's not possible for me to use this other method.
1 Q. Just one last question. When you said the firm, your firm, I
2 assume you're working today for the same organisation that you were
3 working back then?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And I take it your firm, or the firm as we would call it
6 elsewhere, has made that material available to the Prosecution for their
7 inspection, and if necessary, for their collection?
8 A. This is done by the authorised persons. I'm a technical person
9 who was up there doing their job.
10 Q. Thank you very much, sir.
11 A. Thank you.
12 MR. KARNAVAS: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
13 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
14 Ms. Sinatra.
15 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour, I have questions. Would you like
16 to take the break now or would you like for me to go forward? I just need
17 to grab the podium because I can't see that far.
18 JUDGE LIU: How long will your cross-examine last, more or less?
19 MS. SINATRA: More or less 30 to 40 minutes. It depends on the
20 answers from the witness, Your Honour, also. You know, I don't know how
21 long he's going to give -- how long his answers are going to be, so I
22 predict 30 to 40 minutes.
23 JUDGE LIU: Well, you have to remember sometimes you cannot get
24 whatever answers you want from a witness.
25 MS. SINATRA: I am very familiar with that, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE LIU: Yes. Let's take the break and resume at 20 minutes to
3 --- Recess taken at 5.09 p.m.
4 --- On resuming at 5.43 p.m.
5 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Ms. Sinatra.
6 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour. May I proceed?
7 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
8 MS. SINATRA: Thank you.
9 Cross-examined by Ms. Sinatra:
10 Q. Sir, you've received orders from your command to focus on certain
11 issues and certain features that you were monitoring. Right?
12 A. In addition to receiving an order to gather intelligence, I didn't
13 get anything more specific than that --
14 MS. SINATRA: Your Honour --
15 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
16 MS. SINATRA: I'm not getting any translation.
17 JUDGE LIU: Well --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear me now?
19 JUDGE LIU: Are you on the right channel?
20 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour. Number 4. Maybe it's a technical
21 problem. I'm not sure. I saw Mr. Waespi turning his mike off when he was
22 questioning and because there's extra protections with the witness, maybe
23 there's some clue that I'm not sure of -- if I leave this open ...
24 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Waespi.
25 MR. WAESPI: Yes, I understand that if you do that, the voices get
1 mixed. So you need to turn it off.
2 JUDGE LIU: We try it again.
3 MS. SINATRA: I'll try it again. Thank you.
4 Q. Sir, isn't it true that you received orders from your command
5 headquarters explaining to you what your focus of your monitoring should
6 be. Is that correct?
7 A. I did not receive any orders in a written form --
8 MS. SINATRA: I'm sorry. Even with the microphone off.
9 JUDGE LIU: Well, there may be some technical problem.
10 MS. SINATRA: I could move up there. Maybe I should see if I can
11 hear anything from the interpretation booth.
12 THE INTERPRETER: Can you hear me now?
13 MS. SINATRA: I can hear you now. Thank you.
14 Q. Sir, I don't remember if you remember my question, but instead of
15 asking again, could I just hear your answer, please.
16 A. Yes. I've already tried several times to begin my answer. I did
17 not receive specific orders. Before I went to that location, my duty was
18 to gather intelligence, all the intelligence that I could obtain.
19 Q. Thank you. But you were aware that on July 14th and 15th, 1995,
20 you had been ordered to focus on the fleeing Bosnian Muslims of 10.000
21 soldiers, women and children, who were trying to escape to Tuzla from
22 Srebrenica. Right?
23 A. I really did not have an order. Let me put it this way: It's
24 typical of the military chain of command, but it didn't pertain to my
25 service. We were taught to identify intelligence ourselves and to
1 prioritise, to assess what was more or less relevant. It was up to us to
3 Q. Okay. So you're saying that these 10.000 people running for their
4 lives was not a concern of the association or the firm that you're with?
5 A. No. That's not what I'm saying, not at all. I did gather
6 intelligence and I forwarded the intelligence obtained. But I don't think
7 I fully understand your question.
8 Q. The natural focus of your monitoring situation would have been a
9 concern for the security services, the state security services, for the
10 well-being of 10.000 of its citizens, wouldn't it?
11 A. Among other things, we monitored and tried to obtain intelligence
12 that throughout this entire period was related to people who were moving
13 through the woods and so on and so forth. Everything that was related to
14 intelligence or any intelligence that may have been essential for my work,
15 I would record it and forward it.
19 (redacted) But I've been a radio amateur since I turned 14. You're quite
20 right in claiming that.
21 Q. Okay. Thank you. I want to ask you based on your expertise in
22 anti-electronic warfare, at the time you were aware of Operativno
23 Maskiranje, weren't you?
24 A. Yes. It's part of the theory of electronic surveillance and
25 anti-electronic warfare. I am familiar with the term of masking.
1 Q. Right. And masking includes misinformation, decoying, planting
2 fake conversations, and supplying false data and false names, doesn't it?
3 A. Obviously. You seem well informed. That's in theory.
4 Q. And also, there are other methods of obstructing interceptions,
5 right, such as encryption, switching channels, channel switching as they
6 call it, changing your codes and your code names that you use in times of
7 combat. Those are common methods of obstructing interception, aren't
9 A. I agree with you.
10 Q. Thank you. Now, the equipment that you identified earlier, it was
11 a picture of a Kenwood, but what was that Kenwood? Was it a transceiver
12 or a receiver? Can you explain what that Kenwood was, please.
13 A. The device depicted in that photograph is a Kenwood TR-7000. It's
14 a receiver. It's not a transceiver.
15 Q. So basically you had one set of equipment in your room with a
16 two-man shift. It was a scanner with a hand-made, home-made device hooked
17 to the antenna with another connecter to an UHER recorder. Right?
18 A. Can you please clarify. What was home-made?
19 Q. I believe you stated that the connector from your Kenwood scanner
20 was a home-made box that was connected to the antenna. Is that correct?
21 A. Yes. Yes. Precisely. It was hand-made but not home-made. It
22 was not professionally manufactured. It was not bought from a factory or
23 a specialised shop. This was put together by people in a workshop who
24 were qualified to put together this piece of equipment.
25 Q. Okay. You also I don't think ever explained to us exactly, you
1 have four men at your position at one time. Right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And two men serving shifts of 24 hours each?
4 A. Not 24 hours. Two men would spend several days at a time. And
5 then another two men would come to relieve them, and then they would also
6 spend several days there, depending on the work load. We made assessments
7 whether it would be two days, five days, or a maximum of seven days.
8 Q. Okay. So I believe what you're telling me is you didn't have four
9 men present at the unit at all times, you had two men present for anywhere
10 from a four- to seven-day shift. Is that right?
11 A. It is correct that I always had two men there while the other two
12 were resting, but this depended on the work load and how tired the men
13 were. Their shift would sometimes last two days, but sometimes the shift
14 lasted seven days.
20 Q. And that reminds me, when you say when the activities were stepped
21 up or the monitoring was stepped up, there was extremely heavy radio
22 traffic from the end of June until the end of July, wasn't there?
23 A. I'm not sure if I can explain this. When we talk about those
24 radio frequencies, there were always conversations going on, but depending
25 on what was happening on the ground, sometimes the intensity of the
1 intelligence coming in was higher or lower, depending on what specifically
2 was happening on the ground.
3 Q. Excuse me, sir, I just asked you the end of June through the end
4 of July, the radio traffic was extremely heavy during that time, wasn't
5 it, because there was a lot going on on the ground?
6 A. Yes. There was a lot more intelligence at that time, a lot more
7 intelligence relevant to us.
8 Q. Well, I just want to get this clear, too. When you say
9 "intelligence," intelligence doesn't mean that you got some secret
10 information. It means that you were just receiving more traffic on the
11 radio waves when you were at Okresanica. Right?
12 A. A lot more information. A lot more intelligence indicating
13 certain developments that were of interest to us at the time. I will try
14 to clarify this. If you look at the military aspect, once combat
15 operations are under way, then there's a lot of intelligence going on.
16 And every single piece of information that you can lay your hands on is
17 essential, which makes you more dedicated to your work throughout such
19 Q. Didn't give you more men to back up your position with, did it, or
20 give you more equipment to monitor 24 frequencies, didn't it?
21 A. Well, at that time my service could only spare so many men or so
22 much equipment. It was certainly a pity that more men could not be spared
23 at the time.
24 Q. And I want to ask you now about the UHER recorder that you were
25 describing and you identified a picture of. What we know is in the one
1 room that you shared with two men for a four- to seven-day shift or that
2 comprised, made up of two men, the UHER recorder that you identified, you
3 had one set of equipment during this time, right, one receiver, scanner,
4 and one recorder?
5 A. That's not correct. Would you like me to explain this.
6 Q. How many receivers did you have?
7 A. I had three combinations, what we called combinations. Now,
8 what's a combination? I tried to explain before. A combination would
9 assist of an antenna, a converter, a radio receiver, and a reel-to-reel
10 recorder. The next combination would normally be another receiver and
11 another reel-to-reel recorder. The third combination would normally be
12 yet another receiver, yet another reel-to-reel. And we had another
13 reel-to-reel recorder which we used to play back the tapes which was
14 separate from these sets. It wasn't connected to the other sets.
15 Q. Let me just ask you. When you had two men up there for a
16 seven-day shift, there was one person working 24 hours at a time, and then
17 the other person would take over. It would be impossible for that one
18 person to use more than one set of equipment. Right?
19 A. I would be a very poor chief of section to work in this way.
20 That's not how it worked. There were two men working from morning to
21 evening and at night. During the night, there was usually a lull and
22 everyone would try to get some sleep. You saw the reports and the last of
23 the reports would usually be sent just after midnight, sometimes a little
24 later, but normally the men would then try to get some sleep late in the
25 evening, both of them. One of the men was operating one of the
1 combinations, and one of the sets, combinations, was always kept on the
2 frequency of the Main Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska. And the
3 other man meanwhile was operating the other combination being used.
4 Q. So you had what we call banking hours. Two men worked side by
5 side on a shift and then they both took a rest and went to bed. Right?
6 A. For the most part, yes.
7 Q. I want to ask you about -- the attorney for Blagojevic had asked
8 you about raw material, raw tape. There are no raw tapes that you know of
9 that existed in your unit from July 1995 that exist today. Is that
10 correct? That you know of.
11 A. I'm afraid I can't say anything about that. You should talk to
12 some other people, those who actually have these tapes in their safe. Let
13 me repeat this: I was the person who carried out this work, and I just
14 passed it on. But then there were other people who processed everything
15 after I had passed it on.
16 Q. But during this process of preparing to testify, you haven't heard
17 any raw tape from your unit or any unit at Okresanica from -- July 1st
18 through July 30th, 1995?
19 A. One thing I know is that there were tapes. I don't know what the
20 Tribunal actually has. I don't have this information. It's not my job.
21 If there was a specific conversation that was played back to me, perhaps I
22 could tell you something about it. But only if you played to me, then I
23 can tell you something.
24 Q. Sir, I just asked if you had heard one during your preparation.
25 It is a yes or no answer.
1 A. No, no.
2 Q. Thank you. I want to go back to the equipment that you were
3 using. Did you maintain that equipment yourself?
4 A. With the exception of some very few cases when the belt on the
5 UHER broke, we had no other cases where repairs were needed.
6 Q. And by belt you mean the Mylar magnetic tape that y'all used.
8 A. No, the belt. Inside the UHER there is a belt that conveys the
9 revolutions from the engine, the motor itself to the reel. When we used
10 it several times it happened that the belt broke and we fixed it
12 Q. I understand. It's like a belt on a vacuum cleaner. But when it
13 was down, do you remember what month it was that your recorder was broken?
14 A. I don't. I can't specify the time for any of these occurrences.
15 I'm talking about the belt breaking. It would only take a few minutes for
16 us to fix it and then we would just go ahead as usual.
17 Q. So you didn't maintain any maintenance logs on your equipment
18 either, did you?
19 A. No. This was not our obligation.
20 Q. Well, you discussed earlier in your testimony your procedure for
21 recording. I just want a yes or no answer. The truth is there are no
22 recordings from your activities at Okresanica in 1995. Right? That you
23 know of. You haven't heard any?
24 A. I know there are some. I'm certain about this. Now, how many are
25 there, what does the Tribunal have in its possession, I can't say. But I
1 know that we made those and we sent them on.
2 Q. And you destroyed all of your handwritten notes or rough notes
3 that you took down in writing. Right?
4 A. That's right.
5 Q. And you didn't keep any notebooks where the content of any
6 conversations were transcribed into, did you?
7 A. As I said before, we did our best to pass on to the centre
8 everything that we typed into our computer. Then we would receive
9 confirmation that they had received what we had sent on to them. Then
10 after a day, after one day, we would just destroy the whole lot.
11 Q. So the answer is yes to my question, there are no handwritten
12 notes reflecting the content of any conversations?
13 A. We have not preserved the transcripts of those conversations
14 because we burnt them.
15 Q. Thank you. And so what we have here is a notebook that you
16 brought to the Tribunal, which is a log of a record of your -- when a
17 message was sent to your encryption department and when it was sent on to
18 your command. Is that correct?
19 A. Yes. This was our duty, our responsibility, to keep those records
20 and when the information was encrypted and sent on, with the contents as
21 you can see them in the notebook.
22 Q. And I believe you testified earlier that what you did was you took
23 the intercept information from the army. You, what we call, cut and
24 paste. You cut off its heading, you pasted it on your heading, and you
25 forwarded it on to your encryption department and then on to your
1 headquarters. Right?
2 A. Yes. But in addition to that, we added a single sentence at the
3 top of the page indicating that the document or the report was obtained
4 from the PEB of the 2nd Corps. We didn't pass this on, because we had all
5 of that in front of us on our desk. When you say sending it on to the
6 communications centre and encrypting it there, we encrypted this
7 information right where we were, because we had it all there.
8 Q. What I'm trying to explain is that you received the message from
9 the army, you encrypted it yourself, and then you sent it on to your
10 headquarters. Right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And for those intercepts, you have no personal knowledge of the
13 contents of those intercepts. You put a header on it, you gave it a
14 summary, but it was a summary of a summary of the army recordings. Right?
15 A. Well, yes. Very often we did not read those reports, we just sent
16 it on. We had no time for that.
17 Q. Thank you. So the notebook that you brought here is really just a
18 representation of when you encrypted a message and when it was sent. It
19 has nothing to do with the contents of the message itself?
20 A. Nothing whatsoever indicates the contents.
21 Q. And that also goes for P232, which was an exhibit that you
22 reviewed earlier, which represents your notes that were the notes of
23 the -- as indicated of Bosnian army that you sent on to your headquarters.
24 Right? P232 was recorded on July 14th?
25 A. I don't have the document.
1 Q. I was just trying to save time as the Prosecutor has done by his
2 indexes. But I would like to ask you. You have been very forthcoming in
3 your information here. The truth is that you would never be able to have
4 a voice identification or know the voice of Dragan Jokic, would you?
5 A. That's correct. I could not identify his voice unless he
6 introduced himself, of course, or unless one of military came along and
7 told us that's that.
8 MS. SINATRA: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
9 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much indeed.
10 Any re-direct, Mr. Waespi?
11 MR. WAESPI: No, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE LIU: Well, are there any documents to tender at this stage?
13 Mr. Waespi?
14 MR. WAESPI: Yes, there are, Mr. President. The Exhibit P319,
15 that's the colour photo of a radio. Then P320, that's a photo of the
16 UHER. Then I guess in relation to P347, the index to the intercepts we'll
17 have that share the fate of all the other intercepts. I think it's really
18 specific to this witness, but we can be patient and wait for that. In
19 relation to P347, the five pages of the notebook, Defence has suggested
20 they would like to copy the whole notebook. I personally don't have a
21 problem, but it's not my notebook, obviously, but the witness's. And
22 since he -- and much of it is empty. So I'm not entirely sure whether
23 that assists the Trial Chamber with any other pages of it, whose contents
24 I really don't know other than the five pages which contain these numbers.
25 So I leave it to Your Honours how to deal with it. If it becomes too
1 complicated, I wouldn't use it as an exhibit at all because he explained
2 the procedure and told how it went. But I would suggest just to admit the
3 five pages -- perhaps even only the one page on which he marked something
4 in relation to Exhibit 173.
5 And lastly, the piece of paper, P353 with his name on it.
6 JUDGE LIU: And the last document is -- I think is 350.
7 MR. WAESPI: That may well be. I may have confused something.
8 JUDGE LIU: Yes, 353. It's under seal.
9 MR. WAESPI: Thank you.
10 JUDGE LIU: Any objections or comments?
11 Yes, Mr. Karnavas.
12 MR. KARNAVAS: I'll start with my comments first, Your Honour.
13 With the exception of the notebook, I have no objections. With respect to
14 the notebook or the pages from the notebook, I do object. First, there
15 are only five pages. Secondly, the notebook hasn't been translated. We
16 would ask, one, that if they so wish to introduce anything from the
17 notebook, that, one, the entire notebook be copied; secondly, that it be
18 translated. But aside from that, I'm not confident that a sufficient
19 foundation was laid, particularly after listening to the cross-examination
20 by Ms. Sinatra and portions of mine, but I would say that the lion's share
21 of my loss of confidence in the foundation is based on the
22 cross-examination done by Ms. Sinatra.
23 It's uncertain whether this gentleman was there during the
24 critical period of time when these notations were made, particularly the
25 ones that the Prosecution is most interested in. (redacted)
11 Also, he did indicate that by looking at a particular number he
12 could tell when something was sent off, but yet we have nothing else to
13 verify that. So I am afraid unless I can be persuaded, and there may be a
14 persuasive argument from the Prosecution or from the Trial Bench, I'm
15 afraid that I would have to register an objection to the five pages or
16 even the entire notebook being introduced with the lack of -- or with the
17 foundation as it stands today. So that's my position. I hope I was clear
19 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
20 Ms. Sinatra, any objections?
21 MS. SINATRA: Yes, Your Honour. I join in, of course, the
22 objection by the counsel for Blagojevic. I believe that there was an
23 improper foundation laid. We don't know whether he was even present
24 during the days that we are talking about that he has notated in his book.
25 We don't know whether the book is full of his handwriting or someone
1 else's or whether it was just a log kept in the unit. So I think there is
2 an improper foundation. I just wanted to clarify, is it my understanding
3 that -- that's P348. P347 was withdrawn by the Prosecutor at this time
4 for admission? I don't think he tendered it.
5 JUDGE LIU: Yes, Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Not withdrawn, but I thought we agreed upon
7 that all the intercept-related exhibits would be admitted once the legal
8 arguments were finalised. That was my understanding.
9 JUDGE LIU: I see. As for the other documents, you have no
11 MS. SINATRA: No objections, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much.
13 MS. SINATRA: I just want to clarify, if I can.
14 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
15 MS. SINATRA: When he says he's just not tendering it at the
16 moment, he's tendering it but subject to the ruling by the Court on the
17 intercepts or he's going to wait and tender it after the ruling by the
18 Trial Chamber?
19 JUDGE LIU: I think Mr. Waespi told us that he will wait until a
20 later stage.
21 MS. SINATRA: Thank you for clarifying that.
22 JUDGE LIU: Well, since we still have the witness here and since
23 both Defence teams claim that there is something unclear about that
24 document, Mr. Waespi, could you take the opportunity to ask some more
25 questions concerning this document towards this witness?
1 MR. WAESPI: Certainly, Mr. President. If the witness could be
2 shown the notebook. I want to clarify.
3 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
4 Further examination by Mr. Waespi:
5 Q. Sir, whose notebook is this --
6 JUDGE LIU: Yes.
7 MS. SINATRA: I'm sorry, Your Honour. Just in the spirit of true
8 professional gamesmanship, I just want to clarify that once we've passed
9 the witness and we have no further questions of him and we argue over
10 whether the proper foundation had been laid by the Prosecutor, then they
11 get another bite at authenticating their documents? I'm just trying to
12 get whether we have the same rights sometime in the future.
13 JUDGE LIU: Well, of course. That's why we have the witness here
14 when we -- concerning whether to admit a document or not. That's just to
15 give the witness the opportunity to explain to us those questions raised
16 by either parties. Of course, you know, you will have the full right to
17 cross-examine this witness on that particular point. And of course in the
18 future you have the same right to do that.
19 MS. SINATRA: Thank you very much for clarifying that. I
20 appreciate it. Thank you.
21 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
22 Yes, you may proceed, Mr. Waespi.
23 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President, just for clarification, I
24 did not ask to re-examine this witness. I believe we have laid enough
25 foundation because of the questions he -- the answers he gave in direct
1 examination, and I believe you have asked me to ask a few questions
2 because the witness is still here.
3 JUDGE LIU: Yes, yes. Of course. Just for the sake of the Trial
4 Chamber as well as for the Defence team.
5 MR. WAESPI: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
6 Q. Sir, the notebook in front of you, to whom does it belong?
7 A. It's the diary which was in the electronic surveillance centre of
8 the state security service at the Okresanica location from 1994 until the
9 end of our stay there.
10 Q. And in whose possession has it been since 1995?
11 A. It was at the section in that one room on the desk, and we used it
12 to note down the numbers, as I mentioned before, as is appropriate for a
13 correctly managed logbook. We cannot say that this is really a
14 communications centre, since there were very few people there, we unified
15 this. So this was the logbook which recorded all the information that had
16 been sent out. On the other hand, there was also a notebook where
17 information was noted about the electronic surveillance of certain
18 directions. For example, if we direct our antenna towards the south and
19 monitor the frequencies or scan the frequencies there, all the data that
20 we receive or acquire in that period, we note down here. After a while,
21 if we assess that something is interesting, we stay there; if not, we
22 continue on. Here you have the exact dates. For example, that on the 4th
23 of June, 1995, we have a note by one of the workers who was scanning.
24 Then on the 7th of June, 1995, and then -- just one moment, please. It's
25 a little bit untidy, but it's still quite possible to find one's way. On
1 the 7th of June, also we have more. On the 22nd of August, we also have
2 something. On the 25th of August, we have something. So this is a
3 workbook. On the other side of the logbook, since we had a shortage of
4 paper, indicating in this period when we were sending out this information
5 also noted down the scans. For example, on one route we noted down eight
6 working channels which were active. So it's quite clear what is written
7 down here. For example, channel 1 it says, "Extension 837, Panorama."
8 And we know that Panorama was the location of the Main Staff of the army
9 of Republika Srpska. Then channel 02, the telephone and telegraph
10 messages were recorded from Badem one. This is a pseudonym for one of
11 their communication centres, for one of their locations. Then there is a
12 phone number of an exchange on channel 5, 786545. So this is a telephone
13 extension which you can dial from town. Then on channel 7 we recorded
14 that there was a city telephone number 783785. We have some other numbers
15 here which were linked to the persons who were then important in Republika
16 Srpska. So I don't want to go through all of them. We have information
17 about them. When you were talking about whether to copy the entire
18 logbook, I suggest that you can copy that, you can copy sections of the
19 logbook or the notebook. Unfortunately, like all human beings, the people
20 who worked there have some personal notes and remarks in the workbook.
21 For example, they have some -- for example, they say "pearls," they heard
22 a funny sentence as they were listening, so they noted that down. So this
23 is nothing more than than some sort of personal comment in those difficult
24 times, but you can clearly determine who it was by the handwriting. My
25 handwriting is there, the handwriting of my colleagues also.
1 In this other part in the logbook, also you will see that there is
2 the handwriting there of the people who wrote that down, and my
3 handwriting is also amongst them. The conversations that we presented
4 here, amongst them there are those that I personally recorded. So this is
5 as much as I can say regarding this logbook.
6 MR. WAESPI: I have no further questions, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE LIU: I have some questions to you, Mr. Waespi. When did
8 you get this diary, this notebook?
9 MR. WAESPI: I can ask the witness when he provided it to us.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I forgot this logbook. It came
11 subsequently. I cannot remember the exact date, but I think it was a day
12 before I made remarks in the evidence based on the logbook. The next day
13 we analysed the report of the past -- on intercepts, and I could say that
14 they were done on such and such a day. This is something that can be
15 determined only based on the crypto file, encryption file. For a time our
16 computers, when I would send the computer to the communications centre, at
17 the end of the file there would be a date and also the time. I don't know
18 where these files are, but this is enough proof that this was done in such
19 a way.
20 JUDGE LIU: Did you disclose this earlier, to the Defence?
21 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, yes, we did. The five pages with
22 these numbers on it, we did disclose it to the Defence the same day, I
23 believe, or a day later. I have seen the notebook for the first time.
24 And to clarify when the witness came in on the weekend, that was the
25 weekend prior to last weekend, he indicated that he had a notebook at home
1 which may solve a couple of our questions. So he asked that his office in
2 Tuzla, a colleague of his would write to Sarajevo, and then it was
3 processed from Sarajevo to The Hague. And that's the first time we saw
4 this -- I personally saw this notebook.
5 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
6 Any questions, Mr. Karnavas?
7 MR. KARNAVAS: Yes, Your Honour. If I may have a moment.
8 For the record, Your Honour, I am told that we got the several
9 pages with the proofing notes from the Prosecution. That's when we
10 received the five pages, but if I can move, Your Honour, and I'm going to
11 need to look at the notebook very briefly, if that's okay.
12 MR. WAESPI: Perhaps in the meantime I can tell that the
13 correspondence which Mr. Karnavas mentioned when we gave these five pages
14 to the Defence was on the 31st of October, 2003.
15 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
16 MR. KARNAVAS: If I could take a look at the notebook.
17 Further cross-examination by Mr. Karnavas:
18 Q. Now, sir, did you bring this notebook the first time when you
19 testified in the Krstic trial?
20 A. Yes, I did bring it. I didn't bring it this time, because my
21 briefcase at that time was lost in the airplane. It had been opened, and
22 I received it after a week. I had received a new briefcase, because my
23 old one was damaged. So this time I didn't bring it because I was afraid
24 that somebody would take it.
25 Q. Okay. Now, you indicated that this was brought over from Tuzla.
1 Was this in your personal possession the entire time or was it stored
3 A. It was stored in a safe.
4 Q. And who has the key to the safe?
5 A. I had the key.
6 Q. So it was stored with you, not by somebody else? You kept it?
7 A. Yes, yes.
8 Q. And is there a particular reason why you are in possession of a
9 certain evidence that belongs to a section that you no longer work for?
10 A. If we were to talk now about my business engagement, then I would
11 like to ask the Court to move to a private session. But the logbook, just
12 as in my statement which was given, I don't remember anymore which year,
13 it was used. That's why it remained in the safe. So as a document in the
14 service, it's not such an important document. It is important only to
15 you. We don't need it anymore.
16 Q. Okay. Well, if that were the case, is there a particular reason
17 why you didn't leave this document -- this notebook with the Prosecution
18 two or three years ago when you were here testifying for the Krstic case?
19 A. There's no need for that. It was returned to me. I took it back,
20 and then things occurred as I explained. So I just simply took it back
21 and stored it. It wasn't used.
22 Q. Now -- and if I understood you correctly, there are actually two
23 notebooks within this -- two different sets of records in this notebook?
24 A. You can see that for yourself in the logbook. Precisely at the
25 place where you have your hand it says: Record of information sent out, I
1 think. And then on the other side there are notes which were actually the
2 written notes of electronic surveillance, the monitoring of the
3 frequencies. And that contains all the information that is there.
4 Q. With respect to the particular intercepts that we discussed here
5 today, did you make notations with respect to those intercepts in this
6 notebook, you yourself?
7 A. Yes. There are some places where I did that personally, and I can
8 indicate those to you.
9 Q. Well, let me make sure you understood my question correctly.
10 There were several intercepts that were discussed here today that you had
11 the opportunity to initial in the English version of the index. Do you
12 recall that?
13 A. Of course, yes, I do.
14 Q. With respect to those particular intercepts that are numbered, did
15 you make the notations yourself in the book, in this -- did you make the
16 record of those particular intercepts, or were they made by your
17 colleagues, your subordinates?
18 A. I would have to look.
19 Q. Okay. All right. We'll get to that. The next question is: Did
20 you as the chef, the chief of this little operation, did you conduct any
21 quality control measures to make sure that what was put down by your
22 subordinates matched what had happened? And if so, what were those
23 quality control measures that you had in place?
24 JUDGE LIU: That question is out of the scope.
25 MR. KARNAVAS: Very well, Your Honour. Well, if that is the case,
1 Your Honour, then I have no further questions.
2 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
3 Ms. Sinatra.
4 MS. SINATRA: I have two questions, Your Honour, maybe one.
5 Further cross-examination by Ms. Sinatra:
6 Q. You stated just then under re-cross that this notebook was only
7 important to Mr. Karnavas, as counsel for Blagojevic. Didn't you just
8 state that?
9 A. No, no, no.
10 Q. I'm sorry, your exact words were: It's important only to you.
11 That's the exact testimony.
12 A. When I say "you," it's a pseudonym, meaning this Honourable Court.
13 Q. And knowing that this notebook was important to this Honourable
14 Court, you chose to leave it in your safe back in your country. Right?
15 A. In my first statement which I gave, I provided this logbook. So I
16 didn't think that it would be a good idea to destroy it afterwards.
17 Q. So your answer is knowing that this was important to the Tribunal,
18 you chose, you made the decision, to leave it in your safe. Right?
19 A. That's right. Knowing that it was important for this Court, I
20 left it in the safe for safe keeping.
21 MS. SINATRA: I have no further questions.
22 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
23 Mr. Waespi, do you want to ask something?
24 MR. WAESPI: No, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE LIU: Thank you.
1 Well, first of all I would like to say that document P319, P320,
2 and P353 are admitted into the evidence. As for this document, we believe
3 that we only need what is relevant in that diary. And this Tribunal is
4 only concerned with any information which is related to this case but not
5 other matters.
6 So we would like to ask the registrar to make a copy of that diary
7 and keep it in the possession of the Registrar. Then we will give it, the
8 copy, to the parties, but not all of this notebook is admitted into the
9 evidence. Only those five pages tendered by the Prosecution are admitted
10 into the evidence. It's so decided.
11 Well, Witness, thank you very much for coming to The Hague to give
12 your evidence. I'm sorry that we have kept you here for quite a long
13 time, but I'm sure that tomorrow morning we'll send you back home. We wish
14 you a pleasant journey back home.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
16 JUDGE LIU: And, Witness, before you are leaving, please send this
17 diary to the registrar which is sitting there in front of you. I can
18 assure you that he will return that diary to you before you take your
19 flight tomorrow morning. Do you understand that?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand.
21 JUDGE LIU: Thank you very much. The hearing is adjourned.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
23 at 6.44 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday,
24 the 6th day of November, 2003, at 2.15 p.m.