1 Wednesday, 2 July 2003
2 [Private session]
12 Pages 18662 to 18682 – redacted – private session.
11 [Open session]
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 JUDGE AGIUS: Where is Mr. Treanor?
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, he was told to wait in the witness
15 room for courtroom 3 so I think that's where the usher has gone to get
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes.
18 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour may I raise a matter before he comes
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Let's hope it's only one.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: I think it's only one. I notice from the list of
22 documents that the Prosecutor proposes to use with regard to this witness,
23 that they mention several of the intercepts. These documents have not
24 been --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Disclosed.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: They have been disclosed but they have not been
2 admitted as exhibits and I have rather strong objection to those
3 intercepts because I believe they were done contrary to the law of
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina, illegally done, and therefore should not be admitted
5 before Your Honours and therefore I would object to their being used with
6 this witness on that basis.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Korner?
8 MS. KORNER: Your Honour, Mr. Ackerman has in the course of
9 conversations mentioned this but we've had absolutely no warning that
10 there is an objection or that there is any conflict over the legality of
11 these because the intercept witnesses are actually going to be starting
12 tomorrow, and we've had no notice of this. No legal motion has been filed
13 on this. So that's the situation. I suggest Mr. Ackerman files this
14 fairly quickly or raises it fairly quickly because these witnesses are
15 here to testify from tomorrow onwards, and we can't waste time on legal
16 submissions that they shouldn't be admitted into evidence.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman, I'm making it very clear at this
18 point that telling us, "Because I believe they were done contrary to the
19 law of Bosnia-Herzegovina, illegally done," is not enough in itself. It's
20 so vague, unless you come up with something really substantial, indicating
21 where precisely the law of Bosnia-Herzegovina has been violated, by whom,
22 and whether that should necessarily bring us to the conclusion not to
23 admit these intercepts just the same --
24 MS. KORNER: Your Honour I'd ask if there is going to be -- it be
25 done in writing, what we don't want to do is waste valuable court time.
1 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, no. I agree with you, Ms. Korner. I agree
2 with you. So I am going to admit these intercepts until I have enough,
3 sufficient reasons forthcoming from you to substantiate what you are
4 alleging, telling me, "I believe that they were obtained in an illegal
5 manner" alone without substantiating that statement is not enough.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour I understand that. It was only late
7 last night that I became aware there was an intent on the Prosecutor's
8 part to use them with this particular witness. I thought they were going
9 to be dealt with with the witnesses that are coming tomorrow.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly.
11 MR. ACKERMAN: I was in the process of preparing exactly what
12 you're suggesting and that is an objection. It's always been my view that
13 the time to object to exhibits is when the Prosecutor makes it clear they
14 are going to offer them and that seems to be clear with regard to the
15 coming witnesses and I'm prepared to make a more detailed objection at
16 that time but I didn't bring the documents with me this morning. But I'll
17 have something in writing in your hands before the day is out.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Yes, but in the meantime I'm going to
19 admit them with the caveat that I mentioned. You can rest assured,
20 Mr. Ackerman, that if there is an illegality, we go into it, but it
21 doesn't necessarily mean that the illegality means expunging the documents
22 or not having them admitted.
23 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm also aware of that, Your Honour. This matter
24 was heavily dealt with in an earlier case.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Exactly it has been.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: That I was involved in.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, exactly. So where is Mr. Treanor?
3 I must also admit that I haven't seen any of these documents as
4 yet, the intercepts. I haven't even come across them.
5 [The witness entered court]
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Good morning to you, sir.
7 THE WITNESS: Good morning.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: And saying welcome to this Tribunal is a little bit
9 of a misnomer. You are about to give testimony in the case which has been
10 instituted against Radoslav Brdjanin. You are here as an expert witness
11 for the Prosecution. I suppose that you are not new to the proceedings
12 before this Tribunal. For the time being, what is required from you is to
13 make the solemn declaration provided for in the rules and namely to speak
14 the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth in the course of your
16 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
17 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
18 WITNESS: PATRICK TREANOR
19 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you, please take a chair. I don't know if
20 you have been informed but you will not be cross-examined at this point.
21 You will be cross-examined in a couple of months' time.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, I've understood that, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Sutherland, I understand, will be examining you
24 in chief. Thank you.
25 Examined by Ms. Sutherland:
1 Q. Thank you, Your Honour. Sir could you please state your full
3 A. My name is Patrick Joseph Treanor.
4 Q. When were you born?
5 A. 14 February, 1949.
6 THE INTERPRETER: Can a break please be made between question and
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Ms. Sutherland, Mr. Treanor --
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Presiding Judge, please?
10 JUDGE AGIUS: You both speak English and if you don't allow a
11 short interval of time between question and answer, the interpreters will
12 find it very difficult to catch up with you. So please try to help the
13 interpreters as much as you can.
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: I apologise.
15 Q. Mr. Treanor, did you -- do you have a Bachelor of Arts degree in
16 modern languages from the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, U.S.A.
17 and you gained that in 1968?
18 A. Yes, that's correct, in Worcester, Massachusetts.
19 Q. You also have a masters degree in Russian and East European
20 studies from Yale University in New Haven in the United States and you
21 gained that in 1970?
22 A. That is correct.
23 Q. You also have a doctorate of philosophy from the University
24 College of London, University of London, United Kingdom, you gained that
25 in 1999, after completing a course of study at the school of Slavonic and
1 East European studies?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. I wish to deal briefly with your relevant work experience. From
4 1977 until 1980, you worked as an intelligence analyst in the federal
5 research division of the U.S. Library of Congress?
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. And your work involved analysis of Yugoslav military and related
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. From late 1980 until 1994 you worked as a historian and later
11 senior historian in the office of special investigations of the United
12 States Department of Justice?
13 A. That's right.
14 Q. This office had the mandate to investigate and litigate cases of
15 persons living in or attempting to gain entry to the United States and
16 alleged to have participated in Nazi persecution during the years 1933 to
18 A. Yes, it did and it still does.
19 Q. And much of the work related to the former Yugoslavia; is that
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. From July, 1994, or in July, 1994, you commenced working for the
23 Office of the Prosecutor at this Tribunal as a research officer?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And since February, 1998 you have been leader of the leadership
1 research team?
2 A. That's right.
3 Q. As leader of the LRT, is it common practice for you to supervise
4 the production of reports for investigations and trial teams?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Would you say that you have more experience than others in the
7 section with respect to war crimes-related matters?
8 A. Yes, I've been working in that area as was mentioned earlier,
9 since 1980.
10 Q. Does anyone in the section have higher academic qualifications
11 than yourself?
12 A. I don't believe so. There are several others that have Ph.D's as
14 Q. You mentioned that you've been working in the area since 1980, war
15 crimes area. How many years have you spent researching and analysing
16 documentary collections?
17 A. Well, I first started doing documentary research in my student
18 days, probably going back at least to 1970. On a professional basis I
19 became involved in doing documentary research when I joined the U.S.
20 Department of Justice in 1980. In the course of my employment there of
21 over 13 years, I did research in any number of archives in several
22 countries, including of course the United States, but also the United
23 Kingdom, Germany, former Yugoslavia, the former Soviet Union and Israel.
24 Q. How many years have you spent researching and analysing Bosnian
25 Serb or Serb documentation?
1 A. I've been involved with that documentation since very shortly
2 after my arrival at the Tribunal, since the end of 1994.
3 Q. So almost nine years?
4 A. Almost.
5 Q. Have you reviewed documentary collections with respect to other
6 ethnicities from the SFRY?
7 A. Yes, to some extent.
8 Q. Are there other people within the LRT who specialise in those
10 A. Yes, we have people specializing in doing research and analysis in
11 regard to each of the parties to the various conflicts in the former
13 Q. You prepared a report entitled, "The Bosnian Serb leadership, 1990
14 to 1992. Addendum. Governing structures in the Autonomous Region of
15 Krajina, 1991, 1992." I would ask that that be admitted into evidence,
16 Your Honours, and if it could be given Exhibit number P2351?
17 JUDGE AGIUS: Any objection, Mr. Ackerman?
18 MR. ACKERMAN: No objection other than with regard to the
19 proposition that there -- I believe there are documents referred to in the
20 footnotes of those reports that are not exhibits in this case, and to the
21 extent that they are being presented to the Trial Chamber in any form,
22 they need to be properly marked and exhibited, as far as I'm concerned.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. Point taken, Mr. Ackerman.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND:
25 Q. Sir, in order to put the addendum report into context, you had
1 prepared an earlier report; is that correct?
2 A. Yes. The earlier report was prepared in connection with another
4 Q. And which case was that?
5 A. The -- as it was at that time the Krajisnik Plavsic case.
6 Q. And that report deals with the structures and how they functioned
7 and the main decision-making process, does it not?
8 A. Yes, it deals with the main political structures that the Bosnian
9 Serbs created in the period 1990 to 1992, including the Serbian Democratic
10 Party and then the governmental structures proper that were created during
11 that period.
12 Q. And how did you come to prepare the addendum report? Could you
13 briefly explain that to the Trial Chamber?
14 A. Well, the Prosecution trial team in this case asked me, I believe
15 at the end of 2000, the year 2001, if my unit could prepare a similar
16 report in regard to the governing structures in the area of the Autonomous
17 Region of Krajina, which of course we were more than glad to do. By the
18 time that report was fairly well along, the other report had already been
19 submitted in the Krajisnik Plavsic case so there was a bit of overlap and
20 redundancy between the two reports at which point it was decided to make
21 the second report, that is the ARK report, an addendum to the first report
22 and simply put in that report the portions that were different from what
23 was in the main report, covering in particular the governing structures
24 that the -- the main governmental structures of the Socialist Republic of
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina and in the ARK region per se.
1 Q. In writing this report, you were assisted by other members of the
3 A. In writing both reports, yes, the main report, if we can call it
4 that, and the addendum.
5 Q. And in writing the addendum report, you were also assisted by
6 another member of the Office of the Prosecutor; is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And Mr. Aguirre, the strategic analyst, assisted in writing
9 section 6 of the report; is that correct?
10 A. Yes, that's right. He was the only person who was outside my team
11 who worked on that report.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: For the record, Ms. Sutherland, according to the
13 submission of Ms. Korner, of the 6th of June, Mr. Aguirre, Xavier Aguirre,
14 did not assist in writing section 6 but he actually wrote section 5. Now,
15 what I have here, Prosecution wishes to point out to the Trial Chamber and
16 the Defence that the report has been written by expert witness,
17 Mr. Treanor, with the assistance of members of his leadership research
18 team, with the exception of section 5 of the report entitled "Municipal
19 implementation of ARK Crisis Staff directives" which has been written by
20 Mr. Xavier Aguirre, a strategic analyst, employed by the Office of the
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, I'm sorry. I misspoke when I
23 said section 6. I meant section 5. And I take your point that he wrote
24 that section.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I just wanted to correct the record. I mean, it's
1 not that important.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND:
3 Q. Is right, Mr. Treanor, that in the addendum report you refer back
4 to the -- you refer the reader to the main report for certain sections?
5 A. Yes, that's correct. At certain points in the addendum there
6 would be an obvious gap if we did not treat certain subjects which were
7 treated in the main report, so at those points we refer back to the main
9 Q. And of those sections was dealing with the Serbian Democratic
11 A. That is dealt with in the main report. I don't think there is an
12 explicit reference to that section in the addendum.
13 Q. No. And that's where you refer the reader back to the main
14 report. Could you briefly tell the Court how the SDS functioned?
15 A. Well, the SDS was founded in July, 1990, at an assembly at which
16 the party adopted a programme and statutes. The statutes of the party set
17 up a structure which was slightly modified the following year at the
18 second assembly of the party in July, 1991, and they adopted a modified
19 statute. I think we have a copy of the statute available.
20 Q. Yes, could the witness be provided with the document? It's a new
21 exhibit. Could that be marked P2352?
22 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment. We marked 2351, the expert's report
23 that you referred him to. Then there was the other report which was the
24 one he had prepared for the Krajisnik Plavsic. Is that going to be
25 tendered as well? Because if it is I suppose that should be the 2352 and
1 not this one. I think it's important that both are tendered in evidence.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: That's how I see it.
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: In order to comprehend the parts in the addendum
5 you need to refer to --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Also because the second one was submitted so that to
7 enable us to understand the first. So I don't see how we can live with
8 one and not with the other. All right?
9 MS. SUTHERLAND: But I would just like to make clear that there
10 are a number of documents contained in the main report that have not been
11 disclosed to the Defence.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Because they are not relevant.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. We will come to that at the right
15 moment. So that will be 2352, I take it, Ms. Sutherland?
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: The main report and the draft statute of the SDS
17 dated July, 1991 can be P2353.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Why draft statute? Is it a draft?
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Mr. Treanor will explain.
20 JUDGE AGIUS: Draft translation of the statute.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: No it's a draft statute, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Oh, is it? Yeah P2353, all right.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND:
24 Q. Mr. Treanor you may continue.
25 A. Certainly. First of all to address the issue of the draft statute
1 that is the nature of this document I'd like to make a general observation
2 in regard to the nature of the report which is that it is closely based on
3 documentation on original documents and of course it can only be based on
4 documents that are available to us. Not every document that may have been
5 created that would be of interest to us in connection with the report is
6 in fact available to us. In many of the documents contain various
7 editorial and other imperfections. The document before us now, the
8 statute of the Serbian Democratic Party of 1991 is marked as a proposal.
9 It does however carry the date at the end of the document of 12 July,
10 1991, which is the date of the second assembly of the Serbian Democratic
11 Party. One of the documents that we do have available to us is the
12 stenographic record of that assembly from which it is apparent that they
13 did adopt the new statute without much discussion.
14 However, we do not have -- we do not happen to have a copy of a
15 document which says statute adopted on this date with a signature. All we
16 have is this proposal, which is presumably what was sent to the delegates
17 to the assembly for their consideration during the meeting. As I say, the
18 stenographic records of the session make it clear that the statute was in
19 fact adopted. So we have used this document as the basis for our analysis
20 of the statutes of the Serbian Democratic Party. In the main report we in
21 fact refer to both of them, the 1990 statute which bears no such notation
22 of being a draft and this one, in order to economise, it seemed
23 appropriate just to use this one. This was the statute that was in force
24 after 1991, after July, 1991.
25 Q. Can you take us to the articles in the statute that you deem to be
2 A. Certainly. I would first of all call attention to Article 1 in
3 the statute, which defines the Serbian Democratic Party of
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina as a political organisation of the Serbian people and
5 of other ethnic groups that accept the programme and statute of the
6 party. I would also call attention to Article 10 of the Statute which
7 sets out the goals of the party, and it states that the goal of the SDS is
8 to work on the realisation of the interests of the Serbian people, the
9 Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina and goes on to say, for instance, the
10 interests of the Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina are primarily
11 manifested in the struggle for: A, a federation of the federal state of
12 Yugoslavia and a Bosnia-Herzegovina with equal rights within Yugoslavia
13 and the equal rights of all ethnic groups in Bosnia-Herzegovina and in the
14 federal state of Yugoslavia. It goes on to speak of its desire for a
15 unified Yugoslav national army, respect for human rights, the rule of law,
16 and close cooperation with the Serbian Orthodox Church.
17 Next I would like to call attention to Article 13 which sets out
18 the rights and duties of members of the Serbian Democratic Party, one of
19 which is to respect and implement the programme and statute of the Serbian
20 Democratic Party. The further articles I'd like to call attention to deal
21 with the internal organisation of the party which I believe was the
22 original question. We could move to Article 19, which states that the
23 organisational forms of the Serbian Democratic Party shall be an assembly
24 and boards in local municipal city and republican organisations. Those
25 are basically the levels of government that existed in the Socialist
1 Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. So the party is organised -- the party
2 structure is organised to correspond to the structure of governmental
3 bodies in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
4 I would next call attention to Article 29, which sets out the
5 internal organs of the party. It says that the SDS organs are as follows:
6 An assembly of the SDS; the president of the SDS; a main board; an
7 executive board; and then also a supervisory board; a statutes council and
8 various councils of the SDS. Those bodies in their composition and duties
9 are described further on in the statute. We could move, for instance, to
10 Article 30, which deals with the assembly of the SDS. This is the body
11 that met as I mentioned in July, 1990 and then again in July, 1991. This
12 Article defines the assembly of the SDS as the highest organ of the SDS
13 and it goes on to specify its composition from representatives of the
14 municipal and other lower assemblies of the SDS. It says it should
15 convene once a year and goes on with some other duties of the assembly in
16 Article 30. And in Article 31 specifies some particular duties of the
17 assembly such as adopting and amending the programme and statute of the
18 party, adopting rules of procedure, electing and dismissing the president
19 of the party, electing and dismissing the main board of the party and
20 similarly for the supervisory board, the statutes council and goes on to
21 specify some other duties of the assembly.
22 Further articles address the other organs of the party, namely
23 Article 32 if we could move to that one, which discusses the president of
24 the SDS. It says that the president of the SDS is by virtue of his
25 position also the president of the main board, specifies that he or she
1 will have a mandate of four years. Article 33 goes on to specify some
2 particular rights and duties of the president of the party which is to
3 represent the party, to ensure the implementation of the programme of the
4 party, to convene the assemblies, to convene the sessions of the main
5 board, to coordinate the activities of organs and bodies of the party, to
6 take political and other decisions on behalf of the party, unless they
7 were within the competence of other organs and bodies of the party, and
8 goes on. Ending with the statement that in extraordinary situations the
9 president could take over extraordinary powers that were within the
10 competence of the assembly and the main board.
11 Now, the main board is described in beginning in Article 35, where
12 the main board is defined as the highest organ of the party between
13 sessions of the assembly. Remember those only met once a year.
14 Article 36 specifies the composition of the main board, which in
15 1991 was changed to 45 members from I believe the original 52 members.
16 And then Article 37 is one similar to the previous articles for the other
17 bodies which specifies some of the particular duties of the main board
18 such as electing the presidents and two-thirds of the members of the
19 executive board, preparing documents and decisions to be adopted by the
20 assembly of the party, to decide on the territorial organisation of the
21 party, to implement decisions of the assembly, to adopt an election
22 programme of the party, and on and on, ending with providing guidance and
23 adopt decisions for the activities of the lower party levels, that is the
24 municipal, city and local boards of the party.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Treanor, I've been asked to ask you to slow down
1 a little bit, please. Thank you.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Now, I believe we can turn to the
3 executive board of the party, which is treated beginning with Article 38
4 and I think we will call it quits here, this being the last important
5 organ of the party. For present purposes I believe Article 38 defines the
6 executive board as the executive organ of the main board. Article 39
7 specifies its membership consisting of 15 members some of whom will be
8 elected by the main board and some appointed on the basis of nomination by
9 the president of the party. The -- Article 40 specifies that the members
10 of the main board would be responsible to the main board for their work,
11 and then we have Article 41 which again lists a series of particular
12 rights and duties of the main board such as preparing materials for the
13 needs of -- I'm sorry, the rights and duties of the executive board such
14 as preparing materials for the needs of the main board, adopting its own
15 rules of procedure, to ensure the implementation of decisions of the main
16 board, control over SDS property, and on, ending with to conduct other
17 business entrusted to it by the presidents and the main board. So those
18 are the main organs of the Serbian Democratic Party as set out in its
20 MS. SUTHERLAND:
21 Q. Are you aware of regional boards of the SDS?
22 A. The original 1990 statute made provisions for regions within the
23 party and regional boards were apparently formed and apparently continued
24 to exist even after July, 1991, as coordinating bodies among the municipal
25 organisations, in particular regions, they did not have the same
1 authority, however, that the municipal organisations of the party had,
2 which are defined in the statute. They played merely a coordinating role
3 and did not have the same status within the hierarchy of the party as the
4 other levels I described, the local, municipal and republic level.
5 Q. The SDS participated in the November 1990 elections, did they not?
6 A. Yes, that's right. I suppose that was the whole point of founding
7 the party, as other parties were founded at that time in
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina to take part in the elections of 1990. They were
9 elections for the assembly of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
10 for the Presidency of the republic and there were also elections for the
11 municipal and local assemblies in the -- all the municipalities of
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I note the time.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Ms. Sutherland. We will have a break of
15 25 minutes starting from now. Thank you.
16 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
17 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 Q. Mr. Treanor, just before we broke, we were talking about the 1990
21 elections. Can you briefly tell the Court the -- what happened as a
22 result of those elections?
23 A. Yes. I mentioned that elections were held at various levels
24 within Bosnia-Herzegovina in November, 1990. The first round of elections
25 were held on the 18th of November, I believe. The results of the
1 elections were very good for the SDS and the other national parties that
2 had been formed in 1990. The SDS gained majorities in the assemblies
3 of -- according to Radovan Karadzic, who was the president of the party,
4 37 municipalities in Bosnia-Herzegovina, 37 of the 109 municipalities. On
5 the republic level, the party won, I forget the exact figure, about 75
6 seats in the two chambers of the republic assembly, and in the elections
7 for the Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the two candidates of the
8 Serbian nationality who were basically candidates of the SDS were elected
9 to the Presidency, the Presidency was composed of seven people and two of
10 those members had to be of Serbian nationality as well as two of Muslim
11 and Croatian nationality so they elected two members to that body.
12 Q. You mentioned the chamber of -- the two chambers within the
13 assembly. Can you briefly speak about those?
14 A. Yes, there were two chambers, the chamber of municipalities
15 so-called and a chamber of citizens. The members of the chamber of
16 municipalities were elected, one from each municipality in
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, plus one member from the city of Sarajevo. The city
18 of Sarajevo was a conglomerate of several municipalities each of which
19 elected its own representative to the assembly, for instance, but the city
20 had its own assembly and elected its own separate representative to the
21 chamber of municipalities so there were 110 members in that chamber. The
22 chamber of citizens was based on voting in several constituencies,
23 regional constituencies within the country which united a number of
24 municipalities and each constituency was allotted a certain number of
25 seats, and the distribution of seats was based on the proportional
1 principle, depending on how many people voted for what party in each of
2 those constituencies, then the parties would be assigned a corresponding
3 number of seats.
4 Q. Was Mr. Brdjanin the accused in either of the chambers? Was he
6 A. Yes, he was elected a deputy in the chamber of municipalities from
7 the municipality of Celinac.
8 Q. How did the results of the elections affect the operations of the
10 A. Well, the results of the elections had a very interesting impact
11 on the internal operations of the SDS. We spoke earlier about the
12 organisational structure of the party on the basis of its statutes which
13 were basically bodies that were elected by members of the party. The
14 elections resulted in the party having a large number of office holders on
15 various levels and especially important group of office holders were the
16 SDS deputies in the republic assembly who like the other parties that were
17 represented in the assembly weren't what is known as a club of deputies,
18 what we call in the United States, a caucus, that is the group of deputies
19 from that party, who would meet separately and discuss their stands on
20 various issues. So those people got to play a very important role in the
21 governance of Bosnia-Herzegovina obviously, and therefore became very
22 important for the party. The club of deputies met periodically and we in
23 fact have stenographic records of some of those meetings but by no means
24 all of them. What began to happen was that the main board, for instance,
25 which according to the statutes was the body that would meet between the
1 annual assemblies and decide policy didn't really meet that much as the
2 main board and simply the members of the main board, the central
3 leadership of the party, the President Karadzic in particular, began to
4 call meetings at which large numbers of party representatives would be
5 present, including members of the main board, certainly, but also
6 including the deputies and even municipal presidents of the SDS, for
7 instance, sometimes these meetings are called meetings of the deputies
8 clubs, sometimes they are called meetings of the main board, but by and
9 large, the same types of individuals were present at those meetings from
10 the various categories of party and public office holders who were in the
11 SDS, that is the local presidents of the SDS, say, deputies in the
12 assembly, and members of the main board.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown P34?
14 Q. And you list at page 151 and following of the main report SDS and
15 other deputies in the Bosnian Serb Assembly, 1991 to 1992?
16 A. Yes, they are listed in an appendix to the report.
17 Q. And also members of the main board at page 155 and the executive
18 board at page 156?
19 A. Yes, yes.
20 Q. In relation to what you were saying earlier, that the deputies
21 club being very important, can you take the Chamber to the relevant
22 portion of this exhibit, which is the deputies club meeting minutes of the
23 28th of February, 1992?
24 A. Yes, I certainly hope so. This is a very lengthy document.
25 Q. At this meeting, did Karadzic make reference as to who was making
1 the policy within the SDS?
2 A. Yes, he did. I'm trying to find the reference. I'm not familiar
3 with this version of the translation. I'm sorry, I'm not having much luck
4 here but there is -- he does say during the course of this meeting,
5 reminding the deputies who were present that they have played a very
6 important role in making policy over the last year, and this was a meeting
7 that was held in February 1992 reminding them that they have made most of
8 the political decisions after discussion in that body rather than the main
10 Q. We can come back to that, if you wish. The other parts of your
11 reports deal with the government structures. Can you briefly describe for
12 the Trial Chamber the three levels that you outline in your report?
13 A. The report and the addendum deal with governmental structures
14 properly speaking in the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and
15 then in the what became known as the Republika Srpska. The first section
16 of the addendum deals with the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
17 and the third section of the main report deals with the -- with Republika
18 Srpska. Those -- and then I believe there is also a subsection in the
19 main report, in part 2, section 2 of the main report that deals with the
20 municipal legal of government in the social Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
21 and Republika Srpska. Those sections of the reports are based on similar
22 types of documentation to describe the structures of the governing bodies
23 and their operations in so far as information on that was available. They
24 draw on documents such as constitutions and basic legislation which
25 outline the powers, functions and duties of the various organs, and they
1 draw on documents such as the minutes of meetings of those bodies, minutes
2 being short notes of the meetings, more than five pages would be long, but
3 we also have available the stenographic records or even transcripts of
4 audio recordings of many meetings of these bodies.
5 By and large, the -- they -- these sections paint the same picture
6 and as I said the same types of documentation crop up, just different
7 documents, cite in one, where appropriate of course, the constitution of
8 the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina and different section on the
9 Republika Srpska we cite the constitution of Republika Srpska. But they
10 all describe systems which are similar and are typical of the Yugoslav
11 political system, namely the governments at the -- at each level of
12 government and to remind the Court, the levels are starting from the top,
13 the federal level of government, the republic level of government, and
14 basically the municipal level of government, and below that there is a --
15 what they call a local community, a local level of government which we
16 won't really discuss here but each of those levels of government is based
17 on the principle of having an assembly as the most organ of power on that
18 level. Typically -- not typically but the assembly is defined as the
19 highest organ of power at the given level and the assembly selects an
20 executive organ, variously called the executive committee, executive
21 council, later on in the -- beginning in about 1990, 1991, the government,
22 which carried out the decisions of the assembly and was headed by a
23 president - I don't know if they were called the president of the
24 executive committee or the president of the government. And then on the
25 federal and republic level the assembly would also select a body known as
1 the Presidency, which is a collective body composed of individuals, a
2 different set of individuals, not in the assembly, not in the government,
3 whose basic duty was to represent the given republic or the federation and
4 to carry out other duties, very largely in the area of National Defence,
5 such as developing National Defence plans and that sort of thing, and on
6 the federal level being the Commander-in-Chief in time of war. Typically
7 also the Presidency in times of emergency would be expanded, most
8 particularly in a state of war or imminent threat of war, the Presidency
9 would be expanded to include other office holders such as the president of
10 the executive council, the appropriate military commander on the given
11 level, and other political figures.
12 In addition to that, if the assembly itself were unable to meet
13 because of the nature of the situation, the Presidency, expanded,
14 presumably, would exercise all the authority of the assembly. In other
15 words it - the Presidency - would be able to pass laws and do the other
16 things that the assembly would ordinarily do. That's in an emergency
17 situations. And you find this structure throughout the various levels
18 that are -- that I've mentioned in the federation itself, in
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, and in
20 Republika Srpska.
21 Q. You stated that the executive committee would carry out the
22 decisions of the assembly. That body was not independent, was it?
23 A. No. The executive committee is the executive body of the
24 assembly, the members are chosen by the assembly and the executive
25 committee reports to the assembly.
1 Q. And in a time of emergency, the same would apply?
2 A. Well, I'd have to make a bit of an extrapolation, I think. In an
3 emergency situation, when the assembly is not meeting and the Presidency
4 is exercising the powers of the assembly, then the executive committee
5 would report to the Presidency in so far as the executive committee was
6 able to do anything given the situation. But the president of the
7 executive committee would be a member of the expanded Presidency in those
9 Q. You've talked about the republic level and also the municipal
10 level. Was there any level in between the two?
11 A. Well, I didn't really get into the municipal level. I should
12 probably mention that and a couple of other things about the other
13 levels. The peculiarity on the municipal level is that basically it did
14 not have a Presidency that was a separate body, as in the federation and
15 the republic. The chief representative of the municipality was the
16 president of the assembly, and it was only in times of emergency that a
17 so-called Presidency or even a War Presidency would be formed in a
18 municipality, and that would be composed of the same types of office
19 holders as I mentioned before, the president of the assembly, the
20 president of the executive committee, the members of the -- some of the
21 administrative departments of the municipality, including the secretary of
22 National Defence and the head of the police, that sort of thing.
23 And in Republika Srpska I just mention a couple of innovations
24 there in their structure. Typically, the assemblies in the former
25 Yugoslavia were -- had more than one chamber, indeed at certain periods of
1 time they had more than two chambers. In the 1990 elections as I
2 mentioned in the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, there were two
3 chambers. The constitution of Republika Srpska provided for an assembly
4 that only had one chamber. Similarly, it did not have a collective
5 Presidency. The constitution of Republika Srpska provided for a president
6 and not a collective body, as a Presidency.
7 I could also mention in that connection with Republika Srpska and
8 its assembly that the original assembly of Republika Srpska, which, I
9 think, is initially called the assembly of the Serbian people in
10 Bosnia-Herzegovina, was formed in October, 1991, from the deputies club of
11 the Serbian Democratic Party in the assembly of the Socialist Republic of
12 Bosnia-Herzegovina. In other words the SDS deputies club turned itself
13 into the assembly of the Serbian people and later sat as the national
14 assembly of Republika Srpska.
15 Q. And you've now dealt with the two levels. Was there any level in
16 between the two of those?
17 A. Yes, you asked about the regional level. In Bosnia and
18 Herzegovina, there was, in principle, no government -- no level of
19 government in between the republic government and the municipal
20 governments, what they call territorial administrative units. The basic
21 ones were the municipalities. The only exception to that was -- that I
22 mentioned already, alluded to briefly, was the city of Sarajevo which was
23 composed of several municipalities, ten, I believe, who elected from their
24 members a city council, an assembly, if you will, so that the -- Sarajevo
25 had a city government which was based on the municipalities that were part
1 of the city and it elected its own representative to the chamber of
2 municipalities. Aside from that, however, there were -- there was no
3 intermediate level of government between the republic and the
4 municipalities. There was, however, provision in the constitution of
5 the -- of Bosnia-Herzegovina, for the creation of bodies known as
6 communities of municipalities. These were voluntary associations of
7 municipalities that shared various interests, mostly economic, and they
8 could form an association to promote those interests, economic
9 development, tourism, that type of thing, but they were not -- they did
10 not become territorial administrative units, that is a level of
11 government, per se, that they -- they were strictly a voluntary
12 coordinating type of organisation.
13 Q. And in relation to the area known as the Autonomous Region of
14 Krajina, was there such an association set up?
15 A. Yes. In that area, as in other areas of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
16 associations -- there was an association of municipalities which goes back
17 to the 1970s, I believe, the association of municipalities of Banja Luka.
18 However, after the elections of 1990, the SDS became interested in the
19 issue of what are called regionalisation in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and in
20 April, 1991, a new association of municipalities was formed called the
21 association of municipalities of Bosnian Krajina, centred in Banja Luka.
22 Q. Do you know who was appointed president of this association?
23 A. Well, this association had a structure reminiscent of the ones
24 I've been describing. It had an assembly which is composed of the
25 representatives of the municipalities that were members of the association
1 and the assembly elected an executive body similar to a government.
2 Although the association did not have that type of authority but it did
3 elect its own executive body but it did not elect a Presidency so the
4 officers that it elected were a president of the assembly, two
5 vice-presidents of the assembly and then a president of the -- I think
6 they call it the executive committee.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P67?
8 Q. Mr. Treanor, is this -- this document is dated the 26th of April,
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And it refers to the founding session held on the 25th of April?
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Can we have it on the ELMO, please?
13 MS. SUTHERLAND:
14 Q. And that is appointing Mr. Radoslav Brdjanin, civil engineer from
15 Celinac, deputy to the chamber of municipalities, to the position of first
16 vice-president; is that correct?
17 A. Yes. This is a decision of the assembly of the community of
18 municipalities of Bosnian Krajina passed on the 26th of April, the day
19 that the -- of their founding session, and it elects Mr. Brdjanin as the
20 first vice-president of the assembly.
21 Q. I think it's signed by --
22 A. It's signed by Vojo Kupresanin as president of the assembly.
23 Q. Was there an agreement in relation to this community, this
25 A. Yes. The association was set up pursuant to an agreement among
1 the interested municipalities.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: If the witness could be shown Exhibit P69?
3 Q. Sir, is this the document you were referring to?
4 A. Yes. This is the agreement on the formation of the community of
5 municipalities of Bosnian Krajina.
6 Q. Would you take Their Honours very briefly to the important
7 articles within this agreement?
8 A. Certainly. I would call attention to Article 1 of the agreement
9 which sets out the purpose for the -- its -- the formation of the
10 community of municipalities. It states as being in order to fulfil more
11 rationally and efficiently the common interests and needs of the citizens
12 and coordinate social and economic developments, et cetera. And it names
13 the municipalities that were parties to this agreement.
14 I would then call attention to Article 4, which states that the
15 community would have its own statute, the statute is a document similar to
16 a constitution in the governmental framework or similar to the statute of
17 the Serbian Democratic Party, as Article 4 says, the statute will
18 determine things such as the function of the community municipalities, how
19 they will be performed, the organisation of the organs of the community,
20 et cetera.
21 Now, an interesting feature of this community of municipalities
22 appears in Article 9. I indicated earlier that these communities were
23 formed for the purpose of promoting economic development and that sort of
24 thing. In Article 9, however, we see this new community of municipalities
25 taking responsibility in the area of defence, stating that it will ensure
1 the unity of preparations and the efficiency of the system of all people's
2 defence, take organisational and material and other measures for
3 exercising the rights and duties of citizens in preparations for all
4 people's defence. And that in time of war or imminent threat of war it
5 would organise all people's defence in the territory of the community and
6 also in time of war, it would lead that defence. Those I think are the
7 two most interesting -- or the interesting features of this particular
8 agreement. The copy we have is dated the 29th of April, which is three
9 days after the founding assembly.
10 Q. On your review and analysis of the minutes of the sessions of
11 the -- what's commonly known as the ZOBK, which is the association of
12 municipalities for Bosanska Krajina, was Radoslav Brdjanin an active or
13 inactive participant at these meetings?
14 A. Mr. Brdjanin seems to have been a very active member.
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P11, please?
16 Q. This is an extract from the minutes of the second session held on
17 the 14th of May, 1991?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In relation to your statement, could you take the Chamber to the
20 relevant items in the minutes?
21 A. Yes, indeed. On page 2 of the translation, at the top, toward the
22 end of agenda item number 2, we see mention of Vice-President Radoslav
23 Brdjanin, who was quoted as proposing that the statute of the community be
24 adopted that day. He says, "I propose to be adopted today as it stands
25 because we cannot have an association of municipalities on a voluntary
1 basis. We cannot wait for public debate in the municipal assemblies and
2 convene the community assembly every month." And after some other
3 speakers intervened, the statute was in fact adopted unanimously according
4 to these minutes.
5 Then in agenda item number 3 a little bit further down that page
6 in the middle at the beginning of the agenda item we see that the
7 Vice-President Brdjanin intervenes again, saying that the chairman and
8 vice-chairman of the executive council should also be elected that day and
9 that the second vice-chairman and members of the executive council could
10 be elected later. And then he goes on to nominate Andjelko Grahovac for
11 the position of chairman of the -- or president of the executive council.
12 And following some debate according to these minutes, that proposal was
13 also adopted, with one vote against.
14 Toward the end of the minutes, under agenda item number 7, we also
15 see Mr. Brdjanin speaking, making a proposal to the assembly that the
16 municipal assemblies in the region cancel their subscription to Radio and
17 Television Sarajevo which had failed to make a broadcast of a statement of
18 the community support for united Yugoslavia. He went on to make some
19 other proposals and these proposals were adopted unanimously.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown a new document, the
21 statute of the association of municipalities, Bosanska Krajina, and if it
22 can be provisionally marked P2354, Your Honour?
23 JUDGE AGIUS: Are you sure this was not exhibited before?
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, I've checked.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: You checked, all right.
1 MS. SUTHERLAND:
2 Q. Mr. Treanor, could we just deal very quickly with the articles
3 that you deem important in this statute?
4 A. Yes, I would just quickly draw attention to again to Article
5 number 1 which lists the municipalities which are to be members of the
6 association. And it says that they have associated themselves in order to
7 realise cooperation and coordination of planning and the realisation of
8 other joint interests. Further articles, for instance, Article 17,
9 Article 17 and 18, deal with -- begin to deal with the organs of the -- of
10 the community, Article 17 and 18 dealing with the assembly, again setting
11 out the structure of the assembly and its responsibilities and then
12 Article 24, which considers the executive organ, stating that the assembly
13 will select an executive council. Article 25 enumerates the -- some of
14 the duties and responsibilities of that council. And then Article 26 sets
15 out the permanent working bodies of the assembly which are similar to the
16 ministries, if you will, of the community namely the political council,
17 economic council, ecological council and a council for National Defence.
18 And then Articles 28 and 29 deal with the officers of the assembly, the
19 president and the vice-presidents. In particular, it notes that the first
20 vice-president deputises for the president of the assembly. And those are
21 the features that we can mention about the statute right now.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Sutherland -- Mr. Treanor, I do notice in
23 Article 26, that there is a specific reference to the peoples defence
24 council as being a permanent working body of the assembly but is there any
25 where else in this statute, any reference to the function of the
1 association as far as defence matters are concerned?
2 THE WITNESS: No, that is specified in the agreement. Article 27
3 does say in its enumeration of the duties of the various councils, that
4 the council for National Defence would examine issues in the area of
5 National Defence of interest to the community of municipalities.
6 JUDGE AGIUS: But otherwise you do not have a reflection of the
7 conclusion that was reached to which you referred earlier on from Exhibit
8 P67, I think.
9 THE WITNESS: In the agreement?
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah, yeah.
11 THE WITNESS: No.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown --
13 MR. ACKERMAN: Excuse me just a moment.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
15 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I'm becoming somewhat concerned
16 because this is now the second document that has been brought to your
17 attention this morning that as far as I know we do not have. We have not
18 been provided. Now, I assume the Prosecutor is going to show me the
19 document that proves they provided it to me but the fact is I don't have
21 JUDGE AGIUS: You're referring to this statute of the
23 MR. ACKERMAN: The first was the draft statute of the SDS. The
24 second one now is this statute of ZOBK which I can't even find on the list
25 of documents that they said would be used today.
1 MS. SUTHERLAND: The draft statute, if memory serves me correctly,
2 was disclosed yesterday, and the document that we are now looking at, the
3 statute of the ZOBK, was given to you this morning. So you're correct,
4 until this morning, you didn't have that document.
5 MR. ACKERMAN: I still don't. It wasn't given to me this morning
6 either. Nothing was given to me this morning.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: This matter needs to be attended to.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, I think they've had these for months.
9 I think they've had them for months and to wait until yesterday and this
10 morning to disclose them is just backing ridiculous. We can't possibly --
11 if they give them to us at 5.00 in one day we can't possibly process them
12 and have them available and useful to us the next morning. I mean that's
13 just --
14 JUDGE AGIUS: You are 100 per cent right, Mr. Ackerman. And I
15 think the point is made and taken up by the Trial Chamber as well.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: It is not to be repeated. Fortunately you're not
18 going to start with your cross-examination today so not much harm has been
19 done. But please, Ms. Sutherland, Ms. Korner, try to avoid a repetition
20 of such occurrences.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, I took that into account the
22 fact that Mr. Treanor was not going to be cross-examined today in using
23 the document.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: In the meantime I want to make sure that at least
25 Mr. Ackerman can follow what is being stated. Do you have a copy of it
1 now? Please give -- usher, give my copy to Mr. Ackerman and I will --
2 yes, let's proceed.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. Do you have Exhibit P71 in front of you, which is the third
5 session minutes of the 27th of May, 1991?
6 A. I don't have the translation yet.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: I would like someone to check because I remember
8 reading something about this statute.
9 MS. SUTHERLAND: This is the statute of the ZOBK which is very
10 similar in nature which Mr. Treanor will explain later of the statute of
11 the Autonomous Region of Krajina which came into being in September.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I have a suspicion, I may be wrong, completely
13 wrong, that this was incorporated in Donja's report. You definitely have
14 used it because I quite remember. Definitely.
15 MS. KORNER: I'm sorry, Your Honour is right. I recollect taking
16 a witness to it.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I too recollect.
18 MS. KORNER: I'll do a check. Occasionally these things slip
20 JUDGE AGIUS: No, no, no. I'm not criticising. I'm just making
21 this point because it would also reflect on the objection that was raised
22 by Mr. Ackerman.
23 MS. KORNER: I'll tell you what it is. My recollection now is
24 Mr. Ackerman took a witness through it, the statute of the autonomous
25 region and it may have become a Defence Exhibit and that may be why it's
1 not on our list.
2 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour my recollection is this: Dr. Donia
3 spoke of it in his testimony and I think I can even find it here where he
4 did, but I don't think the actual document itself ever came into
5 evidence. Now, there was a time when we used -- but I don't think it's
6 the same document with the witness Ms. Korner is talking about. I'm not
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Let's proceed. The problem will be resolved
10 MS. SUTHERLAND:
11 Q. Mr. Treanor you mentioned earlier that Mr. Brdjanin was an active
12 participant at these meetings. What kind of a role did he in fact play?
13 A. Well, he took a very active part in the discussions and introduced
14 some of the more important actions, proposed the initiation of some of the
15 more important actions of the assembly such as electing officers and
16 initiated and conducted discussions on important issues of the day.
17 Q. If we can just move through a couple of documents briefly, the
18 27th of May, 1991, which is P71?
19 A. Yes. This document unlike the previous document or -- is not like
20 the previous document. The previous document represents minutes of a
21 session of the assembly, that is a document that was drawn up after the
22 session, what happened at the session. This is the proposed agenda for
23 the third session of the assembly, which is the only record we have of
24 that particular session, in fact. But from this agenda we can see that
25 the third item, third numbered item on the agenda, is the issue of the
1 status of the Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina within the
2 socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which was a very important issue
3 of the day indeed, and notes that the rapporteur on this issue would be
4 Radoslav Brdjanin, the vice-president of the assembly of the association.
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P72? And then
6 after that, P77?
7 Q. It can be seen that this is conclusions of a meeting held on the
8 30th of May, 1991?
9 A. Yes, this is actually a resolution passed by the assembly on the
10 30th of May, 1991. And it deals with the issue of the status of
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina within Yugoslavia and states among other things, just
12 to summarise briefly for the Court, that any deviation from the
13 constitutional status of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a federal republic within
14 federative Yugoslavia would provide the assembly of the community of
15 municipalities with a reason to organise a referendum for the democratic
16 regulation of the constitutional status of Bosnian Krajina as an
17 autonomous or federal region within Yugoslavia. In other words they are
18 taking a position on the future and structure of the Yugoslav state, and
19 item 3 in the conclusions says, specifies that as a deputy to the assembly
20 of Bosnia and Herzegovina and vice-president of the assembly of the
21 community of municipalities of Bosnian Krajina, Radoslav Brdjanin is
22 assigned to inform republican assembly of these conclusions.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P77?
24 Q. This is a document dated the 1st of August, 1991.
25 A. Yes. This document is a decision which was taken at a joint
1 session of the SDS regional board, and the association of municipalities
2 on the 31st of July, 1991, and the decision basically recommends
3 Nedjeljko Kesic for a position within the security services centre in
4 Banja Luka and it is signed by Radoslav Brdjanin for the community of
5 municipalities and it says for the personnel commission. I'm not sure
6 what personnel commission that is, whether it's of the regional SDS board
7 or of the association of municipalities and it's also signed by Radislav
8 Vukic for the regional board of the SDS.
9 Q. And so this document -- is this document showing that the parties
10 are having -- are proposing a candidate for within the police structure?
11 A. Yes, as I say the decision basically recommends Nedjeljko Kesic
12 for the position of chief of the state security service sector in the
13 Banja Luka security services centre.
14 Q. I think you mentioned briefly in your testimony earlier, the
15 interparty agreements between the political parties.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown a new document? And
17 this is an intercept dated the 17th of August, 1991, provisionally marked
18 as P2355.
19 Q. This is a -- the conversation -- an intercept of a conversation
20 between Radovan Karadzic and Nenad Stevandic. Are you aware of who the
21 person Nenad Stevandic is?
22 A. Nenad Stevandic, as far as I know, is a local SDS politician in --
23 from Bosnian Krajina.
24 Q. Can you take the Court to the relevant part of this intercept in
25 relation to the accused, please?
1 A. Well, there are a couple of interesting parts in this
2 conversation. For instance, at the bottom of page 1, Radovan Karadzic
3 asks Mr. Stevandic what it's like as concerns the political situation, and
4 they go on to -- Mr. Stevandic goes on to say that, well, Andjelko,
5 Andjelko Grahovac is the chairman of the executive committee of the
6 community and Vojo Kupresanin, the president of the assembly, are going
7 forward, full tilt, quite recklessly. Brdjanin would like to put a stop
8 to it to have a bit of consultation and reasoning. And Karadzic goes on
9 to say, to tell them not to do anything stupid, seeming to agree with him
10 that Grahovac and Kupresanin might be going too far. A little bit further
11 on, at the top of page 1, Karadzic remarks, "Yes, we will do everything
12 that Vojo and Brdjo think but after the failure of the agreements that
13 Alija will bring about, we will accuse Alija for the failure."
14 JUDGE AGIUS: For the record, it's page 2, not page 1.
15 THE WITNESS: Sorry, the top of page 2, continuing on the top of
16 page 2.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: While we are at page 2, sir, I would like you to
18 explain what you understand by the next bit of conversation, "And I have a
19 hold of Brdjanin, last time we took him fishing up to Jovica." What do
20 you understand by that? Who is Jovica, if you know.
21 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure who Jovica is. Presumably another
22 local politician.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: It couldn't be Jovica Stanisic by any chance?
24 THE WITNESS: I could only speculate.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. And do you understand anything by "we
1 took him fishing up to Jovica"?
2 THE WITNESS: I --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you take it literally?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, I take that literally. Yes, indeed.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: You take that literally.
6 THE WITNESS: They went on a fishing expedition.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Okay.
8 THE WITNESS: Further on in this conversation, there is a --
9 perhaps another interesting passage.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND:
11 Q. Is that on page 5 of the English translation?
12 A. Yes. Here it is, I'm trying to compare it with the original.
13 Stevandic tells Karadzic, "One thing is enough" - this is in the middle,
14 the top third of page 5 - "One thing is enough we went to Jovica's and
15 three names have remained that could become official, I, Miroslav and
16 Brdjanin." Karadzic says, "Yup." And Stevandic says, "Since we put
17 Brdjanin into the picture he's not letting Vojo and Andjelko do anything
18 stupid. However, all of them have now turned against Brdjanin, Zoran,
19 Andjelko and Vojo, not because of jealousy but because they wanted to
20 become involved in this part of the work for reasons that I don't even
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman?
23 MR. ACKERMAN: For some reason the translation I have and the one
24 that Mr. Treanor has are fairly dramatically different. Mine says that
25 these say completely different things than what Mr. Treanor's translation
1 says. I don't have any explanation about that at all but I do have a
2 question about it.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: What does your translation say, Mr. Ackerman?
4 MR. ACKERMAN: Mine says, with that paragraph that he just read,
5 for instance, "Now that we've included Brdjanin into the scheme, he won't
6 allow Vojo, he said let them be stupid but Zoran and Andjelko and Vojo
7 they all turned against Brdjanin not out of jealousy but because they
8 wanted to be involved in that part of the job and someone should ..."
9 It's consists, you know, fairly different language.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Can you read yours? I don't know. What I have is
11 pretty much similar to what --
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour we had these documents were initially
14 JUDGE AGIUS: And then revised.
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yeah. What is the ERN number on your page,
17 Mr. Ackerman? Is it 03075743?
18 MR. ACKERMAN: No it's 01048636 Your Honour.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: That explains it. So what I have and what probably
20 the witness -- expert witness has is an updated translation, which I
21 suggest can and should be made available to Mr. Ackerman, because
22 obviously he's got a previous --
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: It was disclosed to Mr. Ackerman, this new
24 translation, last Friday.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: But I see Mr. Ackerman looking at the lap top or the
1 notebook that he has, so... Anyway this can be sorted out, Mr. Ackerman,
3 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, just so you'll all know what's
4 happening, almost every day we get a new stack of documents.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: I know but you're not the only one, Mr. Ackerman,
6 look --
7 MR. ACKERMAN: It's not possible for us to keep up and if they
8 gave them to us Friday that explains it because we just have not been able
9 to get all that material processed.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I'm not blaming you.
11 MR. ACKERMAN: We've got two volunteers working almost full time
12 and we still can't keep up. These are all materials that they've had for
13 months and months and months and I just don't know why we are getting them
14 all of a sudden right now. It just is not fair.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Treanor?
16 THE WITNESS: I think we are finished with that document.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know. It's for Ms. Sutherland to say.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: We have finished with that document, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P16, please?
21 JUDGE AGIUS: What was the number given to this document? Because
22 I missed it.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: P2355.
24 Q. This is a -- dated the 6th of September, 1991 and it is a --
25 entitled a public statement. And it refers to a meeting held on the 6th
1 of September, 1991. Can you tell the -- Their Honours the importance of
2 this document, which leads into the next?
3 A. Well, this is an interesting document. I mentioned earlier the
4 main organs of the community of municipalities of Bosnian Krajina, namely
5 the assembly and the executive council, and I believe I mentioned the fact
6 that similar to the municipalities but unlike the republic and the
7 federation, that assembly did not have a Presidency, that is it did not
8 elect a separate group of individuals to a body of that name which was
9 specified as such in the statute. This document however does make
10 reference to a Presidency and indeed to a session of that Presidency of
11 the assembly of the community of municipalities of Bosnian Krajina which
12 was held on the 6th of September, 1991. I would have to conclude, since
13 the -- such a Presidency is not mentioned in the statute, that the term
14 here is being used to describe a meeting of the president of the assembly
15 and the first vice-president and the second vice-president. That is they
16 are meeting as a separate body and issuing a statement on an important
17 issue of the day, namely the fighting that's going on in Croatia, and
18 they -- in the name of the assembly of the Bosnian Krajina community of
19 municipalities, they demand an immediate end to the shooting and killing
20 of Serbian people in Okucani and Stara Gradiska, which are towns in
21 Croatia just across the river from Bosnia.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown a new document? It's
23 an undated document, disclosure number 4.223. If that can be
24 provisionally marked P2356? Your Honours, the ERN number of the
25 translation is 0110-2452. And if we can put the document on the ELMO?
1 Q. Mr. Treanor this document is undated but the -- is the content of
2 the document the same as the document we just looked at, P16, dated the
3 6th of September, 1991?
4 A. Yes, the document refers to similar subject matter from which I
5 would conclude that it was, although undated, issued about the same time
6 as the previous document. It refers to the situation in Okucani and Stara
7 Gradiska. And goes on interestingly at the end of the paragraph number 2,
8 "This does not mean that we are preparing ourselves for war but it is our
9 holy duty to defend the Serbian people first and foremost and by doing so,
10 Yugoslavia as well." And at the top of the document, we can see that this
11 is a statement issued by Radoslav Brdjanin, vice-president of the assembly
12 of the association of Bosnian Krajina, making a statement I would
13 translate that on the question of defence, the translation I have says
14 department of defence. But I believe that we have him here making a
15 statement on the issue of defence.
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P12? This is
18 an extract from the minutes of the 7th session of the ZOBK, held on the
19 16th of September, 1991.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And what does this -- what was dealt with at this meeting?
22 A. Well, this meeting was a very important occasion in the
23 developments of the Bosnian Krajina. At this meeting, the association of
24 municipalities of Bosnian Krajina changed itself into what it called the
25 Autonomous Region of Krajina. The document is an extract from the records
1 of that meeting. The first item on the agenda is a consideration of a
2 decision on proclaiming an Autonomous Region of Krajina and further down
3 the page, under number 1, we see that the vice-president -- vice-president
4 of the assembly of the community of municipalities of Bosnian Krajina,
5 Radoslav Brdjanin, made a statement in that connection which reads, "By
6 this decision we are ensuring the region's independence. We do not want
7 to bother anyone who does not want to leave Yugoslavia but nobody here can
8 be allowed to put various kinds of pressure on us. Failure to construct
9 major facilities, oil shortage," et cetera. "The BH Presidency again
10 refused today to go to Belgrade to negotiate. We are for peace but we do
11 not want that peace to be implemented over our faces, as Tudjman and the
12 other leaders want. We all know that the Serbs support the army, by
13 declaring autonomy we want to go to negotiations, not to war."
14 And then this extract from the record indicates that they held a
15 vote and the deputies voted unanimously to declare the Autonomous Region
16 of Krajina.
17 Q. If we can turn now to Exhibit P81, which is dated -- which is a
18 decision on the proclamation of the SAO Krajina, and it's dated the 16th
19 of September, 1991?
20 A. Yes. This is the decision that the assembly passed pursuant to
21 the remarks made by Mr. Brdjanin. I would point out two features of this
22 decision. One is contained in Article 1, which states that the -- what
23 the translation here calls the "alliance" but it's "The community of
24 municipalities of Bosnian Krajina declared the Autonomous Region of
25 Krajina as an autonomous democratic unit of sovereign citizens and peoples
1 and an inseparable part of federative Yugoslavia as a federal state which
2 consists of the republics of Serbia and Montenegro and other federal units
3 which have expressed their free will to remain in this federal state."
4 This is the language which is not contained in these founding documents of
5 the original community of municipalities. This is -- this article, in
6 fact, indicates that the autonomous region is being established in order
7 to be and remain a part of the federal state of Yugoslavia. I would also
8 just quickly draw attention to Article 4 which notes that the assembly of
9 the community and its bodies would continue to work as the assembly of the
10 autonomous region and its bodies. So in effect, the association of
11 municipalities of Bosnian Krajina changed its name and its stature, so to
12 speak, into the Autonomous Region of Krajina as an inseparable part of the
13 federal state of Yugoslavia.
14 Q. And the Autonomous Region of Krajina adopted a statute on the same
15 day, did they not?
16 A. Yes. They also have a statute, and it is almost identical to the
17 preceding statute of the community of municipalities.
18 Q. And that is, for Your Honours, Exhibit P80. I don't think we will
19 trouble you taking you to that statute. Could the witness be shown
20 Exhibit P22?
21 Mr. Treanor, did Radoslav Brdjanin continue to play an important
23 A. Yes. As indicated in the decision that I just read, he continued
24 to be the first vice-president of the assembly and he continued to play an
25 active role in that assembly, in the affairs of the now so-called
1 Autonomous Region of Krajina.
2 Q. The document that you have in front of you is dated the 29th of
3 October, 1991?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The document purports to be a telex to be delivered to the mayor?
6 A. Yes, this document is apparently a telex sent by Radoslav Brdjanin
7 signing as vice-president of the assembly of the autonomous region and
8 coordinator for the carrying out of decisions, and it refers to a meeting
9 of all presidents of assemblies held on the 26th of October, 1991, under
10 the leadership of Dr. Radovan Karadzic, the president of the SDS, and a
11 decision which was adopted at that meeting and endorsed, accepted, at a
12 session again reference to the Presidency of the Autonomous Region of
13 Krajina and the government of the autonomous region, and the document
14 itself refers to the issue of mobilisation, ordering the formation of
15 command posts in item number 1, mobilisation of the Territorial Defence in
16 item number 2, and in item number 5, goes on, for instance, to specify the
17 taking of authority in public enterprises, the postal service and the
18 social accountancy service, banks and courts.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown a new document? It is
20 an intercept dated the 31st of October, 1991. This is an intercept
21 between Radovan Karadzic and Radoslav Brdjanin. Disclosure number 2.460.
22 If that can be provisionally marked P2357?
23 Q. Just briefly, what is the context of the conversation about?
24 A. Well, this is a record of a telephone conversation between
25 Radoslav Brdjanin and Radovan Karadzic on the 31st of October, 1991, which
1 is a few days after the meeting of the 26th of October that was referred
2 to in the previous document and a couple of days after that document was
3 sent out, Brdjanin calls Karadzic to discuss various problems.
4 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman?
5 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour, just -- I just want to make a record
6 objection with regard to this and the other intercepts that have been
7 mentioned today, that they all significantly predate the parameters of the
8 indictment in this case, which is 1992. This one we are clear back in
9 October of 1991. I suggest that it's not relevant and should not be
10 admitted or alluded to.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Your objection is not being sustained Mr. Ackerman.
12 I have read the intercept, both this one and the previous one. There is
13 information there or facts that may have relevance with respect to the
14 period which is covered then by the indictment, particularly with regard
15 to the powers that according to Karadzic himself, your client had in the
16 political arena at the time.
17 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, let me just also say for the record, then,
18 Your Honour, that the powers he had in October, 1991 have no relationship
19 to the powers he might have had during the term of the indictment. That
20 would be my argument.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes. But your objection is not being sustained
22 because the Trial Chamber still thinks that at this point in time this is
23 an open matter and we need to get all the information we require to see
24 exactly what your client's position, political and -- within the political
25 structure was, starting from 1991, because that is relevant for the 1992
2 Yes, Mr. Treanor, please proceed.
3 THE WITNESS: As I said, Mr. Brdjanin called Dr. Karadzic to
4 discuss various problems he was having in the Krajina region, and is going
5 to Karadzic to seek some decisions on some of these issues, and Karadzic
6 is a little bit impatient and says --
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Not a little bit. He was quite impatient.
8 THE WITNESS: At one point in the conversation, which I want to
9 point out, which is at the bottom of page 4 of the translation, where
10 Karadzic says to Brdjanin, "Call me about something that you cannot
11 resolve. You have all the power in Krajina. Why don't you exercise this
12 power?" And at the bottom of that page, Karadzic says -- the translation
13 here is a little different from the way I would render this. Karadzic
14 says, "If Brdjo, if Stojan Zupljanin is no good, replace them." So he's
15 encouraging his -- Brdjanin to take charge of the situation there.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: [Microphone not activated] I think I've finished
17 with that document. If the witness could be shown Exhibit P23?
18 This is an extract from the minutes of the 9th session of the
19 assembly of the Autonomous Region of Krajina -- of a session held on the
20 6th of November, 1991.
21 A. Yes, this is an extract from the actual record of the session.
22 That is a document that was drawn up after the session and reflects what
23 actually did happen at the session.
24 Q. At the bottom of the item 1 is the implementation of conclusions
25 adopted at the session and does it state at the bottom of item 1, it was
1 decided that the vice-president of the assembly of the Autonomous Region
2 of Krajina, Radoslav Brdjanin, should inform the president of the
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina SDS, Radovan Karadzic, as to the implementation of the
4 conclusions adopted at the session of the assembly of the ARK?
5 A. Yes, precisely, that is what it says, and as the Court will
6 recall, the document of the 29th of October was signed by Brdjanin as the
7 coordinator for the carrying out of decisions.
8 MR. ACKERMAN: Excuse me, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman?
10 MR. ACKERMAN: The document was not signed at all. It was a telex
11 so there was no signature so that's a misstatement.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman is correct and in fact at the bottom,
13 at the end of the document, there is also another name. I don't know
14 whose it is but --
15 THE WITNESS: Yes, let me rephrase that, in that document,
16 Mr. Brdjanin is described as the coordinator for the carrying out of
18 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
19 THE WITNESS: And here he's being asked to report on the carrying
20 out of those decisions to Radovan Karadzic.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: What I meant is this: That perhaps you can
22 enlighten us on -- leave it. You have explained it enough. That's okay.
23 No problem.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND:
25 Q. Mr. Treanor, also at the end of the discussion of item 2, which is
1 on mobilisation?
2 A. Yes, there is a discussion on that issue and, again, Radoslav
3 Brdjanin is designated by the assembly to play a role in that connection.
4 On the last page of the translation, just above the middle of the page, at
5 the -- just above where item 3 begins, it's -- the record states that "In
6 the end it was decided that on behalf of the assembly of the Autonomous
7 Region of Krajina, Vojo Kupresanin, Vojo Maksimovic, Aleksa Buha and
8 Radoslav Brdjanin should request that the SFRY Presidency declare a state
9 of war and that the number of commanding officers of Serbian nationality
10 on the front be in proportion to the number of Serbian conscripts on the
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you. Could the witness be shown a new
13 document, this is another intercept dated the 7th of January, 1992,
14 disclosure number 2.538. This is an intercept between Radovan Karadzic
15 and Miroslav, if that could be provisionally marked P2358?
16 Q. Just briefly before we break, this is quite a lengthy telephone
17 conversation but could you briefly tell the Court the context of the
18 conversation and then what is important in this conversation? Or what is
19 of interest in this conversation?
20 A. Well, this is a conversation between Radovan Karadzic and a
21 certain Miroslav who is apparently one of the local politicians from
22 Bosnian Krajina, about the situation in that area, and they get around to
23 discussing some of the personalities involved and the type of people that
24 are required, and the name of Radoslav Brdjanin comes up in a favourable
25 manner, Miroslav telling Karadzic at one point, after Karadzic says -
1 which I'm trying to locate in the translation.
2 Q. Is it towards the bottom of page 7 or --
3 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Sutherland, I was -- I had skipped this. I
4 haven't read it. I would suggest that we have the break now so that it
5 gives me the opportunity to read it.
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Because I would like to know the content of this
8 intercept. So we will have a 25 minute break again starting from now.
9 Thank you.
10 --- Recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
11 --- On resuming at 1.00 p.m.
12 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. Mr. Treanor, before we broke, we were -- you were just about to
15 briefly advise the Chamber of the content of the conversation of the
16 intercept between Radovan Karadzic and Miroslav on the 7th of January,
18 A. Yes, as I believe I said this is a conversation involving a -- one
19 of the local politicians from the Bosnian Krajina consulting with Karadzic
20 on problems in that area, particularly personnel problems in the assembly
21 of the Autonomous Region of Krajina. One of the main topics of
22 conversation is the position of Andjelko Grahovac, who is the president of
23 what they now call the government of the Autonomous Region of Krajina,
24 apparently Grahovac called Karadzic to tell him that there was some sort
25 of inquiry going on about him and Karadzic asks Miroslav about this, on
1 page 3 of the translation, in the middle, Miroslav replies, in relation to
2 a Grahovac, he should go. Karadzic says, "But he said he didn't want
3 anyone to attack him, therefore maybe someone could suggest that he
4 resign." Miroslav: "To suggest a resignation?" Karadzic: "Yes, yes,
5 some of the people, he's -- the liaison officer between you and him should
6 suggest that he resign." Miroslav: "They are now trying to back out of
7 this in every possible way. That's completely natural, you know, because,
8 we then found out that Vojo was spoken ill of in Belgrade. They are
9 speaking ill of everyone they can think of." Karadzic: "Yes, yes."
10 Miroslav: "Speaking ill." Karadzic: "They are speaking ill of Brdjanin
11 as well." Miroslav: "Come on, Brdjo has nothing to do with this. He was
12 away for two months chasing his nephew around the battlefield. The man
13 was not in Celinac at all."
14 They then go on to continue discussing the issue of Grahovac and
15 his position in the middle of page 4 of the translation, we see Karadzic
16 suggesting, "All right, I mean, if it can be done with no drama and
17 resignations rather than without any argumentation, then that's better if
18 possible, and do you -- who would be the second premier designate?"
19 Miroslav: "Well, I think that one is from Kupres, I don't know, I don't
20 remember the name, but I think, just a moment, someone called Herceg from
21 Kupres." Karadzic: "Uh-huh, what's he like?" Miroslav: "Well, they say
22 he's good." Karadzic: "Where does he live?" Miroslav: "He lives there
23 but since this is professional I think it would be good if he were here.
24 But I don't think that he will. I think that the main people are
25 Dr. Jaksic and Brdjanin. It will most probably be one of them."
1 Karadzic: "Dr. Jaksic?" Miroslav: "Yes." Karadzic: "What's he like?"
2 "Well he would cooperate well with Radic and the other municipalities.
3 He's more of a scientist and he would set out everything on economic
4 grounds." Karadzic: "Don't give us a scientist, don't." Miroslav:
5 "Yes, yes." Karadzic: "Give us a political figure who will be able to
6 take power." Miroslav: "Then it would have to be Brdjanin, I think."
7 And they continue the discussion and I would just point out
8 finally on page 6 of the translation, towards the top of the page,
9 Karadzic says to Miroslav, "Go ahead, choose a mature personality,
10 one that is politically strong and will be able to create -- and be able
11 to create." Miroslav: "Tell me, you know what, I think that Brdjanin,
12 but Brdjanin is, how can I explain it a bit rash." Karadzic: "All right
13 but he's the vice-chairman of the assembly it would be difficult for him
14 to --" Miroslav: "Yes. But I don't know how they plan to do it."
15 Karadzic: "Yes, then he'd have to leave the assembly and someone else
16 would have to be elected to the assembly." Miroslav: "Any way, any way,
17 yes, someone would have to be, so would you -- would you perhaps speak to
18 Vojo and Brdjanin?" Karadzic: "Please, please, you call them. Call them
19 and tell them to discuss things. I think that Jaksic is not appropriate
20 at this moment because -- because a person with political would suit you
21 better now." "Strong politically, yes." "Excuse me for a moment. Hello
22 is that --" and they -- and the situation continues. So this conversation
23 indicates that Brdjanin was being considered as a replacement for Grahovac
24 in the position of chairman of the executive committee.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: One moment, Mr. Treanor. Mr. Ackerman.
1 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm sorry, Your Honour, I was waiting for
2 Mr. Treanor to finish.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: So was I.
4 MR. ACKERMAN: Again, the translation I have is very, very
5 different. Mine is 03244707, which is a totally different translation and
6 dramatically different in terms of some of its wording and it's the only
7 one I have.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Is the explanation the same as before,
9 Ms. Sutherland?
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, I think so Your Honour because I was going
11 to raise the same thing. Mr. Treanor and my copies are obviously
12 different as well so I think he's got the earlier translation but I will
13 check that.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: M'hm. I wouldn't know which one came first. I
15 mean -- but I would imagine that the one that you -- the one you have,
16 Ms. Sutherland, is the more recent of the two.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, we disclosed this one very recently. When I
18 say that, last week, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: All right so I would suggest that we stick to the
20 more recent version, Mr. Ackerman, unless you have an objection to that.
21 MR. ACKERMAN: No, Your Honour, my interest is in having the most
22 accurate translation no matter what its date was.
23 JUDGE AGIUS: I agree.
24 MR. ACKERMAN: My interest is also in having that as opposed to
25 one that doesn't match up, and with two of them now today, I don't have
1 the one that's being referred to, and it's -- I'll admit it's probably
2 sitting in a pile in my flat but it's not here.
3 JUDGE AGIUS: But can I take it that it's the more recent of the
4 two versions that will be taken into account for the records of this
6 JUDGE JANU: What version do we have?
7 JUDGE AGIUS: The more recent.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 MS. SUTHERLAND:
10 Q. Mr. Treanor does your document have an ERN number on the top of
12 A. Yes, it is 0324-4707.
13 Q. So there is two versions of the same intercept and as people keep
14 saying, translation is an art form.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: What's your ERN number?
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: The same, Your Honour, the same, because these
17 have been done, these aren't official translations. They are -- when it
18 has the prefix ET, it is done by another department.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, but we need to know which text we are going to
20 rely upon.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: So it's the one which we were given this morning?
23 JUDGE JANU: We have ET.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, yes.
25 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. That's for the record, and you can take
1 it -- yes, Mr. Ackerman?
2 MR. ACKERMAN: Does ET then -- I'm glad to know that. As I
3 understand it, then, ET means it was done by someone in the Office of
4 Prosecutor rather than CLSS? Am I correct about that?
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour -- yes, Mr. Ackerman.
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Thank you very much, it's been a while.
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, thank you. So I will be cautious in saying
8 which of the two versions I will ask my two colleagues to rely upon later
9 on. Point taken, Mr. Ackerman.
10 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, we will undertake to have them
12 JUDGE AGIUS: I am sure you will, Ms. Sutherland.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: The ones we have used this morning.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: I am sure you will. So let's proceed.
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: Could the witness be shown a new document which
16 was part of disclosure 2.214? It's dated the 21st of November, 1991 and
17 it was the decision on the verification of the proclaimed Serbian
18 autonomous districts in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
19 Q. Mr. Treanor, I want to deal now with further developments with
20 respect to the regions.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: And if that can be marked provisionally P2359?
22 THE WITNESS: I think this is not the correct document.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND:
24 Q. ERN number 0044-8160.
25 A. You're referring to the 21 November, 1991 decision on the
2 Q. Yes.
3 A. Not that document.
4 Q. My document has highlighting of the municipalities, and one line
5 under section 2, if that can go on the --
6 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honours, what I have is 2.214 is an article
7 from Kozarski Vjesnik of 9 October, 1992.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: Ms. Gustin just advised me of the same thing,
9 Your Honour. I was given this exhibit number yesterday as this document
10 being a part of, and I must say, I didn't go back to the actual exhibit
11 binder and take it from there. I printed it out.
12 Q. In any event, the document is on the ELMO machine. Now I don't
13 have my copy. Can you just explain for the Court this document?
14 A. Yes, this document is a decision passed by the Bosnian Serb
15 assembly on the 21st of November, 1991. I would just observe that the
16 Bosnian Serb assembly as described in section 3 of our main report was
17 established on the 24th of October, 1991, from the deputies club of the
18 SDS, and that at this time in November, indeed until the end of December,
19 it was the only central governmental-type body of the Bosnian Serbs, that
20 is the -- they had at that point no executive council, council of
21 ministers, government, whatever you want to call it, and no Presidency.
22 By this decision, the Bosnian Serb assembly recognises the proclamation of
23 the Serbian autonomous districts and the Serbian -- and the Autonomous
24 Region of Krajina, basically giving them its imprimatur. At the top of
25 section 1 of the decision, it mentions the Autonomous Region of Krajina
1 first and mentions the municipalities and other areas that would compose
2 the Autonomous Region of Krajina, with its seat in Banja Luka. It then
3 goes on to enumerate the other Serbian autonomous districts and their
5 I would also draw attention to item number 2, in which the
6 Bosnian Serb Assembly defines the Serbian autonomous region, that is the
7 Autonomous Region of Krajina, and the districts, described above, as
8 federal units in the joint state of Yugoslavia.
9 Q. We can see in item 1 the reference to Bosanska Krupa in the -- as
10 one of the municipalities?
11 A. Yes, the municipalities are enumerated under their geographical
12 appellation, Kljuc, Kotor Varos, et cetera. When we get to Bosanska
13 Krupa, it refers, however, to the Serbian municipality of Bosanska Krupa,
14 as well as parts of the municipality of Donji Vakuf and other
15 municipalities in this region that have a Serbian majority.
16 Q. Thank you. Could you be shown another document.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: And Your Honours and the Defence it's part of
18 disclosure 2.414, not 2.214. I apologise for the mistake. Can that be
19 provisionally marked P2360? And that is a decision on the -- sorry, a
20 recommendation on establishing municipal assemblies of the Serbian people
21 in Bosnia and Herzegovina dated the 11th of December, 1991.
22 Q. Could you explain for the Court this document?
23 A. Yes. This document is a -- another resolution passed by the
24 Bosnian Serb assembly, this time on the 11th of December, 1991. It's
25 entitled a recommendation on the foundation of assemblies of
1 municipalities of the Serbian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
2 Basically what it does in paragraph 1 of the recommendation is
3 that it calls on the clubs of assemblymen, the SDS clubs of assemblymen in
4 the municipal assemblies to found a separate Serbian assembly in those
5 municipalities in which they are outvoted by the other members of the
6 municipal assembly, resulting in, as it puts it in paragraph 1, the
7 imposition by majority vote of decisions contrary to the interests of the
8 Serbian people.
9 The final paragraph of the decision instructs the -- that the
10 decisions passed by the SDS clubs of assemblymen in the municipalities
11 on the transformation of their -- of those clubs into assemblies of the
12 Serbian people be verified by the assembly -- the main assembly of the
13 Serbian people in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
14 MR. ACKERMAN: Your Honour I just want to point out for the record
15 that we don't have this document. I can't find it.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Ms. Sutherland?
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'm just asking Ms. Gustin to check
18 when it was disclosed. The whole range, which covers about 30 pages,
19 because it's an Official Gazette, was disclosed to the Defence on the 26th
20 of October, 2001.
21 JUDGE AGIUS: This is -- I understand it -- part of the Official
22 Gazette that we had occasion to visit on previous occasions, I suppose,
23 but I would leave it to you to check on that, Mr. Ackerman, and if you
24 still believe that you don't have it, we'll try and find a solution.
25 Thanks. Let's proceed, Ms. Sutherland. Thank you.
1 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you.
2 Q. Mr. Treanor, have you finished with that document?
3 A. If I may be permitted to remark that this document, taken together
4 with the previous document, are interesting in that they indicate
5 something about the goals of the Serbian Democratic Party and the Bosnian
6 Serb leadership at this time. As I indicated a little earlier, by this
7 point in time, the SDS leadership had created an assembly, a
8 Bosnian-Serb assembly, a so-called assembly of the Serbian people in
9 Bosnia-Herzegovina, based on the SDS club of deputies in the assembly --
10 in the regular assembly of Bosnia-Herzegovina. With the decision on the
11 verification of the autonomous regions, this assembly seems to be
12 attempting to give itself a territory. The autonomous regions, however,
13 were composed, as we saw in the case of the Autonomous Region of Krajina
14 and its preceding community of municipalities of Banja Luka, were composed
15 of municipalities which chose to join those institutions. Now, that would
16 in principle only have been municipalities in which the SDS had a
17 political majority in the assemblies of those municipalities. The
18 recommendation on establishing assemblies of municipalities of the Serbian
19 people indicates a desire to take particular portions of municipalities,
20 which are not as a whole, which do not as a whole have a Serbian majority
21 and establish them as separate municipalities, which could then join one
22 of the autonomous regions. Indeed, in the decision on verification we
23 mention the fact that in paragraph 1 it already mentions a Serbian
24 municipality of Bosanska Krupa. So I just want to point out that what I
25 think is going on here by way of establishing autonomous regions as a
1 territorial base for the SDS and the recommendation as an attempt to
2 expand that territorial base into municipalities which were not Serbian
3 majority municipalities.
4 Q. Can I ask you to look at another document, a new document? Which
5 consists of five separate documents within the one document. I must say,
6 the covering letter, a different version of this covering letter, I think,
7 is Exhibit P2162, if my memory serves me correctly. And this has ERN
8 number SA 00-9048. If it can be provisionally marked P2361?
9 Q. Mr. Treanor just quickly, can we see there --
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman?
11 MR. ACKERMAN: If it's already P1 -- 2162, why does it have to
12 have a new number.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, without giving evidence, that letter
14 is addressed to the SDA, this letter is addressed to Momcilo Krajisnik.
15 It was the same bundle of documents that were provided to both the SDA and
16 to Mr. Krajisnik.
17 JUDGE AGIUS: [Microphone not activated]
18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the President, please.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: It's perfectly in order, Mr. Ackerman. I would have
20 understood and even agreed with your remark, but as it is, I think it
21 needs to be given a separate exhibit number.
22 MR. ACKERMAN: Well, the next question is: What is the -- I see
23 you've given me an ERN number. If I look at this ERN number, do you think
24 that's --
25 JUDGE AGIUS: I don't know what you have there so I can't help you
1 there, Mr. Ackerman.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: This bundle was provided yesterday, I understand,
3 but the other document was disclosed a long time ago, the covering
5 Q. Mr. Treanor, can you very briefly tell the Court what these
6 documents are about?
7 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, can we have it on the ELMO as well, please?
8 Thank you, Madam usher.
9 THE WITNESS: Yes. This is a package of material that was sent
10 with a covering letter on the 18th of December, 1991, from the assembly of
11 the Serbian people of Bosanska Krupa to Momcilo Krajisnik. Attached to
12 the letter are five separate items, including a decision, item number 4,
13 on the proclamation of the Serbian municipality of Bosanska Krupa.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman?
15 MR. ACKERMAN: I'm sorry, Your Honour, the document he's
16 describing has nothing -- no relationship at all to P2162. P2162 is dated
17 19 June of 1992 and talks about supplying potable water and fire brigade
18 tanker trucks.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I did say if my memory serves me
20 correctly. I will have Ms. Gustin look up the exact exhibit number for
21 Mr. Ackerman.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you, Mr. Ackerman, and Ms. Gustin is checking
23 that but in any case, we are dealing with the exhibit that we have on the
24 ELMO and perhaps we can proceed on that basis.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.
1 Q. Please continue, Mr. Treanor.
2 A. This material apparently was sent to Momcilo Krajisnik as the
3 chairman, as the president of the assembly of the Serbian People in
4 Bosnia-Herzegovina pursuant to the recommendation that that assembly made
5 on the 11th of December basically informing that assembly in accordance
6 with the last paragraph of the recommendation that a Serbian assembly of
7 Bosanska Krupa had indeed been established. One other feature of these
8 documents which I would draw the Court's attention to is contained in
9 paragraph 2, which I believe is the next page in the translation of the
10 decision on the verification of the proclaimed Serbian assembly of
11 Bosanska Krupa, in which it states that the Serbian municipality of
12 Bosanska Krupa is part of the Autonomous Region of Krajina. Similarly, in
13 paragraph 2 of the decision on the proclamation of the Serbian
14 municipality of Bosanska Krupa, which I believe is two pages further on in
15 the translation, it says, in the translation incorrectly but in a similar
16 fashion to the other document, that the Serbian municipality of Bosanska
17 Krupa is part of the autonomous region, of what it calls the Autonomous
18 Region of Banja Luka, the reference obviously being to the Autonomous
19 Region of Krajina which is what the translation indicates, although in the
20 original it refers to the Autonomous Region of Banja Luka. So a new
21 municipality at this stage has definitely joined the Autonomous Region of
23 Q. And joined it on the 11th of December, 1991, and we saw in Exhibit
24 P2359, dated the 21st of November, that the Serbian municipality of
25 Bosanska Krupa was actually named in that document, did we not?
1 A. Yes, we did.
2 Q. And for Your Honours and Mr. Ackerman, the exhibit number of the
3 same document going to the SDA is P2061. I apologise for giving you the
4 wrong exhibit number.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: Can you check that, Mr. Ackerman, please?
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: I have a copy here. 2061.
7 Q. Mr. Treanor, I'm sorry, one thing I forgot --
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Ms. Sutherland, one moment, I understand Ms. Korner
9 you require about five minutes. Mr. Ackerman do you require.
10 MS. KORNER: Yes, please, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you require any -- do you have any points,
12 matters to raise before we close down for the day today or not.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: Just very briefly with regard to this situation we
14 are having today regarding documents. I just want to make an objection.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: We need to hand down an oral decision very briefly,
16 one minute on the 22nd and 23rd protective measures because that has
17 become urgent now.
18 So I would suggest, Ms. Sutherland, that you adjust the amount of
19 questions that you still have left according to the importance, leaving us
20 something like five minutes, five to six or seven minutes.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: I will do, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: Thank you.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND:
24 Q. Mr. Treanor, I'm sorry, one thing I meant to ask you this morning
25 as we were going through your work experience and qualifications, when did
1 you first learn to read the -- what's commonly known as the Serbo-Croat
3 A. I began studying Serbo Croatian, as it was then called, in 1970.
4 I had previously studied the Russian language for many years, as well as
5 Bulgarian, and I began studying Serbo Croatian as my third Slavic language
6 in 1970.
7 MS. SUTHERLAND: All right. I finished with that document. Could
8 the witness be shown another document which is disclosure 2.46? With the
9 ERN number 0044-8167. It's a decision on the establishment and election
10 of the ministerial council of the Assembly of the Serbian People in Bosnia
11 and Herzegovina, dated the 21st of December, 1991. It's part of the
12 Official Gazette of the 15th of January -- published on the 15th of
13 January, 1992.
14 Your Honour, this document has a different ERN number to the one I
15 just said.
16 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman?
17 MR. ACKERMAN: I have it as disclosure 2.414 with the ERN number
18 she gave. I assume this is the same document.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, it is.
20 MR. ACKERMAN: All right.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: This is yet another version of it.
22 Q. Mr. Treanor --
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: If that could be provisionally marked just the
24 decision on the establishment as P2362?
25 Q. Could you please briefly tell the Court the significance of this
2 A. Yes, certainly. As I mentioned earlier, the Bosnian Serb Assembly
3 had been established in October -- 24th October, 1991, and was the only
4 organ of the -- central organ of the Bosnian Serbs until this time. This
5 decision marks a development in their governing structure. The assembly
6 forms what it calls a council of ministers by this decision on the 21st of
7 December and it specifies who the members are. I would quickly draw
8 attention to two names. In paragraph 2, after the list of 18 names, those
9 18 names being basically SDS office-holders in the government of the
10 Socialist Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, occupying corresponding
11 ministries in the new Bosnian Serb council of ministers. Below that list
12 we see a list of additional names which are the names of the presidents of
13 the governments of the Serbian autonomous regions, including in item
14 number 20, Andjelko Grahovac the president of the government of what it
15 calls here the Serbian autonomous district of Bosnian Krajina, as ex
16 officio members of that government. Then I would also draw attention to
17 item number 17 in paragraph 3 where it mentions the name of Jovan
18 Cizmovic, as a minister without portfolio in that council of ministers.
19 Q. In that very next decision in that same Official Gazette, very
20 quickly, on the 21st of December, 1991, it's a decision on the appointment
21 of the coordinators of the governments and executive bodies of the Serbian
22 autonomous districts and the Autonomous Region of Krajina.
23 A. Yes, well this document, which is passed by the assembly on the
24 same day, we get to find out what the significance of Jovan Cizmovic is
25 precisely and he has been named to be coordinator for the work of the
1 executive organs of the Serbian autonomous districts and the Autonomous
2 Region of Krajina, a position which the previous document indicates was
3 important enough to get him named as a minister without portfolio in the
4 council of ministers.
5 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour --
6 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, Mr. Ackerman.
7 MR. ACKERMAN: This second document that's number 23 in the
8 gazette, does it have the same exhibit number P2362 or are you giving it a
9 separate exhibit number?
10 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, that's a good point, Ms. Sutherland. I don't
11 know how to answer that question.
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: It can have a separate Exhibit number P2362.
13 MR. ACKERMAN: 3.
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Sorry, P2363.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: P2363. We don't have it, at least to my knowledge,
16 Madam Registrar, neither this one nor the previous one.
17 Sir, before you leave this courtroom, we need this because you
18 will be cross-examined at a later stage, there is one part in your report
19 which you were referred to earlier on today, namely section 5, which was
20 authored by Xavier Aguirre.
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 JUDGE AGIUS: It was included in your report.
23 THE WITNESS: Yes.
24 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you assume responsibility for it without
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 JUDGE AGIUS: You do. All right.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, we intend to continue with
4 Mr. Treanor tomorrow morning at 9.00.
5 JUDGE AGIUS: All right. Okay. But I wanted to make this clear
6 because it's very important. I mean I do not think you are producing
7 Mr. Aguirre as a witness, are you.
8 MS. KORNER: No, Your Honour for the simple reason we are trying
9 to keep the witness count down.
10 JUDGE AGIUS: I can live with that.
11 MS. KORNER: Can I put it this way? If there is any serious
12 challenge to what is effectively an analysis of what the documents show,
13 then we will put him in to be cross-examined by Mr. Ackerman.
14 JUDGE AGIUS: There is a possibility as well that we may also
15 require Mr. Treanor to come back later on. So we leave it at that for
16 today. I thank you, sir, for being patient with us. We'll see you again
17 tomorrow morning at 9.00.
18 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE AGIUS: I thank you.
20 [The witness withdrew]
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Mr. Ackerman, I think in order not to waste time or
22 lose time --
23 MR. ACKERMAN: Just very briefly, Your Honour, I just want to, for
24 the record, and as a very practical matter object very strongly to the
25 proposition that documents are for the first time brought before the
1 witness even though they may have been given to us last night, brought
2 before the witness and the witness is commenting on them. I don't have
3 them. No opportunity to read them. There may be valid objections that I
4 could make to the use of the document. I can't possibly tell if I can't
5 read it and I just think that's an inappropriate way to present evidence
6 in this Trial Chamber and those documents should have been disclosed to us
7 well before yesterday.
8 JUDGE AGIUS: Do you want to respond to that, Ms. Sutherland?
9 MS. KORNER: I will do it. Your Honour the difficulty has been
10 that we have had to speed everything up. We never intended to put
11 Mr. Treanor in at this stage of the game, as it were, and so we apologise
12 but the fact is we've been trying to keep it as short and as efficient as
13 possible but Mr. Ackerman's point is taken and we'll try to ensure that it
14 doesn't happen with Mr. Brown.
15 JUDGE AGIUS: I think he's right and I appreciate also the
16 problems that you encountered. And I leave all options open, as I have
17 always done. But I appreciate what you say, Ms. Korner. Ms. Korner, I
18 understand that you have got something for to us raise.
19 MS. KORNER: Can I just ask to go into private session very
21 JUDGE AGIUS: Yes, let's go into private session.
22 [Private session]
12 Pages 18754 to 18757 – redacted – private session.
4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
5 1.53 p.m., to be reconvened on Thursday,
6 the 3rd day of July, 2003, at 9.00 a.m.