1 Wednesday, 21 November 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Good morning, everybody in the court.
7 Madam Registrar, will you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours.
9 This is case number IT-04-83-T, the Prosecutor versus Rasim Delic.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
11 May we have the appearances for today, starting with the
13 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Good morning, Your Honours, Counsel, and everyone in and around
15 the courtroom. For the Prosecution, Daryl Mundis, Laurie Sartorio, Anna
16 Svensson, and our case manager, Alma Imamovic.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
18 And for the Defence.
19 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Honours. Good
20 morning to my learned friends from the OTP. Good morning to everyone in
21 and around the courtroom. Vasvija Vidovic and Nicholas Robson on behalf
22 of General Rasim Delic. Our case manager is Ms. Lana Deljkic.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
24 Good morning, Mr. Saric.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning to you, too, Your
1 Honours, and everyone else.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
3 Yesterday, before you started your testimony, you made a
4 declaration to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing else but the
5 truth. I remind you that you are still bound by that declaration. Okay?
6 Thank you very much.
7 WITNESS: EDIN SARIC [Resumed]
8 [Witness answered through interpreter]
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Sartorio.
10 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Examination by Ms. Sartorio: [Continued]
12 Q. Good morning, sir.
13 A. Good morning.
14 Q. Yesterday, at the end of the session, I was asking you some
15 questions about any communications between the 3rd Corps military security
16 service and subordinate units, and my question to you is: How -- was
17 there a system in place for sharing information? In other words, if the
18 subordinate units' counter-intelligence operatives came into possession of
19 information, how would that information be relayed up the chain?
20 A. I apologise. Could you please repeat that question?
21 Q. Yes. My question to you is: How would you receive information
22 from counter-intelligence operatives from subordinate units?
23 A. There was a communications system in place down what we termed the
24 security line. Security organs from subordinate units, from minor units
25 you might say, used their reports to inform the superior command on
1 various developments. If, for example, there was an independent brigade,
2 a brigade, it would use its reports to pass information along to its
3 superior command, such as, for example, the division command.
4 The division command, in turn, informed the corps command; and
5 then the assistant commander for security attached to the corps command
6 would receive all these reports. He would analyse the substance of these
7 reports, and then the reports were sent on to whichever sector was
9 Specifically, in my case, these would be reports about the kind of
10 developments that I covered. The assistant commander for security of the
11 corps would forward these reports to my sector; and then my superior, my
12 boss, upon receiving such a report, would forward the document to me.
13 This is how I learned about certain things and about activities that had
14 to do with my work.
15 Q. Now, when you say "the assistant commander for security of the
16 corps would forward these reports to my sector; and then my superior, my
17 boss, upon receiving the report, would forward the document to me," what
18 assistant commanders are you speaking of; and, then, please, for the
19 record, just state who your boss is?
20 Can we talk about particular persons here, the names?
21 A. Sure. Specifically, if a report came, for example, from the
22 command of the 35th Division, the assistant commander for security in the
23 corps, at the time discussed yesterday, 1994 and 1995, was Major Pavel [as
24 interpreted] Imamovic. He received certain reports and forwarded those to
25 the assistant commander for security of the 3rd Corps command, Colonel
1 Ekrem Alihodzic. Then, in mid-1995, he was replaced by Colonel Agan
3 Whenever they received those reports from someone from one those
4 units, if this report contained any information that had a bearing on my
5 work in the counter-intelligence sector, this document would be forwarded
6 to my sector. Major Osman Vlajcic was the head of my sector. He would
7 study the report and then he would address it to whoever was concerned,
8 and that was normally one of us, the operatives working there.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sorry. There's something I would like to
10 understand here. Maybe, at lines 23 to 25, the witness says things would
11 be received from the 35th Division and the assistant commander for
12 security in the corps, at the time discussed, was Major Pavel Imamovic."
13 Then he said he received certain reports and forwarded those to
14 the assistant commander for security of the 3rd Corps, which is Colonel
15 Ekrem Alihodzic. It looks like this position is occupied by two persons.
16 MS. SARTORIO: I was going to clarify that, Your Honour. Okay.
17 Q. Sir, first of all, can you repeat the first name of Mr. Imamovic,
18 because I believe the record is incorrect. What is his first name again?
19 A. Yes, I noticed that. Fadil, Fadil Imamovic.
20 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, what the Judge is asking is also my
21 confusion when you say the assistant commander for security in the corps
22 received certain reports and forwarded them to the assistant commander for
23 security of the 3rd Corps.
24 When you say "assistant commander for security in the corps," do
25 you mean in a subordinate division? How are you using the word "corps"
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: There cannot be a subordinate division that is a
3 corps. It either comes from a division or a brigade.
4 MS. SARTORIO: I understand that, and that's why I'm asking him to
5 clarify that, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: But then you are confusing the question by
7 saying "subordinate division." What do you mean by "the corps" here,
9 MS. SARTORIO: You may answer the Judge's question.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me make one thing clear. I'm
11 not a professional military man. I happened to be a member of that
12 military unit at the time, that is true, but there are certain limits to
13 my understanding of how this worked.
14 The corps is an organisational unit comprising several
15 subordinate, smaller units: Brigades - independent units, that is -
16 battalions, and divisions. As for the chain of command, it looks like
17 some sort of a pyramid, and then the corps is at the top of this pyramid.
18 Above the corps in the system of command and control, or in the
19 organisational chart as far as I can remember, at the time we only had the
20 Main Staff. There was the subordinate unit, the 35th Division, and there
21 was the corps command.
22 The subordinate division, the 35th Division, also had its own
23 subordinate units which received reports down the security line of
24 command, send them down to the division, and the division up to the corps.
25 When these reached the head of --
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: May I please interrupt you. Let me ask the
2 question differently.
3 Can I --
4 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, sorry to interrupt. Just going back to
5 the answer of the witness, which appears to have caused the confusion,
6 I've been informed by my colleague that the answer made perfect sense,
7 but, unfortunately, it hasn't been recorded in the transcript correctly.
8 So perhaps --
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let's try and correct that. That's what we're
10 trying to do.
11 Now, sir, who was the assistant commander for security in the 3rd
12 Corps, if you know?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, at the time we are
14 discussing, the assistant commander for security in the 3rd Corps was
15 Colonel Ekrem Alihodzic.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Right. And what position at that time did Fadil
17 Imamovic occupy?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I remember, at the time
19 Major Fadil Imamovic was assistant commander for security in the 35th
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much. That clears the question up.
22 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
23 Q. Now, sir, what was the -- was there a major source for you of
24 your -- for your counter-intelligence information? Where did you get your
25 information from?
1 A. I personally gathered intelligence in several different ways. For
2 the most part, I would obtain information the following way: By talking
3 to any prisoners, to civilians who were exchanged by the other side, by
4 collating information from reports received from subordinate units in the
5 way I just described a minute ago, and based on information that I
6 obtained from my sources in the field.
7 Q. So one of your sources would be POWs; correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And how would you be informed about the existence of a POW?
10 A. Specifically, talking about this segment, I had the brief in the
11 counter-intelligence sector that I talked about yesterday. Activities of
12 the Serb-Montenegrin aggressor - that's how we defined my brief - and all
13 activities to do with the work of that sector were passed on to me.
14 Among other things, as a result of the fighting, certain people
15 were captured along the front lines, and those people were POWs. I spoke
16 to these persons, and this was one way for me to retrieve certain types of
17 information that was material, especially to units who needed this
19 Q. Thank you, sir.
20 But my specific question for you is this: When someone became a
21 POW, how would you learn about this? Who would tell you, and how soon
22 after someone became a POW would you learn this?
23 A. I can explain how it worked in practice in my case.
24 We had meetings on a daily basis within our sector, the
25 counter-intelligence sector. My boss, Major Osman Vlajcic, briefed us
1 every morning and handed out assignments to all of us. There were a total
2 of five of us operatives working there. It would sometimes be the case at
3 one of these morning briefings that he would, for example, say he had
4 information indicating that there were a certain number of POWs, one or
5 more, who were to be brought into the POW Reception Centre in Zenica.
6 His information, for example, indicated that these persons had
7 been captured in a combat zone where there was fighting going on at a
8 particular point in time. All this was probably - certainly, actually -
9 based on some sort of a written report. Whichever unit was engaged in
10 combat in a certain area took these prisoners of war.
11 Q. And how soon after you received this information would you want to
12 interview the POW?
13 A. I conducted interviews the minute I was told that a certain POW
14 was brought in, and once they were put up in the POW Reception Centre in
15 Zenica. Normally, this would happen after a POW had been brought over
16 from the area of responsibility of that particular unit and over to the
17 centre. It would sometimes be the case that a unit involved in the
18 fighting, a unit taking a prisoner -- I'm sorry.
19 Security organs of that particular unit in the area of
20 responsibility of that unit, in their HQ, would first talk to these
21 prisoners. They would obtain information that seemed important at the
22 time. Information that the unit in question had found much more useful
23 than any information I could have retrieved several days after.
24 The moment this person was captured, any information provided was
25 far more important than any additional information that could have
1 followed up three or four days later.
2 Q. Exactly.
3 So when a POW was captured, where was that POW -- were there
4 procedures in place for where that POW was supposed to be brought to?
5 A. You see, at the time, yes, there was a procedure. Efforts were
6 made for each POW to be brought in as quickly as possible to the POW
7 Reception Centre in Zenica. I'm talking about the area of responsibility
8 of the 3rd Corps specifically. This is the area of responsibility of the
9 35th Division.
10 Once all these activities were performed, the ones I mentioned a
11 while ago, efforts were made for these POWs to be brought in as quickly as
12 possible. Of course, they would be listed in keeping with the Geneva
13 Conventions. They would be registered with the International Red Cross,
14 and put up in the POW Reception Centre in Zenica.
15 I can't say exactly whether it took a single day, two, or more.
16 Every effort was made to do this as quickly as possible.
17 Q. Thank you, sir. Now I would like to move on to the topic --
18 another topic.
19 I believe that you mentioned, earlier in your testimony, African
20 or Asian -- persons who came from African or Asian countries, and my
21 question to you is: When is the first time that you learned of these
23 I believe I asked you also if they were known under another term,
24 and you said "Mujahedin." So my question is: When is the first time you
25 learned about the existence of a Mujahedin?
1 A. I personally learned about the existence of the Mujahedin sometime
2 in 1993, I believe. Unofficially or semi-officially, this was the story
3 circulating among the common folk. Likewise, you could hear these stories
4 among the ranks of the army. Nothing special, just something to the
5 effect that there were people called "the Mujahedin" fighting for the BH
6 Army. This was the sort of story one could hear at the time. This is
7 what I heard.
8 Officially, having started work with the counter-intelligence
9 sector, I want to point out again that my boss was Major Osman Vlajcic who
10 was personally in charge of monitoring any activities to do with this
11 Afro-Asian element, the Mujahedin. So it wasn't before then that I knew
12 for sure, and I knew that he was involved with this sort of thing.
13 Q. Did he tell you anything about them?
14 A. Well, you see, the code of conduct that we followed in that
15 particular unit was to each mind our own business. No ill intention, but
16 nobody was to interfere with anyone else's work or with anyone else's
17 brief. There was no need for me to do anything like that, since this was
18 his brief. This was something that he did. He didn't need to share
19 anything, and he never shared anything. I, myself, didn't pry, because I
20 had my own brief. It was quite a comprehensive one, and I was quite busy.
21 His brief was no concern of mine at all.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you know exactly, more or less, when it was that
23 he told you about the existence of the Mujahedin?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I joined the sector, I
25 believe, sometime in September 1994. There were those regular morning
1 briefings that I mentioned. It was there that I learned, with any degree
2 of certainty, that this, in fact, existed and that he was the person in
3 charge of monitoring this.
4 My boss, Major Osman Vlajcic, he was in charge of, well,
5 monitoring these, what shall I call them, activities that they performed.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question, really, is: Do you know more or less
7 when? Month, date, year? When did you first come to know of their
8 existence officially?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Officially, I learned, as I said,
10 sometime in September 1994, at one of the morning briefings.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
12 Yes, Madam Sartorio.
13 MS. SARTORIO:
14 Q. Now, did you ever discuss the Mujahedin with your colleagues; and
15 if so, what were the discussions?
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Robson.
17 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, I believe that the witness has fully
18 dealt with this question that's just been put. He said earlier that there
19 was a code of conduct and this witness didn't pry into what others were
21 MS. SARTORIO: I think I'm asking a different question, Your
22 Honour. I'm not asking about whether he participated in any work with
23 them. I'm asking if he ever discussed the Mujahedin, just in general,
24 with the colleagues; and if so, what were the stories about the Mujahedin?
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed.
1 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
2 Q. Can you answer that question, Mr. Saric?
3 A. I've already answered the question to some extent. Specifically,
4 off the record, there was precious little that one actually knew, and it
5 wasn't official information. We each tried to abide by the code that I
6 mentioned. We each tried to do our work, take care of our brief, and not
7 to look into anything that anyone else was doing, anyone else that we
8 perhaps happened to be in touch with in our work.
9 If there was a request for assistance, obviously, we would rush to
10 one another's aid, but we weren't exactly used to exchanging information
11 among ourselves, in terms of our respective briefs.
12 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
13 [In English] Again, I hear the translation in English.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: I didn't even hear any translation at all.
15 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] First of all, please slow down,
16 because there is a slight delay with the French interpretation. The
17 second thing, I have a question to put to the witness.
18 Here's my question: Witness, in your answer to Judge Moloto's
19 question, you said that, officially, in September 1994, you learned,
20 during a morning briefing session, for the first time, about the existence
21 of the Mujahedin. How did you learn it during this meeting? What was
22 discussed during the briefing session?
23 How was the information conveyed to you, officially speaking,
24 because you said it's during that briefing session that you were
25 officially informed of the existence of the Mujahedin.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, on this subject, when I
2 learned officially in my service about the presence and existence of that
3 category of persons in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
4 specifically in the area of responsibility of the corps to which I
5 belonged, that is, the 3rd Corps, it is true it happened at one of the
6 morning briefings that I had to attend and that were held in my sector
7 every day.
8 My chief, Major Osman Vlajcic, had materials that he received from
9 the superior service, the superior commander, that is, the assistant
10 commander for security of the 3rd Corps. He commented on them, and he
11 signed off various documents. We called it "signing off," meaning
12 indicating on each document which operative is going to deal with it.
13 I believe there was one report that contained information about
14 some activities of the Mujahedin, "the Mujahid Detachment," I believe it
15 was called. I mean, I'm trying to be as accurate as I can after all this
16 time. I'm afraid I can hardly remember very precisely after all this time
17 how it was formulated, but I am trying to be as precise in answering your
18 question as I can. Let's see if I will succeed.
19 So he, who was in charge of that area, said he had some
20 information. That's when I learned about their existence and the fact
21 that their activities are monitored, but I had no further interest in that
22 because I had my own desk, my own brief, and my own work.
23 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Saric, I noted that you told us that your
25 commander, Major Osman Vlajcic, received the information from the superior
1 command in the 3rd Corps about the Mujahedin, and I would be curious to
2 know, if you know, whether he had also received information from the 35th
3 Division; that is to say, from underneath. Do you know that?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I believe I have
5 explained already the hierarchy in my prior testimony to the best of my
6 ability, considering that I am not a military person myself.
7 I believe, and I suppose, that the communication went like this:
8 The security organ of the 35th Division forwarded information to the
9 assistant commander for security of the 3rd Corps. The latter evaluated
10 the contents of that information and evaluated the subjects; and depending
11 on that, he directed it to various sectors of the security -- military
12 security service. That included our sector of counter-intelligence. I
13 believe that's how the communication went within our service; that is,
14 within our sector.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
16 MS. SARTORIO:
17 Q. Now, sir, did you ever encounter any Mujahedin during your work as
18 an operative in the counter-intelligence sector?
19 A. I did not myself, because there was no need for me to meet any of
20 them. My boss was in charge of that area of work. I worked exclusively
21 with prisoners of war from the side of the Serbian-Montenegrin aggressor,
22 and I was involved in operative work in the field, gathering information
23 that was relevant to the units involved in combat activities in the area
24 of 3rd Corps.
25 Q. Well, we're going to be looking at some documents in a minute. If
1 the Mujahedin or El Mujahedin Detachment took prisoners, would this not
2 put you in contact with them?
3 A. Not personally, because in the chain of command and control, I was
4 the last person to do the actual work; that is, the interview with the
5 prisoner of war, regardless of whether he was captured by the Mujahedin or
6 some other unit in the area of combat operations.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: But you told us that one of your sources of
8 information, sir, was interviews with prisoners of war. You told us this,
9 this morning.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, what I said is correct.
11 I did talk to each of the prisoners who were brought to the Zenica
12 Reception Centre for Prisoners of War, but only once they were brought to
13 the centre.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's what counsel is talking about.
15 MS. SARTORIO:
16 Q. So if there was -- if, for instance, the El Mujahedin had taken
17 prisoners in their custody, were they under the same obligation to
18 transport the prisoners to the POW centre in Zenica?
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Robson.
20 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, I just wonder if this question -- I'm
21 objecting. I'm just wondering if this question could be clarified a
22 little. It was put: "Would the El Mujahedin be under the same obligation
23 to transport the prisoners to the reception Centre in Zenica."
24 I don't believe the witness has explained any obligation to
25 transport prisoners, certainly not at any length, and I think it would be
1 useful to establish that before.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Sartorio.
3 MS. SARTORIO: I will go along with that, Your Honour.
4 Q. Sir, what were the normal procedures in the area of responsibility
5 of the 3rd Corps for when a prisoner of war was captured? Who would take
6 custody of the prisoner, and where would the prisoner go?
7 A. I believe I did describe the procedure briefly in my prior
8 testimony. The unit conducting some combat activities in a particular
9 area of responsibility, if it captures one or more prisoners of war, had
10 the obligation to take such prisoners of war to the Reception Centre in
11 Zenica as soon as practicable. I'm talking about the procedure that I
12 knew of as an operative of the counter-intelligence sector.
13 Now, what really happened in the field, I cannot know that
14 firsthand, because I have never been in the field. I spent all my time in
15 my office in Zenica; and when such prisoners of war were brought to
16 Zenica, I could interview them in the centre, not in the field. But I
17 said that's the way I suppose it should have happened. It was supposed to
18 work that way.
19 Q. And was there a particular unit that did the physical transporting
20 of the prisoners to Zenica?
21 A. You see, within the Command of the 3rd Corps, we had a battalion
22 of the military police; and within that battalion, there were a number of
23 organisational units. I believe that members of that MP battalion, maybe
24 not the battalion itself but one of its subordinate units, had the
25 obligation to physically transport prisoners of war from the place where
1 they were captured, from the unit that captured them, to the centre in
3 Q. So I'll go back to my original question, which is: When -- if the
4 Mujahedin or if the El Mujahedin Detachment had taken custody of POWs,
5 were they under -- were they required to follow the same procedures as
6 anyone else within the area of the 3rd Corps?
7 A. You see, from all I know, they were supposed to. Whether they
8 really followed the procedure or not, I don't know.
9 MS. SARTORIO: May the witness be shown document -- Exhibit 553,
11 Q. Now, while waiting for the English version to come up, sir, can
12 you tell us what this document is?
13 A. This, as far as I can see - the top part of the copy is not so
14 good - this seems to be a report resulting from an interview with
15 prisoners of war from -- this is really illegible.
16 MS. SARTORIO: Sorry. Can the English version be moved up so that
17 the Chamber can see.
18 Q. Well, let me ask you some specific questions, sir: Can you tell
19 us whether this document is from the 35th Division, military security
20 service department, to the 3rd Corps commander, security service
22 A. Yes. We can see that without a doubt.
23 Q. And can you tell us if the date of this document is the 22nd of
24 July of 1995?
25 A. I have to repeat. The copy is very bad, especially when important
1 details are concerned, but I believe that is, indeed, the date.
2 Q. And can you see the subject matter, which shows an interview was
3 carried out; correct?
4 A. Yes, yes. I can see that. It's an interview with POWs.
5 MS. SARTORIO: Okay. There's something wrong with the screen
6 right now. There is something wrong. Okay. Okay. I don't have --
7 okay. Sorry.
8 Could you turn to the second page in English, please.
9 Q. Now, do you see, sir, in the second -- the second line of the body
10 of the document, it says, "the interview was carried out in the Reception
11 Centre in the village of Livade." Is that what it says?
12 A. Yes, yes. I can see that.
13 Q. Can you tell us where the Reception Centre in the village of
14 Livade is located?
15 A. Unfortunately, I can't tell you. I've never been there.
16 Q. Do you know who conducted these interviews at the Reception Centre
17 in Livade?
18 A. I suppose the interviews were conducted by one of the members of
19 the security service; that is, one of the members of the military security
20 service of the 35th Division. If I see any initials, I could perhaps say
21 who exactly. Initials are usually in the bottom left corner; but, no,
22 there are none. But it was certainly one of the members of that security
23 service of the 35th Division.
24 Q. Okay. And given the fact of your position as operative in the
25 counter-intelligence, and your area of responsibility was Serb and
1 Montenegro aggressors, having received this information at the 3rd Corps
2 level, would you have received -- shouldn't you have received or did you
3 receive this information immediately?
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Robson.
5 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, before -- sorry to interrupt. Before
6 asking whether he received the information immediately, could we please
7 ascertain whether the witness received this document at all or has ever
8 seen it before?
9 MS. SARTORIO: I'll rephrase the question, sir.
10 Q. When is the first time that you learned of these POWs?
11 A. Could we move the document a bit. That's excellent.
12 Here, we see the date the document was created, 22nd July 1995,
13 and I see the mark, the sign-off that I spoke about earlier. Every
14 document received by the assistant commander for security of the 3rd Corps
15 would be reviewed by the assistant commander; and based on the contents,
16 he would direct it to a particular person or sub-sector in the service.
17 What we see here is that it was directed to the sector to which I
18 belonged, and the mark says that a report should be made. The specific
19 task was given by the assistant commander for security of the 3rd Corps,
20 Mr. Alihodzic. It says that "Sare," that was my nickname, "Sare should
21 talk to the Muslims."
22 Can I clarify that, if you want me to?
23 Q. Please do.
24 A. Thank you.
25 During combat operations, two or three prisoners of war were
1 taken -- two, three. Three. It's a bad copy. However, in addition to
2 those three prisoners of war who were Serbs, and I believe one was
3 Ukrainian, around 11 Muslims were captured, and those Muslims either
4 fought or worked in so-called "labour platoons" for the Army of Republika
6 Q. May I interrupt you? I'm sorry to interrupt you, but we are going
7 to get into that in a bit. My question to you --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me just interrupt.
9 Can we please zoom in a little bit on the English version, so that
10 we can see what the parties are talking about. Thank you.
11 MS. SARTORIO:
12 Q. My specific question to you, Mr. Saric, is this: You say that you
13 were tasked with interviewing these POWs. This report is dated the 22nd
14 of July. So when did you interview the POWs, if you recall?
15 A. I really cannot tell you that with any certainty. There's
16 probably a document, some written trace of it, maybe an Official Note, or
17 a report about the interview with the said persons.
18 Q. Okay. And we will look at those documents, but would there -- is
19 there any indication from this document why these -- whether or not these
20 prisoners were going to be transported to Zenica in accordance with the
21 standard procedures?
22 A. I haven't seen it written here that they would be transported, but
23 I believe that they were eventually transported to Zenica, to the
24 Reception Centre.
25 Q. And when you say "eventually," do you know how long after this
1 document it was that they were transported to Zenica?
2 A. I cannot tell you precisely, but I believe there is a document
3 that will confirm the time when I conducted an interview with them.
4 Q. My last question, before I move on to another document, is: Do
5 you know of any reason why they would not have been immediately
6 transported to Zenica?
7 A. I have said something about that, briefly. The unit that took one
8 or more prisoners in the course of combat, security organs would probably
9 immediately talk to those prisoners because the information that they are
10 able to provide at that moment is topical and priceless at that moment.
11 If I may finish, the information that they would give three days
12 later is worthless.
13 Q. Right. So it would be important for you, as the
14 counter-intelligent operative in the 3rd Corps, to speak with them as soon
15 as possible, wouldn't it?
16 A. Precisely, but I could not wield any influence on that. I would
17 interview them when they arrived at the POW Reception Centre.
18 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you. This document may be put away.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: I have a few questions on this document.
20 MS. SARTORIO: Certainly, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Sir, do you remember - before we put away that
22 document, please, can we bring it back - do you remember at any time
23 interviewing these POWs that are mentioned in this document?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Looking at the names, I believe I
25 did interview them.
1 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you able to remember when you interviewed them,
2 the date?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Hardly. I could hardly remember the
4 exact date, but I believe I talked to them within 10, 15, maximum a month,
5 after reading this report.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you able to remember where you interviewed
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] All the prisoners of war that I
9 interviewed were interviewed exclusively in the POW Reception Centre in
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you very much.
12 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
13 Now may the witness be shown P02303. Okay.
14 Q. Now, sir, can you tell us if this document is dated the 23rd of
15 July, and it's from the 3rd Corps security service department to the
16 General Staff Security Administration?
17 A. Yes.
18 MS. SARTORIO: And if we could look at the bottom of the document
19 in B/C/S, and the second page, please, in English.
20 Q. Can you tell us who the initials -- who "GI" is?
21 A. I cannot be certain.
22 MS. SARTORIO: Can we go back to the first page in English, then.
23 Q. Now, does this document -- does this document again contain the
24 subject matter of the prisoners that were taken in July?
25 A. Yes. We can see that from the document.
1 MS. SARTORIO: And, in fact, if we can move the document down a
2 little bit in English.
3 Q. In fact, the three names, there are three names mentioned, are
4 those the three names mentioned from the previous document?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And this document also mentions 11 enemy troops in the first
7 sentence. Can you tell us what those -- who those are?
8 A. These are 11 persons who were Muslims, Bosniaks, who were used by
9 the Serb-Montenegrin aggressor to perform labour on fortifying the combat
10 positions and lines of the Serb-Montenegrin aggressor.
11 We call these "labour platoons."
12 Q. Okay. Now, from the first -- the first paragraph of the document,
13 it mentions that these prisoners had been interviewed.
14 My question to you is: Were these interviews conducted by you or
15 anyone in the 3rd Corps, or were these interviews -- are you reporting to
16 the Main Staff about interviews that had been conducted by someone in the
17 35th Division?
18 A. Let me make one thing clear. I'm not the person who produced
19 this document --
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Robson. Just a second, sir, just a
22 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, the witness's last answer is touching
23 upon the very reason that I stood up. It hasn't been established that
24 this witness has ever seen this document before. His initials are not on
25 it. We can see the date of the document, and the witness has just told
1 the Trial Chamber the time period that he believes that he spoke to the
2 persons mentioned in this report.
3 So I don't believe it's appropriate for the witness to be asked
4 about whether he conducted the interview with the prisoners that's
5 mentioned in this particular document.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Sartorio.
7 MS. SARTORIO: I don't understand the objection. He understands
8 the content of the document. All I'm asking is whether this report was a
9 result of any interviews conducted by his department, or are they just
10 reporting on what someone else did. He would know, being in the
11 counter-intelligence department of the 3rd Corps military security
12 service, whether he interviewed them and whether these interviews resulted
13 in this report. It's yes or no.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: What I find a little incomprehensible from the
15 objection is that a little earlier I asked the witness if he did remember
16 ever interviewing at least these three, and he said, "Yes, some 10, 15,
17 maximum a month," after he saw the previous document.
18 Now, the last part of Mr. Robson's argument is: "It is not
19 appropriate for the witness to be asked about whether he conducted the
20 interview with the prisoner that's mentioned in this particular document."
21 I don't understand that because he's already told us that he
22 conducted those interviews anyway.
23 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, I was drawing the Trial Chamber's
24 attention to the date on the face of this document; and from the last
25 document that we saw, that mentioned information about when the three men,
1 prisoners of war mentioned in this document, were detained.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. These documents are a day apart: The one was
3 the 22nd, the other one was the 23rd.
4 MR. ROBSON: Exactly.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: And this gentleman said he did interview these
6 three some 10, 15, maximum a month, after he saw the document of the 22nd
7 of July.
8 MR. ROBSON: Indeed.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: So to say it is inappropriate to ask him whether he
10 did interview these people, that's what I don't understand.
11 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, I withdraw the objection.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
13 MS. SARTORIO: Okay. I don't want to spend more time on this
14 document than necessary because there are other documents, but I guess I'm
16 Q. Why would there be a document, a second document, about the same
17 subject matter the day after the first document? Can you explain that?
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we see the heading of this document.
19 Is it not so, Madam Sartorio, that the document of the 22nd was a
20 report from the 35th Division to the 3rd Corps?
21 MS. SARTORIO: Yes.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: And that this one is from the 3rd Corps to the
23 General Staff.
24 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you. I stand corrected, so let me just --
25 let me just wrap up this document.
1 Q. Is there a stamp on this document, sir, that indicates that it was
2 received by the General Staff [as interpreted]?
3 A. Yes. There is a stamp which shows that the document was received.
4 It's an incoming stamp. It was received by the General Staff of the Army.
5 Q. Okay. So, in line with what Mr. President just said, and in line
6 with the previous document, can you tell us whether this is just reporting
7 up what your department had received the previous day?
8 A. Yes.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Robson.
10 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, I apologise. It's not an objection;
11 it's a matter to do with the record.
12 The witness, at line 6 of page 26, stated: "It was received by
13 the General Staff Security Administration of the Army.
14 The words "Security Administration" have not be captured in the
15 transcript. I just wonder if that could be clarified, please.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's recorded now.
17 MS. SARTORIO: That could be added in.
18 Q. Sir, it went to the General Staff of the Army Military Security
19 Administration; correct? Could you answer "yes" or "no"?
20 A. Yes. Yes, yes.
21 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honours, may this document be admitted in
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
24 please be given an exhibit number.
25 Yes, Mr. Robson.
1 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, it's the Defence's submission that a
2 sufficient basis has not been laid to admit the document into evidence.
3 There's not a link, we would submit. This is a document that went from
4 the 3rd Corps security service department, which is -- although the
5 witness is within the 3rd Corps, we've heard that there were layers within
6 the security service department. It went to the Military Security
7 Administration of the General Staff. The witness has said that he did not
8 see this document, and all he's been really done -- all that's been done
9 is that he's been asked to read out segments of it.
10 We can see from the document that the author of the document is
11 Ekrem Alihodzic. He will be coming to testify next week. So in my
12 submission, Your Honour, it's not appropriate for the document to be
13 admitted through this witness. It can be dealt with in due course by the
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Sartorio.
16 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honour, I think, given documents that have
17 come in, he is completely familiar with the substance of the document.
18 This is his department that he worked for, and he has answered the
19 questions about the document. This is no different than other documents
20 that have come in through witnesses.
21 They don't have to be the author of the document. They don't have
22 to have seen the document previously. If they're aware of the contents,
23 and he was able to answer questions about the content, I would argue that
24 there is a sufficient basis for the admissibility of it.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: This question of admission of documents is really
1 becoming a festering sore. I'm not quite sure. It does seem as if there
2 is an enjoyment of just standing up and objecting to admission of
3 documents at times because maybe people feel uncomfortable about them.
4 You know, I can remember when the last witness that was
5 cross-examined by Madam Vidovic, that a whole lot of documents were being
6 tendered in during that cross-examination which were in exactly the same
7 position as the documents exactly like this. A person looks at the
8 document. He understands and knows the content of the document. He's not
9 the author of the document, but he knows who the author is, can say who
10 the author is, identifies the document, and the document goes in.
11 Now, we now have another standard that you've got to be the author
12 of that document for the document to come in. It's no more a question of
13 Rule 89 (C), which says you admit anything that's got probative value.
14 Now you've got to be the author also.
15 I would like guidance from the parties on just how and what
16 standard is supposed to be used here to admit documents. Is authorship a
17 requirement now?
18 Yes. You're on your feet. I am pointing at you, Mr. Robson.
19 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, just to clarify, we don't say that
20 authorship is necessary. We're following the -- we're taking it from the
21 guidelines that the Trial Chamber set out at the beginning, and you said
22 there needed to be a sufficient link. The complaint is really that all
23 that's this witness has done is really being asked to read a few extracts
24 from the document, but he's not familiar with it.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Would you like the witness to be led on who wrote
1 the document and whether he knows the person who wrote the document, who
2 signed the document? We can do that. I think you should do that, ma'am,
3 just lay the foundation.
4 MS. SARTORIO: All right. But just one point, Your Honour. I did
5 ask him what 11 enemy troops meant, and he did explain who they were, so
6 he's obviously is familiar.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's not the obvious. The objection is he just
8 commented on the content and didn't lay the foundation. You asked him
9 about the initials of the drafter. He didn't ask him about the signatory.
10 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you. I will.
11 Q. Sir, do you know, who is the signatory of this document? Whose
12 name is at the bottom of the document?
13 MS. SARTORIO: You need to show the witness, please, the
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Show him the end of the document.
16 MS. SARTORIO:
17 Q. Whose name is here, sir?
18 A. What I see is "Colonel Ekrem Alihodzic"; to be more precise, Ekrem
19 Hadji Alihodzic.
20 Q. This person, was he assistant commander for the 3rd Corps Security
21 Service at this time?
22 A. Yes. If I may just add something, yes.
23 Q. And that is -- so he was your immediate superior, Mr. Vlajcic's
24 immediate superior; is that correct?
25 A. Precisely.
1 Q. And did you know this man?
2 A. Directly or -- yes, I did.
3 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
4 We have no further questions with regard to the foundation.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
6 please be given an exhibit number.
7 THE REGISTRAR: It will become Exhibit 858, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
9 MS. SARTORIO: This is probably a good time to take a break, Your
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
12 We'll take a break and come back at quarter to 11.00.
13 Court adjourned.
14 --- Recess taken at 10.15 a.m.
15 --- On resuming at 10.45 a.m.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Sartorio.
17 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 May the witness be shown P02321.
19 Q. And, sir, could you tell us who this document -- the document is
20 to and who it's from, and the date of it?
21 A. If we could please pull it all the way down.
22 Q. I believe you're looking for -- are you looking for -- actually,
23 I'll go back to that question.
24 MS. SARTORIO: If we could look at the last page in English and
25 the second page in Bosnian, so the witness may see who wrote the document.
1 You'll need to go one more page in B/C/S, sorry, and then one page
2 previous in English, it looks like. Thank you.
3 Q. Sir, can you tell, from looking at this document, did you write
5 A. If I look at the initials, I think I can confirm that I am the
6 author of this document. I can also say that this was information to do
7 with the results of an interview that was conducted with POWs.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you know who "RS" is?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These are the initials of the
10 typist. I dictated this and he typed it up.
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you know the name of this person?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Unfortunately, I can't remember. I
13 know who the person was.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed.
15 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
16 May we go back to the front of the document, the first page,
18 Q. So, sir, this document is dated the 25th of July, 1995; correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is there a stamp showing that the General Staff of the Army
21 Military Security Service Administration received this document?
22 A. There is the incoming stamp that we can see in the header.
23 Q. Now, we see, in the first page, the names. Are these the same
24 three persons who were on the previous documents?
25 A. Yes. I'm looking at their names, and I can see that these are the
1 same persons.
2 Q. And, in the first sentence of the document - if we could scroll
3 over a tad bit in English - in the English version it says: "Results of
4 the interviews conducted with captured aggressor soldiers."
5 Then after, "To the GS ARBiH Security Administration," it
6 says: "In the interview with the captured aggressor's soldiers, the 35th
7 Division of the Army, SVB, military security service learned the following
9 So I take it, from that, that this is a report up the General
10 Staff Military Security Service Administration with regard to the 35th
11 Division interviews. Is that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honours, we ask that this document be admitted
14 in evidence.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Vidovic.
16 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I think this document
17 has been exhibited. We might want to check that first.
18 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Sartorio.
19 MS. SARTORIO: We've double-checked, Your Honour. It may have
20 been admitted under a different ERN; but under this PT number, our records
21 show it has not been admitted as a document. It's not to say that a
22 duplicate hasn't been admitted, but we would -- if Defence knows, perhaps
23 it could give us the number.
24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we'll do our best to
25 check this. I am highly certain that this document was tendered with one
1 of the previous witnesses.
2 MS. SARTORIO: The -- one thing that can happen, Your Honour, is
3 the same documents are obtained from different sources, and the other
4 document may not have the stamp, so I would like this document admitted
5 with the stamp.
6 So I'd just ask that it be assigned an exhibit number today; and
7 if we find a duplicate, then perhaps it can be corrected later.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Would that be okay with the Defence?
9 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
11 Then the document is admitted into evidence. May it please be
12 given an exhibit number.
13 THE REGISTRAR: It will become Exhibit 859, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
15 Yes, Madam Sartorio.
16 MS. SARTORIO: May the witness now be shown P03022, and if we
17 could -- if we could go to the last -- the next-to-the-last page in
18 English. Again, we're looking for the signature page, please.
19 Q. Sir, can you tell us whether you wrote this document?
20 A. Yes, that's what the initials indicate.
21 MS. SARTORIO: Okay. And may we go back, then, to the first page
22 of the document.
23 Q. And would you agree this document is dated the 25th of July, 1995,
24 and it's to the army General Staff, Administration of Military Security?
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. And can you tell us briefly what this document is all about?
3 A. I'll try to keep this as brief and accurate as possible.
4 You see, in my evidence today, I've mentioned already that during
5 the fighting, a number of Muslims were captured. Through interviews, we
6 ascertained that these people had been members of the labour platoons.
7 These were Muslims who were captured as members of this labour platoon.
8 They were performing labour for the purposes of the Republika Srpska Army
10 Q. And is this report written as a result of any interviews that you
11 conducted of these persons?
12 A. That's right.
13 Q. Now, do you know whether these 11 Muslim work platoon -- or labour
14 platoon persons were captured at the same time as the other three,
15 Mr. Sikanic and Mr. Trivicevic, that are the subject matter of previous
17 A. I think this was one of the operations carried out by I don't know
18 exactly which unit of the BH Army. It was during that operation that
19 these 11 persons, plus these three POWs, were captured.
20 Q. So by the 25th of July, you had interviewed some or all of the 11
21 persons at -- was this at KP Dom, Zenica?
22 A. Yes.
23 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honour, we ask that this document be admitted
24 in evidence.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Just before you do, I just want to ask the witness
1 just one question.
2 Witness, you say at line 23: "I think this was one of the
3 operations carried out by I don't know exactly which unit of the BH Army."
4 Do I understand you to say that in your drafting of this document,
5 you didn't establish which unit had captured these labour platoon people?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] To be quite honest, this may have
7 been an omission on my part. However, at the time, what I found
8 incomparably more important was to find out whatever was of interest to my
9 units. Well, I didn't mean to say "my units," in the sense of units
10 belonging to me, but units that were active and were performing combat
11 operations in the area.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you.
13 The document is admitted into evidence. May it please be given an
14 exhibit number.
15 THE REGISTRAR: It will become Exhibit 860, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Sartorio.
17 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
18 May now the witness be shown Exhibit 552, please, and if we could
19 scroll down to, again, the bottom to see the signature page.
20 Q. Sir, can you tell, from looking at this document, whether you
21 wrote -- are you the author of this document?
22 A. The copy is not very clear. But judging by the initials and the
23 signature, I think that I was the author of this document.
24 Q. Is that your signature, sir?
25 A. Yes.
1 MS. SARTORIO: And now may we go to the front, the first page
2 again of the document.
3 Q. So this is dated the 26th of August, 1995. Can you tell us -- can
4 you identify what the contents are of this document?
5 A. If you look at the name of this document, you see that it is an
6 Official Note containing the information regarding an interview that was
7 conducted with a POW. You can see the name right there: Velibor
9 Q. And did you interview this person on the same day that you wrote
10 this Official Note?
11 A. You see that the Official Note was produced on the 25th, which was
12 right after the interview. There's a possibility that perhaps I talked to
13 this person a day earlier or perhaps on that same day, but the time gap
14 between the dates could not possibly have been greater than that.
15 Q. Thank you. Now, are you able to explain to the Chamber why you
16 didn't interview this person until around the 26th of August, yet you
17 interviewed the Muslim work platoon around the 25th? Can you explain why
18 that was?
19 A. Yes, I can. In my evidence, I have already pointed out, and I
20 reiterate that, that my sole task or mission was to speak to POWs the
21 moment they were brought into the Zenica POW Reception Centre, probably
22 the same minute they were brought in. If there was a room that was
23 available, as soon as this POW was brought in, I would receive
24 instructions from my boss to the effect that the prisoner was there, and I
25 would receive an order to go there, right there and then, and talk to this
2 Q. And just to clarify the record, when I asked you about
3 interviewing the Muslim work platoon around the 25th, I meant the 25th of
4 July. Do you confirm that?
5 A. Precisely.
6 Q. Now, did you make any inquiry about the three soldiers who had not
7 appeared or been brought to Zenica? Did you want to speak with these
9 A. No. But to avoid all misunderstanding, I did not make any
10 inquiries about them, nor was I interested, until the moment these persons
11 would arrive to the POW Reception Centre. I had no time and no
12 possibility to do such things.
13 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
14 May this document be put away.
15 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] I have a question to ask of this
16 witness beforehand.
17 Witness, please, you spoke of "Odbrana Republike." What does it
18 mean? Were you talking about the Ministry of Defence?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, could you say that
20 again? I'm not sure I got the right interpretation.
21 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] In B/C/S, at the beginning of the
22 document, on the right-hand side, we can read "Odbrana Republike," which
23 has been translated into English as "National Defence." I was wondering
24 if this was referring to the Ministry of Defence.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You see, that is the mark of
1 confidentiality of a document. This "National Defence" means "military
2 secret." It's the degree of confidentiality of a document. This document
3 is considered to be strictly confidential, because it contains strictly
4 confidential information we received from that person.
5 If you ask me if that's the Ministry of Defence, well, yes, the
6 General Staff had above it the Ministry of Defence.
7 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] This sign, this mark at the
8 beginning of the document, doesn't correspond to the institution which
9 received the document in this case?
10 Madam Sartorio, could you try and clarify this point?
11 MS. SARTORIO: Yes, I will, Your Honour.
12 Q. Sir, when you made this Official Note, where did this Official
13 Note go to, if anywhere?
14 A. Yes. This Official Note was first reviewed by my immediate
15 superior, Major Osman Vlajcic. He evaluated the quality and volume of
16 information contained therein. After his personal assessment, he would
17 decide whether there was any need to make a report of that information to
18 be sent to the superior command.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: And was that decision ever made or was it not made,
20 to send this document to the superior command?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I suppose it has.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Thank you.
23 I have a question before we admit this.
24 At page 37, line 14, Madam Sartorio asked the question: "Now, did
25 you make any inquiry about the three soldiers who had not appeared or been
1 brought to Zenica? Did you want to speak with these soldiers?"
2 Your answer was: "No. But to avoid all misunderstanding, I
3 didn't make any inquiries about them, nor was I interested, until the
4 moment these persons would arrive to the POW Reception Centre. I had no
5 time and no possibility to do such things."
6 I'm not quite sure I know which three soldiers are being spoken
7 about here. I know that we have spoken about three soldiers and 11 labour
8 platoon people. Now, those three soldiers that we spoke about included
9 this person.
10 Now, when the question says,"Did you make any inquiry about the
11 three soldiers who had not appeared," I would like to know which soldiers
12 these are. Are you able to tell us, Witness, because you answered the
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's very possible that this is one
15 of them, and that is easily verifiable. We had a document a moment ago.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question is: When you answered, "No," which
17 three soldiers did you have in mind which you didn't interview?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think the Prosecutor asked me a
19 question referring to the three prisoners who were captured together with
20 the 11 Muslims from the labour platoon. On one document those three
21 persons are listed first before the reference to the 11 Muslims.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: But this one that you are talking about on this
23 Official Note is one of those three.
24 So the question should have been: "Did you talk to the other two,"
25 but it says "the other three." I want to know, who did you have in mind.
1 Madam Sartorio, are you able to clear this for us, because I don't
2 know who you're talking about here.
3 MS. SARTORIO: All right. Yes, Your Honour.
4 Actually, the question was about the time period between the time
5 when they were captured - and we saw some documents earlier - which was
6 the 21st of July, and the time of the interview of this person, which was
7 around the 28th of August.
8 My question to him was whether he had tried to interview them
9 during that month period, and that was my specific question with regard to
10 this. Well, Mr. Sikanic is the subject matter of this, as well as the
11 other two, which are mentioned in several of the previous documents.
12 But I can go back to those documents, and we can put the names on
13 the record, if that would be helpful.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: You see, I had been under the impression that when
15 we were dealing with or when you were dealing with Exhibit 553 and Exhibit
16 858, the witness told us that he did interview those people around
17 those -- I'm not quite sure.
18 I think I asked you the question: "When did you interview these
19 people and where you interviewed them?""
20 In your answer, you said, "10, 15, up to a maximum of a month,
21 after they had been arrested."
22 Now, did you also interview the other two -- or let me rephrase my
24 Is it your testimony, sir, that this one, Velibor Trivicevic, did
25 you interview him; or let me ask you, on what date did you interview him,
1 if you did interview him at all?
2 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honour, I don't mean to interrupt, but we have
3 a document to show that, that I'm getting to next.
4 JUDGE MOLOTO: Well, you see, you have been mentioning dates of
5 interviews, and I'm trying to clear the dates. We're talking about the
6 26th August, 28th August, 25th July, and I'm trying to find out exactly
7 when these people were interviewed, because a number of dates have been
8 given, mainly by you.
9 MS. SARTORIO: I think the dates are in the documents, Your
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay. Then attend to that.
12 MS. SARTORIO: Okay. Well, we need to go back.
13 If we could put Exhibit 859, please, and we'll go to the signature
14 page, please.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you need the signature page? It's admitted.
16 MS. SARTORIO:
17 Q. Sir, you wrote this document; correct?
18 A. Da [No interpretation].
19 Q. Okay. What is the contents of this document about? What,
20 specifically, is this about?
21 A. Yes. I created the document and I signed it. On the basis of
22 information we received from security organs of the 35th Division, we
23 informed the security of the General Staff about the interviews with those
24 three POWs. We just forwarded this information.
25 Q. And these three POWs, could you, for the record, please state
1 their names?
2 A. We can see from this document that the interview was conducted by
3 the military security organ of the 35th Division. The interviewees were
4 Branko Sikanic, Velibor Trivicevic, and Igor Guljevatej.
5 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: My question is: Did you, sir, ever interview these
7 people, because now this report talks about an interview by the 35th
8 Division? Did you personally interview these people at any stage?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, from the moment when
10 those people were brought to the Reception Centre, I talked to them, and
11 that is probably reflected in a document that the Office of the Prosecutor
12 has. But this is an interview with those people that was conducted in a
13 different, lower unit.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can I suggest that you listen to the question that
15 is put, and try to answer the question as briefly as you possibly can. If
16 you can say, "yes," just say, "yes."
17 My question to you is: Did you, at any stage, ever interview
18 these people? "Yes," "No," "I can't remember"?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Do you remember when, on what date, you interviewed
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot confirm that with any
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: You may proceed, Madam.
25 MS. SARTORIO: Okay.
1 Now, briefly, can the witness be shown again 860.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is that the exhibit, Madam?
3 MS. SARTORIO: Yes, it's an exhibit. I'm going to clarify
4 everything again.
5 Q. Now, sir, we talked about this document a moment ago. You wrote
6 this document; right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. This involves interviews of the 11 Muslim work platoon members;
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you, I believe in your testimony, you indicated that you had
12 participated in interviewing these persons. Correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And I also asked you if these 11 Muslim work platoon members had
15 been captured and detained, along with the three persons that we just
16 mentioned in the previous document.
17 A. From the document itself, we see they were captured in combat, so
18 in the same operation.
19 MS. SARTORIO: Well, may we go to document 552 now, please --
20 Exhibit 552, 552. That's not the same one.
21 Well, now, can I have a moment, Your Honour, to double-check the
22 number of the exhibit to show him.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Madam Vidovic.
24 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, let me avail myself of
25 this opportunity, while Mrs. Sartorio is looking for something.
1 For the record, I want to say the document that was admitted today
2 under number 859 was admitted earlier, in fact, as Exhibit 595. It's
3 completely identical. It only had a different ERN number.
4 The same is true of document 858 admitted today. It was admitted
5 earlier as 581.
6 I'm sorry, Ms. Sartorio.
7 MS. SARTORIO: With regard --
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, Madam Vidovic, for that
10 MS. SARTORIO: No, Your Honour, may I be heard? The document that
11 she claims -- that Defence counsel claims is identical does not have the
12 stamp received in by the Main Staff, so it has -- it's a different
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
15 MS. SARTORIO: Okay.
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Ms. Vidovic.
17 MS. VIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we can check. It is
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much, both of you, ladies. Let the
20 documents stay as they are; and if there is any cross-referencing, let's
21 please ask the Registrar to make a cross-reference and that's it. Let the
22 document stay in, the document on the record.
23 Yes, Madam.
24 MS. SARTORIO: I would like to respond to 858 as well, Your
25 Honour, but perhaps not at this time. Defence counsel says there's
1 another duplicate, but I would like time to look at that duplicate.
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes. If what they are suggesting covers 858 as
3 well, 858 and 851 will stay on the record, and we will also ask the
4 Registrar to make a cross-reference between those two.
5 Thank you very much.
6 MS. SARTORIO: Now may the witness be shown 858.
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: You are done with 552, Exhibit 552?
8 MS. SARTORIO: Yes, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
10 MS. SARTORIO:
11 Q. We talked about this document as well, sir.
12 Now, this document, do you agree, in the first sentence, I asked
13 you about the captured 11 enemy troops, and are these the 11 work platoon
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And also contained in the same document below, you will see the
17 name of the three soldiers again: Mr. Sikanic, Trivicevic, and
19 Those are the same three soldiers from other documents; correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 MS. SARTORIO: Okay. Thank you.
22 Now may the witness be shown PT2446.
23 Q. Sir, did you write this document?
24 A. Can I have a look at the last page.
25 Yes, but this document does not bear my signature.
1 Q. But that's your name; correct?
2 A. Yes, my initials, my name. I think I wrote this document, but the
3 signature is missing.
4 MS. SARTORIO: Can we --
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: But it is your document? You drafted the document,
6 can you confirm that?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
8 MS. SARTORIO: Okay.
9 Can we go to the first page again, please.
10 Q. So, sir, what is the content of this document?
11 A. The contents of this document, in this Official Note of the
12 security service, resulted from the interview with Branko Sikanic.
13 Q. And did you conduct the interview of Branko Sikanic?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And do you recall when you conducted this interview and if this
16 document can help you recall that?
17 A. Well, you see the heading. It says that this Official Note was
18 done on the 25th of August, 1995; that it was made on the 24th, a day
19 earlier; and that it was made just after the interview.
20 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
21 May this document be admitted in evidence.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
23 please be given an exhibit number.
24 THE REGISTRAR: It will become Exhibit 861, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
1 MS. SARTORIO: May the witness be shown P02485, and may we go to
2 the last page, the signature page, please.
3 Q. Sir, did you participate in writing this document?
4 A. Yes. From the initials, yes.
5 MS. SARTORIO: May we go to the first page now.
6 Q. So this appears to be an Official Note, and it states it's going
7 to the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina, General Staff, Security
8 Administration; correct?
9 A. No. This is not an Official Note. This is a report
10 titled: "Information," and it is true it was sent to the Security Service
11 of the General Staff.
12 Q. And what is the contents? Can you tell us what this document is
14 A. This document speaks of the result of the interview conducted with
15 POW Dusko Pejicic. The copy is not very good, but I believe it was Dusko
17 MS. SARTORIO: May this document be admitted in evidence, Your
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
20 please be given an exhibit number.
21 THE REGISTRAR: It will become Exhibit 862, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
23 MS. SARTORIO: May the witness now be shown P02487, and go to the
24 second page, the signature line, please.
25 Q. Now, sir, these two initials are not your initials, are they?
1 A. No.
2 Q. And do you know whose initials they are?
3 A. I know who the creator of the document is. It's my colleague,
4 Mehmed Siljak, an operative from that sector. The other initials are the
5 initials of the operator who did the typing.
6 Q. And do you recognise -- is the person who -- there's no signature
7 on this document.
8 Can you tell us, back to the first page, what the contents is of
9 the document?
10 A. From the title of this report, we see that it resulted from an
11 interview with POWs Goran Stokanovic and Igor Guljevatej.
12 Q. And Mr. Guljevatej, is he the same person who is named on the
13 previous documents that we've looked at today?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And this document's dated the 30th of August, 1995?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And this colleague, did you work together with this colleague in
18 interviewing POWs?
19 A. I just want to clarify this briefly.
20 At the time these combat operations took place, the chief of my
21 sector simply issued a verbal order that in the event of arrival of a
22 larger number of POWs, one of my colleagues should help me out by
23 interviewing some of the POWs, because I cannot physically manage to
24 interview them all. This report resulted precisely from the interviews
25 conducted by my colleague, Mehmed Siljak.
1 Q. And would this colleague of yours also attend the daily morning
2 briefings that you mentioned earlier?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. So were you familiar with the work that he did and the persons
5 that he interviewed?
6 A. When he was helping me with my work, with my brief, I knew that.
7 But I don't know and I wasn't interested in what he was doing, as that was
8 strictly his area.
9 Q. Okay. But in the second -- this document is about interviews of
10 POWs, so this is one of your areas of interest?
11 A. Yes.
12 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honour, we ask that this document be admitted
13 in evidence.
14 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] One point of clarification,
15 please, Witness.
16 In that particular case, the help provided to you by your
17 colleague, did he provide it to you on your initiative? Did you ask for
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE LATTANZI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: May we go to the last page of this document,
23 Sir, can you see the person who is supposed to have written the
24 document? If it were assigned, who would have been the author? Can you
25 see that name? It's clearer on the English.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It's a poor copy, but I can see that
2 the initials are "SM," which means that this was Mehmed Siljak.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm talking about Agan Haseljic. Do you know him?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: He also worked in the same division as you did?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. At this time, he was chief of
7 the military security service in the 3rd Corps Command.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
9 The document is admitted into evidence. May it please be given an
10 exhibit number.
11 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit 863, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
13 MS. SARTORIO: May the witness now be shown P02607, and go to the
14 signature page, please.
15 Q. Sir, did you write this document? Are these your initials?
16 A. Yes.
17 MS. SARTORIO: If we could go to the first page.
18 Q. Are you able to tell me from looking at this document, at least
19 now you have the first page, what this document is about?
20 A. Yes. This is a report that I drafted based on information that I
21 received, having conducted an interview with POW Vidosav Vukovic. I sent
22 this report along to the Security Administration of the General Staff,
23 which was the line of communication that we normally used.
24 MS. SARTORIO: And if we could just now go again to the last page,
25 to the next-to-the-last line of the document.
1 Q. And it mentions Drazenko Dabic. Do you see that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And it says: "The above-named persons are currently being
4 interviewed." So did you interview Drazenko Dabic?
5 A. I can't confirm that with any degree of certainty. If it wasn't
6 me, then it was one of my associates, the one who was seconded to me for
7 assistance in these interviews.
8 MS. SARTORIO: Thank you.
9 May this document be admitted in evidence, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
11 please be given an exhibit number.
12 THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit 864, Your Honours.
13 MS. SARTORIO: Just three more documents, Your Honour.
14 May the witness be shown the document that has been marked for
15 identification 779. And, again, if we could go to the last page, it's
16 actually the last page in English.
17 Q. Sir, are these your initials, indicating that you wrote this
19 A. Yes. This is obviously a document that I produced. However,
20 there is something that I find slightly confusing here, and that is the
21 signature of Colonel Agan Haseljic, the assistant commander for security
22 of the 3rd Corps commander. The name was crossed out. That's what I find
23 confusing about this.
24 MS. SARTORIO: May the witness be shown -- may we go to the first
25 page of the document now.
1 Q. And can you tell us, sir, what this document is all about?
2 A. Yes. This is a brief description of a visit made by members of
3 the El Mujahedin Detachment to POW Mile Gojic on the 6th of November,
4 1995, at least that's what the document states. This information was sent
5 on to the Security Administration of the BH Army General Staff.
6 MS. SARTORIO: And if we could go to the second paragraph, first
8 Q. It says: "While the members of El Mujahedin Detachment held Gojic
9 and other prisoners of war in their detention facility, Mile Gojic
10 expressed a desire to change his faith and convert to Islam," et cetera.
11 Do you know where their detention facility was located?
12 A. I think this was mentioned in one of the earlier documents that we
13 were looking at. Was it the Livade location? I'm not certain, but I
14 think it was in Livade, someplace like that.
15 Q. And, again, do you know why Mr. Gojic and "the other prisoners"
16 were held in this detention facility, rather than being transported to KP
17 Dom Zenica?
18 A. No. You see, as far as I know, they were there with the El
19 Mujahid Detachment, but they were transferred to the POW Reception Centre
20 in Zenica later on. As for information regarding the names and numbers of
21 these POWs, I believe I have that in some other documents.
22 How long were they there for, this is not something that I can
23 answer for you, I'm afraid, not with a degree of accuracy that would be
25 Q. Well, if you look at the paragraph above that, the last sentence,
1 it states that they were captured by members of the El Mujahedin
2 Detachment in the wider area of Vozuca on 17 September 1995. So they're
3 captured on the 17th September, 1995. The date of this document is the
4 6th of November, 1995. So they were in detention with the El Mujahedin
5 Detachment for the time period in between?
6 A. Yes, I assume so.
7 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honour, we ask that this document be admitted
8 in evidence.
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
10 please be given an exhibit number.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, it will retain the same number, but
12 will become Exhibit 779.
13 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
14 MS. SARTORIO: May I have one moment, Your Honour, quickly just to
15 speak with my colleague. Thank you.
16 May the witness now be shown, please, Exhibit 671. Now may we go
17 to the last page, please.
18 Q. Do you see the initials "SM"? Is this your colleague, Mehmed
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we suggest, Madam Sartorio, that you ask the
21 witness and let him provide the answers.
22 MS. SARTORIO: I apologise. Your Honour. I'm just trying to move
23 things along.
24 Thank you.
25 Q. Sir, can you tell us whose initials these are; in other words, who
1 wrote this document?
2 A. Yes. This is my associate, Mehmed Siljak. I mentioned that he
3 was seconded to me in order to assist me with these interviews.
4 MS. SARTORIO: Okay.
5 May the witness now be shown the first page of the document.
6 Q. And can you tell us the date of this document?
7 A. It's a very poor copy, but I think it's the 1st of October, 1995.
8 Q. And what does this document -- what is this document about?
9 A. Again, this is some basic information in relation to two POWs:
10 Mile Gojic and Nebojsa Banjac. This information was deemed to be quote
11 information by my associate who conducted interviews with these persons.
12 But if I may just observe something else, on page 1, we have their
13 personal details under items 1 and 2.
14 Q. Right. And so your colleague interviewed Mile Gojic. Did you
15 interview him as well?
16 A. You see, after I'd found out about this circumstance, that this
17 POW had allegedly converted to Islam or changed his nationality, if you
18 like, I found this to be quite a --
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did he change his nationality or his religion, sir?
20 I'm not quite sure now what is Islam. Is Islam a nation or a religion?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Religion, religion. My apologies.
22 Your Honours, I apologise. Religion, religion.
23 MS. SARTORIO:
24 Q. My question to you is: Did you ever speak with this person,
25 Mr. Gojic?
1 A. Yes, yes.
2 Q. And you didn't finish your sentence above when you said that after
3 you found out about the circumstance, "that this POW had allegedly
4 converted to Islam or changed his nationality, if you like, I found this
5 to be quite a ..."
6 What were you going to say?
7 A. Indicative of his reasons, so that was the reason I decided to
8 personally go and see that person, to see for myself whether this was his
9 own desire or whether there were other reasons that drove him to do that.
10 Q. And what did you discover when you spoke with him?
11 A. Well, he told me the same thing that he had previously told my
12 associate who had interviewed him and who later wrote up the report that
13 was sent to the Security Administration of the General Staff.
14 In addition to that, though, what I found out, or at least that
15 was my inference based on the conversation that I had with this person,
16 was that he had been driven to convert by fear. That was my conclusion,
17 that fear was the motive behind his conversion, and not necessarily his
18 free will or his desire to do that.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, can you tell from the -- can you tell us where
20 this document was -- who it was addressed to or what it was addressed to?
21 A. I think I said that, haven't I? You can see that it was sent to
22 the Security Administration of the General Staff.
23 Q. Thank you. And one other question about the document.
24 MS. SARTORIO: In the English version, it's the third paragraph,
25 about halfway down; and in the Bosnian version, it's hard to tell. It
1 starts out with, "On the 27th August 1995."
2 Q. It starts at the bottom of the first page in Bosnian, and then
3 you'll have to, if you could, read that paragraph that starts at the
5 MS. SARTORIO: Then it goes into the next page for the witness.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Can we be given the exact page?
7 MS. SARTORIO: Yes. It's page 2 in English, and it's the
8 paragraph, "On 27.08.1995." I'm asking the witness to read the paragraph.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'd love to do that for you, but the
10 copy is exceptionally poor. I'll try to do my best, though.
11 MS. SARTORIO: Perhaps a hard copy might be easier.
12 Q. It is poor quality, sir.
13 A. Thank you.
14 Q. In particular, yes, I'm looking at the last statement -- last
15 sentence, that says: "From that place, they were taken to the camp of the
16 El Mujahedin Detachment."
17 Do you see that?
18 A. Yes. That's on the last page.
19 Q. And my question -- sorry to interrupt you.
20 My question is: Do you know where this camp was, and can you
21 answer the question as to why these POWs weren't taken to KP Dom Zenica,
22 rather they were taken to this camp?
23 A. I don't know why that was the case. My sole brief was to
24 interview POWs who were brought to me, as I pointed out before, brought to
25 the POW Reception Centre.
1 MS. SARTORIO: Finally -- this document may be put away. It
2 already has an exhibit number.
3 The last document I'd like to show the witness is Exhibit 412.
4 We'll start with the signature page, please.
5 Q. Sir, can you tell us, from looking at this, who wrote the
7 A. Yes. I am the author of this document.
8 Q. And since we're on this last page, I'll go right to that
10 MS. SARTORIO: This would be the previous page in English. No.
11 Actually, if you could just scroll up in English to the top of the page,
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Did you interview these persons?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And do you recall these interviews?
19 A. Yes, in part.
20 Q. Do you know when you interviewed them?
21 A. I think there's a document about that interview. There must be
22 some sort of report or Official Note that was produced.
23 I would not like to find myself suddenly simply speculating on
24 these dates, for fear I might get them wrong.
25 Q. Do you see in the paragraphs, though, underneath the names, it
1 says that they were captured on 11 September 1995; correct?
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Robson.
3 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, I note that the name of the female
4 detainee should have been mentioned in closed session.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
6 May we ask that line 20 of page 57 be redacted, please.
7 Thank you very much, Mr. Robson.
8 MS. SARTORIO: Yes, I apologise. Thank you.
9 Q. So my question was: If you look under the -- under the names,
10 sir, it says they were captured on 11 September 1995?
11 A. That's right.
12 MS. SARTORIO: And may we now go to the first page of the
14 Q. And can you tell us the date of this document and to whom it's
16 A. Sure. The 5th of October, which also happens to be my birthday,
17 1995. This is an exchange of information, quite literally, with the 2nd
18 Corps Command, Military Security Administration.
19 During the operations to free Vozuca, there was an involvement on
20 the part of some units of the 2nd Corps. This was about information being
21 exchanged between two military security services, two commands: That of
22 the 3rd Corps and that of the 2nd Corps. This is a document in which we
23 are informing them about the first and last names of POWs who were taken
24 prisoner during the fighting, during the combat operations at the time.
25 Previously, we had received it from them, and this is something
1 that the document shows. The header says "in reference to" document
2 such-and-such, which date it was forwarded to us, with information on the
3 first and last names of the POWs, showing that their units had been
4 previously captured in the same round of the fighting.
5 Q. So if this document is coming from the 3rd Corps, going to the 2nd
6 Corps, is the document about POWs who had been taken in custody by the 3rd
8 A. Yes. This is a collective report about the combat operations that
9 unfolded at the time or that my sector produced based on information that
10 we had obtained from our subordinate units and based on interviews
11 conducted with POWs who were in the POW Reception Centre in Zenica.
12 Q. And one last question, sir, and it regards the interviews of the
13 three women we just spoke about: Can you tell us what you observed when
14 you first met these women, what their condition was?
15 A. Yes. Right after I'd found out - and it was my boss, Major Osman
16 Vlajcic, who told me - that, among other things, three ladies had been
17 captured during the fighting, I was told to interview them. So off I was
18 to the POW Reception Centre, and I saw those three ladies.
19 At first sight, they looked a little worse for wear; no visible
20 injuries, though. You could see that they were scared, in a way. If you
21 looked at their eyes, you could see fear in their eyes, a certain amount
22 of fear. They knew that they were now POWs, after all.
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: Did you say they were now POWs or not POWs? They
24 knew that?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They knew that they were POWs, and
1 that was probably --
2 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you.
3 You may proceed, madam.
4 MS. SARTORIO: One point, Your Honour. The last document is an
5 exhibit, but I think it should be put under seal, 412, if we may.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: May Exhibit 412 be filed under seal, please.
7 MS. SARTORIO: We have no further questions, Your Honour, of the
9 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
10 Mr. Robson, would you rather start a little later, or do you want
11 to use two or three minutes?
12 MR. ROBSON: I'm in the hands of the Court. Perhaps we could take
13 an earlier adjournment, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE MOLOTO: Okay.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE MOLOTO: We'll take an earlier adjournment and come back at
17 half past 12.00.
18 Court adjourned.
19 --- Recess taken at 12.00 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 12.30 p.m.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Yes, Mr. Robson.
22 MR. ROBSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Cross-examination by Mr. Robson:
24 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Saric. My name is Nicholas Robson, and I'm
25 representing General Rasim Delic today. I'll be asking you some
2 If I can ask you some background questions to begin with: Is it
3 right that at the start of the war, you moved to the Zenica area and
4 joined the Territorial Defence?
5 A. Da [No interpretation].
6 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, I heard the witness answer there, but
7 it hasn't come through on interpretation.
8 Q. Could you repeat the answer, please, Mr. Saric?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And, I believe, on the 1st of August, 1992, you joined the Army of
11 Bosnia and Herzegovina. Is that so?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, we've heard that you were a member of the military security
14 service of the 3rd Corps at a certain point in time; but is it right that
15 before joining that unit, you were a member of the military police?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And in which unit did you serve when you were a member of the
18 military police?
19 A. In the Battalion of the Military Police of the 3rd Corps, there
20 was a service for criminal investigation, the Criminal Service. That's
21 how it was called, and I was holding a position of inspector in that
23 Q. And is it correct that when you joined that service within the
24 military police, you had no relevant experience or training to fulfill the
25 position of inspector?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And is it right that within the criminal investigation section of
3 the military police, there were other operatives working there, and none
4 of them had proper education or training for this role?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. You were interviewed by an investigator from the Office of the
7 Prosecutor on the 27th of March, 2007. Do you remember being interviewed
8 by that person?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And during the interview, the investigator asked you about the El
11 Mujahedin Detachment and whether the 3rd Corps military police was
12 responsible for that unit, and you told him that whilst you worked for the
13 military police, you had no cases that brought you into contact with the
14 El Mujahedin Detachment; is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And you've told us today that you only became aware of the
17 existence of the El Mujahedin Detachment once you joined the
18 counter-intelligence service of the 3rd Corps in September 1995 -- I beg
19 your pardon, September 1994; is that right?
20 A. Yes, yes. At that time, I learned officially. Until then, I had
21 unverified, informal, hearsay information. This was something really
23 Q. Now, I want to turn to your experience in the counter-intelligence
24 section. You've told us that you held the position of operative within
25 the section and that the head of the department was Osman Vlajcic; is that
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Did you remain a member of that section until the end of the war?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And Major Vlajcic was responsible for assigning tasks to you; is
6 that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You've explained that the focus of your work in the section was
9 the Serbian-Montenegrin aggressor, and that your role involved trying to
10 collect as much information about the activities of the aggressor as
12 Now, is it right that, having collected information, your duties
13 involved you submitting written reports to your superior, Osman Vlajcic?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You've explained earlier on the duties entailed in your position,
16 and you mentioned that your role involved receiving information from units
17 subordinate to the 3rd Corps.
18 Is it right that, from time to time, you would receive information
19 or reports from those subordinate units, and you would extract relevant
20 information and compile a report for Major Vlajcic?
21 A. Yes. But I have to explain, if that's not a problem.
22 It wasn't me, personally and directly. I couldn't get anything
23 from my boss, Mr. Vlajcic, that he didn't know previously about. He was
24 the primary receiver of that information. If he would evaluate this
25 information to be good quality and valuable, then he would sign it off to
1 me, if that was my sector, my area of work, and he would give me
2 instructions what to do. After I did what he told me to do, I would
3 inform him.
4 Q. So Major Vlajcic would pass information or material down to you.
5 Conversely, you would pass material information back to Major Vlajcic.
6 Now, if there was information that Major Vlajcic thought was of
7 interest, it would be his decision as to whether to forward it to the
8 assistant commander for security of the 3rd Corps; is that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. So just to clarify that, you couldn't send the information
11 directly to the assistant commander for security, could you?
12 A. No.
13 Q. And if your superior, Major Vlajcic, considered that there was
14 information that should be forwarded to the Security Administration of the
15 General Staff, would you agree with me that he couldn't just forward that
16 information directly; he had to send it, first of all, for approval to his
17 superior, the assistant commander for security, before the information
18 could be passed up the chain?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. It's right to say that only the assistant commander for security
21 was authorised to send reports to the General Staff Security
23 A. Yes, as far as I know.
24 Q. Now, you've told us about your brief or field of specialty within
25 the service. Can you just confirm that at no stage did you to do any work
1 in connection with foreigners from Afro-Asian countries?
2 A. I can confirm that. Really, at no time did I do anything that was
3 outside my brief, which only had to do with the Serb-Montenegrin
5 Q. When you took on the new --
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: I would like to understand what is meant by you did
7 not do any work in connection with foreigners from Afro-Asian countries.
8 I ask that question because we have seen this morning reports
9 drafted by this witness, mentioning Mujahedin or El Mujahedin people.
10 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, if I could clarify that.
11 Q. Witness, as an operative within the counter-intelligence section,
12 it's right that you did not at any time carry out any monitoring role of
13 persons from Afro-Asian countries or work of that nature; is that so?
14 A. Yes, you're right.
15 Q. And in this role as an operative in the section, is it right that
16 you similarly had not previously received any relevant training or
17 experience to enable you to carry out your role?
18 A. No. We really had no training, at least let me speak only about
19 myself. I had no particular experience. All I had was a manual that was
20 developed at the level of the army, I believe, the level of the General
21 Staff. That manual contained outlines of procedures that had to be
22 followed, in my case, in interviewing prisoners of war.
23 Q. And is it right that you had to rely upon Major Vlajcic for advice
24 as to how to carry out your role?
25 JUDGE MOLOTO: The witness has just said he had a manual that gave
1 him the procedures.
2 MR. ROBSON:
3 Q. Witness, you've told us you had a manual. Did you also rely upon
4 Major Vlajcic for advice as to how to go about your job?
5 A. Yes, certainly. It's true we had a manual. It's an aid because
6 it provides guidelines that had to be followed in conducting an interview.
7 But as for guidance from my superior, Osman Vlajcic, this guidance
8 was mainly on how to be fair and very cautious in working with prisoners
9 of war, in terms of observing very strictly the provisions of the Geneva
10 Conventions. He said, at one point, "We are serious people here, grown-up
11 people. Something that is said once has to be observed."
12 Q. Is it correct that Major Vlajcic would regularly remind you about
13 the importance of complying with the Geneva Conventions and other
14 regulations relating to prisoners of war?
15 A. Yes, that's just what I said. It was getting repetitive, even.
16 Every morning, when I was setting out to go to the Reception Centre for
17 POWs, he constantly emphasised it.
18 Q. Now, I'd like to turn to the issue of you gathering information.
19 You've explained how you would speak to people who had been exchanged or
20 to prisoners of war.
21 It's right, isn't it, that you did not go to the front line to
22 gather information yourself?
23 A. I never went to the front line for that purpose.
24 Q. And just to clarify, you only ever gathered information at the
25 Reception Centre at KP Dom in Zenica?
1 A. Yes, yes.
2 Q. Now, you had authority to interview captured prisoners of war at
3 that centre. When you went to interview such prisoners of war, is it
4 correct that the procedure you would use is that you would speak to the
5 prisoner alone, normally, and you would ask them to note down any useful
6 information that they may have for you?
7 You would give them a sheet of paper and a pen, so that they could
8 write down the statement themselves, and you at the same time took a note
9 of what they told you. Is that right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And if the prisoner did make a statement themselves, you would ask
12 them if they wished to sign the sheet?
13 A. Correct.
14 Q. So based on the information you received from the interview, you
15 would then prepare a report for your superior, Osman Vlajcic; is that so?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, turning to your interviews with the Serb prisoners that were
18 captured in July 1999 [sic], you've explained in evidence --
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: 1999?
20 MR. ROBSON: I beg your pardon, Your Honour.
21 Q. I'm interested in the interviews you conducted with the Serb
22 prisoners in July 1995, and I should say that these prisoners were
23 captured in July 1995.
24 We saw a number of documents which showed that you interviewed
25 them at some stage in late August 1995. Is that correct?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Now, we know from some of the documents that we saw today that you
3 certainly interviewed three men. I believe their names are Sikanic,
4 Trivicevic, and Guljevatej. Did you interview any other Serb prisoners in
5 late August 1995?
6 A. It's very hard to recall the details; but if there were any, and I
7 believe there were, I conducted interviews with them.
8 Q. Now, I want to refer you to the interview that was conducted by
9 the OTP investigator with you earlier this year.
10 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, the reference is it's tape T0089861B,
11 pages 10 and 11.
12 Q. The investigator asked you about the treatment and the appearance
13 of these Serb prisoners of war that you interviewed, and what you said to
14 the investigator was this: "They were worn out. They were not shaved.
15 They were dirty. I couldn't note on them, at least I couldn't see visible
16 traces of torture or violent behaviour. I think that's quite enough. And
17 especially if each men, each of them, tells you that there was no such
18 things, what else could I do but believe these people?"
19 And then the investigator asked you: "Did you ask them whether
20 they were maltreated?"
21 And your reply was: "Certainly. And certainly I asked them, and
22 that is a logical question I could ask anyone."
23 So, Mr. Saric, do you recall telling the investigator what I've
24 just read out?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. So it follows from what you told the investigator that when you
2 saw these Serb prisoners of war, you could not see any signs of physical
3 abuse on them?
4 A. On the visible body parts, at first glance and later during the
5 time we talked, there were really no visible injuries that would tell me
6 that they were caused by inhuman treatment, torture, anything like that.
7 Q. And also, from what you told the investigator, it follows that you
8 asked each of the prisoners whether they had been maltreated, and all of
9 them told you that there had been no mistreatment. Is that correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Now, the investigator, in the interview earlier this year, went on
12 to ask you this.
13 Well, I should say you told the investigator: "If during the
14 interview, in that part of the interview, I came to the knowledge of or I
15 learned that they were not treated in a humane way, I would note that
16 down; and what I would write, my chief would have every morning at his
18 Do you remember telling the investigator that?
19 Mr. Saric, my colleague is saying that the question didn't come
20 across clearly. Would you like me to repeat that?
21 A. Please do.
22 Q. So what I'm doing is reading out the response that was recorded
23 during the interview given by you to the OTP investigator, and you were
24 talking about the process of interviewing these Serb prisoners.
25 What you told the investigator was: "If during the interview, in
1 that part of the interview, I came to the knowledge of or I learned that
2 they were not treated in a humane way, I would note that down; and what I
3 would write, my chief would have every morning at his desk."
4 Do you remember explaining that to the OTP investigator?
5 A. Yes, I can.
6 Q. So, as I understand that answer, what this means is that if one of
7 the Serb prisoners that you met with and interviewed had told you that
8 they had been mistreated at any time by the Mujahedin, you would have
9 written that information down?
10 A. Certainly.
11 Q. And that information would have been sent by you to your superior,
12 Osman Vlajcic?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now, Mr. Saric, I'd like to turn to the various documents that the
15 Prosecution showed you this morning.
16 MR. ROBSON: If we could start with Exhibit 858, please.
17 Q. Now, Mr. Saric, do you remember seeing this document dated the
18 23rd of July, 1995, which is a report from the assistant commander for
19 security of the 3rd Corps to the General Staff Security Administration?
20 MR. ROBSON: Perhaps if we can just scroll down to the bottom of
21 the page in B/C/S, and have a look at the page 2 of the English version
22 just to confirm that.
23 Q. Do you recall seeing this document, Mr. Saric?
24 A. I have already commented on this document earlier today, when the
25 Prosecutor asked me the same question.
1 I did not create this document. I can't even tell, by the
2 initials, who it was, but I believe -- but I see in the signature "Ekrem
3 Alihodzic," "Colonel Ekrem Alihodzic." It's an information sent to the
4 General Staff containing the names of three prisoners of war.
5 Q. And just to clarify, as I said, the date of this report is the
6 23rd of July, 1995, but you didn't actually interview the men named in
7 this report until late August 1995?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Now, the point of bringing this document up, Mr. Saric, is to
10 say: Can you confirm for us that this document that went to the General
11 Staff Security Administration makes no reference to any mistreatment
12 towards these three prisoners?
13 A. Yes.
14 MR. ROBSON: The document can be put away, and if we could please
15 turn to Exhibit 859.
16 Q. While we're waiting for the document to appear, Mr. Saric, if I
17 could just explain that what we're about to see is a report dated the 25th
18 of July, 1995. Again, it's going from the 3rd Corps Military Security
19 Service to the General Staff Security Administration. This document is
20 from -- again from Ekrem Alihodzic.
21 MR. ROBSON: And if we could please just scroll down to the bottom
22 of the page in the B/C/S, and look at page 5 -- I beg your pardon, 4 in
23 the English, just to confirm the name of the person from whom the document
24 has come from.
25 Could we please return back to the first page in both documents.
1 Q. Do you recall seeing this document earlier today, Mr. Saric?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And perhaps just for the purposes of clarification, we can see
4 that -- you mentioned earlier that you actually prepared this report?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. It's dated the 25th of July, 1995, and we know that you didn't
7 interview these men until late August.
8 Is it correct that the information that you have put into this
9 report is basically information that has come to you from the 35th
10 Division Military Security Service, and you are simply collating that
11 information and repeating it again?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Now, can you confirm for us, once again, Mr. Saric, that this
14 document that went to the General Staff Security Administration contains
15 no information about mistreatment towards these three prisoners?
16 If you'd like to look through the document, please let me know.
17 A. There is no need. I think there is no reference there.
18 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, if we could put this document away.
19 I apologise, we are going to engage in a little bit of a laborious
20 process, but the Defence believes it's important to go through the
21 documents that have been introduced.
22 If we could please show Exhibit P2446, it's Exhibit 861.
23 Q. Again, this is a document we looked at earlier. It's an Official
24 Note dated the 25th of August, 1995. Do you remember seeing this
25 document, Mr. Saric?
1 A. Yes.
2 MR. ROBSON: Perhaps if we can briefly look at page 10 in the
3 English, and the last page in the B/C/S version.
4 Q. So Mr. Saric, this was a document that you prepared that was sent
5 to the 3rd Corps Military Security Service department; is that correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. ROBSON: If we can return to the first page, please.
8 Q. This document is your note about the interview that you conducted
9 with the Serb prisoner of war, Branko Sikanic, on the 24th of August,
10 1995; is that right?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And, again, I don't want to waste too much time on it, and it may
13 be that you can remember this document, Mr. Saric, but would you agree
14 with me that at no point within this Official Note is there any
15 information that Mr. Sikanic sustained mistreatment when he was held by
16 the Mujahedin?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. When you were interviewed by the OTP investigator earlier this
19 year, the investigator specifically questioned you about this Official
21 What the investigator asked you, in respect of Mr. Sikanic,
22 is: "If he had said that he would have been -- that he would be
23 maltreated, would you have noted it down?"
24 Your reply was: "Yes."
25 Do you remember saying that to the investigator?
1 A. [No interpretation]
2 Q. And, again, you can confirm that when you interviewed Mr. Sikanic,
3 at no time -- sorry.
4 Mr. Saric, your last answer wasn't captured on the transcript. I
5 asked you if you remembered saying those words to the investigator.
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Moving to the next question: Can you confirm that, when you
8 interviewed Mr. Sikanic in August 1995, at no point did he say that he had
9 been mistreated during his detention with the Mujahedin?
10 A. If that had happened, I would have recorded it, most probably. I
11 would have made a note, and that would have been passed along to my boss.
12 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, this document can be put away, and if
13 we could move to Exhibit 595.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Before we get there, Mr. Robson, I was not
15 completely sure that the witness testified that he did, indeed, ask
16 Mr. Sikanic about any mistreatment while being kept in the El Mujahid
17 detention. Did he?
18 MR. ROBSON:
19 Q. Mr. Saric, I believe I put a question to you earlier on on this
20 issue, but if you could please answer His Honour.
21 Did you ask Mr. Sikanic if he had been mistreated?
22 A. Your Honours, whenever I interviewed POWs, POWs taken by any of
23 the BH Army's units, this was a question that was self-evident. It was a
24 compulsory question put to prisoners: What was the sort of treatment they
25 received on the hands of the unit that captured them, and how were they
1 taken to the POW Reception Centre?
2 Therefore, I asked Sikanic if there was anything that merited
3 recording, any indication of inhumane treatment in the camp over there.
4 If he had told me anything of the kind, I think I would have certainly
5 recorded it, and I would have forwarded any such information to my boss.
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
7 MR. ROBSON: If we could turn to Exhibit 595, please.
8 Q. Now, Mr. Saric, this is a report headed "Information," dated the
9 25th of July, 1995. Again, it's going to the General Staff Security
11 MR. ROBSON: If we could look at the last -- if we could look at
12 the last pages in both the B/C/S and the English versions, please.
13 Q. We can see that it bears the name of "Ekrem Alihodzic," but this
14 is a document that you prepared; is that correct?
15 A. Correct.
16 MR. ROBSON: If we could return to the first page, please.
17 Q. So, Mr. Saric, this document contains information about the three
18 men we've seen in the other documents: Sikanic, Trivicevic, and
19 Guljevatej. It contains a lot of detailed information, and, again, please
20 feel free to let me know if you'd like to look through the contents of the
22 But can you confirm that at no point, within this document going
23 to the Security Administration, does it say that any of these three men
24 were mistreated whilst they were in the hands of the Mujahedin?
25 A. There is no reference to that. I'm certain about that. I think
1 I'd be the first person to know about it, since I'm the person who
2 actually authored this document.
3 MR. ROBSON: Thank you.
4 If this document could please be put away, and if we could please
5 turn to Exhibit 552.
6 Whilst we're waiting for the document to appear, if I could just
7 explain that this is an Official Note dated the 26th of August, 1995.
8 Please, could we look at page 2 in the B/C/S version.
9 Q. Mr. Saric, if you could just look at the bottom of the page, could
10 you confirm that you prepared this official note?
11 A. Yes.
12 MR. ROBSON: If we could return back to the first page, please.
13 Q. Mr. Saric, this document relates to Velibor Trivicevic, who was
14 one of the men whose name we've just seen in several of the documents.
15 Again, as the author of this report, could you please confirm that
16 within the report there is no information about Mr. Trivicevic sustaining
17 mistreatment whilst he was detained with the Mujahedin?
18 A. That's right.
19 MR. ROBSON: If we can put this document away, please, and turn to
21 Whilst we're waiting for the English to appear, if I can explain
22 again that this is an Official Note. It's dated the 26th of August, 1995.
23 If we could look at the final page in the B/C/S version, and page
24 4 of the English, please.
25 Q. Now, it's a little hard to see. Perhaps you can't make it out,
1 Mr. Saric, but do you know -- are you able to say whether you are the
2 author of this Official Note?
3 A. It's really difficult to see.
4 MR. ROBSON: Perhaps we could have a look at the first page in the
5 B/C/S version.
6 Q. Let's see whether you're able to comment when you see that.
7 We can see here that the interview was carried out with a man
8 called "Miodrag Samac," and it was carried out on the 26th of August,
9 1995, it appears.
10 A. That's right.
11 Q. Do you know, Mr. Saric, did you prepare this Official Note? Does
12 that -- does it sound familiar to you?
13 A. Yes. It seems familiar to me, and I think I was probably the
15 Q. And, again, if you'd like to look through the note, Mr. Saric, or
16 perhaps a hard copy at all, what I'd like to ask you is: Can you confirm
17 that within this report there is no information about Mr. Samac being
18 mistreated by the Mujahedin?
19 A. If anything like that had happened, it certainly would have got a
20 mention in one of the Official Notes, which implies that it never
22 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, I believe that this document is not an
23 exhibit, so I'd like to tender it now.
24 JUDGE MOLOTO: The document is admitted into evidence. May it
25 please be given an exhibit number.
1 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit 865, Your Honours.
2 MR. ROBSON: If we could look at Exhibit 545, please.
3 Whilst we're waiting for the document to appear, I can tell you
4 that this is another Official Note, and it's dated the 28th of August,
5 1995, as well.
6 Q. Do you see, Mr. Saric, that this is an Official Note of an
7 interview conducted with Krstan Marinkovic?
8 A. Yes, I see that.
9 Q. Can you confirm that you are the author of this note?
10 A. Could I look at the last page of this document, please?
11 MR. ROBSON: Certainly. If we could look at --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed.
13 MR. ROBSON:
14 Q. So just for the record, Mr. Saric, can you confirm that you are
15 the author?
16 A. Indeed, I am.
17 Q. And as with the other documents, please let me know if you'd like
18 to study this document at all.
19 The question I wish to put to you is: Can you confirm that within
20 this note there is no mention of Mr. Marinkovic being mistreated by the
21 Mujahedin at all?
22 A. Yes, I can. If that had happened, that would have been noted in
23 this document, and this report would have been tabled to my boss. It
24 wasn't written; therefore, it probably never happened.
25 MS. SARTORIO: Your Honour, I object to the witness's answer, and
1 the question is begging for speculation. I think, "It probably never
2 happened," again is speculation on the witness's part. He can testify
3 about what the document says or doesn't say, but I would object to any
4 speculation on the part of the witness.
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you objecting to an answer by the witness?
6 MS. SARTORIO: Well, I'm objecting to the question, well, which
7 begs that response, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE MOLOTO: Let me be clear what are you objecting to. Talk
9 about the question and forget about the answer, if it is the question you
10 are objecting to? If it is the answer, tell us what it is you are
11 objecting to.
12 MS. SARTORIO: Well, the question is -- well, the witness is
13 overstating the answer to the question. I think the question calls for a
14 "yes" or "no" answer.
15 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you objecting to the --
16 MS. SARTORIO: Yes, I am.
17 JUDGE MOLOTO: Are you objecting to the witness's answer?
18 MS. SARTORIO: Yes.
19 JUDGE MOLOTO: That's a new one on me.
20 MS. SARTORIO: Well, I'm objecting to this line of questioning
21 which is now begging this answer to --
22 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Sartorio, if it is the question you are
23 objecting to, articulate your objection to the question. Don't articulate
24 your objection to the question via the answer, because now you end up
25 saying you're objecting to the answer, not to the question.
1 You can't shut the witness's mouth once he has given the answer,
2 unless you stop him; and once he has answered, he has answered. You can't
3 object to an answer by the witness.
4 MS. SARTORIO: I understand that, Your Honour.
5 I'm objecting to a question, which is a "yes" or "no" answer, and
6 the counsel is --
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: A question which is a "yes" or "no" answer?
8 MS. SARTORIO: And counsel should instruct the witness to answer
9 the question, and not to speculate on what something means or doesn't
10 mean. If the question asks for a "yes" or "no," then --
11 JUDGE MOLOTO: Madam Sartorio, the question was: "And as with the
12 other documents, please let me know if you'd like to study this document
13 at all. The question I want to put to you is: Can you confirm that
14 within this note, there is no mention of Mr. Marinkovic being mistreated
15 by the Mujahedin at all?"
16 What, in that question, invites speculation?
17 MS. SARTORIO: Well, what invites speculation is the fact that
18 he's not instructing the witness that that is a "yes" or "no" answer,
19 rather permitting the witness to explain.
20 JUDGE MOLOTO: I'm sorry, Madam Sartorio, I rule you out of order.
21 You may proceed, Mr. Robson.
22 MR. ROBSON: Thank you.
23 We obtained the witness's answer in respect of this document, so
24 we can put this document away.
25 The next document I'd like to turn to is P2481.
1 Your Honours, I'm being told that it's not on the list, if that's
2 indeed the case. No. This is the document that I was looking for.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: It's not on the list, so we can't see it?
4 MR. ROBSON: Your Honour, it's here on the screen, so apparently
5 the information must have been conveyed. So I'd like it to remain,
7 JUDGE MOLOTO: Is it on the list? Is it on the list?
8 MR. ROBSON: It's certainly on the Prosecution's list. If it's
9 not on the Defence list, then I can move on.
10 JUDGE MOLOTO: Move on, then.
11 MR. ROBSON: If we can move to document Exhibit 862.
12 While we're waiting for the document to appear, if I could just
13 explain that Exhibit 862 is an Official Note dated the 30th of August,
14 1995, and it's a document that was sent to the General Staff Security
16 Q. Mr. Saric, we looked at this document earlier today.
17 MR. ROBSON: Perhaps if we could just look at the page 3 of the
18 English, and if we could scroll to the bottom of the B/C/S.
19 No. We'll have to move to the next page in B/C/S, please.
20 Q. Now, again, it's a little hard to make out in the B/C/S version,
21 but would you accept, Mr. Saric, you were one of the -- you prepared this
23 A. I'm one of the persons who produced this document.
24 Q. Are you able to tell us who the other -- or other persons are who
25 were involved in the creation of the document?
1 A. I'm looking at the initials, and this should be my associate,
2 Mehmed Siljak. The initials "RS," well, must be one of the typists. I
3 can't remember the name of this person who did this.
4 MR. ROBSON: Right. If we could return back to the first page,
6 Q. Would you agree, Mr. Saric, that this document shows the results
7 of the interview that you carried out with prisoner Dusko Pejicic?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. And, again, if you'd like to look at this document on your screen
10 in more detail, or a hard copy, can you confirm that within this document
11 there is no information about Mr. Pejicic being mistreated during his
12 detention with the Mujahedin?
13 A. I don't think there is any information like that that is included.
14 If that had happened, it would have been recorded and written up alongside
15 with all the other information contained in this document.
16 Q. You say you don't think there is. Would you like a moment just to
17 go through the document to confirm that?
18 A. My apologies, but the copy that I have on my screen is very poor
19 and hardly deserves to be called "legible."
20 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, I'm sorry to take up court time, but
21 perhaps the witness could be shown a hard copy just to deal with this
23 JUDGE MOLOTO: By all means.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I've read it.
25 MR. ROBSON:
1 Q. Can you confirm that there is no information about Mr. Pejicic
2 receiving mistreatment at the hands of the Mujahedin during his detention?
3 A. Yes.
4 MR. ROBSON: Then, Your Honours, the final document on this
5 particular issue, if we could please show the witness E863.
6 JUDGE MOLOTO: Does "E" stand for exhibit or is it just another
7 series of documents?
8 MR. ROBSON: It's an exhibit, Your Honour, I'm sorry, 863.
9 Q. Again, Mr. Saric, this is a document that you were shown earlier
10 today, and you were asked questions about it. Would you agree that it
11 contains information that was sent to the General Staff Security
12 Administration about the prisoners of war, Stokanovic and Guljevatej?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. I believe that you said that this was a document that your
15 colleague, Mehmed Siljak, produced. But if you could help us out, could
16 you please take a look through the document and confirm that, once again,
17 there is no mention of these two prisoners sustaining mistreatment during
18 the time of their detention with the Mujahedin?
19 Again, I can show you a hard copy, if you'd like that.
20 A. Yes. This was produced by Mehmed Siljak, my associate. I can't
21 see any reference here to inhumane treatment of POWs. That's all I can
22 say about the document; otherwise, I would prefer to refrain from
23 commenting, since it's not a document that I produced.
24 Q. Okay. Thank you.
25 I'd now like to turn to events that occurred in the Ozren-Vozuca
1 region during September 1995.
2 Can you confirm for us, Mr. Saric, that you never actually visited
3 the Vozuca area at that time period?
4 A. Yes, I can confirm that. I didn't.
5 Q. As I understand your testimony from earlier, although you learnt
6 that a number of prisoners of war had been held by the Mujahedin during
7 September 1995, it was your understanding that all of those prisoners of
8 war were eventually transported to the Reception Centre for Prisoners of
9 War at Zenica; am I correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Now, to return to the interview that was carried out by the Office
12 of the Prosecutor investigator earlier this year, that investigator asked
13 you whether you had ever received a rumour that 60 persons, 60 Serb
14 prisoners, had been captured and taken to a Mujahedin camp.
15 In reply to that - and it's on the reference tape marked
16 T00089881A, page 2 - you said: "I never heard that information. This is
17 the first time I hear it."
18 Do you remember telling the investigator that?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And can you confirm for us today that you -- that while you served
21 in the military security department of the 3rd Corps, you did not hear a
22 rumour that 60 prisoners of war had been taken to a Mujahedin camp?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. I'd now like to ask you about the interviews that you conducted
25 with the three captured Serb women.
1 MR. ROBSON: Your Honours, it might be prudent to go into private
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session.
4 [Private session]
11 Pages 5953-5956 redacted. Private session
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in open session.
21 JUDGE MOLOTO: Thank you very much.
22 Now that we are in open session, may I repeat what I just told
23 you, sir.
24 We are not done with your testimony. We would like you to come
25 back tomorrow at 9.00 in the morning in this same court.
1 You may stand down for now, and you're excused.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
3 JUDGE MOLOTO: See you tomorrow.
4 [The witness stands down]
5 JUDGE MOLOTO: May the Chamber please move into private session.
6 [Private session]
11 Page 5959 redacted. Private session
8 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,
9 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 22nd day of
10 November, 2007, at 9.00 a.m.