1 Wednesday, 22 May 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Registrar. Can we have the case called,
8 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is the case number,
9 IT-99-36-T, the Prosecutor versus Radoslav Brdjanin and Momir Talic.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning, Mr. Brdjanin. Can you hear me in a
11 language that you can understand?
12 THE ACCUSED BRDJANIN: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.
13 I can hear you and I understand you.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you. You may sit down.
15 General Talic, good morning to you. Can you hear me in a language
16 that you can understand?
17 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour. I
18 can hear you in a language that I understand.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you.
20 I notice, General Talic, that again we are back to square one. We
21 don't have either Maitre Pitron or Maitre de Roux. Are you still happy
22 with the situation?
23 THE ACCUSED TALIC: [Interpretation] Yes. For this week, that's
24 what we have agreed on.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
1 Appearances for Prosecution.
2 MS. KORNER: The usual, Joanna Korner, assisted by Susan Grogan.
3 Good morning Your Honours.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you.
5 Appearances for Radoslav Brdjanin.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Good morning, Your [Realtime transcript read in
7 error "Honour"] Honours. I'm John Ackerman, I'm with Tanja Radosavljevic
8 and Milan Trbojevic.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you.
10 Appearance for General Talic.
11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Natasha Ivanovic-Fauveau,
12 assisted by Fabien Masson. I represent General Talic.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, Madam . And good morning to you.
14 So -- yes, Mr. Ackerman.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, a slight correction in the
16 transcript. When I said good morning. I said good morning Your Honours.
17 Meaning I said good morning to all three of you. And the transcript only
18 says I said good morning to you, Your Honour. And I wouldn't want to
19 leave the other two judges out. Good morning, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Ackerman.
21 Yes, could one help Madam Fauveau, please. Usher.
22 Yes, Judge. Now, good morning to you. Could I ask you to repeat
23 the solemn declaration once more before you start giving evidence today,
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honour.
1 I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,
2 and nothing but the truth.
3 WITNESS: ADIL DRAGANOVIC [Resumed]
4 [Witness answered through interpreter]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. You may sit down.
6 So what's going to happen, Judge, today is Madam Fauveau will
7 conclude presumably her cross-examination, and then Mr. Ackerman will
8 commence his.
9 Mr. Ackerman, as I told you before, is counsel for -- lead counsel
10 for Radoslav Brdjanin.
11 Yes, Madam Fauveau. You may proceed. Thank you.
12 Cross-examined by Ms. Fauveau-Ivanovic: [Continued]
13 Q. [Interpretation] On the 26th of April, you spoke about
14 General Talic's visit to the Manjaca camp. On page 5084 of the French
15 transcript. Why didn't you mention General Talic's visit to the Manjaca
16 camp in any of your written statements?
17 A. I don't know why I didn't.
18 Q. You said that it seems to you that you saw General Talic at the
19 observation post. What was the distance between you and this observation
21 A. About 50 metres to 80 metres perhaps.
22 Q. Would you allow for the possibility that you were mistaken and
23 that you didn't see General Talic but someone else?
24 A. I do allow for that possibility.
25 Q. You said -- and it's still on the 26th of April, 2002, page
1 5087 -- when counting all the persons who died in Manjaca and those who
2 died in the transport, there were between 60 and 80 persons who died.
3 Could you say how many people died in the Manjaca camp itself?
4 A. Well, as for what I saw with my very own eyes, I saw eight people
5 being killed in front of the entrance; that is to say, by the gate.
6 That's when the transport arrived from Prijedor in the morning, when
7 people were being taken off the buses. I saw these eight people being
8 killed. In the camp, as far as I know, four persons were killed and then
9 one died as a consequence of the beatings, so that's five. I think that
10 one or two died -- I don't know -- from an illness or the consequences of
11 hunger. I know that one man from the village of Crljeni from the
12 municipality of Kljuc died two days before a transport was supposed to go
13 to England transporting the ill. That's about it.
14 Q. You spoke about the death of Omer Filipovic. Did you see his
16 A. Yes, I did.
17 Q. Where did you see this body?
18 A. I saw it as they were carrying him out of the horse stables in the
19 morning, when there was some military commission that was carrying out an
20 investigation and when the body was held there.
21 Q. You also spoke about an incident in which about 20 people died.
22 They suffocated in transport on the way to Manjaca. Did you personally
23 see their bodies?
24 A. I did not see their bodies myself, but I spoke about that. I said
25 how I found out about this event that night and also the next days, the
1 following days we talked about this at the camp and we knew what had
3 Q. Could you confirm that the representative of the Red Cross went to
4 the camp?
5 A. Are you referring to the International Red Cross?
6 Q. Yes the International Red Cross.
7 A. I can confirm that.
8 Q. Did you personally speak to the representative of the
9 International Red Cross?
10 A. Yes, I did, several times at that.
11 Q. Did you have the opportunity of speaking to the representative of
12 the International Red Cross without the guards being present?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. At the hearing of the 13th of May -- it's page 12 of the
15 LiveNote -- you said that there was only one exchange of prisoners. Could
16 you be more precise and say which exchange you are referring to.
17 A. As for what I know, this was an exchange that took place on the
18 14th of November, 1992 at Vlasic. Once this exchange didn't go through,
19 but the next time it succeeded. This was an exchange of civilians from
20 the camp for combatants, as far as I managed to find out -- Serb
22 Q. Do you know whether an exchange took place on the 25th of June?
23 A. I don't know about that.
24 Q. Do you know about an exchange that took place on the 17th of
1 A. Perhaps it was organised, but I don't know whether it was carried
2 out actually.
3 Q. Do you know about another exchange on the 28th of July?
4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. Do you know about an exchange that took place on the 31st of
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. On the 23rd of August?
9 A. What kind of exchange was this and where? I don't know. It's not
10 that people went from Manjaca, no.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, are you aware of a particular date when an
12 exchange as the one that is being suggested to you took place? At least
13 the month.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I mentioned the 14th of November.
15 That's when there was an exchange and when it actually went through.
16 Several times there were attempts to have an exchange, but people were
17 returned to the camp. I don't know. Possibly there was one more exchange
18 at Jajce, but I really don't know about that. Perhaps this took place
19 before I was released from solitary confinement.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: And you are not aware of any other exchanges that
21 may have taken place.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: So please, next question, because we can't go on
24 from one week -- or from one month to the other, when you could ask a
25 simple, direct question. Madam Fauveau, please.
1 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Do you allow for the possibility that there were regular exchanges
3 of which you were not aware?
4 A. During my stay at the camp, I could notice if somebody went to be
5 exchanged. In July, August, September, October. Perhaps there were some
6 individual cases. People went perhaps on an individual basis for money.
7 I know of some individual cases of this kind.
8 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I think that may be a good
9 point -- is it suggested that these were large-scale exchanges? In other
10 words, more than a few individuals.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Fauveau.
12 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] No. The suggestion is --
13 the suggestion is that there were regular exchanges but not on a large
15 Q. You also spoke about people who had been released from Manjaca.
16 Could you confirm that the persons who were elderly and underage people
17 were released from Manjaca?
18 A. I remember that elderly people from the municipality of Sanski
19 Most were released. That happened once.
20 Q. Could you confirm that through the intermediary of the
21 International Red Cross, a group of persons was sent to England from
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Could you confirm that a certain number of clerics were also
25 released from Manjaca?
1 A. I remember about a particular number. But they were released
2 quite late. They spent a long time in Manjaca, in the camp of Manjaca.
3 Q. Could you confirm that the Merhamet representatives visited
5 JUDGE AGIUS: When you say, Madam Fauveau, a representative in the
6 singular or the plural? Because here the translation -- the
7 interpretation says "Merhamet representative," just one.
8 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I said "the
9 representatives," in the plural?
10 A. And I have confirmed that.
11 Q. Sir, I'm going to read to you a report from an international
12 organisation. And for the record, it's document 763, which was
13 communicated in accordance with Rule 70.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. 763?
15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: 763, yes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I have it here.
17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Korner.
19 MS. KORNER: Yes.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Am I right --
21 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, Madam Fauveau spoke to me about this,
22 and I said there was no objection by --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: This is a confidential document, as you know.
24 MS. KORNER: It was dealt with, yes.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
1 MS. KORNER: But I -- Your Honour, I have no objection to it
2 being -- part of it being put.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Please proceed, Madam Fauveau.
4 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. It's the first paragraph on page 3, the second sentence. I'm
6 going to read this part of the report which dates from the 23rd of June,
7 1992. And I'm going to ask you whether you agree with this analysis of
8 the Manjaca camp. [In English] "The delegation from Merhamet visited a
9 prisoner camp at Manjaca mountain where 1.200 persons are held by the
10 army. Material conditions were poor, especially concerning hygiene. But
11 there were no signs of maltreatment or execution of prisoners, they
13 A. Could I please see this document.
14 Q. [Interpretation] I'm sorry. I can't show it to you.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. You can be shown the paragraph in question,
16 just the paragraph. It's on page 3, at the top of the page --
17 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: You object?
19 MS. KORNER: I do. I'm sorry. This -- all that the witness is
20 being asked to do -- and I appreciate he wants to see the document -- is
21 does he agree that's an accurate description of the camp.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I will read it out to you, Judge. The Prosecution
23 has every right to object to this, because this is a confidential document
24 released to the Prosecution under a special -- I'm going to read out to
25 you very clearly the paragraph in question, which is -- forms part of a
1 report which is dated 23rd of June, 1992 and covers the period 16 to 20th
2 of June, 1992 and updated on the 22nd -- being an update on the situation
3 as it was obtaining previously on the 22nd of May, 1992 till 16th of June,
4 1992. So basically we have an update of the situation relating to the
5 dates 16th to 20th June, 1992, even though the report is dated 23rd of
7 The paragraph in question reads as follows: "Arbitrary detention
8 of persons allegedly participating or planning hostile actions against
9 Serbian authorities." These last words are in quotes. "A delegation from
10 Merhamet visited a prisoner camp at Manjaca mountain where 1.200 persons
11 are held by the army. Material conditions were poor, especially
12 concerning hygiene, but there were no signs of maltreatment or execution
13 of prisoners, they reported." And then there is another part of the
14 paragraph which does not concern us. So this is the report. And this is
15 supposedly a report by an independent observer.
16 MS. KORNER: Well --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I need to -- I need to make it clear that it's
18 someone reporting what supposedly Merhamet --
19 MS. KORNER: Reported to them.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Reported to them, yes.
21 MS. KORNER: So it's not an independent observer of what happened.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: No. What -- who is reporting this is an independent
24 MS. KORNER: Yes.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: But he's reporting or she's reporting not just --
1 not to give an indication -- what supposedly Merhamet representatives who
2 had visited Manjaca camp had reported to them.
3 MS. KORNER: Yes. Your Honour, I think the simple question that
4 Madam Fauveau asked was: Does he agree that that's accurate.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, exactly.
6 Do you agree that as on 16th to 20th of June, 1992, the
7 description of the conditions in Manjaca, as I read out to you, is
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't agree with that. That has
10 no foundation whatsoever. Merhamet was under the control of the Serbian
11 authorities. And those people who wrote that, they should be ashamed of
12 that. At the time it was terrible in the camp. There was beating,
13 maltreatment, and other things, killing. I've already spoken about
14 this -- returning people who had disappeared in the transport --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: You don't agree.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. That's shameful.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Next question, Madam Fauveau.
18 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. You said that there were 5.434 prisoners. How did you get this
20 figure? 5.434 prisoners.
21 A. I did not say 7.000. I said 5.434. That's the number of people
22 who went through the camp.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. According to the interpretation that I am
24 receiving, at least, I don't think you said 7.000, did you? Here I have
25 5.434. And Madam Fauveau wants to know how you came up to that figure.
1 What's the basis of your information, in other words.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This information is reliable. I
3 obtained this information, this accurate information, on the basis of the
4 statement of a camp inmate, Ibrahim Begovic is his name, and he kept
5 records. He was at the other camp. He is perfectly aware of that
6 figure. I agree with that figure, because my estimation was about
7 6.000 -- my estimate was about 6.000, so I know exactly how many people
8 were in one camp and how many people were in the other camp. So at the
9 time when the inmates from Omarska, Sanski Most, and other places arrived,
10 there were about 4.500. So one camp, about 2.000, 2.250, and about that
11 many in the other one. These are approximately accurate figures. And as
12 for that particular figure, I got it from the statement of an inmate who
13 kept records. So the figure is 5.434. That is from the 1st of June until
14 the 18th of December, 1992. That's how many people went through the
15 camp. That's how many people were deprived of all conceivable rights, all
16 human rights.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Fauveau.
18 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Would you allow for the possibility that this figure is not exact
20 and that the total number of detainees in Manjaca was 4.400, more or
22 A. The figure ranging between 4.400 to 4.500 refer to the summer
23 period; that is to say, when people arrived from Sanski Most and Prijedor,
24 when they were transported. I know that for sure because I was cutting
25 bread, and I know how many slices of bread I had to cut. And also, I took
1 cards -- International Red Cross cards when I was cutting bread, so I knew
2 exactly how many people there were there.
3 Q. I would like you to have a look at an extract from a videotape.
4 It's a videotape that the Prosecutor has already shown you. I'm not going
5 to show the entire tape but just the part where Paddy Ashdown made a
6 comment on leaving the camp. And I'm going to ask you to read the
7 subtitles, since there are Serbo-Croat subtitles. I'd like you to read
8 what Paddy Ashdown said as he was leaving the camp. It's Prosecutor's
9 document 468 -- P468.
10 Sir, can you read the subtitles in Serbo-Croat.
11 [Videotape played]
12 A. I can.
13 Q. Could you read it.
14 A. There's no need for that.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: No. Judge, please let me decide. Please read it.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Very well, Your Honour.
17 "When leaving, he stated that no matter how dismal things
18 looked --"
19 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Next sequence.
20 A. "It seems that this camp was run properly."
21 Q. This cassette dates back to August 1992. Do you agree with this
23 A. This is a person's very own opinion based on one particular thing
24 that was seen. I do not agree with this assessment.
25 Q. You spoke about an exhumation which took place in the year 2000
1 and at which you found the body of your colleague Nedzad Muhic. Do you
2 remember this?
3 A. Yes. I mentioned that. I mentioned they saw the body.
4 Q. Could you say where the location was of this mass grave, the mass
5 grave in which Nedzad Muhic was found?
6 A. In Krkojevac.
7 Q. Was this mass grave in the vicinity of a bank -- of a river bank?
8 A. Yes.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: That's different, between a bank and a river bank.
10 Yes, okay. But for a moment I thought what does a bank have -- what does
11 it have to do with it -- with the mass grave. It's a river bank we are
12 talking about, not a bank, because the translation here said a bank, you
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. There are no buildings there.
15 This is the canyon of the Sana River.
16 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. And Nedzad Muhic was allegedly killed in 1992; is that correct?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Could you say how you recognised Nedzad Muhic's body in the year
21 A. On the basis of the clothes he was wearing, because we were in
22 prison together. We were together in prison at the public security
23 station, and I know what he was wearing.
24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show
25 the witness document P778. It's in fact the map that is over there.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: That's the map that we had yesterday, which I see in
2 the back there. It's still there.
3 Judge, if you need to stand up at any time, please feel free to do
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: It's okay, usher. Usher, it's okay.
7 Yes. It's -- wait for the question first.
8 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Sir, you said that you found this map in 1995 in the house of the
10 Nezirevic family in Sanski Most; is that correct? Did you yourself find
11 this map?
12 A. That's what I said, and I'm the one who found this map. I'm the
13 one who took it from this house.
14 Q. When did you find this map?
15 A. Well, I found this map in the second half of October 1995.
16 Q. Did you find this map accidentally, or were you aware of the fact
17 that there were military documents in that house?
18 A. This is my street where my burnt house was, in Mahala. And this
19 house is about 150 to 200 metres away. That's where the primary school in
20 Mahala is. The command of the brigade was in this primary school during
21 that period; that is to say, that the military command was there and the
22 military police of the 6th Krajina Brigade. And I toured these
23 buildings. This house was also burnt down, and I knew that it was
24 repaired during the war and that meetings were held there. It's like a
25 villa by the river. That's where there were some documents, and I took
1 them over, maps for the most part, including this one. This was in the
2 basement of that house.
3 Q. So before going to that house, you found -- where you found that
4 map, you knew or you assumed that you would be able to find military
5 documents there. Have I understood you correctly?
6 A. That's right.
7 Q. Was anyone able to enter that house before you arrived and before
8 the Serbs left Sanski Most, and would such a person have been in a
9 position to place that map there?
10 A. I don't know why anybody would do that. When I came, there were
11 some military people there in Sanski Most -- or rather, operations were
12 still taking place towards Banja Luka and Prijedor.
13 Q. Is it true that this map is titled, "The war route of the 6th
15 A. Yes. It says, "The war journey of the 6th Krajina Brigade." It
16 means the same thing, what you said.
17 Q. Do you agree that this term, "the war route, war journey," and
18 answer the question only if you know the answer -- is it true that this
19 term is only used when a state of war has been declared?
20 A. I do not agree with what you stated.
21 Q. Isn't it the term that a military person would have used for the
22 situation which existed in the Republika Srpska in 1992 and 1993?
23 Wouldn't such a person have used the term "the combat route," rather than
24 "the war route"?
25 A. I disagree with your statement, because I found other documents
1 too, such as, for example, the manuscript of the commander of the 6th
2 Krajina Brigade, Colonel Branko Basara. And he is describing their war
3 route, their war journey in this report. And this was submitted to the
4 Prosecution, the original.
5 Q. As far as these manuscripts are concerned belonging to Colonel
6 Basara, how do you know that they belonged to Colonel Basara?
7 A. How do I know? This is a leading question, but I shall respond
8 nevertheless. His signature is there.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, Judge, Judge. I don't know what the system
10 is in your country, but over here on cross-examination you can be asked
11 direct questions, leading questions. So please -- and I frankly don't see
12 the objection.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's not an objection, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. But it's a simple question. You're making an
15 allegation, a statement, that these documents belonged to Colonel Basara
16 or -- you're being asked to explain how you know that or how you came to
17 that conclusion. So what's wrong with that question? It's a perfectly
18 legitimate one.
19 Go ahead.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] On the basis of his signature,
21 handwriting, and the facts presented in that report, and the place where
22 the document was found, actually.
23 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. How can you affirm that this document was really written by
1 A. How can I affirm that? I said it on the basis of his handwriting,
2 his signature, and the place where the document was found, and the facts
3 that are mentioned. This document was not something that was observed
4 here in this case.
5 Q. Do you know that Basara left Sanski Most in December 1992?
6 A. I can't remember exactly when he left. On the basis of the
7 documents and analyses that I had. But I know that he did leave Sanski
8 Most and that another commander was appointed. I think it was
9 Mr. Kajtez.
10 Q. I'll return to the map. Could you have a look at what is written
11 next to "Bosanski Brod."
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, if you need to leave your place to have a
13 closer look, please do. But then when you speak, do speak -- do go back
14 to your place and speak into the microphone. Thank you.
15 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Is it true that it says "Bosanski Brod," and that there is a date
17 next to that?
18 A. Yes, that's correct. It says "Bosanski Brod," and there is an
19 arrow towards Bosanski Brod and also there is a date, the 18th of
20 September, 1992.
21 Q. Do you agree that this town, Bosanski Brod, was called Srpski Brod
22 in Republika Srpska?
23 A. I think that's right.
24 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry. Could we know from when it is said that
25 Bosanski Brod was called Srpski Brod.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: I think some other witness did mention that. I
2 can't remember exactly who. But he did give that explanation.
3 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's right.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't recall the date, obviously.
5 MS. KORNER: No. I'm asking Madam Fauveau if she'd be kind enough
6 to suggest from what date.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Madam Fauveau, please. I think that's
9 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] According to what I know,
10 immediately after the Serbian army arrived in Bosanski Brod, this town was
11 renamed Srpski Brod; that is to say, in October 1992.
12 Q. This map dates back to May 1993 at the earliest, because the last
13 mark on this map is May 1993. Why would the Serbs have used the name of
14 Bosanski Brod for a town which they themselves had renamed Srpski Brod?
15 A. I don't know about that.
16 Q. Do you agree that a war route or a combat route should show the
17 exact movements of the brigade?
18 A. Yes, I confirm that. That is precisely what I think.
19 Q. According to this map, the 6th Brigade went to Srebrenica and
20 Bratunac and it went through -- it passed through Travnik. Could you
21 explain how a Serbian brigade could have passed through Travnik.
22 A. I think this shows the municipalities, the territories or the
23 municipalities. That's where the arrow is pointing. It's not pointing
24 towards the town itself, because the 6th Krajina Brigade was at Vlasic,
25 the territory of Travnik, that is. And it took part in operations.
1 Q. If you have a look at the war route of the 6th Brigade in the
2 direction of Bratunac, the 6th Brigade would have had to pass through
3 territory under the control of Muslims. How could it have done such a
5 A. I don't agree with you, because this brigade had corridors -- or
6 rather, up to Bratunac, the territory was linked up.
7 Q. But I agree with you on that point, sir. But the arrow on the map
8 passes through Muslim territory.
9 A. The arrow does not necessarily depict the direction of movement.
10 It just shows the territory of the municipalities where the brigade
11 operated. This is a map. And the arrows do show the municipalities where
12 the brigade was and where it operated.
13 Q. But five minutes ago or even less you said that a war route should
14 show the exact movements of a brigade. So if this map is authentic, it
15 would have shown the real route that the brigade took to reach Bratunac;
16 isn't that right?
17 A. I don't think that's right. Military experts know where they went
19 Q. Is it a military map or not?
20 A. Yes, this is a military map.
21 Q. Why would members of the military have made a map that didn't
22 correspond to the military route?
23 A. I'm not an expert for maps or a military expert, so I can't really
24 answer these questions.
25 Q. Would you allow for the possibility that this map was made by
1 anyone but a member of the military?
2 A. Why would anybody else chart a map except for the military, except
3 for the 6th Krajina Brigade?
4 Q. The 6th Krajina Brigade in May 1993 allegedly used the name
5 Bosanski Brod for a town called Srpski Brod and allegedly showed a route
6 which wasn't the real route. Can one call that the war route?
7 A. These are official names of municipalities of Bosnia-Herzegovina;
8 therefore, I believe that this is an official map, a military map, of the
9 6th Krajina Brigade where they show the territories where they were at the
10 front line. There are also other documents and reports. Believe me. In
11 Sanski Most, we found this military documentation. It says exactly when
12 people left, on which buses, and how many people, and the exact names and
13 surnames of the people involved. So there are other documents too that
14 show this. This is not the only document. General Talic will agree with
15 me, won't he?
16 Q. He has said that these names -- the official names of
17 municipalities in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Since when has the army of
18 Republika Srpska respected the laws of Bosnia-Herzegovina rather than the
19 laws of Republika Srpska?
20 A. I don't know about that. I have no answer to that question of
21 yours. I don't know how to answer it.
22 Q. I'll ask you the question once more, and then I will move on to
23 another subject. Would you allow for the possibility that this map was
24 not made by members of the 6th Brigade?
25 A. I do not allow for that possibility. This map was made by the
1 members of the 6th Krajina Brigade. And it's in colour too, the original,
2 that is.
3 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar show
4 the witness document P667.
5 Q. Is this a list of persons who were arrested between the 18th of
6 May and the 6th of June, 1992 in Sanski Most?
7 A. This is a list of civilians collected from the houses of Sanski
8 Most. They are Bosniaks and Croats. They're no prisoners of war.
9 Q. Do you know who found this document?
10 A. I think that this document came from me.
11 Q. Where did you find this document?
12 A. At the public security station in Sanski Most.
13 Q. Does this document bear a signature?
14 A. No, it doesn't. There's no signature.
15 Q. Is there a stamp on the document?
16 A. There's no stamp.
17 Q. Is there a date on the document?
18 A. There is a date. It says "List from the 18th of May until the
19 16th of June. Persons handed over to the military investigation
20 authorities of the 5th Corps for further investigation procedure." And
21 this is from a file of documents.
22 Q. The dates that you have just mentioned, it's in fact the period
23 during which these persons were arrested. That's correct, isn't it? It's
24 not the date of the document.
25 A. This document was compiled in that period. That is my assertion.
1 My name is in this document too, under number 85. And from the public
2 security station -- from the prison, my name was called out and I was
3 taken out and transported by a truck on the 17th of June. I know all
4 these persons.
5 Q. So the dates that you have read, the 18th of May and the 6th of
6 June, they refer to the period during which these people were arrested;
7 isn't that right?
8 A. I said that these persons were not taken prisoner. They were
9 arrested or called in for an interview, an interrogation, and then they
10 were kept in prison. But they were not taken prisoner.
11 Q. I don't know what interpretation you received in Serbo-Croat, what
12 the translation was in Serbo-Croat, but the verb "arreter" in French means
13 arrest. So could you answer my question. Were these people arrested
14 during the period 18th of May, 6th of June, 1992?
15 A. That's right.
16 Q. But this document doesn't have a date. The document itself hasn't
17 been dated. We don't know when this document was written.
18 A. There is no date on it.
19 Q. Do you agree that this document could have been written on the 6th
20 of June at the earliest?
21 A. I can't say, because the inspectors of the crime investigation
22 service in Sanski Most, when they actually processed this document and
23 when they brought this to Manjaca, I really don't know, because there
24 should be a document of this kind in Manjaca when they came up there.
25 Q. Since the people mentioned in this document were arrested between
1 the 18th of May and the 6th of June, do you agree that this document could
2 not have been written before the 6th of June?
3 A. The arrest started on the 25th of May, and I don't know when this
4 document was made but I know when these people were arrested, in that
6 Q. Yesterday I showed you a document which didn't have a signature
7 and didn't have a stamp. You said that it wasn't an official document.
8 In that case, why -- why is this document without a signature, without a
9 stamp, without a date? Why would this document be an official document?
10 A. Well, this document -- well, you can take it as an unofficial
11 document too, but it does show something. Facts are contained in it,
12 facts, and a list of persons who were arrested and handed over to the 5th
13 Corps of the Yugoslav army for further investigation procedure. And thank
14 God most of these people are still alive. They will say when they were
15 arrested and when they were detained and when they were at Manjaca and
16 when they were released and what they lived through.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated]
18 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. You allow for the possibility that it's not an official document.
20 A. This is an official document; that is to say, from the
21 documentation of the public security station in Sanski Most, from the
22 official file of investigators. And it is the way -- it was taken over
23 from the public security station. It's in the same file, the same
24 binder. This is the original, and that's the way it's been since then,
25 and I still stand by that.
1 Q. Do you know that on the 6th of June, 1992 the 5th Corps no longer
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Did you say the 6th or the 5th?
4 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: 5th.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Because again we've got the 6th Corps. Now, it's
6 the 5th Corps, Judge, not the 6th. I don't know what interpretation you
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This shows that the document was
9 made earlier -- that is to say, during the arrest of people and while they
10 were being investigated, interrogated. I know that the 5th Corps was
12 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Just a moment. You said that the first arrest took place on the
14 25th of May. Do you stand by this statement?
15 A. I do stand by that.
16 Q. Do you know that on the 25th of May, the 5th Corps no longer
18 A. I don't remember the date exactly when the 5th Corps of the JNA
19 was transformed into the 1st Krajina Corps of the Serb army. I can't
20 remember the exact date. But it's not important what it says up here. I
21 know who did this. I know who arrested us. I know who escorted us,
22 who -- I know where we were, and I know who was responsible for us.
23 Q. Yes. But that's another problem. What I'm interested in at the
24 moment is the authenticity of this document. And I can understand very
25 well that you don't know when the 5th Corps withdrew from Bosnia. But it
1 seems to me nevertheless that an officer from the Sanski Most police
2 station would have known that the 5th Corps was no longer in existence.
3 MS. KORNER: [Previous translation continues] ... but not to give
4 her own interpretation of what a police officer knew in Sanski Most.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: She's right, Madam Fauveau. Ms. Korner is right.
6 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] I'll reformulate that
8 Q. Do you know -- and if you don't, just say that you don't know the
9 answer -- do you know why a person who was allegedly an official of the
10 Serbian state -- why would such a person who said that these people were
11 forwarded to the 5th Corps -- were handed over to the 5th Corps since this
12 corps was no longer in existence?
13 A. First of all, what kind of a Serb state? What kind of a Serb
14 state are you talking about? This is nonsense.
15 Q. Do you mean to say that the Serbian state was not in existence,
16 that the Republika Srpska did not exist?
17 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter is not sure what the answer
18 was. Could the witness please repeat it.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, could you repeat your answer, because the
20 interpreters did not quite get it.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said, what kind of a Serb state?
22 JUDGE AGIUS: No. But the question was: "Do you mean to say that
23 the Serbian state was not in existence, that Republika Srpska did not
24 exist?" This was the question. And you answered something which the
25 interpreters did not hear well. Could you repeat your answer.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said what she says is nonsense.
2 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] If I could translate that
3 for you. The witness said that what I am saying is rubbish.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Go ahead, Madam Fauveau, please.
5 And Judge, as a Judge I think don't put me in a position where I
6 have to explain to you that you have no right to attribute the kind of
7 statements to Defence counsel, who are only doing their duty here. I'm
8 sure that if you were in my position, you'd be doing exactly the same.
9 Madam Fauveau, please.
10 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Could you tell me how an official of the Serbian state or of
12 Republika Srpska, if you prefer, was unaware of the fact that the Serbian
13 army had been formed and that this zone was covered by the 1st Corps?
14 JUDGE AGIUS: That's -- Madam Fauveau, you should rephrase it,
15 because you are assuming that he -- this official, whoever the official
16 would be, was unaware. I mean, I -- it takes me at least two to three
17 weeks at the beginning of each year to get used to the idea of writing
18 down the new year, and I keep writing the previous year. So I am
19 perfectly aware that we would have started a new year, but it just happens
20 that I keep writing down "2001" even though we are in 2002. It doesn't
21 mean that I'm not aware. It means that -- it's just a habit.
22 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, I don't want to interrupt. And I
23 take the point that Ms. Fauveau is making about this document but in fact
24 it seems to me that it ought to also be pointed out that they went on
25 using the stamp of the 5th Corps after the transformation as well, which
1 is clear from the document. So how good a point this is, I don't know.
2 And we have spent a lot of time on it.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: And I don't understand why the witness is being
4 so -- when he could answer it in just two words or three words.
5 Do you assume responsibility for what others write, Judge?
6 Because I don't.
7 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
8 Could the registrar show the witness P740.1 and P740.2 -- 780.
9 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter corrects himself. 780.
10 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. First of all, could you have a look at document P782, which is a
12 decision of the judge from the municipal court in Sanski Most.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Did you say 78 --
14 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: 780.2.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Because the interpretation says 782. And
16 that's not correct.
17 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Do you agree that this is a decision from a judge of the municipal
19 court in Sanski Most?
20 A. [No audible response]
21 Q. Could you have a look at the Serbo-Croat version.
22 A. That is the case. That is the case. This is a document of the
23 municipal court of Sanski Most, number 714/97, dated the 20th of October,
25 Q. If you look at the Serbo-Croat version. It's on the first page,
1 the second paragraph -- the last paragraph. And it's the second page in
2 the English version. It's the only paragraph on that page.
3 The judge of Sanski Most established that: [In English] "The son
4 of the applicant was indeed killed on 25 June 1992 by Serb-Chetnik
5 military units near the hospital in Kotor Varos." [Interpretation] Is
6 that correct?
7 A. That's what it says here.
8 Q. This terminology, "the Serbian Chetniks," is this a terminology --
9 are these terms that were currently used in Sanski Most?
10 A. I don't think so.
11 Q. Is it true that this is a derogative term for the Serbian army?
12 A. No, it is not a derogatory term. It is one of pride for the Serb
14 Q. I assume that the "Ustasha" is also a term which is honourable for
15 the Croatian army.
16 A. I don't know about that.
17 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I'm going to
18 move on to another subject. I need another 15 minutes. Would it be
19 better to have a break now?
20 JUDGE AGIUS: We'll have the break now. We'll resume in 30
21 minutes' time. So it's -- at five to 11.00. Thank you.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.24 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Fauveau.
25 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. At the hearing of the 13th of May -- page 48 of the LiveNote, it
2 was from that point -- you stated what the procedure was in order to
3 declare that a person who disappeared was dead. Do you remember speaking
4 about that?
5 A. Yes, I remember that.
6 Q. And you said that a birth certificate had to be attached to the
7 request; is that correct?
8 A. That's right.
9 Q. Do you agree that normally -- in normal situations the
10 municipality in which the person was born issues the birth certificate?
11 A. That's right.
12 Q. Do you have in front of you document 780.1? It's a birth
13 certificate. Do you have this document?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. It's the birth certificate of a person who was born in Kotor
16 Varos; is that correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And this birth certificate was issued by the Sanski Most
20 A. That is not correct. This certificate was issued by an authority
21 of the administration that was set up in the federation for citizens,
22 refugees from the municipality of Kotor Varos; that is to say, their
23 office, which had the authority to issue such documents.
24 Q. Very well. You are right. And this organ, this office, did it
25 have the archives of the Municipality of Kotor Varos?
1 A. Well, I think so, because these offices for citizens who were
2 refugees in the Federation had their own records, their books of
3 registration, ledgers that they obtained from the authorities involved.
4 But they did have these records of citizens. So they were established in
5 the Federation for all municipalities, for all refugees in the Federation.
6 For example, in Sanski Most, there were a few such offices: For the
7 Municipality of Prijedor, for the Municipality of Banja Luka, for the
8 Municipality of Kotor Varos, I think, then Bosanska Dubica, and other
9 municipalities. I can't remember all these offices right now, but
10 citizens who were staying as refugees in Sanski Most could address this
11 office for the issuance of this kind of a document. So this is a legal
13 Q. Is it true that the archives of Kotor Varos municipality remained
14 in Kotor Varos?
15 A. I think so. So the Municipality of Kotor Varos has its organs in
16 Kotor Varos, and that is where the archives are.
17 Q. Did this office in Sanski Most have access to the archives in
18 Kotor Varos?
19 A. I don't know about that, but I said that these offices had
20 communications, some communications with these official institutions in
21 Sarajevo, in the Federation, and they obtained these lists, these excerpts
22 from the birth registers, because without this kind of an excerpt from the
23 records of births, death, et cetera, they couldn't have issued documents.
24 Q. You spoke about an identification number that every citizen in ex-Yugoslavia had.
25 Do you remember speaking about this?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. So you could confirm that all the citizens of ex-Yugoslavia had an
3 identification number.
4 A. I can't confirm that fully, because a citizen would have to go to
5 the authority in charge -- and that is public security station, or the
6 MUP -- and then his personal identification number would have to be
7 established. I don't know if all citizens had their personal
8 identification numbers established. I assume they did. Not only the
9 former Yugoslavia, but also in Bosnia-Herzegovina now, because a person
10 who is of age, if he or she seeks to get an ID or a passport, has to have
11 this personal identification number, just like children who are
12 registered -- who are registered in these books of records.
13 Q. Do you agree that the personal identification number consists of
14 13 figures?
15 A. I think that the personal identification number consists of 13
17 Q. Do you agree that the first seven figures in the personal
18 identification number refer to the date of birth?
19 A. That's right.
20 Q. Could you explain why the birth certificate, which is P780.1,
21 contains a personal identification number which is not complete and which
22 only contains the numbers which refer to the date of birth? And I would
23 like to draw the Trial Chamber's attention to the fact that there is a
24 translation error in the numbers in the English translation, in the
25 English version?
1 JUDGE AGIUS: You are right. There is an extra number, "9," which
2 shouldn't be there. In fact, just for the record, the Trial Chamber is
3 indicating that on the -- what appears to be the original, the identity
4 number -- personal identity number is shown as 1505960, while in the
5 translation -- translated version in English, the personal identity number
6 is shown as 15095960, which does not correspond to the number shown on the
7 original document.
8 Yes. Thank you, Madam Fauveau. I had already noticed it, but I
9 was going to -- to bring it up myself later. Thank you.
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, the -- can I just say that the only
11 thing that I'm slightly concerned about is I understood -- and Your Honour
12 will recall when I was going through the evidence of declarations of death
13 and exhumations -- I understood there was no challenge to this evidence.
14 And indeed both Defence counsel agreed. But we now seem to be going
15 into -- we've already done it with part of the exhumations, how part of a
16 body was identified and now with this particular birth certificate. If
17 there is some kind of challenge, then obviously I'm going to have to
18 devote more time to going through the documentation.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know whether there is a challenge or not, to
20 tell you the truth, because I don't --
21 MS. KORNER: Well, that's what I'm just asking.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't quite see where Madam Fauveau is heading.
23 It may well be something much simpler, which I very much suspect, in fact.
24 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] All right. Well, Your
25 Honour, I'm just making that point so it's clear.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Korner.
2 Madam Fauveau, you may proceed for the time being as if this
3 exchange of debate did not take place. Don't worry about it. Go ahead.
4 If it's the case of drawing your attention to something, I will.
5 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Could you explain why this personal identification number is not
8 A. I can say that often records had shortcomings, in terms of
9 personal identification numbers, because in the former Yugoslavia these
10 records anyway were not complete, as far as personal identification
11 numbers were concerned. I remember during the elections as well there
12 were considerable difficulties concerning personal identification numbers.
13 It is possible that this citizen did not have his personal identification
14 number established. I don't know why it's missing. So it's this part,
15 this date of birth. And the rest -- the rest can be established.
16 Q. On the basis of which facts was a birth certificate issued in this
17 Sanski Most office for the persons who were not born in Sanski Most?
18 A. I can't answer that question now because I didn't go into records
19 of these offices. But I would go and pay a visit to some of these
20 offices, and I saw that they did have some records. You see what I'm
21 saying? I really do not know on the basis of what this authority issued
22 this certificate. I imagine that they had some records, some lists that
23 they obtained from the central records of the MUP in Sarajevo or in some
24 other way. But for me, this is a legal document concerning a person who
25 was born in Kotor Varos with all the personal data contained here. This
1 was confirmed by the person who actually initiated these proceedings
2 before the court of law; that is to say, that these data are correct.
3 Q. Is it possible that this birth certificate was issued at the
4 request of the family and that the facts weren't at all verified?
5 A. This certificate was issued upon the request of the family of the
6 person concerned. As for the facts, I can't say anything about that.
7 This was issued according to the procedure that was made possible for
8 these authorities during the transition period after the war, because the
9 citizens could not immediately address the authorities in Republika Srpska
10 for the issuance of such documents. There were considerable difficulties.
11 That is why these authorities, these offices, had been established as
12 interim authorities. I think they've been abolished by now and that on
13 the basis of federal regulation, such offices no longer exist.
14 Q. At the hearing of the 14th of May, you spoke about people in
15 Vrhpolje who decided to not surrender their arms, their weapons, and to
16 defend themselves. Do you remember speaking about this?
17 A. Yes. I remember.
18 Q. You said -- and it's on page 17 of the LiveNote of the 14th of
19 May -- that all these people were killed. Is that correct?
20 A. That's not what I said.
21 Q. I'm going to read what you stated. [In English] "They withdrew to
22 a position above the village in order to defend their village, to defend
23 their houses. They didn't want to surrender. They had infantry weapons
24 on them. I think that all those people died. They were all killed."
25 A. Apart from those who were involved in the exchange, I did mention
1 that these persons had captured a group of officers and soldiers of the
2 6th Krajina Brigade and that they asked for an exchange and that this was
3 made possible for them, that is, to take buses to a locality in Bihac.
4 That's what I said. And there were about 180 such persons, perhaps a bit
5 less. And the rest who stayed in the forest were captured and killed.
6 Some were captured and interrogated at the public security station in
7 Sanski Most, and there is a trace of that. There are statements, but all
8 these persons were liquidated at an unknown locality. That's what I
10 Q. So you do agree that not all of them were killed.
11 A. No. They all were not killed; that is to say, those who went to
12 Bihac were not killed, those who were exchanged. And this was made
13 possible for them. And I imagine that Mr. Talic knows this, that this
14 group went to Bihac and that these 46 Serb officers and soldiers were
16 Q. You said that there were 300 prisoners in Vrhpolje. Do you know
17 how many of them were exchanged?
18 A. The figure I gave was approximate, was less, I think. I said that
19 this was the maximum that could have been there. According to what I
20 know, 158 persons went to Bihac -- no, 183. 183. I received this
21 information -- I received this information from persons who went to Bihac,
22 and I saw them after the war.
23 Q. And these resistance in Vrhpolje, these Muslims, were they armed?
24 A. I don't know the extent to which they were armed, but I think that
25 some of them - probably a large number - had small arms, light weapons. I
1 mean automatic rifles, and some ammunition as well.
2 Q. And these people in Vrhpolje, these Muslim members of the
3 resistance, were they wearing uniforms?
4 A. Well, I'm not sure that they wore uniforms. Possibly some of them
5 could have had uniforms, but I don't know. I do not preclude that
6 possibility, that somebody did have a uniform. But most of them had no
7 uniforms. Most of them were in civilian clothing.
8 Q. So they were wearing civilian clothing and they had weapons.
9 That's how it was, isn't it?
10 A. I'm not sure. I'm not sure about that, so I really can't say. I
11 know that there was one person who was a former JNA officer. He was with
12 them and he was their commander and he was involved in negotiations with
13 the command of the 6th Krajina Brigade concerning negotiations --
14 concerning an exchange. And he led these men.
15 Q. But you would allow for the possibility that some of these 300
16 Muslims in Vrhpolje, of these 300 resistance, were wearing civilian
18 A. I do allow for that possibility.
19 Q. At the hearing of the 15th of May, you spoke about mass graves in
20 Vrhpolje, and you said that they weren't marked. Is that correct?
21 A. That is correct.
22 Q. These mass graves were located in the vicinity of the bridge of
23 Vrhpolje; is that correct?
24 A. Some mass graves were right by the bridge and underneath the
25 bridge at Vrhpolje.
1 Q. And the bridge in Vrhpolje was destroyed in 1995; is that correct?
2 A. That is correct.
3 Q. So these mass graves which were near or under the bridge in
4 Vrhpolje were in a combat zone; is that correct?
5 A. Which combat? Tell me, which combat? Conflicts took place in
6 1995. Are you referring to 1992?
7 Q. 1995.
8 A. All right.
9 Q. So it is possible that the markings at these mass graves were
10 destroyed in the fighting.
11 A. That's not possible, because the ground where I was searching for
12 the graves, it was levelled and there was grass there. There weren't any
13 visible markings, because had there been any, people would have known that
14 a grave was there and they would have marked that place.
15 Q. When were these exhumations carried out, these exhumations in the
16 vicinity of the Vrhpolje bridge?
17 A. There were several exhumations, because in that area several mass
18 graves were found at several localities too. But over there by the
19 bridge, the first exhumations were carried out, and there is a report in
20 writing about that. I don't want to engage in guesswork concerning the
21 date, et cetera, so I think it's there in the report. I can just say that
22 I was informed by SFOR that they found this on the left-hand side while
23 they were clearing the remnants of the bridge, that they found some
24 skeletons deep down, and that they stopped further work on clearing the
25 rubble, because they were supposed to build a bridge. That's when I
1 established that particular locality. So it was SFOR that was the first
2 to find this grave.
3 Q. Could you tell us the year.
4 A. I think it was the beginning of 1996.
5 Q. And this mass grave was beneath the debris of the bridge that had
6 been destroyed; is that correct?
7 A. That's right.
8 Q. So how can you say that among the debris from the bridge, there
9 was no debris from markings of the mass grave?
10 A. I can assert that because people were there in September 1995,
11 members of the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. No one told me that there was
12 such a locality there. Furthermore, the grave was found deep down when
13 they were digging there, because a new bridge was supposed to be built
14 there. So it was not on the surface; it was deep down. This grave was
15 concealed underneath the left side of the bridge by the river bank, by the
16 bank of the River Sana.
17 Q. Could we agree that at the place where the mass grave was found,
18 the terrain, the ground, had been covered by debris from the bridge?
19 A. Yes. In 1996. Or rather, from October -- September 1995 until
20 the bodies were found.
21 Q. I have just one more question for you. Before you came to give
22 testimony here, did you have the opportunity of reading the indictment
23 against General Talic?
24 A. No, I did not.
25 Q. Thank you.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Madam Fauveau.
2 Judge, you're now going to be cross-examined by Mr. Ackerman.
3 Mr. Ackerman, do you prefer to take Madam Fauveau's place, or are
4 you going to remain where -- okay.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.
6 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just before Mr. Ackerman begins --
7 because effectively, Manjaca is more evidence-related to General Talic
8 directly than Mr. Brdjanin. If I understand the cross-examination, part
9 of a report has been read that said that conditions seemed to be all right
10 and Mr. Ashdown's comments afterwards. There's been no specific challenge
11 to any of the events and incidents that the judge described.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, that in itself is a challenge, I think. No?
13 It's -- in other words, I mean, his words are being put in question, in
15 MS. KORNER: Right.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: -- By two affirmations coming from other sources.
17 One was which supposedly Mr. Ashdown said.
18 MS. KORNER: Yes.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: And the other one Merhamet told the other gentleman.
20 MS. KORNER: Yes well, that's --
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I'm satisfied --
22 MS. KORNER: Well, Your Honour, the reason I'm raising it at this
23 stage so to make it very clear. Virtually every witness we're calling is
24 going to be dealing with events in Manjaca. I'm anxious to reduce, if
25 possible, the amount of time I have to spend with each witness dealing
1 with the conditions in Manjaca. Obviously there will be two or three
2 more -- if as I understand it, therefore, the challenge is limited to
3 well, there are reports that say this was all right but that there's
4 no -- because there is no -- Madam Fauveau has no specific instructions
5 and cannot have specific instructions to challenge the detail, then I will
6 take it that the general's defence on this is simply that he doesn't know
7 one way or the other. It seems to me the proper way to draw it. Because
8 otherwise, if there's more information specific to the detailed account of
9 the camp that's been given by this witness --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's put it like this. Ms. Korner -- and then I'll
11 call upon you, Madam Fauveau, to make your remarks.
12 The report that Madam Fauveau read from is very specific in that
13 it relates to a period of four days --
14 MS. KORNER: Absolutely.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Those four days, however, supposedly representing an
16 update of --
17 MS. KORNER: Yes. But not an update on the report on the camp.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Exactly. Between the 16th and the 20th of
20 MS. KORNER: Yes.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: So basically whatever that report states can only be
22 referred to those particular four days.
23 MS. KORNER: Yes.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ashdown's alleged comments -- because these
25 are -- if I read well or I heard well, someone saying Mr. Ashdown said --
1 MS. KORNER: Well, one actually hears him saying it in English at
2 a later stage.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't remember the exact date of Mr. Ashdown's
5 MS. KORNER: It was the 10th of August.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: So basically we're talking of the 10th of August and
7 what he saw, what he was allowed to see, whatever. That's about it.
8 Having said that, I now call upon you, Madam Fauveau, to remark or
9 to comment on Ms. Korner's submission. In other words, what are you
11 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I gave to
12 the witness evidence that I had at the moment. In fact, what we are
13 contesting is the image of this camp, and I didn't have any other evidence
14 to show him other than the evidence that I presented him with. As far as
15 the personal acquaintance with General Talic is concerned, Ms. Korner is
16 quite right because General Talic never went to that camp, so it could
17 only be based on the reports that he received.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's -- that -- it's clear enough.
19 MS. KORNER: Yes. That is clear.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I think so.
21 MS. KORNER: Thank you. I'm sorry. Your Honour, that is clear.
22 Thank you.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: So Mr. Ackerman, if you're ready, we can start.
24 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you, Your Honours. I am ready.
25 Cross-examined by Mr. Ackerman:
1 Q. Mr. Draganovic, I have a lot of questions to ask you. I have 41
2 pages of notes of questions I want to ask you. And the Judge has told you
3 that you can get yourself out of here quicker if you'll listen carefully
4 to the question and just answer the question that I'm asking you and not
5 follow that with some speech. Do you think you can do that?
6 A. I hope so.
7 Q. So do we all.
8 You became a judge in Sanski Most, didn't you, in 1987?
9 A. I think that it says in my statement exactly when I became a
10 judge. It gives the exact date. It should be contained in my statement,
12 Q. So you don't know when you became a judge.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: He didn't say that, Mr. Ackerman. He told you
14 basically -- you already have the answer in my statement.
15 MR. ACKERMAN:
16 Q. Do you know when you became a judge?
17 A. I said that in my statement, it gives the date. And it was in
18 1997 -- no, not in 1997 -- in 1987 in Sanski Most. That's when I came
19 from Bosanska Dubica, where I was also a judge.
20 Q. Now, we started this process with me suggesting to you that if
21 you could just listen and answer my questions, we'd be a lot quicker. And
22 the simple question I asked you is: You became a judge in Sanski Most in
23 1997? It would be so easy to say yes, rather than all this business about
24 your statement, wouldn't it?
25 A. Please. Don't try to suggest to me how I should answer.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, you should know that if you are on a
2 collision course -- and I am not going to help you. You are very much
3 alone there. I have been a witness myself in my career. And as a judge,
4 you are alone. As a witness, you are alone as well. And I can sense that
5 if you are not careful, you are on a collision course. You could have
6 answered the question in the simplest of ways, yes or no, and you didn't.
7 Mr. Ackerman.
8 MR. ACKERMAN:
9 Q. The second thing you need to know, Mr. Draganovic, is your
10 statements are not evidence in this case. The evidence in this case is
11 the testimony you give from this witness stand and the exhibits that are
12 admitted. So it is not sufficient to make evidence in this case that you
13 said something in your statement. Do you understand that?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. Now, you were not from Sanski Most. You were not born and raised,
16 you didn't grow up in Sanski Most, did you?
17 A. I grew up in Sanski Most, and I've lived in Sanski Most since when
18 I was a child, but I was born in the Kljuc municipality.
19 Q. What I want to know is how is it that after only one year of going
20 to the judiciary in Sanski Most, you were made the court president. How
21 did that happen?
22 A. It was part of regular procedure. That's how it happened. Since
23 my term of -- the term of office of the former president had expired --
24 she was Snezana Tesanovic, I was proposed as the president of the court
25 and I was elected.
1 Q. And elected by whom?
2 A. I think it was by the parliament. I was elected by the
3 parliament -- or the Assembly of Sanski Most municipality. I can't
4 remember now exactly.
5 Q. Were there other judges in Sanski Most that had been there longer
6 than you in the lower court?
7 A. At that time I don't think there were any other judges who had
8 been there longer than myself. Perhaps one of the judges had been there
9 for longer than I had, but she was on sick leave -- on maternity leave for
10 three years.
11 Q. And when you became president, you'd been there about a year.
12 A. More or less.
13 Q. And how is it you don't know who elected you judge? How could
14 that be?
15 A. At the time, the laws had been changed. I know that the municipal
16 courts were under the competence of the municipalities and that at
17 sometime during that period, they fell under the Republic of
18 Bosnia-Herzegovina. I can't remember exactly.
19 Q. So you -- as you sit here today, you just don't know who elected
20 you president of that court.
21 A. Perhaps the Municipal Assembly of Sanski Most or the parliament of
22 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
23 Q. But the answer is you don't know.
24 A. I think it was the Municipal Assembly of Sanski Most.
25 Q. All right. You told us in your testimony the other day that 48
1 members of your family had been killed during the war. Understand that
2 I'm not asking you this question. I just am asking you: If I were to ask
3 you to name each of these people and tell us how they died, would you be
4 able to do that?
5 A. I -- first of all, I didn't say 48. But I think that I could
6 describe -- give the names of all my relatives who were killed.
7 Q. You told the Chamber a few moments ago -- well, let me ask you a
8 question before I ask that one. The organisation Merhamet -- the
9 organisation Merhamet is a Muslim charity organisation, isn't it?
10 A. A Bosniak humanitarian organisation. Yes, you could say that.
11 But not just for Muslims; for everyone who needs help.
12 Q. And you know that in 1992, it had offices in Banja Luka, don't
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. And you know that Bosniaks worked in those offices and did the
16 work of Merhamet during that year, 1992?
17 A. Yes. I found out that they worked there. That's correct.
18 Q. You know Adil Medic, don't you?
19 A. I know Mr. Medic.
20 Q. And do you want to stand by your statement that Mr. Medic was
21 under the control of Serbian authorities?
22 A. I stand by my statement that Merhamet in Banja Luka was under the
23 control of the Serbian authorities but not Adil Medic.
24 Q. You know that Adil Medic, on behalf of Merhamet, was visiting
25 Manjaca, don't you?
1 A. That's right.
2 Q. On the first day of your testimony here, Mr. Draganovic, you told
3 us -- I'm going to read you the exact question and answer. It's page
4 4846, lines 3 through 5.
5 MS. KORNER: Date, please.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Hmm?
7 MS. KORNER: The date.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: 23 April.
9 Q. Question: And you -- "And have you worked in liaison with the
10 office of AID both in Sanski Most and in Sarajevo?"
11 Answer: "Yes. I cooperated with the AID."
12 Is that true?
13 A. That's not what I said.
14 Q. Sir, I'm reading from the transcript.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. But he said much more than that,
16 Mr. Ackerman.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I've read the entire answer.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: We could actually stay here and read the entire
19 deposition as far as it relates to the questions that he was asked about
20 his cooperation with AID, but I do remember that he said much more than
22 MR. ACKERMAN: Maybe during the cross-examination of Madam Fauveau
23 he talked about that.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: No. No. It was not during the cross-examination
25 only. Also on -- upon the cross-examination, but not only on
1 cross-examination. Also on examination-in-chief.
2 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, Your Honour, if you want to look at page
3 4846, there is one question about AID and one answer about AID and that's
4 it. There is nothing more than that.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. Well, that may be on that particular date.
6 But on other days he did amplify on the alleged cooperation with AID. So
7 go straight to the question that you need to ask him, because it's not
8 fair to refer the witness to one statement only if you know that he has
9 made further statements on his cooperation with AID, be it on that same
10 occasion or on other occasions.
11 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I don't know why you are saying his
12 alleged cooperation with AID. It sounds like you have made a conclusion
13 that he did not cooperate with AID --
14 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: And in the transcript he says he did --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm saying "alleged" because it was put to him
17 whether he cooperated or not, and it was put to him one way by one counsel
18 and put to him in another way by another counsel. So when I say "alleged
19 cooperation," because he's already qualified what kind of cooperation he
20 had with the AID.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: It was put to him by the Prosecutor, "You worked
22 in liaison with the office of AID both in Sanski Most and in Sarajevo,"
23 and his answer was yes --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: And then later he explained that he worked as a
25 judge in cooperation with AID and he also worked not as a judge with AID.
1 So this is why I am asking you go straight to the question that you want
2 to ask him. Because he did explain in detail to --
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, I object to your characterising it, Your
4 Honour, as "alleged cooperation." That sounds like a finding being made
5 by the Court that he did not.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, I can assure you that it is no finding
7 at all, especially knowing that you are going to ask questions to the
8 witness on his cooperation with AID. He has already stated that he
9 cooperated, but it's not the cooperation that was put to him at one point
10 in time. He qualified his cooperation by explaining what kind of
11 cooperation it was.
12 MR. ACKERMAN:
13 Q. Sir, did you prior to coming here to testify in the period of time
14 between the time you knew you would be a witness in this case and the time
15 you came here to testify, did you speak with anyone from AID about the
16 testimony you would give here?
17 A. Please. Could you repeat that question again. I'm sorry.
18 Q. During that period of time between the time you became aware that
19 you would be a witness in this case and when you actually came here to The
20 Hague, did you speak with anyone from AID about your testimony, about the
21 testimony you would give here?
22 A. No, I didn't.
23 Q. During that period of time that you returned home while we had a
24 break in the trial, did you speak with anyone there, AID or otherwise,
25 about your testimony here?
1 A. No, not at all. I didn't.
2 Q. In Sanski Most during the investigations you conducted in 1995 and
3 later, you knew a person by the name of Zijad Ibric, didn't you?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And he worked for AID, didn't he?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, do I have to answer
7 this question?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: If you know the answer, yes.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could you please repeat the
11 MR. ACKERMAN:
12 Q. Zijad Ibric worked for AID, didn't he?
13 A. Zijad Ibric does work for the AID. He's an official in AID, the
14 Agency for Investigation and Documentation.
15 Q. Did anybody from AID give you a ride to the airport in your trips
17 A. Never. Never. I don't drive around with those people.
18 Q. You think that would be improper, don't you?
19 A. I don't think anything. I know who -- who brought me there.
20 Q. You and Mr. Zijad Ibric interviewed some witnesses together,
21 didn't you, in connection with those investigations?
22 A. That's possible.
23 Q. And as an example, sir, I'd like you to look at three exhibits,
24 DB73.1, DB74.1, and DB76.1. I'd ask you be shown those, please.
25 Now, sir, my question is really very simple, and I think it would
1 be very easy for you to answer it. All I want to do is direct you to the
2 last page of each of those statements and ask you if it's not the case
3 that these documents show that you and Zijad Ibric took statements from
4 the person whose name also appears -- and signature also appears on those
5 documents. And I'm only showing you it for that purpose. Is that the
7 A. Yes. This is a statement that I took as an investigating judge --
8 Q. Referring to 73.1? Just look at all of them and then confirm for
9 me that they're all statements that you took as investigating judge, along
10 with Zijad Ibric.
11 A. I took this statement as an investigating judge, and Mr. Zijad
12 Ibric typed this statement out on a computer.
13 Q. And you're referring to 73. what? Look at the front. It says
14 73. something on it.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. 73.1? Now, look at 73.2. The same thing? It should say DB73.1,
17 DB73.2 -- no, 74.1 and DB76.1.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And the last one.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Mr. Ackerman. Take the first one of
21 these documents, DB73.1, please, Judge. Starting from the title [B/C/S
22 spoken], and skip the first paragraph, consisting of one line, the second
23 paragraph, consisting of eight lines. The third paragraph, starting with
24 [B/C/S spoken]. Can you read out that paragraph so that I have it
25 translated, please.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "This statement is being taken and
2 recorded by the investigating judge of this court, Adil Draganovic, with
3 the assistance of an official from the AID, Zijad Ibric."
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These two copies are identical.
6 MR. ACKERMAN:
7 Q. Give me the numbers of the identical ones.
8 A. It's this one. Down here there is a Prosecution number, 00431945,
9 and number 00431945. They are identical.
10 Q. You're correct. I think two of them are identical.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. In the first of these documents, you have a
12 reference number which is redacted, while in the second you don't.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: I believe they're identical, Your Honour. They
14 were --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know. If it's not important for you,
16 Mr. Ackerman --
17 MR. ACKERMAN: Okay. It's not.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: -- You may go ahead.
19 MR. ACKERMAN:
20 Q. My only purpose, sir, in showing you these was to show that you
21 and Mr. Ibric worked together in taking these statements. And you signed
22 them yourself, didn't you?
23 A. That's right. That's how this statement was taken.
24 Q. How about a man named Husein Ganic? Did you know him?
25 A. I can't remember now.
1 Q. Do you recall if you and Mr. Ibric took a statement from a
2 gentleman named Husein Ganic? Does that ring any bells with you?
3 A. I really can't remember.
4 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honours, I want to bring to your attention and
5 move the admission of defendant Brdjanin Exhibit number 77. I will tell
6 you that it is a -- an extract from the transcript in the Kvocka case,
7 pages 11018 through 11060. It contains --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: 11018. Yes.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: Through 11060. Those are the page numbers of
10 transcript. It contains the full testimony--
11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour. I object to this completely. I object
12 to a description of this document. I object to the admission of testimony
13 from another case which the Defence, if they wish to put it in and it has
14 some relevance -- I was unaware till this morning. Indeed a pile of
15 documents was placed on the -- in front of me this morning, which I
16 haven't had an opportunity to go through, and I object to this in its
17 entirety. And if this is going to happen --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: That is something which I had hoped we agreed upon
19 in the very beginning of this trial. And this is somewhere where
20 cooperation has been shortcoming, because it's not fair that even the
21 Chamber itself comes to today's sitting only knowing what documents are --
22 you're going to make use of at the beginning of the sitting, at 9.00, and
23 then having the documents available during the first -- first break and
24 not having had an opportunity to go through them.
25 MS. KORNER: That's right, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: That's not what we had agreed upon in the very
2 beginning of this trial, Mr. Ackerman.
3 MS. KORNER: And Your Honour, Mr. Ackerman should --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: The same applies to Madam Fauveau.
5 And sometimes the same applies to you, because you do exactly the
6 same thing.
7 MS. KORNER: [Previous translation continues] ...
8 JUDGE AGIUS: And my complaint is quite a clear one. You should
9 not -- I do acknowledge that everyone is busy here, but I do acknowledge
10 also that we have an agreement that you should make available the
11 documentation or at least indicate what documents you are going to make
12 use of in good time. I don't expect to know weeks and months before, but
13 at least we should be in a position to know a day before what documents
14 you are going to make use of.
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, that's not in fact correct. Unless Your
16 Honour points to a specific incident in each case. Because otherwise
17 there's complaints from the Defence. We say the documents we're going to
18 use --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, Ms. Korner, there have been days when I came
20 here having a List of Documents which I had asked my staff to have
21 prepared for me and I have gone through only to find out that in the space
22 of 12 hours, that list has changed, it has increased in number. That
23 happened yesterday. For example, Madam Fauveau started with a list of
24 about six or seven documents. All of a sudden yesterday I found out
25 that -- or the day before yesterday that it had increased in number,
1 multiplied by about three or four. And as regards your list, we only had
2 it this morning, Mr. Ackerman.
3 MS. KORNER: Can we return -- I'm sorry if Your Honour feels that
4 we're deficient in providing lists. As I've said, in fact, we're not
5 going provide lists in future because it's too complicated. We're going
6 to hand out the documents was we come to them.
7 But Your Honour, at this moment; we've drifted slightly off the
8 point, which is I was unaware that an attempt was going to be made to put
9 in part of a transcript, and I certainly want to read it and in principle
10 I object to method -- this method of attempting to adduce evidence into a
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I haven't read it either, Ms. Korner. The only
13 thing I can suggest at this point in time -- banking on the cooperation
14 of -- from Mr. Ackerman -- is if he could postpone this -- putting this
15 question with regard to that -- to later until we at least go through the
16 script -- the transcript and see what it is -- what it is about.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: I'd be happy to do that, Your Honour. Of course.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. And then we will decide on your objection
19 later on, because I -- don't expect me to rule on the admissibility of
20 this document and on the -- the legitimacy of the question that
21 Mr. Ackerman has put and will be putting on this document, not having read
23 MR. ACKERMAN: Let me just say that it represents prior recorded
24 testimony that the Prosecutor had --
25 MS. KORNER: No. I object to this, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Don't -- don't say it in front of the witness.
2 MS. KORNER: I object --
3 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm not going to talk about the content at all.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: So what you are talking about.
5 MR. ACKERMAN:
6 MS. KORNER: And what's the prior recorded testimony got to do
7 with anything.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: It's admissible.
9 MS. KORNER: Your Honour I object to this. I don't want any of
10 the content of this document -- until I have had a chance to look at it.
11 And Your Honour, I would in future ask that if this type of document is --
12 there's going to be attempt to put it in, we must be notified in advance
13 so we don't have this unseemly discussion in front of a witness.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's leave it at that for the time being. We
15 are going to take time to read this document. And there is Mr. Ackerman's
16 understanding on this. He will put the question if it's admitted -- and
17 the document-- on the document if it's admitted later on. Is that okay
18 with you, Mr. Ackerman?
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
21 MR. ACKERMAN:
22 Q. Sir, do you know a person by the name of Jasminka Putica?
23 A. I don't remember.
24 Q. Would it -- let me see if I can refresh your memory a bit. She is
25 a judge in Sarajevo. Do you know her?
1 A. That's not the name.
2 Q. Have I got the name wrong?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Could you tell us what the name is.
5 A. If you're asking about a judge, I know that there is a judge by
6 the name of Jasminka Putica at the Supreme Court of the Federation of
8 Q. That's what I thought I said. Obviously I was misunderstood.
9 And do you know what her ethnicity is?
10 A. I don't know.
11 Q. Do you know a gentleman by the name of Bakir Alispahic?
12 A. I don't know.
13 Q. Have you ever heard of Bakir Alispahic?
14 A. I've heard of him.
15 Q. Have you heard of him in connection with any function that he had
16 with AID?
17 A. I've heard about that.
18 Q. Do you know that he used to be the chief of AID?
19 A. I read about that in the newspapers.
20 Q. Do you know where he is now?
21 A. I don't know.
22 Q. Didn't you read in the newspapers that he's in jail?
23 A. I didn't.
24 Q. Do you know Enver Mujezinovic?
25 A. I don't know him.
1 Q. Do you know of him?
2 A. I haven't heard of him.
3 Q. How about Irfan Ljevakovic?
4 A. Could you please put a question to me.
5 Q. Do you know Irfan Ljevakovic?
6 A. I don't.
7 Q. Do you know Edhem Veladzic?
8 A. If you're referring to Edhem Veladzic, I do know that person.
9 Q. Do you know him -- he was the ex-chief of police security centre
10 in Bihac. Is that where you knew him?
11 A. I know him as former minister of the police of the canton of
13 Q. Do you know where he is now?
14 A. I don't.
15 Q. Didn't you read that he was in jail?
16 A. I didn't read about it, because I've been in The Hague for a long
17 while now.
18 Q. You told us that you had read something in the newspaper about
19 Mr. Alispahic that had to do with some of his recent problems, did it
21 A. I don't know what you're driving at, but -- I really don't know
22 what you're asking me.
23 MR. ACKERMAN:
24 Q. How about -- do you know --
25 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry. Your Honour, I'm going to ask what the
1 relevance of this is. What this witness may or may not have read about
2 people in the papers.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'd be happy to tell you out of the
4 presence of the witness. I'd be eager to tell you out of the presence of
5 this witness.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated].
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm sorry about the microphone.
9 Usher, could you escort the witness out for a while, and then
10 we'll continue.
11 Judge, we need to discuss something in your absence, which I am
12 sure you understand.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.
14 [The witness stands down]
15 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] He doesn't need to be
16 taken far, because I suppose this is only going to last a couple of
18 Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I can tell you only my current
20 understanding, and I can also tell you this matter is -- continues to be
21 under investigation. But it is clear that five individuals have been
22 arrested and are sitting in jail in Sarajevo, having been detained on the
23 orders of this judge Jasminka Putica. They are described as five former
24 officials of AID and their associates, including the former head of AID,
25 Mr. Alispahic. They are charged by the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina
1 with engaging in terrorist activities, with manufacturing documents. And
2 it's a very, very serious matter. There is an article about it in
3 Oslobodenje. And I have an investigation going on trying to find out
4 more about it. They apparently also were engaged in some kind of a plot
5 to assassinate Fikret Abdic.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Who is Fikret Abdic?
7 MR. ACKERMAN: Fikret Abdic was the person who got the most votes
8 in the election for president of BiH but was not seated. Mr. Izetbegovic
9 was seated instead. So Abdic went off to the Bihac area and formed his
10 own organisation and actually wound up fighting against the
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina forces, the Bosnian army. He's a controversial
12 figure. He was recently tried, as I understand it, in Croatia. And as I
13 understand it -- and please understand my information right now is pretty
14 sparse -- the purpose of this plot to kill him was that he was seen by
15 these people at AID as a traitor to their cause, which is -- well, I'm not
16 going to describe what it is because I want to investigate a little
17 further. But I think it's a serious matter. I only wanted to ask this
18 witness --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly. I mean --
20 MR. ACKERMAN: -- If these were people he had worked with. And
21 apparently they are not. So that will end my questions to him.
22 This matter will come to your attention I think in much greater
23 detail at some point regarding all the documents we have here from AID.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: No. At this point I think the questions that he's
25 been putting up, perfectly legitimate, providing he ends the question
1 there, depending on what kind of answer he gets.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm going to ask again. How is it
3 relevant that certain people that this witness may or may not know have
4 been arrested and charged?
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. But again, these are allegations, like -- like
6 I said. It -- I am taking them on the face value for the time being. I
7 take Mr. Ackerman's word that the facts are as he states, as he stated --
8 in other words, that proceedings have been instituted against these four
9 or five persons. Obviously -- I mean, he's got an interest to establish
10 whether the witness ever cooperated or worked with these four or five
11 persons in particular if amongst the charges that they are facing is the
12 fabrication of false -- forged documents, as he has suggested.
13 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I'm sorry. At the moment, Mr. Ackerman
14 may be right, he may be wrong. I haven't the faintest idea even if Your
15 Honour hasn't --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: But we are not judging --
17 MS. KORNER: Can I finish, Your Honour?
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
19 MS. KORNER: I am simply asking what is the relevance unless it is
20 suggested that a particular document that we have produced -- and I've
21 been through this before. We've had these wild allegations being made.
22 If it is suggested that these particular documents, any one of them that
23 we have got, are forged, are not authentic, then that -- and that this
24 witness knows something about it, then it can be put. But this sort of
25 general do you know these people and then Your Honour to be informed that
1 these people have been arrested and have been charged and the charges
2 involved -- Your Honour, again, I say what is the relevance?
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I must respond, if you'll allow me.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I'm going to exempt you from having to
5 respond, Mr. Ackerman, because the position is as follows: The Chamber
6 has admitted on a prima facie basis all the documents -- practically all
7 the documents that you brought forward, knowing all the time that there is
8 a ongoing objection on the part of both Mr. Ackerman and Madam Fauveau
9 with regard to if not all, the majority of documents originating from
10 Bihac and in the case of Madam Fauveau in particular, documents
11 originating from Sarajevo. We've had statements in this Chamber that
12 these documents are not trusted. Now, obviously the question is still
13 there at the end of the day. That's going to be one of our major tasks.
14 We will have to distinguish between one document and another and come to a
15 conclusion. At this point in time, if there is this allegation
16 throughout -- permeating all the proceedings in this case that some
17 documents which are unsigned or unstamped or both and some documents
18 originating from Sarajevo and some documents originating from AID and --
19 and/or Bihac, these are being contested -- although for the time being, no
20 specific details are forthcoming with regard to any one of these
21 particular documents. If there is an allegation now or if there is a
22 statement by Mr. Ackerman that there are persons from AID that are being
23 charged with -- amongst inter alia fabrication of documents, I'm going to
24 allow to question, to see whether the judge -- whether the witness has
25 ever been associated with these five persons, because that may have a
1 relevance. If he has been associated with these five persons, that may --
2 it may not have a relevance even if he has been associated, because
3 everything stands to be proved. But if he has not been associated in any
4 way with these five persons, obviously that is going to be given its due
5 weight. If he has been associated with these five persons, that will also
6 be given its due weight. This is why I'm definitely going to allow the
7 question to go ahead.
8 MS. KORNER: [Microphone not activated] Your Honour, I'm not going
9 to pursue this -- I'm not going to pursue except to point out to Your
10 Honour that the fact that these people may have been arrested, may have
11 been charged, proves precisely nothing.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Of course it doesn't.
13 MS. KORNER: If the allegation is -- and I repeat this again and
14 then I'm going to sit down, Your Honour -- that a particular document or
15 all the documents in this case that come from -- through the auspices of
16 AID are forged, fine, then let that be put and we'll deal with that.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: That stands to be seen and to be decided.
18 MS. KORNER: I know. Your Honour. But that's why I need to deal
19 with that. Obviously, if that's the allegation that's been made and it's
20 going to be put in terms that any documents handed in through this witness
21 who allege -- who says, I'm sorry, not alleges -- who says he found these
22 documents in the CSB that these documents were not found there, or that
23 they've been forged by him in conjunction with other members of the AID,
24 then that is an allegation that must been put.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait one moment.
1 Ms. Korner, the motion is very simple in any mind, at least. It's
2 true that what Mr. Ackerman has stated as being reported -- and I don't
3 know which newspaper -- is something that is -- seems to be in the air,
4 that one day or another maybe will be decided but that at the present
5 moment there is no decision on those facts. But do you expect the Trial
6 Chamber to ignore as if it is not happening the fact that there are four
7 or five persons from AID that are being charged -- I'm not saying that
8 they are guilty -- but that are being charged with, amongst other things,
9 fabrication of documents, when this Trial Chamber has in front of it an
10 allegation from the Defence, again which will need to be decided upon
11 later on, that there are amongst the documents originating from Sarajevo
12 or -- and AID documents that are forged or are not being accepted? How
13 can I ignore that?
14 MS. KORNER: I don't think I'll answer Your Honour's question.
15 Thank you. I've made my objection.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, if there's anything that you would
18 like to say, please go ahead. If not, we'll get the witness back, and I
19 would like you to put the question before the break.
20 MR. ACKERMAN: All right. I'm not sure I have a question left to
21 put. I think I went through every individual. Let me just make sure. I
22 think I -- the last person I asked him about was Mr. Alispahic and he said
23 he didn't know him. And that was the end of the names. And I don't think
24 there's another question to put to him because he doesn't know them and he
25 clearly doesn't work with them. And that would end it.
1 But let me say this: Ms. Korner is trying to shift a burden to us
2 that we cannot have.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: It's not going to be shifted to you, Mr. Ackerman.
4 MR. ACKERMAN: And what she's saying is we must show they're
5 forgeries. She must show they're authentic. And by Your Honour's ruling
6 at the beginning of this trial if we raise any indication whatsoever that
7 these documents do not come from an official source and are not
8 trustworthy, then it's up to the Prosecutor to prove their authenticity.
9 That's her job, not ours. It's not our job to prove they are forgeries.
10 So she has her burdens wrong. She has what she has to do wrong.
11 Secondly, I have newspaper articles that say more about this, but
12 they say things that I think might be reckless. For instance, they
13 connect these people with Al Qaeda and the activities of Al Qaeda in the
14 U.S. And I don't think -- that may not be responsible. The one newspaper
15 that --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: We have enough on our shoulders already.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: The responsible newspaper of Oslobodenje. It's not
18 a Serbian newspaper. It's an independent newspaper. And the charges are
19 made by the government of Bosnia-Herzegovina, not Serbian court. And so
20 that's all I have to say about it. And so say that this is wild
21 allegations, I think is -- is an outrageous thing for her to say. If the
22 Prosecutor knew about this --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: They could be the wildest of allegations. I don't
24 care at this point in time, Mr. Ackerman.
25 MR. ACKERMAN: If the Prosecutor knew --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: If there is a hint that there may be -- there could
2 have been cooperation between any witness -- not just this one -- and AID
3 members or officials who are being charged -- presently charged with
4 fabrication of documents, that is of course of interest to this Trial
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, what I want to say is if the Prosecutor knew
7 about it, I think it was her obligation to bring it to your attention.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: The Prosecutor didn't know about it. I mean, don't
9 bring it -- as if the Prosecutor knew about this and is trying to hide
10 something from us. I mean, I don't take it like that.
11 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I know nothing whatsoever about this. I
12 will clearly be making inquiries as a result of now finally being told.
13 Had we been asked about this, we could have probably made inquiries
14 ourselves. But the point is still -- the one I made is in our submission
15 a valid one. Of course the burden is upon us to show that these documents
16 are authentic. Not for one moment do I suggest that the Defence has any
17 burden upon it to show they're not authentic. But if the suggestion is
18 going to be made that all the documents that we have produced, that come
19 through the auspices of AID are in some way suspect or forged, then of
20 course we will discharge our burden by calling as much evidence as we can
21 to show that those documents are in fact authentic. But until such time
22 as we have an inkling -- because this is the first time it's been
23 suggested -- or at the beginning of this trial that these documents are
24 forgeries -- we can't discharge our burden unless we know about it. So
25 that's all that I'm saying about it.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: No. Perfectly --
2 MS. KORNER: The second thing is, Your Honour, as I say again in
3 respect of this witness, if the suggestion is to be made because he has
4 cooperated with AID officials, he in some way is responsible for the
5 creation or has lied about documents, then that must be put to him.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, you are right there as well.
7 I think we can leave it at that for the time being. We'll have a
9 Madam Registrar, please, the witness will be taken to his room.
10 And until he continues with his evidence in 30 minutes' time, he must
11 remain incommunicado. That includes members of his family.
12 --- Recess taken at 12.32 p.m.
13 --- On resuming at 1.04 p.m.
14 [The witness entered court]
15 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just before Mr. Ackerman --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait. We don't have the accused present as yet.
17 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, just before Mr. Ackerman continues, it
18 may be as well if we were to leave ten minutes at the end of the session
19 to deal with the document which I've now read.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, you have read it already.
21 MS. KORNER: I read it on the break. I know what this is about.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
23 MS. KORNER: I don't think it will take longer. And also there's
24 a couple of administrative matters I want to deal with.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Okay. So we'll agree, Mr. Ackerman -- I would
1 say we stop at least ten minutes before quarter to 2.00 so that we thrash
2 this -- the submission on this document and whatever is left to be
4 Yes, Mr. Ackerman, you may proceed.
5 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, the first thing is what I'm told was a
6 mistranslation. That document 73.1, Your Honour, that you asked the
7 witness to read, the third paragraph of --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Yes.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm told by my associates that that was not
10 properly translated, and I'm wondering how you would like to try to solve
11 that problem.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I think I can solve that problem by kindly asking
13 you to turn to your co-counsel who knows the language, and if she agrees
14 to read that third paragraph, if I remember well. Then we -- I'm not
15 going to ask the witness again to read it.
16 MS. RADOSAVLJEVIC: [Interpretation] The statement was taken --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Slowly. Slowly. Yes.
18 MS. RADOSAVLJEVIC: [Interpretation] "The statement was taken and
19 recorded by the investigating judge of this court, Adil Draganovic with
20 the cooperation of Ibric Zijad a professional associate of the AID -- a
21 professional official from the AID." [In English] Thank you.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you happy now with the interpretation?
23 MR. ACKERMAN: [Microphone not activated] I suppose I am. Your
24 Honour. I was just told that the original one was not absolutely
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So you may proceed with your questions.
2 MR. ACKERMAN: [Microphone not activated] I'd like the witness to
3 be given DB78, please.
4 And Your Honour -- oh, Your Honour, I mentioned to Ms. Korner that
5 there actually was one lingering question from what we were doing right
6 before the break, and that's what I'm going to do now. It will be quite
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I would suppose it's expected from you.
9 MR. ACKERMAN:
10 Q. Sir, you told us that you did recognise the name Edhem Veladzic as
11 being someone who had served as a minister in Bihac. And I've now given
12 you two -- one document, which actually contains two documents, DB78 B.
13 And you'll notice two signatures, a signature on each of those documents,
14 purporting to be from a person Edhem Veladzic. Is that the person that
15 you were talking about that you knew?
16 A. Yes, it is.
17 Q. And is this a person that you ever worked closely with in
18 connection with your work with AID?
19 A. No. This person has nothing to do with my work.
20 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, I know you have told us this, and I'm
21 asking you again simply because I don't recall. What -- when was it --
22 the date that you returned to Sanski Most in 1995?
23 A. The 15th of October, 1995.
24 Q. And I think you told us that that was about five days after the
25 army had captured Sanski Most, the BiH army.
1 A. That's right.
2 Q. What was Sanski Most like five days after the BiH army retook it?
3 What did you see when you returned to Sanski Most?
4 A. I arrived there in the afternoon with my wife. I first went to
5 see my house which had been destroyed. I went there. It was a sunny
7 Q. Were there a lot of military vehicles in the streets?
8 A. I don't think there were many of them.
9 Q. How about flags and symbols of Bosnia-Herzegovina or Croatia?
10 A. Why of Croatia?
11 Q. I'm just wondering. I'm just asking the question.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Just answer the question. I mean, it's -- why do
13 you want to argue the point? He might as well ask you why there were
14 other flags. But what's the point?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think there were flags in front of
16 the municipality building. I don't know whether there were any others. I
17 saw some flags, but only the flags of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
18 MR. ACKERMAN:
19 Q. And did you immediately upon your return -- I mean, within a day
20 or two, resume your post as president of the court?
21 A. In the first few days, I had conversations in the municipality
22 building, and I then went to the court building and prepared to resume
23 my work in those days.
24 Q. Did some authority ask you to resume your post as president of the
25 court, or did you just do that on your own authority?
1 A. When I arrived there, I first heard that another colleague of mine
2 who was a lawyer had been appointed as the president of the court in
3 Sanski Most. Knowing full well that he couldn't have that post and that
4 the organs in Sanski Most could not do that, I went and told them that I
5 had come there to carry on with my work, and that was accepted.
6 Q. And the colleague who had been appointed president I take it was
7 someone who had been appointed by the Republika Srpska?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Who had appointed this person?
10 A. The presidency of the municipality had appointed him before I
11 arrived there from Germany.
12 Q. And what was his name?
13 A. His name was Ismet Sarcevic.
14 Q. And how was it you took over his position?
15 A. I went to the president of the presidency, who was then Mr. Mirzet
16 Karabeg, and to Alagic Mehmed, who was a member of that presidency. And I
17 spoke to them. I explained that I had come to stay and to start with my
18 work and that I was a legal -- president of the court in Sanski Most and
19 the judge and that no one else could be appointed to this position without
20 following the procedure, and they agreed with me on that point. I then
21 went to the building of the municipal court, where I met Mr. Sarcevic,
22 and he really showed me the decision of the presidency according to which
23 they were appointing him as president of the court. I explained to the
24 gentleman that that could not stand, that there was a legal procedure that
25 had to be followed, and that my term of office had not yet expired, and I
1 asked him to leave the building immediately. He handed over the keys to
2 me without objecting, and he left the building, and he no longer attempted
3 to get involved in my work. And on my own initiative, I started working
4 at that point, because according to the law of Bosnia and Herzegovina, my
5 term of office had not yet expired.
6 Q. How long was your term of office?
7 A. I think my term of office was four years as president of the
8 court. But as a judge, the term of office was for an eight-year period.
9 But given the wartime situation, an amendment had been made to the law,
10 and these terms of office had been extended until further notice and they
11 were valid for six months after the end of the war. Or that is to say,
12 after the signing of the Dayton Agreement.
13 Q. So did Ismet Sarcevic remain as a judge of the lower court even
14 though he was not the president?
15 A. No. As I said, he left the building, and he stopped doing this
16 work. He didn't do anything else. He was a deputy of the head of the
17 Municipality of Sanski Most.
18 Q. Would it be fair to assume that he was not happy with what you
20 A. He didn't show this.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: But he didn't send you a bouquet of flowers either,
22 did he?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, he didn't.
24 MR. ACKERMAN:
25 Q. Did other judges who had left in 1991/1992 return and resume their
1 positions in Sanski Most?
2 A. No, they didn't.
3 Q. You were the only one that came back and resumed your position?
4 A. At that time, yes.
5 Q. I assume there came a time when you started living in your house
6 in Mahala again. Is that true?
7 A. Three years later, when I had managed to repair it to a certain
8 extent and ensure that there were living conditions there.
9 Q. And one of the repairs you made was to replace the roof, wasn't
11 A. Yes. The roof was replaced too.
12 Q. And how did you do that? Where did you get the materials to
13 replace the roof?
14 A. With a labourer who had built a roof for me before, I agreed that
15 he should repair the roof.
16 Q. But my question was: Where did the materials come from? Where
17 did the actual roof come from that was put on your house?
18 A. This labourer obtained the material -- or rather, he and his
19 relatives obtained the material.
20 Q. Do you know from where?
21 A. Maybe I do.
22 Q. And what would the answer be?
23 A. I don't have to answer that question.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, please don't take my place. I'm the Judge
25 here. You are the witness. For the time being, you have to answer that
1 question, until I am not of the opinion that it is an irrelevant question
2 that is being asked, you are required to answer it.
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: You don't need to explain for the time being,
5 Mr. Ackerman. Put the question again, and the witness will answer it.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I do have a suggestion.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: If what I thought to be the case is actually the
9 case, it may be that -- the reason I'm hesitating is I'm hesitating as to
10 whether I want to say this to you in the presence of the witness or not.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: If you don't, we'll send the witness out again.
12 MR. ACKERMAN: I think it's better we do that.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Usher --
14 MS. KORNER: Looking at the time, is there much -- I wonder if
15 Mr. Ackerman perhaps could move to another topic and then he could deal
16 with that when we're going to deal with the other matters.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: No.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: I wouldn't, if I were you. I would -- I would
19 rather the witness leaves the courtroom for a while.
20 Is it going to take you long to put this to us?
21 MR. ACKERMAN: It will be extremely brief. Probably less than one
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So the witness is better out rather than in,
24 if this is going to be discussed. Also because he's being reticent, he
25 doesn't want to answer the question. So that makes me suspicious in any
2 MS. KORNER: Well, my point is it's going to leave ten minutes --
3 by the time he goes out --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Korner, I want this to be done and concluded
5 before the witness goes back the his hotel. I have my own reasons.
7 [The witness stands down]
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
9 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, the information I have -- which is not
10 completely verified. I understand there is even a videotape -- is that
11 the roof that is on his house was stolen from a home of a Serb resident
12 who had left the area because the Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina had taken it
13 over, that he and his workers went there and stole the roof off that house
14 and took it over and put it on his. The reason I hesitated to have him
15 answer the question when he said what he said was it became clear to me
16 that that may be the case. And in that case, it may be that you should
17 advise him that -- of his rights regarding self-incrimination, because it
18 may be a crime what he did, if that's what he did. And that's why I
19 wanted to do it out of his presence.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. The witness can -- the usher is with him.
21 No? Okay. You can bring the witness in again, please.
22 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
23 [The witness entered court]
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Judge, I am -- I am authorising Mr. Ackerman to put
25 the question to you again. In other words, as to whether you knew where
1 the material for the construction of the roof or reconstruction of the
2 roof came from. If in answering that question you think that you may be
3 throwing some -- you would be giving some information which could be
4 either incriminating or that you have a good reason not to answer, then
5 you can ask for the permission of the Trial Chamber not to answer the
6 question. But you have to furnish an explanation first.
7 Mr. Ackerman, you may proceed with the question, and then we'll
8 deal with it as -- with the problem as we go along.
9 It's not being hinted that you have anything that is
10 incriminating. But it's not being excluded either. In other words, I
11 will have to answer -- ask -- wait for the question and for your answer,
12 and we'll move from there.
13 MR. ACKERMAN:
14 Q. The question, sir, is: Where did the materials come from that you
15 used to replace your roof?
16 A. I had an arrangement, an agreement with the labourer with regard
17 to obtaining the materials for the roof, with the labourer who worked on
18 the roof.
19 Q. And you told us that you knew where the labourer got those
20 materials. The question is: Where did the materials come from?
21 A. The labourer said that this was second-hand material that he had
23 Q. Why were you hesitant to answer that question when I first asked
24 you? Why did you feel you should not answer it?
25 A. I just think that this is not important.
1 Q. Isn't it the case, sir, that you know that that material came from
2 the roof of the home of a Serb resident who had left Sanski Most when the
3 BiH army came there? It was stolen from that residence and put on your
4 house; isn't that the case?
5 A. I didn't know about that.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Do you want to break now, Your Honour, or do you
7 want me to go forward?
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Well, if you have no further questions that you can
9 bring to an end in five minutes, we can --
10 MR. ACKERMAN: I do. I can do five more minutes, if you like.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Would ten minutes be sufficient for what you have to
13 MS. KORNER: No idea, Your Honour. I wouldn't have thought it
14 should take longer than that.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. So we'll go on for the next five minutes,
16 Mr. Ackerman.
17 MR. ACKERMAN:
18 Q. How long after your return to Sanski Most did you begin conducting
20 A. Well, I already said that in my statement, that I started
21 collecting documents straight away.
22 Q. Were you doing those -- this document collection that you were
23 doing, were you doing that as a judge of the lower court of Sanski Most,
24 or was that something you were doing as a private individual?
25 A. I didn't do anything as a private individual, only as a judge.
1 Q. And this gathering of documents, then, I take it was in connection
2 with some case that was being put together in your court to charge someone
3 with a criminal offence?
4 A. I was assigned to duty by the presidency of the municipality to
5 collect documents and evidence concerning war crimes in the territory of
6 the Municipality of Sanski Most.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I think he has -- he has already explained this,
8 Mr. Ackerman, with reference to the document itself or two documents,
10 MR. ACKERMAN: Yes, Your Honour.
11 Q. How is it that the presidency of the municipality was in a
12 position to control the court and to tell the president of the court what
13 to do? How is that? I thought you were independent.
14 A. Yes. I was independent.
15 Q. All right.
16 A. But since there were quite a few documents and at that time it was
17 necessary to tour various institutions and have a look at these documents.
18 This was suggested to me, and I accepted that.
19 Q. So you characterise it as a suggestion that you accept it rather
20 than any order from the president of the municipality; is that a fair
22 A. Yes, that's right. It was not an instruction.
23 Q. Did anyone else direct your investigations and tell you what to
24 investigate or suggest to you what to investigate, or did you do most of
25 this on your own?
1 A. This was not a classical investigation. This was collection of
2 evidence, facts, documents. And they were submitted to prosecution
3 authorities. At that time, as a professional man and in cooperation with
4 the cantonal prosecutor's office in Bihac, I did that.
5 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I think we need to stop there.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
7 MR. ACKERMAN: And if the witness has more answer to my question,
8 I guess he can give it in the morning.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you. The witness can be escorted out.
10 Thank you, Judge. We'll continue tomorrow.
11 Do you think you will finish your cross-examination tomorrow,
12 Mr. Ackerman?
13 MR. ACKERMAN: I will try very hard, Your Honour. I'm on page 8
14 of a 41-page set of notes. But --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I think the witness is being pretty short in his --
16 MR. ACKERMAN: I think we're going to get there, yes.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: -- Reply. So if I can ask you to make an effort.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: I'll certainly make an effort.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Judge, you may withdraw. Thank you. And
20 we'll continue tomorrow morning at 9.00.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you too.
22 [The witness stands down]
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner.
24 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, this refers back -- Your Honour, this
25 refers back --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: DB77.
2 MS. KORNER: Yes. DB77. But it refers back to what Madam Fauveau
3 was attempting to do in her cross-examination relating to the Kvocka
4 trial, to which I object. Your Honour, there are really two objections,
5 but I don't have to go further than relevance. It's the transcript of a
6 graphologist who gave evidence on behalf of the Defence in respect of a
7 statement taken by AID from a witness who in fact was granted protective
8 measures. So I'm not going to refer to his name -- suggesting that the
9 signature on the statement taken by AID was in fact not the signature of
10 the man who purported to sign it.
11 Your Honour, this was not a witness that we're calling. This is
12 not a statement referred to which there is any suggestion that this
13 witness had anything to do with it. The fact that it was alleged by the
14 Defence and it got no further than an allegation that Mr. Ibric in some
15 way forged that signature. It was never ruled upon because in the event
16 it didn't need to is neither here nor there as far as this trial is
17 concerned nor as far as this witness is concerned. In any event, this is
18 not the way to attempt to get in evidence that relates to a person who is
19 not a witness to the case. Your Honour, that's very simply my objection.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, before you reply to this, given what
21 the witness has already testified on, his connections or absence of them
22 with the four -- five persons that you mentioned and also as to the
23 names -- other names that you mentioned, I would like you to address also
24 the relevance of this document when you are replying, because that's
25 important. I mean, I haven't read it. I don't know whose signature was
1 in question in this other case.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, you don't need to read it in detail. It
3 was -- it was a witness in the other case who's not a witness in this
4 case, who gave evidence, actually. And it was suggested apparently on
5 behalf of the Defence that Mr. Ibric from AID in the statement he had
6 taken from this witness -- the only relevance of which can have been
7 contradictory -- can I just finish, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
9 MS. KORNER: Had forged the witness's signature.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I see.
11 MS. KORNER: That was it.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: And I remember when Madam Fauveau had raised the
13 matter, the -- her intention was to ask the witness whether he knew --
14 MS. KORNER: About this.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: -- About this incident.
16 MS. KORNER: Yes. And again I say it's irrelevant whether he knew
17 or didn't know.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I see you standing, Madam Fauveau.
19 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. You
20 are -- you interpreted my question quite correctly. And in fact, I didn't
21 continue to pursue this line of questioning because the witness replied
22 no. I don't really see how Ms. Korner can say that it is a question which
23 is not relevant since if the witness knew anything about this incident, he
24 could have told us what the working methods of the AID were. And as
25 Ms. Korner says, there are many documents which come from the AID which we
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Given the situation or the picture as it emerges,
3 Mr. Ackerman, what's your position? Are you going to proceed with
4 questioning the witness on this document, or are you going to limit it to
5 the -- to some other simple question without the need of having to refer
6 or -- to this document or bring it -- or seek to bring it in evidence --
7 tender it in evidence?
8 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, what I want to do at this stage --
9 JUDGE AGIUS: I'll explain to you why. Because if you see that
10 you are not going to get anything from the witness on this document, we
11 will visit the problem when it comes to the evidence that will be tendered
12 by the -- by the Defence.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'm not finished with Mr. Zijad Ibric,
14 so any judgement made about whether this is relevant or not, based on the
15 proposition that I am finished with Zijad Ibric would be incorrect.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know whether you are or not.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: What I suggest to you is that we defer whether or
18 not this document is admissible until I've finished my cross-examination
19 and then perhaps you'll see that it is.
20 The question, of course, has to do with this witness's association
21 with and working with Zijad Ibric who this piece of transcript shows may
22 very well have forged the signature of a witness to a statement.
23 Ms. Korner tells you that witness was protected. But you will see if you
24 look at the statement that his name is openly mentioned throughout the
25 testimony. So if he was protected, at least his name was not protected.
1 And Ms. Korner says you don't have to read it. And of course you
2 do. I mean, if you're going to determine its admissibility, you do have
3 to read it.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: I will read it for sure. You can rest assured.
5 MR. ACKERMAN: And I think the best thing is to wait until I have
6 finished all the questions I'm going to ask him about Ibric and all the
7 things I'm going to do about Ibric before I then submit it --
8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, I better make this absolutely clear.
9 Your Honour said, "Are you going to ask the witness about it?" I object
10 to the witness being asked about testimony in other cases.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: No. No. What I suggested was asking the witness
12 questions that may actually originate from here but without making it
13 explicit that he's being asked or without reading out to him or without
14 having in evidence the transcript of proceedings in another case. I
15 mean, he could -- for example, what Madam Fauveau was seeking was to ask
16 the witness whether he knew a certain person, first; and secondly, whether
17 he knew that the signature of that certain person had been forged or
18 something like that.
19 MS. KORNER: No, that's not what she asked.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: No. What she --
21 MS. KORNER: She asked --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: She didn't ask the question. She was seeking to
23 ask --
24 MS. KORNER: She was seeking to ask, Your Honour - I know
25 she'll correct me if I'm wrong - not whether the witness whose signature
1 was forged knew about it. She was seeking to ask whether --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: The witness knew.
3 MS. KORNER: -- the witness knew that there had been an allegation
4 made in the Kvoca case that he, Mr. Ibric, had forged somebody's
5 signature. That's what she asked.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: No. You are right.
7 MS. KORNER: It's objectionable on any grounds, because it's
8 irrelevant. If the question had been phrased "At the time when you were
9 collecting evidence together with Mr. Ibric or taking statements, were you
10 aware -- did you know that he was in the habit of forging signatures,"
11 fine. Although, there's no evidence of that. But nonetheless, the way it
12 was phrased was objectionable.
13 And I see both counsel on their feet. They'll have a chance when
14 I'm finished.
15 What I'm saying is this is not a proper way of getting this sort
16 of evidence in. And certainly the admission of a transcript of an
17 examination and cross-examination of a graphologist relating to a
18 statement not before this Court -- to a witness not before this Court is
19 irrelevant and objectionable.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Mr. Ackerman first -- or rather, I would give
21 the floor to Madam Fauveau, because obviously her remark would be shorter
22 and related only to --
23 Yes, Madam Fauveau.
24 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I still
25 don't understand the objection raised by Mrs. Korner. My question was
1 exactly what you said and what Mrs. Korner said. It's not a witness who
2 has no relation to this Tribunal. It's a witness who has been cooperating
3 with this Tribunal for years. And it concerns a trial which has a direct
4 connection with the investigations carried out by this witness in Bosnia
5 and also a connection with the trial that is being conducted here. And I
6 can't ask this witness whether the signature of the person in question is
7 false or not because I have no evidence with regard to this. The only
8 thing that I can ask is what I did ask, whether -- when in his contact
9 with the Prosecutor or with others, was he -- did he hear that there was
10 an allegation about a signature on a document from AID, an allegation that
11 this was a false signature. And I don't see why this should be
12 inappropriate in this hearing.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: There is a very simple approach to it. You asked
14 the witness with regard to the documents that he has been shown where
15 there are three signatures -- his own, the AID man - I forgot his name -
16 and the person making the statement -- whether that person put his
17 signature in his presence. And that would bring everything to an end.
18 Mr. Ackerman, with regard to those three documents -- or two
20 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, one of the names that I asked this
21 witness today if he recalled was the name of the witness whose name --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I know. I remember that.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: -- you see in here.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
25 MR. ACKERMAN: And I have information that he was involved in the
1 taking of that statement and that his signature appears on it.
2 The problem is this: The report of the expert and the forged
3 document are missing from the records of this court. We tried to get
4 them. We were told that they're gone. Now, if I were a particularly
5 paranoid --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: You were told by this Chamber that they were gone?
7 MR. ACKERMAN: We were told by the Registry that they were gone.
8 Now, if I were a particularly suspicious and paranoid individual,
9 I would wonder if that didn't happen to protect AID and Mr. Ibric. But I
10 don't --
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you mean to state that this document was ever
12 in -- amongst the documents that you tendered?
13 MR. ACKERMAN: No. No. They were exhibits in this case.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: In the Kvocka case?
15 MR. ACKERMAN: In the Kvocka case.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: What do we have to do with that? I mean -- I mean,
17 I thought you had asked Madam Registrar to give you this document --
18 MR. ACKERMAN:. No, no, no. I'm not suggesting you had anything
19 to do with it. We were trying to confirm what we heard about this
20 witness's signature also appearing on the document, and we wanted to look
21 at the actual report of the witness so we could be a little bit more
22 precise about what we're doing here. And we're told those documents are
23 all missing. And that's the word I think that was used, isn't it, that
24 they were missing? It's missing.
25 MS. FAUVEAU-IVANOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. I could even add that
1 the document in question is D28/4 and D29/4 in the Kvocka case.
2 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, we've run over time, in any event.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, we have.
4 MS. KORNER: So we'll have to -- I've made my objection. And
5 Mr. Ackerman says he wants to deal with it at the end of his
6 cross-examination, so let's leave it at that.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I think that --
8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, may I just very quickly just ask --
9 we're just finishing off the protective measures motion for the rest of
10 the witnesses. It will run over. The page limit is ten pages for a
11 motion. Can we -- it's so obvious. Your Honours asked us to do it. Can
12 we have leave --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: It's necessary. If it's necessary, you have our
14 consent -- our authorisation straight away.
15 MS. KORNER: All right. And Your Honour while I'm here -- and
16 finally very quickly, in relation to Rule 92 for Sanski Most, the two
17 witnesses who Your Honour ruled that --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
19 MS. KORNER: -- need to be brought for cross-examination, no
20 protective measures - that's Mr. Kurbegovic and Mr. Seferovic - we're not
21 going to extend the life of the Sanski Most thing by calling them, so
22 we're not going to call them.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
24 MS. KORNER: And that's -- in respect of Mr. Mayhew, we're
25 going to see what the cross-examination in respect of Mr. MacLeod is like
1 before we decide.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I thank you. My apologies --
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I wonder if you've ordered that they
4 be brought here by cross-examination, is it up to the Prosecutor whether
5 to comply with that order or not?
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Pardon?
7 MR. ACKERMAN: If you've ordered that these witnesses be brought
8 here for cross-examination, is it the Prosecutor's decision as to whether
9 or not to comply with your order?
10 MS. KORNER: Your Honour -- we're going to get slaughtered by the
11 Samac case, but Your Honour, in fact we asked -- we said we want to put
12 the evidence in under Rule 92 and we didn't want to call them. Your
13 Honours said no, if we want to put them in under Rule 92, we have to have
14 them here for cross-examination. We're saying --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: No. I don't think you need to explain.
16 MS. KORNER: Right.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Because it's -- to me, it's very clear. That's why
18 I asked Mr. Ackerman to repeat the question.
19 MR. ACKERMAN: It's too late in the day. I'm sorry. I shouldn't
20 have even raised it.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. Thank you.
22 So my apologies again to the technical staff and to the
23 interpreters. You've been most kind. I thank you.
24 Tomorrow morning at 9.00.
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
1 at 1.51 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday,
2 the 23rd day of May, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.