1 Friday, 30 May 2003
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.18 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Madam Registrar. Could you call the case,
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. This is the case number
8 IT-99-36-T, the Prosecutor versus Radoslav Brdjanin.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
10 Mr. Brdjanin, good morning to you.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous interpretation continues] ... so I take it
13 that you can follow the proceedings in a language that you can understand.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I can.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous interpretation continues] ... you may sit
17 Appearances, Prosecution.
18 MS. RICHTEROVA: Good morning, Your Honours. Anna Richterova for
19 the Prosecution, assisted by Denise Gustin, case manager.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, and good morning to you both.
21 Appearances for Radoslav Brdjanin.
22 MS. BARUCH: Good morning, Your Honours. Barbara Baruch, assisted
23 by Vesna Anic, for the Defence.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you and good morning to you too.
25 MS. BARUCH: Your Honour, Mr. Cunningham may be coming later.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. I appreciate you telling me. Thank you.
2 So, any preliminaries? I suppose not.
3 Let's bring the witness in then please, and don't drop him on the
4 way, Usher.
5 Did the papers that were dropped this morning, were they put back,
6 everything in order? Yes, because coming in here he dropped everything
7 and ...
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: I just want to inform you that the witness will
9 testify in French.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: The witness will testify in French. Okay. For a
12 [The witness entered court]
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Bonjour. Good morning to you, sir, and welcome to
14 this Tribunal. In fact, I don't need to welcome you, because you work
15 here, so you are at home. You are about to give testimony, as you know.
16 You have already given testimony in other cases, in other proceedings. So
17 I would just invite you to make the solemn declaration that is required of
18 every witness before we proceed.
19 WITNESS: NICHOLAS SEBIRE
20 [Witness answered through interpreter]
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
22 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Merci. Please take a seat.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Madam Richterova, he's all yours.
1 Examined by Ms. Richterova:
2 Q. Good morning, sir. Can you please state your full name for the
4 A. My name is Nicholas Sebire.
5 Q. Do you work for the OTP?
6 A. Yes. I work as an investigator for the OTP.
7 Q. And is it correct that you testified in the Stakic case, which is
8 case number IT-97-24-T?
9 A. That is right.
10 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, I would like to tender Exhibit
11 transcript from Mr. Sebire's testimony from 3rd of September and 27 of
12 September, 2002. We provided --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Is there any objection on your part, Ms. Baruch?
14 MS. BARUCH: Your Honour, may we submit our objections in
15 writing? Because I have not had the opportunity to review that.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So they are being admitted in the
17 meantime with the caveat that if there is any objection that you would
18 like to put on record, you will do that at a subsequent stage.
19 MS. BARUCH: Thank you.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
21 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, in this case, there were tendered
22 other exhibits, and I would like to tender the transcript together with
23 the exhibits. And these exhibits were, among others, additional report by
24 Nicholas Sebire on exhumation and proof of death municipality, and it is
25 on CD. Your Honours were provided by the CD, and the registry was
1 provided by the CD. I would start with the exhibit number so it would be
2 easier and I would like to --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry, Ms. Richterova, before you proceed. Because
4 we have had other transcripts from the Stakic case with attached exhibits.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: With attached exhibits.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: And we had adopted a formula, numbering system, that
7 would reflect the number -- the exhibit numbering sequence in this case,
8 but also, also, the exhibit number as it was in the Stakic case.
9 Ms. Gustin, I'm sure, knows exactly what I'm talking about and she will
10 help you. Because I don't think you were involved in that process. It
11 was Ms. Korner who was involved in that process. So my suggestion to both
12 of you, both Prosecution and Defence, is to keep the same pattern.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes. I agree with you. I only want to ask
14 whether you received this morning updated version of exhibit which will be
15 used --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: I can tell you, Ms. Korner [sic], what I received,
17 and I haven't actually compared what I have received with Judge Janu, so
18 that --
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: There should be 17 --
20 JUDGE AGIUS: I have.
21 MS. RICHTEROVA: -- items.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: What I have received this morning, I have a sheet of
23 paper on its own which says exhibits to use with witness 7.44, Nicholas
24 Sebire, and there is a list of seven CDs.
25 MS. RICHTEROVA: This is old version. I provided new version this
1 morning, and this lists all the exhibits. And I gave it -- or Ms. Gustin
2 gave it to the registry before we start.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: That's not what I have. That's not what I have. I
4 have a folder with the transcripts that you have just referred to, and
5 also some reports, and I have this piece of paper --
6 MS. RICHTEROVA: No. Unfortunately, it's really --
7 JUDGE AGIUS: We don't have it.
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: Too bad.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: So if you have it in your hands now, usher will make
10 very quickly 3, 4, 5 photocopies.
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: We provided enough photocopies before we start.
12 I don't know -- probably it got lost somewhere between courtroom 2 and
13 courtroom 3.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Quite possible, but in order not to waste time,
15 let's do this. Thank you, Ms. Gustin.
16 MS. RICHTEROVA: So this transcript would be P2006.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: So wait a minute, because -- transcript which
18 starts with -- from page 7330?
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: It should start page -- let me -- yes. 7330.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. And this is going to be Exhibit number --?
21 MS. RICHTEROVA: It should be Exhibit number P2006.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
23 MS. RICHTEROVA: Then we have additional report by Nicholas
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. One moment. Additional or with -- additional
1 report starting with ERN number 01843960.
2 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
4 MS. RICHTEROVA: You have it on the CD and --
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Is it on the CD as well, this one?
6 MS. RICHTEROVA: It is on the CD.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Which CD?
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: CD which has on the top this ERN numbers?
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, I see. So which is going to be the exhibit, the
10 CD or the hard copy?
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: The CD. Because it is just one CD without all
12 the detachments.
13 JUDGE AGIUS: And the CD -- relative CD would be?
14 MS. RICHTEROVA: It would be P2006.1. The transcript is --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, one moment, one moment. Yeah, all
16 right. Okay.
17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
18 JUDGE AGIUS: All right? Thanks. So one moment, because I need
19 to catch up. 3960.
20 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, we have two transcripts, so maybe
21 the transcript from the 3rd of September should be P2006.1, and the
22 transcript from 27 September 2002 should be --
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait. Wait, wait, wait, Ms. Korner [sic]. The
24 transcript -- we have two -- we have two transcripts. Yes. That's
25 correct. One is 3rd September, the other one is 27 September?
1 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: So you want to give them two separate numbers; do I
3 read you right? That's a good idea. P2006.2. So the CD which has the
4 additional report that you referred us to will be marked what?
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: This will be marked P2006.3/ --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment because now I lost my pen. P --?
7 MS. RICHTEROVA: P2006 --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Uh-huh.
9 MS. RICHTEROVA: Ms. Gustin is telling me that because it is
10 connected to the transcript, it should have the same number as the
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I am not contesting that to you. P2006...?
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: I would put .3/S281, because it was exhibited --
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Chuqing. Madam --
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: Mrs. Chuqing, maybe you could assist us. I'm not
16 quite sure --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I cannot assist you, for sure, because I am for the
18 first time in I don't know how many years, sensing -- having the sensation
19 that I am heading into some kind of confusion. P -- you tell me what
20 number this is.
21 MS. RICHTEROVA: I will put this CD P2006.3/S281.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
23 MS. RICHTEROVA: And there is CD book of missing persons, which
24 was also exhibited in Stakic case, and --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. List of -- okay. Is
1 it on CD as well?
2 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes, it is on CD.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Which CD?
4 MS. RICHTEROVA: It starts with 0291-3396.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
6 MS. RICHTEROVA: /3762.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. So this is going to be P --?
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: This is going to be P2006.4 --
9 THE REGISTRAR: No, no, no, no. P2006/S368.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: No, it can't be like that, because what would be the
11 previous one be, then? The previous one we said was 2006.3/281.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Do we need a .3?
13 JUDGE AGIUS: If you give this one now P2006.4/281 without another
14 number, what are you going to do with the rest?
15 THE REGISTRAR: The reason we give P2006 is the exhibit number to
16 all the exhibits pertaining to this current witness, and then the
17 previous --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: No, I don't think so. 2006 is actually the number
19 that is given to the transcript of his testimony.
20 THE REGISTRAR: To -- yes.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: If this is related -- if this was exhibited by him
22 in the course of his testimony in Stakic, it has to remain 2006.4 or
23 whatever /281.
24 THE REGISTRAR: We don't need to go for --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know, but.
1 THE REGISTRAR: That was the previous agreement between me and the
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but it has to be distinguished. This has to be
4 distinguished from this.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. It's already distinguished by /S something.
6 And I see testing is not in its head.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
8 THE REGISTRAR: We both agree.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: So Ms. Gustin, how would you recommend that we do
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: I'm sorry. Ms. Gustin just told me that all
12 these exhibits should be .2/, and Exhibit number from Stakic. So --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: That's what I said in the beginning. So let's go
14 back to the previous one.
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: I'm sorry, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: So Ms. Gustin, please. The previous CD will be
17 P --?
18 MS. RICHTEROVA: 2006.2.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: .2, yes.
20 MS. RICHTEROVA: /S281. It was the CD with additional report by
21 Nicholas Sebire.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
23 MS. RICHTEROVA: And now we have the CD book of missing persons.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
25 MS. RICHTEROVA: And it would be P2006.2/S282. It's exhibit from
1 the Stakic case.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Yes. Next.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, you should have hard copy which is
4 the title is "List of missing persons from the database Nastradali." And
5 it doesn't have any ERN number.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Is it this document?
7 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Is this on a CD as well?
9 MS. RICHTEROVA: No, it is not. We have only hard copy.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. So this becomes?
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: This becomes P2006.2/S368. So I think we are --
12 we have one more exhibit. It's three pages, hard copy, which was annex
13 16, and unfortunately we couldn't put it on the CD, so it is -- it was
14 disclosed separately. The ERN number --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: You mean this one?
16 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Baruch?
18 MS. BARUCH: [Microphone not activated] I'm seeing a map.
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone.
20 MS. BARUCH: Sorry. I have seen the map that the Court has -- the
21 Tribunal has displayed.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. No, no, no. No. No. It's a quarto size
24 MS. BARUCH: If it was disclosed separately --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I have it on my desk this morning, so ...
1 MS. BARUCH: I will be more than happy to sit down with Ms. --
2 With Denise later and --
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: We disclosed it yesterday. Everything was
4 disclosed yesterday to the Defence.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: So this is P.
6 MS. RICHTEROVA: P2006.2/, and each page has separate Stakic
7 exhibit number.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. S281.
9 MS. RICHTEROVA: Which is -- yes. S281-1.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: S281-2.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Yes.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: And the last one is S281-3.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Yes, let's move.
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes. I think that's -- we just managed to get
16 over the worst part of this hearing.
17 Q. Mr. Sebire, you --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: And what about the other four?
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: We will deal with these four in due course.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: And in the lists that you gave us, there seems to
21 be, as there was in the previous list, seven CDs. I only have six, and
22 Judge Janu, if I -- two, four, six. Judge Janu has six too. So there is
23 one missing. How many do you have? Six.
24 MS. RICHTEROVA: You weren't provided with the tape -- with, I'm
25 sorry, with the CD on which is video, which is -- which is CD V000 --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: What I want to know - I mean let's not make things
2 complicated - should we have six or seven?
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: You should have six.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: But if we should have six -- look at number 2 on the
5 item -- item 2 on the list, exhibit list that you handed to us.
6 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: There is a CD over there. That's one. Look at
8 number 3. It says two CDs. So that's three now.
9 MS. RICHTEROVA: It was not provided. You have in the brackets
10 that we haven't provided this CD.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Which one you haven't provided?
12 MS. RICHTEROVA: The third on the list. On this list --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: You haven't provided those two CDs. All right.
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: I haven't provided.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: No. It's -- how can you tell me that it was not
17 provided if Exhibit P2006.2/S282 precisely starts with 02913396? This
18 starts precisely with what you're telling me you haven't given us.
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: I'm sorry. I was -- I thought that you were
20 looking at a different -- at a different list. I would -- I would suggest
21 that we are dealing with the remaining CDs. When I will --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but I want to know whether I should have six or
23 whether I should have seven or eight.
24 MS. RICHTEROVA: You should have six CDs as you have.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I take your word for it. But we do have a CD which
1 is shown on the exhibit list as you say here two CDs 0291-3396, 23762 --
2 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes, you should have it.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: And we have in one CD, not on two CDs and the last
4 CD that was exhibited, which is 2 --.2/S282.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes, it's correct, because when we were burning
6 these CDs, the original was on two CDs and they managed to burn it on one
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay. All right. But that explains it. Yes.
9 Mr. Brdjanin, if you prefer to go back to the Detention Unit,
10 because I don't think you're finding this very interesting, just tell me.
11 Yes, let's go ahead.
12 MS. RICHTEROVA: Thank you, Your Honour.
13 Q. Mr. Sebire, you were tasked to prepare reports with respect to
14 exhumations and proof of deaths in the -- within the autonomous region of
15 Krajina; is it correct?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And you prepared report called "Progress report." Dated 13th of
18 August, 2001?
19 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. I am not receiving any interpretation
20 at all on channel 4. I don't know if there is anything wrong with the
21 earphones. Are you receiving interpretation?
22 JUDGE JANU: No.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: The interpretation should be forthcoming from the
24 French booth.
25 Ms. Baruch, were you receiving any interpretation?
1 MS. BARUCH: I was not, Your Honour, but I think he said "oui,"
2 and I do understand that, so --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: I understand that too, but I want to make sure that
4 the interpretation is coming through.
5 Can I have a test, please. Could you say -- Witness, could you
6 say something in French, please, so I make sure that the interpretation is
7 coming through.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. As far as I'm concerned, I can
9 hear the French interpretation.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous interpretation continues] ... thank you.
11 So let's proceed.
12 Sorry, Ms. Richterova. It has taken us three quarters of an hour
13 plus to get moving now. Let's start.
14 MS. RICHTEROVA:
15 Q. Mr. Sebire, you were tasked to produce a report on exhumations on
16 proof of deaths within the Autonomous Region of Krajina; is it correct?
17 A. Yes, that's correct.
18 Q. The progress report which I have in front of me was -- is dated
19 13th of August, 2001.
20 A. That's right.
21 Q. Before -- then before you came here, you were asked to prepare
22 addendum, and your addendum to this report is dated 16th of May, 2003; is
23 it correct?
24 A. That's right, yes.
25 Q. What was the purpose of this addendum?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. This was to produce supplementary figures as far as exhumations
2 were concerned, proofs of death, and also to make a list of the incidents
3 through which we could have a link between the incidents and exhumations
4 in the Krajina region.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, I would like to tender into evidence
6 these two reports, and I believe you have these two reports as well as the
8 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Yes. I have them in hard
9 copy. What I want --
10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Sorry, my apologies. I have them in hard copy.
12 What I want to know is whether they're included in any of the CDs.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: No, Your Honour. They're only in hard copy.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: That's perfect.
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: The progress report dated 13th of August, 2001 --
16 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. Yes.
17 MS. RICHTEROVA: The ERN number should be 0209 --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: -- -04870503.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
21 MS. RICHTEROVA: So this would be Exhibit number P2007.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
23 MS. RICHTEROVA: Addendum to this report is, with annexes, the ERN
24 number is 0292-7889.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
1 MS. RICHTEROVA: Until 7990.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: And this should be P2008.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Perfect.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA:
6 Q. As we already heard, you testified in the Stakic case, and you
7 provided many details with respect to the exhumations which took place in
8 Prijedor municipality; correct?
9 A. Yes, that's right.
10 Q. I only want to mention one thing: Can you tell us, when you
11 joined the national police in France?
12 A. I joined the French police in April 1988, and I am still a
13 policeman. I am still a member of the French police.
14 Q. And when in your transcript it's stated that "In 1999 I became
15 part of the direction in Paris," it's probably also a misspelling; is it
17 A. That's right. I worked in Paris from September 1999. From that
18 date, I worked for the judicial police in Paris. I went to different
19 services. The last one was the homicide detachment in Paris, where I
20 worked from 1995 to 1999, in Paris.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Can the witness slow down, please.
22 MS. RICHTEROVA:
23 Q. You were asked to slow down when answering your questions.
24 Now I would like to direct your attention straight to your report,
25 and I want to work with the report dated 13th of August and 16th of May,
1 2003, which is addendum to this report.
2 Mr. Sebire, as part of your responsibility on this case, were you
3 asked to do some work regarding individuals who had been exhumed or
4 declared dead by courts in Bosnia?
5 A. Yes, that's right. When I joined the Tribunal, in the course of
6 the year 2000, among the tasks that I was given, this was to collect the
7 information in evidence regarding the exhumations and proofs of death for
8 the Autonomous Region of Krajina.
9 Q. And is it correct to state that you created two databases?
10 A. In order to carry out this task as best I could, it was necessary,
11 yes, to have and create two databases.
12 Q. Can you tell us what these two databases are about?
13 A. The first of the databases concerns the exhumations. Inside this
14 database we've entered elements of information that are related to various
15 exhumations conducted in the Autonomous Region of Krajina, also by Bosnian
16 officials, as well as by the OTP. The second database, it had information
17 regarding proofs of death, and this was entered in the Autonomous Region
18 of Krajina.
19 Q. I'm sorry. I am not quite sure whether the translation was
20 correct. The second database, it had information regarding proof of
21 deaths, and this was entered in the Autonomous Region of Krajina. Is it
22 correct? Is it what you stated?
23 A. Not quite, no.
24 Q. Can you --
25 A. The second database, the one that is to do with proofs of death,
1 this database was specifically created in order to have the information
2 entered regarding declarations of the death, regarding the people who have
3 died or were missing in the Autonomous Region of Krajina.
4 Q. I would like to briefly talk about the exhumations and then we
5 will move on to proof of deaths. If we take your addendum, your report
6 dated 16th of May, 2003, and start with the page number 5. When working
7 with the database, what kind of information do you receive? What are the
8 sources of information you receive, and what kind of information do you
9 fill in or put in the database?
10 A. All of the information regarding the exhumations was received in
11 the previous years by the Office of the Prosecutor, in documentary form.
12 These were reports of exhumations provided by Bosnian authorities. These
13 were to do mostly issued by investigating judges from cantonal courts.
14 Then these were also forensic and medical documents that were provided.
15 These had been conducted by forensic specialists working for the cantonal
16 court. Then also investigation documents that were done by Bosniak
17 forensic technicians, also sketches that would contain exhumation details,
18 also would contain autopsy reports, exhumation reports. We also received,
19 in certain cases, videotapes, which would include exhumations. These were
20 documents that were used and these -- this was the information entered
21 into the database. We also entered the information that we received --
22 that we gathered ourselves, that is, the forensic team of the Office of
23 the Prosecutor. We also had a report of the chief anthropologist, of the
24 chief forensic technician, then also autopsy reports of the chief forensic
25 pathologist. Then we've had x-ray reports.
1 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness please slow down.
2 MS. RICHTEROVA: You will have to slow down.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm sorry.
4 MS. RICHTEROVA:
5 Q. You finished that you also had x-ray reports. So did you receive
6 some other reports from the forensic of the OTP?
7 A. The reports that we received from the medical forensic team of the
8 Office of the Prosecutor, this was a general report of the chief medical
9 pathologist which was a kind of overview of the -- in all the reports.
10 Also the autopsy reports for each body or part of the body that was
11 examined, dental reports, whenever this was possible. I also mentioned
12 x-ray reports, when it was possible to have x-rays made of bodies. Also
13 by the forensic team, we also had documents, including photographs, and
14 they would include details of the operations that were conducted during
15 the exhumations, as well as the exhumations themselves.
16 Q. Mr. Sebire, were you using or have you been using DNA tests?
17 A. Yes, we did. Not personally. Of course, I forgot to mention
18 that, that among the reports that we received from the medical forensic
19 team of the Prosecutor's office, whenever this was possible, there were
20 also identifications that were carried out by the forensic medical team of
21 the Prosecutor, and this was through -- done through external
22 laboratories, and these were in charge of carrying out DNA testing on
24 Q. Mr. Sebire, can you tell us what information we can -- you told us
25 what -- the sources of the information. What main information we can read
1 from your exhumation database?
2 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] Ms. Richterova --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Mr. President, please.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. I'm just making a suggestion. We do not have
5 a blackboard or some other kind of large board on which the witness could
6 explain the various templates maybe, but what I suggest is if -- he can
7 direct us himself. If we can identify kind of templates, like, for
8 example, when it comes to the annexes, where you have the reference
9 number, the identification document, and then reference to witnesses,
10 et cetera, that have referred to a particular killing, et cetera. If we
11 could place them as we go along, one after the other, on the ELMO, so he
12 can explain precisely how we can look at the database and understand.
13 Because this is pretty complicated unless it is made very clear to us, and
14 the best thing that we did is that we reserved the cross-examination for
15 some other time, because I wouldn't have expected any Defence counsel to
16 stand up and cross-examine a witness based on these documents without a
17 proper explanation.
18 MS. RICHTEROVA:
19 Q. Is it possible, Mr. Sebire, that we would print -- or you would
20 print from your database the templates so we can see it, what kind of
21 information you --
22 JUDGE AGIUS: What we can do also, in order not to waste time, we
23 can take -- presumably the witness has a copy of his own addendum right in
24 front of him, and also of the other reports that we have referred him to.
25 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes, he has.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: So in answering the question that has been put to
2 you, Mr. Sebire, perhaps you could go straight to what you consider to be
3 the page which would help you best and help us best to understand, you to
4 explain to us and we to understand you, the procedure that we should
5 follow in trying to understand the contents of your reports and tables, in
6 particular. This is what is important. And if, for example, it's - I
7 don't know, just to give an example - it's this page from annex 1 which
8 you would like us to see and then explain, you put that, with the help of
9 the usher, on the ELMO and then he can explain to us like that. Because
10 otherwise I think we would find it difficult to follow, the Defence would
11 find it difficult to follow, and anyone in the public that is trying to
12 follow will certainly not be able to follow anything. At least we know
13 the case, but the public doesn't.
14 MS. RICHTEROVA: Thank you, Your Honour. I appreciate it and I
15 intended to go through annexes and do it exactly as you ask.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: That's perfect.
17 MS. RICHTEROVA: As you are suggesting.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: That's perfect. But also let him choose the pages
19 that he thinks would suit best for the purpose of this exercise, all
21 MS. RICHTEROVA: I'm not quite sure where we finished, but we were
22 talking about the sources of information.
23 Q. I would like now, just generally, briefly and generally, ask you
24 how many grave sites were identified and inputted into the exhumation
1 A. In all, to date, we have entered information regarding 449
2 exhumation sites.
3 Q. Were all these exhumation sites relevant to the indictment against
4 the accused?
5 A. No.
6 Q. So those exhumations which haven't been relevant, did you exclude
7 them or did you include them?
8 A. Yes, that's right.
9 Q. I'm sorry. My question was whether you include them or exclude
11 A. Yes. I'm sorry. The total of exhumations that had nothing to do
12 with the current case were excluded.
13 Q. And is it correct, as stated in your report on the page 8, that
14 after you excluded all irrelevant exhumations, you concluded that 416
15 grave sites, graves, were found, and 2.019 -- which contains 2.019 bodies?
16 A. This is correct. I just want to clarify that these figures are
17 only in relation to exhumations that were carried out by the Bosniak
19 Q. I would like to direct your attention to one place on page 8.
20 It's Ribnik. Can you tell us why this place, Ribnik, which is
21 municipality of Ribnik is listed in this chart?
22 A. The reason is that among the bodies that were exhumed at the
23 graves that was discovered in Ribnik, these were victims from the
24 municipality of Kljuc, disappeared in the course of 1992.
25 Q. Thank you. Now I would like to refer you to your annex 1, and
1 you -- if you have it with you, and if the usher could place it on the
2 ELMO. You already mentioned that exhumations were done either by Bosnian
3 authorities or by the forensic team of the OTP. Is it correct?
4 A. Yes, that's right.
5 Q. This annex 1, you mention that these are just exhumations
6 conducted by Bosnian authorities. Can you just briefly explain what we
7 can see and what kind of information you put in this annex.
8 A. This annex we have the totality of the exhumations that were
9 carried out by the Bosnian authorities and we've entered into the database
10 of the exhumations. In the left hand column, entitled municipality, you
11 will see the name of the municipality in which the exhumation was carried
12 out. In the second column you will see the year during which the
13 exhumation was carried out. In the third column you will find the name of
14 the location where the exhumation was carried out. The following column
15 will indicate -- indicates the number of bodies that were found, basing
16 ourselves on the information received in exhumation reports. The
17 following convoy is the -- the following column is the minimum number of
18 individuals that were found in the mass grave. And the final is the --
19 final column indicates the total number of individuals exhumed.
20 Q. We can see the column --
21 A. -- in each municipality.
22 Q. We can see the column MNI, which you translated like minimal
23 number of individuals. Can you -- is it your abbreviation which you are
24 using or is it abbreviation used by forensic?
25 A. This is an abbreviation which is used by anthropologists and
1 forensic experts. This abbreviation, minimum number of individuals in a
2 particular site we can exhume a number of bodies and parts of bodies, and
3 then, through scientific examination by a pathologist or an
4 anthropologist, we can then deduce a minimum number of bodies that can be
5 found in the site.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Just to clear this up. I've been trying to
7 follow you, and I think I have succeeded in following you. If you look at
8 the first entry on the first page of annex 1, Banja Luka, year 2000,
9 location of exhumation is Culimi-Kostici and then you have four bodies and
10 then four minimal number of individuals. How do you come to seven, then?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I put the number 7 there, that
12 corresponds to the total number of bodies exhumed in that municipality.
13 So if you add the three bodies exhumed in Banja Luka, you arrive at this
14 figure, the figure 7. So there are four bodies in Culimi-Kostici, one
15 body found at Culimi-Kostici 1 and two bodies in the Banja Luka cemetery,
16 which amounts to the same.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, I see. I see. Now I understand you. All
18 right. So actually, what you have in the last column on the first line
19 is -- contains the total of the three lines, okay, of the three entries;
20 in other words, the second entry and the third entry, the Banja Luka
21 cemetery and the Culimi-Kostici 1. So you add 4, 1 and 2. That's why
22 they become seven, yes, in Banja Luka.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, that's right. That applies to
24 each municipality.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Good. Thank you.
1 MS. RICHTEROVA:
2 Q. On this page 1, and if we go through the annex 1, we can see some
3 rows which are in grey. What does it mean?
4 A. When certain municipalities have been highlighted in grey, or
5 certain sites in municipalities, these sites -- it means that these sites
6 weren't taken into consideration as part of the investigation in question.
7 Q. Does it also mean that that exhumation relates to some other year
8 than the year 1992?
9 A. In fact, there are two reasons for excluding certain exhumations,
10 either because the municipality wasn't taken into consideration in the
11 course of the investigation or because an exhumation concerned individuals
12 for whom we have evidence that indicates that they died outside the period
13 of time relevant to the indictment.
14 Q. I will stay with this annex, but I have to ask you one question.
15 Were you also tasked to find the link between particular exhumation and
16 counts in the indictment, the crimes mentioned in the indictment?
17 A. Yes, that's right.
18 Q. And you prepared annex 9, which is some kind of key to the
19 following annexes which starts on the page 0292792 -- 28. And when I was
20 referring to annex 9, it is ERN number 02927926.
21 Were you using the information which you obtained from these
22 exhumation reports which you included in annex 1 in preparing the
23 exhumations linked to incidents mentioned in the indictment?
24 A. Yes, that's correct.
25 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, I want to go through these links
1 later on, and we can deal with them in details, as well with the
2 exhumation reports itself.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: If that's necessary, Ms. Richterova. Thank you.
4 MS. RICHTEROVA: If we are still in annex 1, I want you -- I want
5 to direct your attention to the page 10.
6 Q. And in the second row, we have exhumation Hrustovo 9, Kasapnica,
7 and we can see bodies, 18, MNI, 0. Can you just briefly explain the
8 discrepancies in these two columns?
9 A. Yes, I can. At this exhumation site -- in fact, I should say it
10 was a cream sign that was visited by the Bosnian authorities. On the
11 basis of information from the sole survivor of a massacre when the Bosnian
12 authorities carried out the on-site investigation, certain body parts were
13 returned, but not a sufficient number to determine the exact number of
14 individuals present at the scene of crime. Nevertheless, the report
15 listed the totality of the victims, that is to say, the 18 victims that
16 were involved in this particular incident. But the forensic report stated
17 that it was impossible to determine the exact number of individuals
18 present on the basis of the body parts that were discovered. And it is
19 for this reason that one wasn't able to give a minimum number of
20 individuals and an arbitrary choice which we had to make was to say that
21 this MNI number was 0.
22 Q. So you excluded these 18 bodies which were mentioned in the
23 statement of the witness from the numbers -- the overall numbers of the
24 body exhumed; is it correct?
25 A. This figure, the figure of 18 bodies, was in fact excluded.
1 Q. And in this annex 1, are all the exhumations conducted by Bosnian
2 authorities in the -- within the -- within the Autonomous Region of
3 Krajina, which you were dealing in in your addendum and from which you
4 concluded the numbers of sites is 416 and number of individuals is 2.019,
5 as I already mentioned? Is it correct?
6 A. Yes, that's correct. But I ought to add that there were other
7 exhumations conducted in the course of the year 2002 and 2003.
8 Unfortunately, we don't have all the documents that relate to these
9 exhumations. They weren't included in the report that I have presented.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Is there an indication from the Bosnian authorities
12 as to when possibly these updates could be made available to the Tribunal
13 or to your office?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To give an exact date, that is to
15 say, when we will receive the documents, well, I wouldn't be able to
16 provide you with such a date now. But we ask for additional documents
17 relating to exhumations on a regular basis. All the documents concerning
18 the exhumations that are directly related to incidents in the
19 indictment -- well, for example, I could mention in the list, in annex 1
20 that you have before you, if you have a look at the municipality of Kotor
21 Varos, you will see a very small number of exhumations, whereas in the
22 course of 2002, many exhumations were performed in this municipality. We
23 have received certain partial documents which are mentioned in two annexes
24 that have to do with Kotor Varos, and I think that this will be a subject
25 that will be discussed a little later.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
2 MS. RICHTEROVA:
3 Q. We know that the exhumations were conducted by the forensic team
4 of the OTP. Can you tell us where these exhumations took place?
5 A. The exhumations conducted by the OTP forensic team were performed
6 in the municipality of Prijedor. There were three of them in total.
7 Q. And from your report on page 9, the conclusion is that from these
8 three sites, 193 individuals were exhumed, plus 99 body parts. We will
9 see later under which conditions these exhumations were conducted and why
10 we are mentioning these body parts.
11 Maybe, just to assist the Judges, I would like to show you all the
12 map of exhumation sites so you have idea where these exhumations took
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you going to tender it an exhibit?
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. So let's give it a number straight away.
17 MS. RICHTEROVA: And the number of this map will be P2009.
18 Unfortunately, on the ELMO we cannot see properly the colours, but on the
19 hard copies which are in front of the Judges and the Defence we can see
20 different colours.
21 Q. Can you assist us and explain what we can see on these maps -- on
22 this map?
23 A. You can see the general areas where exhumations were performed in
24 this map. Each colour corresponds to a different body, a different
25 authority. Blue is for the sites exhumed by the BH authorities, by the
1 Bosnian authorities; red indicates the sites where exhumations were
2 performed by OTP forensic teams; green stands for exhumations in which the
3 OTP assisted the Bosnian authorities; and yellow is for exhumations
4 performed by the Croatian branch of -- concerned with missing persons.
5 Q. We can see clearly on this map the locations, and we can conclude
6 that in certain municipalities was great amount of exhumations and in some
7 municipalities there weren't any or just a few. Can you tell us, from
8 your experience, and also based on this map, in which municipalities there
9 were most exhumations?
10 A. I would say that there are three key, three principal
11 municipalities: Prijedor, Sanski Most, and Kljuc. These are the
12 municipalities in which the greatest number of exhumations were performed.
13 Q. We can see also in Bosanska Krupa there is a sign for a site
14 called Jama Lisac. Can you tell us where the bodies came from in Jama
16 A. Part of the bodies exhumed at the site in Jama Lisac were the
17 bodies of victims from the Omarska camp, the Omarska camp which was
18 between -- which was near the municipality of Prijedor, in the
19 municipality of Prijedor. As far as I remember, two persons were
20 identified on the basis of the DNA analysis performed at the site. The
21 persons concerned were two women who had been detained at the Omarska
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. We need to have a break now.
24 Ms. Richterova, how long do you think your in chief will last,
25 more or less?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 MS. RICHTEROVA: I think we can finish by 1.45, and I --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no. How much time do you need?
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: I need probably two more hours.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: You need two hours. So we'll only have a 15-minute
5 break, and the next break will also be of 15 minutes, okay? Thank you.
6 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
7 --- On resuming at 10.48 a.m.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's proceed, Madam Richterova.
9 MS. RICHTEROVA: Before we adjourned, we were talking about this
10 exhumation site in Jama Lisac, and you mentioned two women who were
11 identified as being in Omarska camp.
12 Q. Do you remember their names?
13 A. Yes, I do. Edna Dautovic and Sadeta Madunjanin. Those were the
14 two women concerned.
15 Q. And is it correct that you testified in details about this
16 exhumation site in Jama Lisac during the Stakic case?
17 A. Yes, that's right.
18 Q. And another location which was conducted together with -- which
19 were conducted by Bosnian authorities together with OTP forensic team was
20 Jakarina Kosa; is it correct?
21 A. Yes, that's correct.
22 MS. RICHTEROVA: I would like to show the witness a few
23 photographs from this exhumation to assist the Judges to have some idea
24 how this grave site looked like, and I -- now I am referring to the CD,
25 which Your Honours should have. In your exhibit list, it's under 14 and
1 15. Do you have your list, Your Honour?
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: It's CD 02129871/0309, for the documentation
4 relating to exhumation in Jakarina Kosa. And the other CD is X009-4467
5 until 5464. Other is X010-9585 until 9671. And the last part is
6 X011-1196, 1199. And it is also for the documentation relating to the
7 exhumation in Jakarina Kosa. I would like to tender these two CDs into
8 evidence. The first one under number 14 would be P2010, and the other
9 one, because it relates to the same place, it would be P2010.1.
10 The photographs which I want to show you are from these CDs, and
11 it would be easier to go just with the hard copies.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I agree a hundred per cent.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: So if we could give the witness these
14 photographs, and he can place it on the ELMO.
15 Q. So, Mr. Sebire, if you could place it on the ELMO -- no, on the
16 other side. And always briefly tell us what we can see and what you know
17 about this exhumation site. My first question is: Were you present
18 during this exhumation?
19 A. Yes, I was present, from the very first day of the exhumation
20 until it was completed. I spent five weeks over there in total.
21 Q. So you can elaborate, please, on the photographs which are in
22 front of you and assist the Judges with the atmosphere, with the findings
23 during this exhumation in Jakarina Kosa. So on the photograph 0212-9892,
24 what can we see?
25 A. This is a photograph that was taken at the very beginning of the
1 exhumation. You can see the area where the exhumation was performed. It
2 starts a little lower down in the photograph and ascends in this manner.
3 To give you an idea of the size of the site, the excavator that you can
4 see, the yellow excavator, is a 20-tonne excavator. You can see its size
5 in the photograph and that can give you an idea of the size of the site
6 that was exhumed. The yellow arrow points to the zone which is on top of
7 the exhumation site, where two craters were observed. In these two
8 craters - in the following photograph you can see one of them. I think
9 that it's visible. You can see its form here - there were rocks in the
10 crater that could be found and there were holes in them. Given the nature
11 of the zone, this might seem to be normal, but when performing the
12 exhumations, we found about two kilogrammes of explosives with the bodies,
13 explosives that hadn't been used, and in addition, information provided to
14 us before the exhumation. According to this information, these craters
15 were the result of explosions used -- the purpose of which was to cover
16 the parts where the bodies had been left. I think that we can have a look
17 at the following photograph, the next photograph.
18 This photograph is quite clear. Unfortunately, I don't think we
19 can see the second crater I had in mind. I'll try to point to it
20 briefly. That's the second crater that was observed above the exhumation
21 site. A photograph taken at the site of one of the rocks where we found
22 holes that had been made. It's a cylindrical form, probably typical of
23 the type of holes that you might find in a mining area. If I may, I'll
24 move on to the next photograph.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
1 MS. BARUCH: [Microphone not activated] Your Honour, just so that
2 the record --
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, for counsel.
4 MS. BARUCH: I thought I had turned it on. Just so that the
5 record would be clear, could the witness be instructed, instead of saying
6 "the next photograph," the number of the photograph. Thank you.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. You're a hundred per cent right. So perhaps,
8 Mr. Sebire, let -- I invite you to go back to the previous four photos and
9 you just go ahead saying the first photo has this reference number, the
10 second photo that I showed and then spoke about has... Okay. Yes, go
12 MS. RICHTEROVA:
13 Q. Just say the ERN numbers, nothing more. Just say these four ERN
14 numbers of the photographs you went through.
15 A. Very well. The first photograph that we had a look at, its number
16 is 0212-9892. The number of the second photograph is 0212-9882. The
17 number of the third photograph is 0212-9883. And finally, the fourth
18 photograph bears the number 0212-9889.
19 Q. Thank you. And if we can place the fifth photograph. And again,
20 can you please state the ERN number of this photograph.
21 A. The number is 0212-9893 and represents another rock in which we
22 found a cylindrical hole drilled.
23 Q. You mentioned that these holes were -- most probably from
24 explosions. Did you find any explosions on the site?
25 A. During the exhumations, small quantities of explosives were
1 found. I think one kilogramme, 9050 or something grammes of non-detonated
2 explosives were found there at the same time when we found
3 the bodies. And this explosive was analysed in the Sarajevo laboratory
4 and they confirmed to us the type of the explosive.
5 Q. And all these details are in your report; is it correct?
6 A. Indeed, in the report which was prepared for the Stakic case.
7 Q. Can we please proceed with the photographs. And again, can you
8 start with the ERN number and then indication what we can see on this
10 A. Right. So this is photograph 0212-9965, and this is a photograph
11 which shows the state in which we found human remains during our
12 exhumation here. We can also see an anthropologist who is disinterring
13 human remains.
14 Q. Next photograph, please. It is photograph 0212-9983?
15 JUDGE AGIUS: 63.
16 MS. RICHTEROVA: Oh, 63. I'm sorry.
17 Q. So can you give us explanation as to this photograph?
18 A. The chief objective of this photograph is to show different soil
19 layers which we came across during the exhumation. During our work there,
20 we had to establish how deep one could dig into the slope of this mine.
21 And if I can turn to the photograph now, this part of soil here, we
22 have -- in this soil, we, as a rule, have not found any remains or
23 bodies. The area where we found bodies or parts of bodies were here and
24 here. This photograph is purported to show that bodies were found in the
25 same place, that is, in soil of different colours, which could mean that
1 these bodies were brought from a primary grave site to this one.
2 Q. When you mention a primary site, and in your statement you are
3 talking about primary and secondary, can you explain, please, what does it
5 A. Very briefly, a primary site is a place where one finds bodies,
6 but no mark, no sign, that any attempt has been made to change the site.
7 For instance, the exhumations which are mentioned in -- for this -- in the
8 report for the Stakic case, for instance, there is a site at Kevljani,
9 and this was an exhumation which was conducted by the OTP forensic team,
10 and I believe that there were 70 or 71 bodies found at that site, and
11 parts of bodies or remains once again about 70, 71, with clear signs that
12 these bodies have been moved after having been buried at a place. So a
13 secondary site is a site with bodies or bodily parts which had been taken
14 over from a primary site, transported to the other side, and then buried
15 once again.
16 Q. Were there any other indications that this Jakarina Kosa, that it
17 was secondary exhumation site or secondary burial site?
18 A. We collected information from persons who live in that area, and
19 they said that in 1993 - they couldn't give us the exact date - that this
20 whole area was blocked by the army, that numerous vehicles, numerous
21 trucks, were seen moving in that direction; that one could feel that there
22 were activities there in that area; and that explosions could be heard
23 from there, which made us think that Jakarina Kosa was indeed a secondary
25 Another element which confirmed to us, perhaps even more
1 convincingly, was when we looked at the names of either persons who
2 were -- either identified there or the names which were found on identity
3 cards found at the site which belonged to individuals who disappeared or
4 were killed in 1992 at different places and other places and at different
5 periods of time in 1992. However, these bodies were all found at Jakarina
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Sebire. Before we proceed with probably two more
8 pictures which you have in front of you, I would like to refer Your
9 Honours to annex 7, which is links between incidents and exhumations for
10 Prijedor. It is 02927917. And you can see that Jakarina Kosa is
11 mentioned for several incidents, or better say the bodies or people who
12 were victims of these crimes in different places were identified in the
13 grave called Jakarina Kosa. Can we please proceed with the photographs.
14 And again, can you please read the ERN number, please.
15 A. The number is 0212-9871.
16 Q. From this photograph, we have some idea, but because you were
17 present, can you tell us in which condition were the bodies found in this
19 A. I think that the photograph is self-explanatory. Unfortunately,
20 we do not -- you cannot see what is written here on this small white
21 squares, but these cards indicate the places where bodies were found, and
22 these parts of the bodies, if you look at this photograph, you can see a
23 spine, some elbows. I'd say that, generally speaking, all these parts
24 were in a very bad, bad state. Does that answer your question?
25 Q. Yes. And I want to ask -- because these bodies were in such a bad
1 condition, how someone would be able to identify these bodies?
2 A. As you can see on this photograph, in some cases there was nothing
3 but clothes left. But some identity papers were found inside those
4 clothes, with some of the remains, and we tried to, on the basis of these
5 identity cards, to locate the families, and we also used blood samples and
6 we also requested for DNA analysis. So that -- that was it.
7 Q. [Previous interpretation continues] ... on your desk. If we can
8 have a look at this.
9 A. The number of this photograph is 0213-0067.
10 Q. And what can we see on this photograph?
11 A. This photograph purports to show the circumstances under which
12 exhumations were conducted here, in this part here. You can see the soil
13 on which we walked, because that is above the slope. And down to about
14 here, at the bottom of the photograph, all this was an area where we found
15 bodies. I do not know whether you can see that this slope is about 40
16 centimetres long. It is very difficult when you have a -- it is very
17 difficult to conduct exhumations, but you see that the bodies are here
18 almost at these -- that is, covered by 30 or 40 centimetres of soil. But
19 then you can see the remains down the slope. These yellow flags which are
20 seen different places on this photograph indicate that there some of the
21 remains had become to reemerge, to be unearthed. And here to the left,
22 relatively visible, you have these remains and this yellow flag, because
23 there bone had been dug up. So that is all that I can say about this
25 Q. And as I said, you were in details talking about this mass grave
1 in your report for Prijedor, dated 28th of August, 2002, and in Stakic
2 testimony. But you mentioned that you managed to recover some identity
3 cards. I would like to show you three more photographs. I'm done with
4 these photographs. Maybe we can -- I'm sorry. No. We can have a look at
5 this last photograph?
6 JUDGE AGIUS: I think we've seen that.
7 MS. RICHTEROVA: No. This is different, but ...
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Similar.
9 MS. RICHTEROVA: It's very similar. It's again just for Your
10 Honours to have idea how the site looked like.
11 Q. Can you please read the ERN number.
12 A. This is 012-9267 -- 2976. It is almost identical with the
13 previous photograph. It is a close-up which allows us to see in detail
14 the human remains that were unearthed. And what one can also see on this
15 photograph and which we couldn't see on the previous one is the fact that
16 here, at this site, are some covers, that is, some witnesses have
17 described the way in which they collected -- they unearthed -- they
18 collected the bodies, especially in Biscani, after some incidents which
19 happened in that area. When they were collecting those bodies, they were
20 asked to put the bodies in blankets, and they also were wearing gas masks
21 to protect themselves against the smell. And as you can see, there are
22 these blankets over some bodies, and also the -- according to the
23 identification that was found on some of these bodies, they indeed came
24 from the area of Biscani.
25 Q. Thank you. I would like to show you this document. It is
1 identification card. And we can --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] It's upside down.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes. It's upside down.
4 Q. We can also find this identification card on the CD already
5 mentioned. Maybe you can -- can you read the ERN number from this?
6 A. It is X009-4702.
7 Q. And can you please read for us who --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] He doesn't need to.
9 Let's proceed. I mean, it's --
10 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for His Honour, please.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. He doesn't need to do that. I mean, we
12 can all see it.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: So this is for Your Honours to see in which
14 conditions these documents were kept.
15 Q. Can I just briefly show you another photograph. This is
16 photograph from the morgue.
17 A. The number is X009-4862, and this photograph was taken at the
18 morgue in Sanski Most, where forensic examinations took place. And these
19 are the remains of a body marked 209. Alongside this body, the ID was
20 found, I mean the ID which we saw in the previous photograph. And as you
21 can see, this photograph was taken with the head down. This part here
22 is the skull. I do not know if you can see correctly. You can see the
23 skull and various pieces.
24 Q. Mr. Sebire, I don't want to go into details in respect to this
25 skeleton, but did you -- I'm sorry, was the body identified based on the
2 A. Yes, indeed.
3 Q. And was this body identified as Husein Fijkic, as is the name of
4 this identification card?
5 A. Yes, indeed.
6 Q. And I would like to show you the last photograph, and I want to
7 show Your Honours -- this is the person we are dealing with, a human
8 being. So this is the person who was identified as one of the bodies in
9 Jakarina Kosa.
10 From whom did we obtain -- the OTP obtain this photograph?
11 A. This is the reproduction of a photograph, and it is 0214-4465, and
12 I obtained this photograph after I located the family at the time when we
13 were collecting samples for DNA analysis.
14 Q. Thank you. I am done with Jakarina Kosa.
15 I have another photographs. I would like to show the witness only
16 two, because I think Your Honours have some idea. But at the same time, I
17 would like to tender into evidence another CDs. We just got them.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: What about the two that we have already first?
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: These are two Redak examination sites. What
20 you have is with respect to Jakarina Kosa; is it correct?
21 JUDGE AGIUS: The other two CDs that we have still got --
22 MS. RICHTEROVA: We will go through, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay.
24 MS. RICHTEROVA: We will go through.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
1 MS. RICHTEROVA: If the usher, please, can hand over the registry
2 and the Judges. These are photographs, and they are not listed on your --
3 in your exhibit list. And it's photo documentation of Redak exhumation
4 site and I would like to hand one over to the Defence as well.
5 Q. Mr. Sebire --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: This is going to be Exhibit number --?
7 MS. RICHTEROVA: I'm sorry. This will be Exhibit P2011.
8 Q. Mr. Sebire, Redak, it's another exhumation conducted by primarily
9 forensic team of the OTP; is it correct?
10 A. Indeed, it is. That exhumation was conducted by the forensic team
11 of the OTP in its entirety.
12 Q. I want to show you this photograph. Did you -- were you present
13 during this exhumation?
14 A. Indeed, I was. I was -- I spent about three weeks there. It
15 happened in June 2000. And there were a number of bodies found at that
16 site. So the photograph that you've just given me has the number
18 Q. And can you -- yes, please. Can you describe what we can see on
19 this photograph.
20 A. This photograph shows the exhumation site at the end of the
21 operation. You see here all the places where -- which were dug up. You
22 see how one went around, the contours of this site. Most of the bodies
23 were found in this part here. So you have it. It's like this, roughly.
24 So we see here the exhumation site 1. So the exhumation was completed.
25 Q. Can you tell us where Redak is located, in which municipality?
1 A. Redak is in the Prijedor municipality and is in the mining area
2 called Ljubija, which is south of the village of Ljubija, along the road
3 which goes from Ljubija to Stari Majdan.
4 Q. And Jakarina Kosa, where Jakarina Kosa is located?
5 A. In the same area, that is, in the same mining area, about a
6 kilometre and a half or a kilometre from this exhumation site at Redak.
7 So they are two sites which are very near to each other.
8 Q. I would like to show you another picture, and because you were
9 present, you can tell us in which state were bodies found in this
11 A. This number is 0100-6963-03. We see here the work which was done
12 by an anthropologist who was there and whose task was to unearth, to
13 disinter the bodies which were covered here. We see that five bodies were
14 taken out at more or less the same time, more or less at the same time,
15 and each one was assigned a number, as you can see, 70, 74, 75, 77, and 77
16 [as interpreted]. As you can see on this photograph, the bodies have been
17 reduced to skeletons, although in some places you can see some other parts
19 Q. And again, you described in details the findings from this
20 exhumation site in your report for Prijedor and during the testimony in
21 the Stakic case; is it correct?
22 A. Yes, indeed.
23 Q. I would like to show only one photograph which can clearly
24 demonstrate one kind of injury.
25 A. The number on this photograph is 0100-6966-24A.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. And what can we see on this photograph?
2 A. We see the skull of an individual who was exhumed at Redak, and we
3 can see a wound in the skull, on the right-hand side of the skull, made by
4 a firearm. And the forensic -- the post-mortem showed that it was indeed
5 a firearm wound.
6 Q. Thank you. I am done with this part of your testimony. We were
7 talking about the exhumations done by Bosnian authorities together with
8 OTP forensic team and exhumation done exclusively by the OTP forensic
10 I would like to deal with exhumation done by Bosnian authorities,
11 and I would like you and Your Honours refer to these annexes which relates
12 to links between exhumations and crimes. And if we could go to the
13 page -- or ERN number 02927939. It is -- it relates to the killing of
14 number of men at Vrhpolje bridge and on the way towards the Vrhpolje
15 bridge. We already heard evidence with respect to these killings, and we
16 also exhibited a number of documents. I would only like to present a few
17 more documents. So the Court has the full picture of the exhumations
18 conducted by the Bosnian authorities.
19 I have copies of sketches from the Vrhpolje bridge. I will
20 provide the Judges with the relevant documents, please. And you can see
21 these materials on your exhibit list under number 9 as sketches from the
22 exhumation in Vrhpolje 1, 2, 3, with relevant ERN numbers starting with
23 00491618 until 1619, et cetera.
24 And also -- and I would like to tender these sketches into
25 evidence. This will be -- because we have four sketches. I would suggest
1 to mark the sketches P2012.1, .2, .3, .4, in the order as it is stated in
2 the exhibit list.
3 You don't need to place it on the ELMO. I just want Mr. Sebire to
4 make a comment on these documents.
5 Q. Just very briefly: Are you aware that we received exhumation
6 documents, or documents with respect to exhumations in Vrhpolje?
7 A. Yes. These four maps, four sketches, they are part of the
8 documentation filed that we received from the Bosnian authorities, in
9 combination with the exhumations of the sites VM 1, 2 and 3.
10 Q. And when you were preparing this link between exhumations and this
11 crime, did you review all the documents you identified in your database,
12 or how did you proceed?
13 A. In terms of exhibits in this case, basing myself on the exhumation
14 reports that were produced by the Bosnian authorities and testimony of a
15 survivor of the incident that we made a link to, it was easy to compare
16 the names of the victims mentioned by the witness and the number of -- and
17 the individuals that were identified at the exhumation site in Vrhpolje.
18 Q. And during the preparation of this annex, of this particular annex
19 or the other annexes, did you work with all the materials which were
20 identified within the OTP?
21 A. Yes, that's right, as much as we were able to, as well as the
22 specific documentation that was linked to the exhumation documents. I
23 also examined various files of the Office of the Prosecutor in order to
24 find all the documents that would have a direct link either to the
25 exhumations or to any incidents mentioned by the witness.
1 Q. And from your annex, we can see that the exhumation report, an
2 autopsy report were already exhibited, and these exhibits are marked in
3 the annex. I would like to show you a few photographs from this
4 exhumation site.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: And Your Honours, these are photographs which you
6 can find on the CD. It's under number 7 of the exhibit list, and it is CD
7 00437872 until 8218.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: And this will be Exhibit number --?
9 MS. RICHTEROVA: And this will be Exhibit number P2013.
10 Your Honour, you all have CD, but I have a hard copy, and again, I
11 would like to give this hard copy to the witness.
12 Q. And if you could look up the ERN number 00438102-A -- I'm sorry.
13 03, 8103. It's page 2. And please place it on the ELMO so we all can see
14 it. And again, my question is: Were you present during the exhumation?
15 A. No.
16 Q. And did you visit this place any time later after the exhumation
17 took place?
18 A. Yes. I went during the year 2000. At the time I went to the --
19 when I went to the site, the bridge that we can see here was by then
21 Q. So on this picture are the remains of the bridge and the time when
22 you were there the bridge was already rebuilt. And can you show us at
23 this photograph where is the grave site?
24 A. The first pit would be here.
25 Q. And because you say "first pit," and we also heard Vrhpolje 1
2 3. Were there more graves?
3 A. Yes, that's right. On the other side of the river, the opposite
4 side of the river, there would be the second pit; and a little bit further
5 away, along the river, there was a third pit.
6 Q. And now if I can direct you to the page 26.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Of what?
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: I'm sorry. This is 26 of the hard copy. And on
9 the CD, it will be 00438127.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
11 MS. RICHTEROVA:
12 Q. And again --
13 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] We don't need to go into
14 much detail.
15 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Mr. President, please.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: We don't need to go into much detail. Keep it to
17 the bare minimum. We all know what we are looking at, so ...
18 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes, of course, Your Honour. I just wanted to
19 show the scene.
20 Q. Do you know when this exhumation took place?
21 JUDGE AGIUS: You mean the day, month, and year, or just the
23 MS. RICHTEROVA: The year.
24 Q. And if I can help you, I am just reading now from your annex, and
25 it says that in 1996 Bosnian authorities exhume 28 bodies from three grave
1 sites. Is it correct?
2 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think he can testify for the Bosnian
3 authorities. You have the documents from the Bosnian --
4 MS. RICHTEROVA: It is from the documents. I'm sorry, Your
5 Honour. It is from the document that the exhumation took place in 1996.
6 Q. I think you cannot make any more comments to these pictures,
7 because they are self-explanatory, and I am done with these pictures.
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: As Your Honour pointed that we don't need to go
9 into other details.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think -- you're free to do so if you want to
11 but I don't think we really need to go through the entire --
12 MS. RICHTEROVA:
13 Q. Mr. Sebire, I also want to show you one document.
14 MS. RICHTEROVA: And Your Honours should have them in front of
15 you. It is -- it should be under your number 8. It's on-site
16 investigation record by Sanski Most Serb municipality record dated 10th
17 of July, which is --
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Which document is this?
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: It is document with the number ET 0212-2869. And
20 I will -- I'm sorry. You don't have it. I will provide you with these
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 MS. RICHTEROVA:
24 Q. Mr. Sebire, you mentioned this document in your report, or better
25 say in the annex. It is dated 10 of July, 1992. It means only less than
1 two months after the incident itself.
2 A. That's right.
3 Q. Did you compare this document with the exhumation reports done by
4 the Bosnian authorities in the year 1996?
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. And the bodies which were identified by this document are the same
7 or are similar which were identified during -- in due course of
8 identification process done by Bosnian authorities; is it correct?
9 A. Yes. For some of the bodies, that's true. There was a report
10 dated 10th of July, 1992, and that was an investigation that was done on
11 site. The authorities discovered it, and this was done on the 2nd of
12 June, 1992, that is, three days after the date or the incident -- when the
13 incident happened on the Vrhpolje bridge. In the report prepared by the
14 municipal commission of Sanski Most, a certain number of individuals were
15 mentioned that were found on location, and these individuals were exhumed
16 in 1996 by Bosnian authorities.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated] What's the exhibit
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Mr. President.
20 MS. RICHTEROVA: The Exhibit number for this document will be
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
23 MS. RICHTEROVA:
24 Q. Now I would like to go to Banja Luka, which is the second document
25 in the annex. The ERN number is 02927929. In this document, you refer to
1 deaths of Esad Bender and Omer Filipovic. During your investigation and
2 analysing the documents, what material did you find?
3 A. Among the first documents that I had at my disposal at the Office
4 of the Prosecutor, these documents were issued by the municipal court in
5 Kljuc, and then the documents given by Republika Srpska authorities to do
6 with the bodies of Esad Bender, Omer Filipovic. The examination was done
7 by the forensic pathologist of the Bihac cantonal court. And apparently
8 it said that a preliminary autopsy had been carried out on these bodies.
9 Meanwhile, we have managed to obtain autopsy report carried out by the
10 forensic pathologist from Banja Luka on the 30th of July, 1992, and these
11 were the bodies of -- the autopsy was carried out on the bodies of Esad
12 Bender and Omer Filipovic.
13 Q. We have these autopsy reports here, and I would like to tender
14 them into evidence, and together with death certificate of Omer Filipovic
15 and Esad Bender. The autopsy report is translated, unfortunately [sic].
16 We have requested translation of these death certificates, but we do not
17 have translation yet. So I believe we will be able to hand over these
18 translations next week.
19 And again to be specific, the reports on the autopsy of the body
20 of Esad Bender and Omer Filipovic, it's document 0229-0926 until 09 --
21 8926 to 8931. And I want to tender it into evidence under P2015.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Wait a minute. Wait, wait. Wait a minute. The two
23 certificates which are in Cyrillic script, the one of -- relating to Omer
24 Filipovic and the other one to Esad Bender, what's the exhibit number that
25 you want to give to those two?
1 MS. RICHTEROVA: For Omer Filipovic, which is 0212-1856.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: It will be P2016.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. The other one will be?
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: And the other one for Esad Bender, which is
6 0212-1857, will be P2017.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: And then the clinical -- the autopsy report?
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: And the autopsy report will be, as I already
9 said, P2015.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: And as we can read from the autopsy reports and
12 the date of these reports is 30th of July, 1992. For Esad Bender, the
13 conclusion is: Esad Bender's death is the consequence of purulent
14 inflammation of the gall bladder with bursting of the wall. The bursting
15 of the wall of the gall bladder cannot be brought in connection with the
16 effect of any external force.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you making a statement?
18 MS. RICHTEROVA: It's what I am reading from the --
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Which page?
20 MS. RICHTEROVA: It is page 6.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: I see. Thank you.
22 MS. RICHTEROVA: -- of the translation. And I can -- I already
23 spotted one error in this translation, and it will be corrected. It's the
24 report of Omer Filipovic. We can see it, page 8, page number 8, report
25 on autopsy of the Omer Filipovic. And if we go to page 11, we can see
1 Esad Bender's death. So it is again -- it was a mistake. It should read
2 "Omer Filipovic's death is the consequence of purulent inflammation of
3 the right kidney. And the fractures of ribs on both sides resulting in
4 bleeding of the chest and an injury to the right lung were caused by a
5 blunt force. These injuries were not fleshly inflicted."
6 But the report itself or the reports themselves go into details.
7 And now I would like to move to the municipality of Kotor Varos,
8 which is on the page with ERN number 0292-7987.
9 Q. This is -- you collected information in respect of killings of
10 number of men in the mosque in Hanifici on or about 15th of August. We
11 haven't heard evidence on this incident, because it was in Kotor Varos,
12 but we have a statement, and we also have documents. And we can provide
13 the Judges and the Defence with exhumation report. And again, I have to
14 apologise, because we had -- this was done on very short notice. The
15 translation has not been finished yet, but it will be next week. And I am
16 referring to -- I'm referring to the point 10. And we will see a video,
17 and we also have an exhumation report which is 0094-0954 until 0962. It's
18 only in B/C/S, it will be translated. And the exhibit number would be
19 P2018. And first --
20 MS. BARUCH: Excuse me. Would that be the number for the CD or
21 the number for the autopsy -- the exhumation report?
22 MS. RICHTEROVA: This is number for the autopsy and exhumation
23 report. I will -- I want now to play the video, if we manage to find the
24 right place. You have to switch to "computer evidence."
25 Q. Mr. Sebire --
1 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you want to give instructions to the witness
2 before we proceed?
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes. Can we --
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Can we stop, please? Yes, please.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA:
6 Q. Mr. Sebire, were you present during this exhumation?
7 A. No, I was not present during this exhumation. I was not present
8 when this site was exhumed.
9 Q. Did you visit it -- did you visit this place any time later?
10 A. On several occasions between 2000 and 2003, yes.
11 Q. And did you see this video before?
12 A. I have seen it, yes.
13 Q. And based on your knowledge, personal knowledge of the site, can
14 you make comments what we can see on this video?
15 A. Yes, I believe so.
16 Q. And last question: We received this exhumation report, which is
17 also mentioned in your annex KV 2, and together with this exhumation
18 report, we received also this video; is it correct?
19 A. That's correct, yes.
20 Q. And when you went through this video, does it contain just the
21 site in Hanifici or just some other sites?
22 A. There are several sites that are mentioned on this video also in
23 Kotor Varos and in other municipalities.
24 Q. Do you know which other municipality?
25 A. Teslic.
1 Q. Thank you. Now we can play --
2 JUDGE AGIUS: How are we going to proceed? Are you going to give
3 instructions, tell us when to stop, and then put questions to the
4 witness? Or are you going to leave it in the hands of the witness to tell
5 the technicians when to stop so that he gives us explanations?
6 MS. RICHTEROVA: I would leave it in Mr. Sebire's hands.
7 Q. If you can comment on what you -- on what we can see, and in the
8 moment you want to pause, please let us know. So we can start playing.
9 [Videotape played]
10 MS. RICHTEROVA:
11 Q. So what can we see now?
12 A. What we see at the moment is behind the mosque in Hanifici, in the
13 cemetery. This is the site where the exhumation was being performed.
14 Q. Unfortunately, we cannot fast forward, but it will be really a
15 short part of this -- can we pause now. Yes. What can we see now?
16 A. This is the mosque in Hanifici.
17 Q. We can play. Do you know where the location of the grave was in
18 connection to this mosque?
19 A. The cemetery was next to the mosque.
20 Q. And again we can see the mosque.
21 A. This is the rear part of the mosque. You can see part of the
22 minaret. You can also see the zone where the mosque is in the cemetery.
23 This is a close-up of the interior. Now we can see the interior of the
24 mosque and the state it was in. This video was filmed in 1999.
25 Q. And in which condition -- what could you see inside of the mosque
1 and outside of the mosque? In which condition the mosque was?
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes. Can we pause here.
4 MS. BARUCH: Your Honours, I would object to the condition of the
5 mosque in 1999 unless somebody could associate that condition with the
6 years of this indictment.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Objection sustained.
8 MS. BARUCH: Thank you.
9 MS. RICHTEROVA:
10 Q. Mr. Sebire, during the preparation of this report, you stated that
11 you read the statements and the transcripts of the witnesses who have
12 testified or who will be -- who will testify. What did you learn in
13 respect to this incident? And just briefly.
14 A. With respect to this incident?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. A witness who has not yet testified, and pursuant -- a 92 bis
17 statement was received from him, he describes how a group of men was taken
18 to this mosque in mid-August 1992, and they entered the mosque and burned
19 it. There was a brief description of this incident on the basis of this
20 witness's testimony.
21 Q. Thank you. When you saw the interior of the mosque in 2000, was
22 it burned?
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Were there traces of burning?
24 A. Yes. In fact, I went into the mosque myself on several occasions.
25 The first time was in the course of the year 2000. And I was able to see
1 that there had been a fire inside. And outside the windows, you can see
2 the traces of soot which are present inside and outside the building.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: Can we play just a short ...
4 [Videotape played]
5 MS. RICHTEROVA:
6 Q. So can you comment? Based on your knowledge from the exhumations,
7 what we can see here.
8 A. The board we can see, on which it says "HAN 1/1" indicates that it
9 concerns the exhumation of a body at the Hanifici site. HAN, site 1, body
10 1. That's what this sign means.
11 Q. And this number will follow the body until the mortuary and during
12 the identification and autopsy of this body; is it correct?
13 A. That's correct, yes.
14 MS. RICHTEROVA: I think if -- we can stop it here. Your Honours
15 has again idea how this went on.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
17 MS. RICHTEROVA:
18 Q. Mr. Sebire, as I said already at the beginning, in annex 9, with
19 the following annexes for each municipality, which is under ERN number
20 02927928 until 02927990, you tried to establish the link between the
21 exhumations and the crimes. And can you just briefly tell us the method,
22 how you did it?
23 A. Very briefly. We, having had the opportunity of reading the
24 transcripts of witnesses who testified before this Tribunal, and
25 identifying the names of the victims described by witnesses as having
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 disappeared, I was able to compare the names with the exhumations sites
2 which had been entered into my database, as well as with the database for
3 proof of death. And on the basis of such a comparison, it was evident
4 that in a number of sites, persons who had been identified by people in
5 this Court corresponded to the names of victims who had been exhumed
6 either by the Bosnian authorities or by the OTP.
7 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, I can go page by page --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't think it is -- I don't -- unless there is an
9 insistence forthcoming from the Defence. I don't think it is necessary.
10 I mean it's pretty much clear. The method itself I think is pretty much
11 clear, emerges clear from the documents themselves and then it's up to
12 Mr. Ackerman later on to go through this, if it is -- if he feels it is
13 necessary at all.
14 MS. RICHTEROVA: There is another thing --
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I think there are very few killings that are
16 contested as such, as killings. The rest -- it's the rest that are being
17 contested more or less.
18 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honour, there is another thing which I need
19 to mention, because in these annexes there are documents mentioned which
20 haven't been disclosed, and the only purpose why they haven't been
21 disclosed is that there is a huge amount of these declaration of deaths,
22 huge amount of autopsy reports, huge amount of exhumation reports and
23 other accompanying documents. They are listed in this report. We have
24 written letters to Defence on two occasions, asking them if they wish to
25 inspect these documents. We are more than happy to allow them to inspect
1 these documents or let us know if there is any objection to these
2 documents. In that case, we can of course disclose whatever is necessary.
3 MS. BARUCH: I'm sure a review will be made, and so long as the
4 underlying documents are made available, if there is any objection, we
5 will make it.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. And perhaps if they are made available,
7 they could be made available on CD, if possible. I don't know.
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: You say underlying documents. All the documents
9 which are underlying in these annexes, because most of them are
10 underlying. So you want only those which are underlying in this -- in
11 these annexes or which documents you're asking?
12 MS. BARUCH: Just so that I can be clearer to Ms. Richterova: If
13 all of the underlying mentioned but not disclosed documents would be made
14 available upon request, I think that will be quite satisfactory. We have
15 the summary, and if we need to see something we will ask for it. And I'm
16 sure the Prosecutor would agree with that.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that's a very practical approach, and I
18 appreciate that, Ms. Baruch.
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: And I only forgot one thing, and it is the video
20 which we --
21 JUDGE AGIUS: It hasn't been given an exhibit number?
22 MS. RICHTEROVA: It hasn't been given exhibit number. And it will
23 be P2019. And Your Honours do not have this --
24 JUDGE AGIUS: No, we do not have a copy of it, no. That's the
25 video? Yes. I see.
1 MS. RICHTEROVA: That's the video.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: It hasn't been handed to us.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: The video is V0002475.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Is that it? Yes. We haven't got it, no.
5 [Trial Chamber confers with registrar]
6 MS. RICHTEROVA: No.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: We don't have it for sure.
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: No, you don't have it. We didn't have enough
9 copies of this.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: No, we don't have it. I can assure you.
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: I can assure the Judges that they don't have it.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I know. I know what I have.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA:
14 Q. Mr. Sebire, before I will move to my last part, talking about
15 proof of deaths, I just want to refer you to the page 9 of your addendum.
16 And if you could just very briefly summarise. This is figures for the
17 indictment against the accused. So for how many bodies you managed to
18 establish the link.
19 A. If we're talking about the connection, I assume one is referring
20 to the period covered by the indictment. 1.872 cases. There's
21 informational evidence indicating that individuals died or went missing in
23 Q. And now I would like to move to another point, another part of
24 your testimony, and it's proof of deaths. Now we covered the exhumations
25 and database with respect to exhumations. And as we know from your
1 previous testimony and from your report, the other database relates to the
2 proof of death. Can you very briefly tell the Judges what is the purpose
3 of this second database?
4 A. The second database which was used, called proof of death
5 database, was created after the OTP had received a fairly significant
6 number of rulings by the municipal court in Kljuc, or by Sanski Most,
7 Sanski Most court. These declarations declared that people were -- people
8 who had been declared as missing were in fact dead. The documents about
9 2.226 deceased persons was received and entered into the database. A
10 small number of the declarations of death, or these rulings, I should say,
11 a small number was translated, and this had to do also with -- as far as
12 the documents concerning exhumations are concerned, the rulings on people
13 who had been declared dead was entered into the database, and this
14 facilitated the processing of these documents.
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: Your Honours, I have one example of these proof
16 of deaths, the ruling of the court.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Is it necessary? We have seen several of them. Go
18 ahead, but we have seen quite a few of them.
19 MS. RICHTEROVA: Okay. So I ...
20 Q. Can you -- and I also want to mention that in Stakic case, you
21 were asked about the procedure. I just want to point out that one of our
22 witnesses was talking about the procedure and about the law on
23 administrative procedure declaring missing person dead and proof of deaths
24 and it was exhibited under P779, just to complete this.
25 Can you give us the general figures? And I want to refer you to
1 the -- to page 5 of your addendum. And if you could just explain very
2 briefly your findings.
3 A. Yes. As I said a minute ago, in total there were 2.026 cases of
4 people who had been declared dead, either by the Sanski Most court or by
5 the Kljuc court. Depending on the information contained in those rulings
6 delivered by these two courts, we were able to determine the period when
7 the person was either killed or went missing. In 1991, there was one
8 case; in 1992, there was 1.174 cases; in 1993, there were 43 cases; in
9 1994, there were 23 cases; in 1995, 166 cases. In 19 cases, errors were
10 made when entering the information, and these errors have not been
11 rectified to date. We only mentioned 1.774 cases out of these numbers
12 which concerns 1992 because that is the period concerned in the
13 indictment. All these persons died or went missing in the year 1992.
14 However, the information in the rulings indicates that in certain cases
15 the person died either of natural causes or in the course of directly
16 participating in the armed conflict.
17 Q. Were there any occasions when the person was later exhumed and
19 A. Yes. This happened in 329 cases. A person who had previously
20 been declared dead by a given ruling, when we compared this with the
21 databases concerning the exhumations, we were able to determine that this
22 person had been exhumed. So out of the 1.774 declarations that we
23 received for 1992, we excluded those who had been exhumed, as well as
24 those for whom the ruling indicated that they were -- that they died of
25 natural causes or in the course of an armed conflict. And this left us
1 with a total of 1.277 cases for the year 1992.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: How much longer do you think you have,
3 Mrs. Richterova?
4 MS. RICHTEROVA: I really think that I can finish in ten minutes.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: We've been sitting for an hour and a half. I don't
6 want to proceed unless I have the okay from everyone. And I can't really
7 see behind the dark glasses. If you let the registrar -- if we only have
8 ten minutes, I suggest we proceed for the next ten minutes and then we
9 bring the sitting to a close. All right?
10 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, Your Honours. We can do that.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Thanks a lot. Thank you.
12 So Madam Richterova, you may proceed, please.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA:
14 Q. Mr. Sebire, in -- on both these occasions, I mean when you were
15 dealing with exhumation, as well as the proof of death, you were focusing
16 on ethnicity of the bodies, gender, and the time when the person died.
17 How did you analyse the findings, and which conclusion you reached based
18 on the analytical work you did with all the information you received? And
19 let's start with ethnicity of the victims. Based on which is indicated
20 the ethnicity of the victims? And I'm referring you to page number 6 of
21 your addendum, in which you mentioned this. But I want to point out that
22 this was very in detail described in Stakic case. But in reference to
23 Prijedor. So just briefly if you can tell us.
24 A. As far as the ethnicity of the victims is concerned, the main
25 source of information was obviously the identification of the victim.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: [Previous interpretation continues] ... what? The
2 analysis points to which direction?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With regard to all the bodies that
4 were exhumed, for which we tried to determine the ethnicity, 1.300 were
5 Muslims from Bosnia, 10 were Bosnian Croats, 3 were Serbs from Bosnia, and
6 in one case the person was of another nationality, a nationality that
7 differed from the three previous ones mentioned. And in other cases we
8 weren't able to determine the ethnicity. We didn't have enough
9 information that would allow us to determine the ethnicity. In 55 cases
10 we didn't have such information.
11 MS. RICHTEROVA:
12 Q. And how did you proceed with bodies which weren't identified but,
13 let's say, found in one grave with bodies which were identified? Did you
14 exclude them or did you put them into a category unknown ethnicity, or did
15 you draw some conclusion, some other conclusion?
16 A. I would say that there are two parts of the answer. In the case
17 of sites for which we had no information, and if the body wasn't
18 identified, in such cases the category would be ethnicity unknown. In the
19 case -- in cases in which an unidentified individual in a grave site was
20 exhumed at a site where other members of that ethnicity were exhumed, in
21 such cases, that individual would be taken to belong to the same ethnic
22 group, naturally. This would have to be verified in the exhumation report
23 in order to see whether there were traces or not of an attempt to change
24 the site of exhumation, to change the grave site.
25 Q. And if we want to talk about the time of deaths, whether the
1 person was killed or went missing in 1992, what information did you use?
2 A. The main source of information to determine the time of death was
3 testimony of witnesses who had survived the incidents in which these
4 people were killed or went missing. This is what we relied on. And as I
5 said earlier on, we received 329 rulings from the Kljuc and Sanski Most
6 courts, declaring people dead. These declarations provided indications on
7 the period of death and also on the circumstances of the death. This
8 information was also useful to determine the time of death. Very often in
9 exhumation reports established by the Bosnian authorities when the
10 exhumations were performed, they would refer to the fact that the site had
11 been indicated by a given witness. Usually this would be a neighbour who
12 was present and then buried the body or the bodies. All of this
13 information was entered into the database. And yet again, this database
14 should be considered to be an aide rather than anything else. And on the
15 basis of all of this information, the time of death was established with a
16 certain degree of precision.
17 Q. Before I will ask you my last question to summarise your findings,
18 I want to ask you something about these proof of death rulings. These
19 rulings, the amount of them, is it the final amount or is --
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Ongoing process?
21 MS. RICHTEROVA:
22 Q. -- ongoing process?
23 A. Well, I would say that the figures that I have mentioned are far
24 from being definitive. It's quite possible that in the future, other
25 families might address municipal courts and ask them to make official
1 declarations of death for members of their family. The report that I
2 prepared and the preceding one, from the year 2001, we received 70
3 additional declarations of death. It's a very small number. It's more
4 than obvious that in the months, in the years to come, the number of cases
5 that will have to be excluded from the 2026 I have mentioned will have to
6 do with the number -- the increasing number of bodies identified in the
7 course of exhumations, the figures that you have been presented with today
8 are not definitive and I couldn't say that these numbers refer to the
9 total number of people who were killed or went missing.
10 Q. And what about if any member of the family survived or is not
11 living within the jurisdiction of these two courts?
12 A. Well, obviously, if some members of family have survived, if some
13 members have survived, then applications were made to the courts. But the
14 courts in Sanski Most have established these kind of declarations because
15 the number of persons who lived in Prijedor, Bosanski Novi, Kotor Varos,
16 or other municipality, are refugees, refugees or people who come from
17 these municipalities so who now live in other municipalities at this
18 arrival or other places can go to the local courts. And as far as I'm
19 concerned, I was interested only in those which came out of Kljuc -- of
20 the decisions which came out of Kljuc and Sanski Most.
21 Q. I'm sorry. I don't know whether again it was correctly
22 translated. The first sentence is: Well, obviously, if some members of
23 family have survived, then no application were made to the courts. But my
24 question was if members of family didn't survive.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: That's a little bit -- wait. It's a little bit
1 speculative, because you can't say what happens if there are no surviving
2 members of any particular family.
3 MS. RICHTEROVA: I think we can find the answer in the law.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: Because it can be the member of the family who
6 can request.
7 Q. I have my final question, and it's only very briefly, if you could
8 summarise the result of exhumations, proof of deaths, and total number of
9 individuals which we proved to be either killed or went missing in the
10 course of 1992, as stated in your report on page 11 and 12.
11 A. Right. With regard to the pronouncements of official death of
12 individuals, in 1992, we have arrived at a figure of 1.872 -- 77 [as
13 interpreted]. As for the exhumations, I indicated the number of sites,
14 then through testimonies, then based on the incidents which are mentioned
15 in the indictment, the number of sites which I have already indicated, so
16 that 58 sites could be linked, associated, with 30 allegations of crimes
18 MS. RICHTEROVA: I think that we have again a wrong numbers in the
19 transcript, so you stated that with regard to the pronouncement of
20 official deaths of the individuals in 1992, we have arrived at a figure --
21 and you can see it in the transcript, 1.872 -- 77.
22 Q. So what is the correct number, correct figure?
23 A. Yes, indeed. The figure is 1.277, 1.277.
24 Q. And when we add all the numbers, what would be the total number of
25 individuals who were killed or went missing?
1 A. We arrive at a figure at 2.565. I must add that when we add to
2 the figure declared dead and persons exhumed, there is a slight nuance
3 which has to be borne in mind, that is, that these additions exclude all
4 the of the bodies which were exhumed and not identified. That is, we had
5 from 25 -- from 2565, we have to take out those who were not identified.
6 Which means the number of exhumed bodies which -- for which -- which we
7 used in this addition was 1.088 people who were exhumed from the sites,
8 and we have -- and persons who were -- and those individuals who died
9 elsewhere were excluded from these numbers, and that was 1992. And some
10 other -- that is, we wish to say that there were sometimes duplication
11 between people who were not identified and those people who were found
12 missing and still are.
13 Q. We had a slight problem towards the end of your testimony, but all
14 these figures are clearly stated in the report. So I think I can say that
15 I concluded my examination-in-chief.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. Thank you, Madam Richterova.
17 Thank you, Mr. Sebire. You will be now escorted by the usher and
18 we will see you again on the 10th of June for cross-examination and
19 perhaps some further questions that might come up as necessary.
20 [The witness withdrew]
21 In the meantime, Madam Richterova, there is still one CD that has
22 not been tendered into evidence. I'm referring to what is described as
23 the book of missing persons from Prijedor, with ERN number 0212-4008. It
24 seems to be restamped as 0291-3396, 0291- to 3762. 2 of 2. Which is
25 what? You said earlier on, are the two CD's which were then incorporated
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 into one?
2 MS. RICHTEROVA: Exactly.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you going to tender it into evidence?
4 MS. RICHTEROVA: I tendered into evidence just one which should
5 contain --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, but you haven't tendered as yet. It hasn't
7 got a number as yet.
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: So in that case, it will be P2006.2, because it
9 is exhibit to the transcript. And it's /S282.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I think that we already have.
11 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: 282. S282.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: You have it.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: It can't be S282.
15 MS. RICHTEROVA: I just realised that there is one more CD, and I
16 would like to tender into evidence this CD at a later stage.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: So this was duplicated. This was duplicated. No,
18 it's not. You see what happened? They were two CDs and they remained
19 two CDs.
20 MS. RICHTEROVA: It's only for you, Your Honour, because the
21 registry has only one CD. Because we had -- I apologise that I am making
22 your life so difficult, but unfortunately they at first they did two CDs
23 and later they managed to put these two CDs on one CD.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Because what I noticed is that the first
25 one that you had already exhibited contained pages 1-255, while this one
1 that I was referring to contains pages from 256 to 367.
2 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes. And Mrs. Chuqing of course has --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: All of them put together.
4 MS. RICHTEROVA: All of them on one CD. But what I wanted to say,
5 it's two CDs which are in the exhibit list under number 16 and these are
6 all exhumation reports from Jakarina Kosa, Pasinac, Redak, and Kevljani,
7 and what I exhibited was photo documentation from Redak and Jakarina Kosa.
8 These are the real exhumation reports and autopsy reports and x-ray
9 reports, et cetera. At this moment, the CD is slightly disordered, and I
10 want to avoid the situation with two CDs for book of missing person. So I
11 would provide you and the Defence with better copy, and very soon.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you for that.
13 MS. RICHTEROVA: I have one more thing, which is -- which relates
14 to the witness on Monday, witness 7.57. I would respectfully ask if it
15 would be possible that we will sit on Monday longer hours, because this
16 witness has --
17 JUDGE AGIUS: We have discussed this already. I appreciate what
18 Ms. Baruch pointed out last -- whenever it was, and it was already agreed
19 to, as far as -- from our side, as far as we are concerned. I do not
20 intend to put Mr. Ackerman at any overstressing or over pressure, too much
21 pressure during his first week here. You have to make adjustments
22 accordingly. Perhaps shorten the examination-in-chief.
23 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes. I only want to point out that this witness
24 has problems --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Shorten out the examination-in-chief.
1 MS. RICHTEROVA: We can shorten out the examination-in-chief,
2 but --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: If you need him -- yes, but if you need him out of
4 The Hague on Monday evening, that's what you have to do.
5 MS. RICHTEROVA: There are two parts.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, I know that there are two parts. I am sure
7 that Mr. Ackerman will not try to keep him longer. We'll try, anyway.
8 MS. RICHTEROVA: Yes, sir.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: So that's it. Ms. Baruch, do I take it that this is
10 your last day here?
11 MS. BARUCH: It is, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: So I think, in my own name and on behalf of Judge
13 Janu and Judge Taya, who is not here and who I'm sure would second what I
14 am saying, I should like to publicly thank you for your most valid and
15 professional contribution over the past two weeks, without which we
16 couldn't possibly have proceeded, even with the presence of Mr. Cunningham
17 here. I do appreciate that for both of you, it must have been pretty
18 difficult, because it's not easy to catch up with all the important points
19 that one needs to know, all the information that one needs to know on a
20 trial that has been going on for a year and a half, almost a year and a
21 half. I appreciate that. And I do admire the way in which you managed to
22 conduct the defence during these two weeks, and as I said, I want to
23 publicly express my appreciation and gratitude. Thank you.
24 MS. BARUCH: Thank you, Your Honour. And it was my pleasure to
25 represent Mr. Ackerman's client and to serve this Court. God works in
1 mysterious ways, so 23 years ago, Mr. Ackerman married a lawyer, and it
2 served to benefit everybody, I hope.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you. So we adjourn until Monday, I think it's
4 in the morning. Thank you.
5 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 12.45 p.m.,
6 to be reconvened on Monday, the 2nd day of
7 June 2003, at 9.00 a.m.