1 Thursday, 8 March 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, you are to continue your
8 WITNESS: ISMET HADZIC [Resumed]
9 [Witness answered through interpreter]
10 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I thank you, Your Honour.
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Tapuskovic [Continued]:
12 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Hadzic, I hope your health is somewhat better
13 today. Let us try and complete this task of ours as soon as possible. I
14 will try to deal only with military matters, since you were a brigade
15 commander, and that is all.
16 Shortly, I want to go back to the 65 ter document 023026, which is
17 P332, shown to you by my learned friend, Mr. Waespi, during the
18 examination-in-chief. This is a document from the army of
19 Bosnia-Herzegovina dated the 15th of April, 1995. It is a regular combat
20 report for that date. Mr. Waespi told you that on that day a member of
21 the French Battalion was killed. Do you remember that? I believe you
22 confirmed that for us.
23 A. Good morning. Yes, I do remember that.
24 Q. Please look at item 2, "Our forces." Activities of the 12th and
25 the 14th Division are discussed, and they were a part of the 1st Corps.
1 It is said that at a certain hour they began with offensive activities or
2 offensive combat activities. You, I presume, are familiar with the fact
3 that there were combat activities on that day, on the part of the 1st
4 Corps of the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina?
5 A. I do not see the document.
6 Q. It is the first page of the document.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Waespi.
8 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Perhaps if it could be scrolled up so the date
9 of the document is visible for the witness, which is important for him.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, let that be done.
11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The date is on the top, 15th of
12 April; it is not at the bottom. It is in the heading.
13 Q. Can you see that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And you confirmed another thing to Mr. Waespi, or rather, the
16 thing I have already stated, the killing of a French soldier. It is in
17 item 2 -- so item 1, paragraph 2.
18 A. In item 2, it says, "By sniping from Grbavica, a French soldier
19 from the UN was killed." At that time Grbavica was controlled by the
20 Serbian forces.
21 Q. That's what I'm telling you. It's a document of the army of
22 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
23 Further below, in item 3, it says that in the area of
24 responsibility of the 12th and the 14th Division of your corps, at 1930
25 hours, they began with active combat operations. Do you know whether
1 there were any serious clashes that day between the two opposing sides?
2 A. In item 1, third paragraph, it says, "In the area of
3 responsibility of the 14th division, Serbian forces began intensive
4 operations at 7.00, using their artillery to attack the facilities at
5 Treskavica hill."
6 Q. I'm not disputing that. That is not what I was trying to ask you.
7 A. Well, our forces carried out a counter-attack because of what was
8 taking place at the time.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Waespi.
10 MR. WAESPI: Yes. I think the counsel referred to item 2, "Our
11 forces," that's where he was quoting from, the attack at 1930 in the
12 evening; that can be found in the second paragraph of the second heading,
13 "Nase Snage," "Our forces," and I think the witness refers to another
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that reflected on the screen, Mr. Waespi?
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 MR. WAESPI: Not yet. If we scroll down in the B/C/S version, we
18 might come to the second paragraph. Yes. That's where you see at the
19 bottom, "1930," and I think that is what counsel wants.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Could we have the English synchronised with the
21 B/C/S? It's not possible?
22 MR. WAESPI: I'm sure it's possible. I think in the English we
23 have to go up. And, in fact, we have to go to the previous page in the
24 English, which is the first page. Now -- sorry, it was correct, just
25 before we switched. It's at the top of the second page, if we can go
1 back. Yes. "In the area of responsibility, 14th Division," and then it
2 talks about an action at 1930. I understood that's what counsel was
3 referring to.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: I thank you, Mr. Waespi. I see it now, yes.
5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Mr. Hadzic, you said yourself now that in the morning, at 7.00 in
7 the morning, when the operations began, you initiated your defensive
8 operations simultaneously. Is that correct? You just said that without
9 being prompted by any question of mine.
10 A. That's not what I said. I said that in the third paragraph of
11 item 1, under "Aggressor," it says, "The Serbian forces launched a morning
12 attack on our forces." It is logical if they attacked us that we had to
13 respond. We couldn't keep silent. That's what I said.
14 Q. Thank you. My next question is this: In Sarajevo itself, were
15 the brigades linked up in terms of communications, by wire, so as to be
16 able to coordinate when a certain operation would be initiated?
17 A. The brigades were not linked between -- or rather, with each
18 other, but we were all linked up with the -- or to the system of our
20 Q. In my hands, Mr. Hadzic, I am holding an order by Rizvo Pleh, who
21 was the Chief of Staff, dated the 25th [as interpreted] of May, 1995. It
22 is, therefore, an order of the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina. It is
23 DD00-0909. We are awaiting a translation, and we have been promised to
24 receive it on the 9th of March. It is a very short document, and I wanted
25 to put it to you.
1 That is the document, dated the 20th of May, 1995. Is that so?
2 A. That's what the document says.
3 Q. Yes. "Bearing in mind the importance of communication links in
4 command and control and the units under combat condition, I hereby order
5 that all vital facilitates, Grdonj, Borje, Colina Kapa, Debelo Brdo,
6 Mojmilo, Azici, Stupsko Brdo, Vis, Zuc, the faculty of road transport,
7 have to have wire connection to two sides -- or from two sides."
8 Is what I have just read out correct?
9 A. In this document, Rizvo Pleh ordered that these locations had to
10 have communication links with their respective commands as well as with
11 the command of the 12th Division via brigade commands, of course.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, for your cross-examination, you
13 have, at the most, another 28, 29 minutes.
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will do my best.
15 However, if I use a couple of more minutes than that, I hope you will bear
16 with me. I kindly ask you to bear with me because this is one of the very
17 few officers who were at that level. We may have only one other brigade
18 commander on the entire witness list. I believe it is very important for
19 us to hear those witnesses and -- but, however, I will try to meet your
21 In item 2 --
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't see you cross-examining him on matters
23 that directly relate to the charges. I mean, merely establishing that
24 orders were issued for attacks will not, in my view at any rate, advance
25 your case. There must be attacks which relate to the charges in the
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Anything done by the army of
3 Bosnia and Herzegovina -- anything and everything done by the army of
4 Bosnia and Herzegovina [as interpreted] warranted only a military
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, what do you mean by that?
7 The response from the -- the response from the Serb army must be a
8 response related to one of the incidents, and then you would be seeking to
9 say that that response was a defensive response; then it will become
10 relevant and could lead to your client walking through the doors a free
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That is precisely what I was
13 trying to do. My colleague is telling me there is a part of the
14 transcript missing. Instead of the "army of Bosnia and Herzegovina," it
15 should read the "army of the Bosnian Serbs." All they tried to do was to
16 defend themselves, and it was never their goal to open fire on Sarajevo
17 without any reason. That is the entire case of ours, and I'm trying to
18 put it forth by way of documents.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, proceed. Let's move on.
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps we can correct the
21 transcript then, page 6 --
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. The transcript will have recorded the
23 correction. I don't know the -- the transcript would have recorded the
24 correction that you made. I'm not aware that there is any technical
25 possibility to correct it now, but in another way.
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this document,
2 DD00-0909, could we please mark it for identification pending its
3 translation. It might be in as early as tomorrow.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be marked for
6 identification as D110.
7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please call up P194. It
8 is a map that was admitted as a Prosecution Exhibit. Could we please zoom
9 in on the area of Dobrinja.
10 The area of Dobrinja, it is to the south. A bit more, please.
11 The area of Dobrinja is to the south. Just a bit more, please. Enlarge
12 it a little bit more. If possible, zoom in on this area, where it says
13 "155," the 155th Brigade.
14 Q. Mr. Hadzic, do you see the position of your brigade?
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] That's it. Thank you. Please
16 don't move the map.
17 Q. Do you see the area of the 155th Brigade, whose commander you
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Where it says "155th," and we see a little flag there, was that
21 your command post? Yes or no.
22 A. I cannot tell exactly on this map.
23 Q. This marking with the triangle, wasn't that supposed to be the
24 brigade command place? You made these markings. This is your war map, or
25 rather, that of your command. Isn't that correct?
1 A. This is a map of the 12th Division. If this symbol is used to
2 show the place where brigade command is situated, then I accept your
4 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please repeat the question.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just repeat the question.
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. The battalion command -- the other little flag, or rather, the
8 triangle, is that where the battalion command was?
9 A. Conditionally speaking, yes.
10 Q. Are these mortar positions, the mortars of 82-millimetre calibre,
11 between the two flags, and it is supposed to depict a mortar platoon
12 because of the circle just below. Is that correct?
13 A. It is correct that it was a mortar platoon, but not of 82, but of
14 60-millimetre calibre.
15 Q. Does that mean that were mortars?
16 A. No.
17 Q. How many?
18 A. In my previous testimony, I said that we had two to four
19 battalion -- mortars of 60-millimetre calibre per battalion.
20 Q. Very well. The thing next to your command and the one to the
21 right, each of these locations you had between two and four mortars. Is
22 that correct?
23 A. Yes. But they were not close to neither the brigade command nor
24 to the battalion command.
25 Q. Very well. And this lonesome marking here, isn't that a marking
1 for a mortar of 120-millimetre calibre. Isn't that a sign for a unit
2 which goes forward? Is that a mortar of 120-millimetre calibre?
3 A. As I said previously, we did not have any 100-millimetre [as
4 interpreted] mortars in Dobrinja, but we had 60-millimetre ones and
5 probably this is meant depict that.
6 Q. Therefore, you are telling us that this marking with the three
7 prongs is not supposed to be a 120-millimetre mortar?
8 A. I'm telling that at Dobrinja there were no 120-millimetre mortars.
9 As I said, we had 60-millimetre mortars. If you are talking about the
10 one mortar of 82-millimetre calibre we had, then this may depict its
11 position, and that's as far as I'm prepared to go.
12 Q. In the transcript, we have "28-millimetre." I don't know this
13 interpretation. He said something completely different.
14 However, witness, I categorically claim that this is a marking for
15 a 120-millimetre mortar. What have you got to say to that?
16 A. I know the situation on the ground. That's why I'm telling you
17 this. Had we had such mortars, these would be -- would have been the
18 markings. But tactically speaking, there was no need for us at Dobrinja
19 to use any mortars other than the 60-millimetre ones.
20 Q. How about the three arrows to the right at Mojmilo, are those
21 anti-aircraft pieces --
22 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Anti-armour pieces?
23 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. They were used and there were a number of those. They are to the
25 right of the mortar positions.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Waespi.
2 MR. WAESPI: Perhaps, it could be established first whether they
3 were in the area of responsibility of this gentleman's brigade.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, he would say that.
5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Please, Witness, it says here "155th Brigade." Yesterday, you
7 explained certain things. We can see your command post. Is this the area
8 of responsibility of the 155th Mountain Brigade?
9 A. I said earlier that I was not interested in these markings. I
10 cannot interpreter them. These three arrows that you showed were beyond
11 the area of responsibility of my brigade, but, rather, that of an adjacent
13 Q. Very well. But look at the map. The Chamber itself can see, if
14 you look a little by the to the north and up, there's as many as two
15 120-millimetre mortars in the area of responsibility of the 112th Brigade.
16 I presume that you synchronised your actions through communications
18 You knew about these mortars positioned a little bit to the north,
19 didn't you? Is that true or not?
20 A. Mr. Tapuskovic, these are the responsibility of other brigades. I
21 didn't know what these other brigades had except for men. I was only
22 interested in my area of responsibility and defence and nothing else,
23 apart from us trying to prevent the breakthrough through the defence line.
24 Q. You acted in concert with the 101st and 102nd Brigade, which later
25 merged into one brigade. Is that correct? And you were its commander?
1 A. That's not correct. I could never have -- coordinate any action
2 with any adjacent brigade. If anyone did that, it must have been someone
3 else, not me.
4 Q. In order not to go into all details on this map, can you only
5 confirm that here below 112th, signifies two recoilless guns, and I'm
6 referring to the 112th Mountain Brigade, up there to the north. A little
7 bit above your positions. Were those the emplacement of recoilless guns?
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Waespi.
9 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Twice I hear the interpretation and saying the
10 transcript saying "112th Brigade." I only see the 102nd Brigade and the
11 101st Brigade. If that could be clarified, where that 112th Brigade comes
12 from. I just don't see it on the map.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: The 112th is to the north, on the top left.
14 MR. WAESPI: I'm sorry. I have been looking at my own e-court
15 system and not at yours. I apologise for that.
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, before moving on to
17 the issue of recoilless guns, I would like to ask a question of the
19 Mr. Witness, I followed with great care the discussion regarding
20 the types of mortars you had in your brigade. The Defence claimed that
21 you had a 120-millimetre mortars. You, however, said that you only had
22 one calibre, 82 millimetres. Page 9, lines 23 and 24 of the transcript,
23 you said that, tactically, there was no need for mortars other than
24 60-millimetre mortars. Can you explain this to me? What do you mean by
25 "a tactical need," for only 60-millimetre mortars? Why did you not need
1 120-millimetre mortars as the Defence claimed?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The area of responsibility of the
3 Dobrinja Brigade, and with regard to our lines and the Serbian lines and
4 the distance between the lines and how they were compact actually, if you
5 have 60-millimetre mortars with a range of around 1.000 millimetres [as
6 interpreted], we couldn't meet our defence requirements. 120-millimetre
7 mortars had range in excess of 3.000 metres; therefore, we did not have
8 any need to target any positions that were not directly putting us at
10 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Should the word in the transcript "if you have 60
12 metre mortars with a range of around 1.000 millimetres, we couldn't meet
13 our Defence requirements." Is that right?
14 MR. WAESPI: No. I think the witness said, and because he said he
15 said in chief, that the range of the 60-millimetre mortar would around
16 1.000 metres, but let the witness confirm.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, I'm not a technical person, but this
18 "couldn't" -- they are right. Shouldn't it be "could." Logically, he is
19 saying that with 60-millimetre mortars, they "could" meet their defence
20 requirements, so they didn't need anything more. So I'm questioning
21 whether "couldn't" should not be "could." I'm trying to follow the logic
22 of the explanation.
23 May I ask the witness.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Precisely so, Your Honour. With
25 60-millimetre mortars, we were able to meet our requirements.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] May I continue, Your Honours?
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Mr. Hadzic, can you just confirm that what is written below 112th
6 Brigade, a little bit to the left, are recoilless guns turned towards
7 Serbian positions?
8 A. Mr. Tapuskovic, I told you I know nothing about the marks. If
9 they were there, they were probably there, but I don't know that.
10 Q. Okay. I'm not going to ask you to read this map any further.
11 Your commander will be here, and we shall clarify that with him.
12 We have here now another document, DD00-1259, and we have a
13 translation of that document as well. Can we please have this displayed
14 on our monitors. It's been translated.
15 That's a document dated the 12th of August, 1994. It's been
16 written by Van Baal, an UNPROFOR officer, addressed to Jovan Divjak, a
17 deputy commander of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it reads
18 as follows:
19 "Dear General, today, the 12th August at 0515, a mortar shell was
20 shot from the trig point 847-554 to the Serb-held parts of Dobrinje. Once
21 more I want to emphasise that such an act is a flagrant breach of the
22 agreement relating to the total exclusion, signed in February 1994, which
23 should prevent the city of Sarajevo from being shelled."
24 This refers to a shell fired -- fired at Dobrinja. Is it true
25 that you held a section of Dobrinja?
1 A. Mr. Tapuskovic, my unit didn't do that. Interestingly, I would
2 like it make a comment, if you allow me, on this document. If this
3 officer wrote this letter, why did he address it to General Divjak? Why
4 didn't he address it to the 1st Corps command or the 12th Division
5 command, but rather he chose to write this letter General Jovan Divjak.
6 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Waespi.
8 MR. WAESPI: I think it is also important to understand this
9 document, to figure out what that grid refers to, what location. That's
10 where the mortar shell came from, according to Mr. Van Baal. And -- I'm
11 not going to testify, of course, but it need to be made sure where it
12 comes from, whether inside the area of responsibility of this brigade
13 commander or outside the area of responsibility of the brigade commander.
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Please, you told us that Dobrinja was encircled. Isn't it true
17 that Dobrinja was divided into two parts; one was held by the BH army as
18 you indicated on the map, and the other one was held by the VRS. No one
19 was encircled there, but there was rather a separation line. Is that
21 A. The Serbian forces occupied parts of Dobrinje 4 and Dobrinja 1, as
22 well as part of the airport settlement, and those were the separation
23 lines between one part of Dobrinja and the occupied part of Dobrinja.
24 Mr. Tapuskovic, I'm talking about occupied the parts from which people
25 were expelled. Around 400 people were taken to Kula from the to airport
2 No one was taken away from Dobrinja 4, but they were rather pushed
3 to the inner part of Dobrinja. And some 200 people were taken away from
4 Dobrinja 1, while the rest were pushed further into the Dobrinja
6 Q. I have no time to go back to your statement; but in 1992, the
7 first people, except for some few exceptions, were the Serbs. They
8 abandoned their homes and all their belongs back in 1999 [as interpreted],
9 precisely because of the then --
10 INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: 1992.
11 Q. -- precisely because of the then prevailing situation.
12 A. No one expelled the Serbs from Dobrinja, Mr. Tapuskovic. They
13 followed the instructions given by politicians. They took their things
14 and left Dobrinja, but not all of them. Some of them remained in
15 Dobrinja, and you can check the data about the number of Serbs who
16 remained there. No one was forced to go, and that was the time when there
17 was no conflict yet.
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: Let's stick to the matter at hand. Counsel, you
19 bring forward the document on the screen, and the question is whether the
20 grid position, GR 847-554, is within or without the area of responsibility
21 of the witness. And since you bring forward this document, I suggest that
22 it is on you to show to the Chamber that it is indeed within his area of
23 responsibility, and I kindly ask you to do that.
24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] First of all, it doesn't say
25 anywhere in this letter that this trig point is in the area of
1 responsibility of the Serbian army. You are asking me to do something
2 which is impossible. In any case, it is clear that this position, with
3 this markings, was in the territory of the BH army.
4 So in that respect, I asked the witness if we have this claim in
5 this letter, and if Dobrinja was closest to the other part of Dobrinja,
6 that is Dobrinja 4, I presume that this shot was fired from the Dobrinja
7 side held by the BH army. And I think that the witness is in the position
8 to answer this. He can tell us where this location exactly was.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Shall we hear from the witness or from you,
10 Mr. Waespi.
11 MR. WAESPI: The witness can answer. I --
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Hadzic, what's the answer.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I already said that it wasn't fired
14 from the area of responsibility of our brigade. Even if there had been a
15 mortar, it is technically impossible to fire it, because between the
16 ultimate point of Dobrinja and this point is -- the distance is about
17 4.000 metres [as interpreted]. So there was no shell fired by the
18 Dobrinja Brigade.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: But the question more precisely is whether, what
20 is it, GR 847-554 is within your area of responsibility. Are you in a
21 position to answer that?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not in the area of responsibility of
23 my unit.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic.
25 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, if we can correct
1 the transcript, it says "4.000 metres;" whereas, the witness says "1.000
2 metres." It's been recorded "4.000 metres," but the witness says "1.000
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that correct, Witness? What did you say?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I said that the
6 ultimate point of Dobrinja under our control within -- with respect to
7 Dobrinja 4, the distance is about 1.000 metres.
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Witness, can you at least confirm this second part which reads as
10 follows: "It is very disappointing to discover is that especially the BH
11 in the last few days is trying to exploit the situation after the air
12 attack on the 5th of August." Is at least this true? Did you try to
13 abuse and exploit these air attacks on the 5th of August, and to advance
14 or reinforce your positions vis-a-vis the positions of the VRS.
15 A. Mr. Tapuskovic, when the air strikes started around the area of
16 responsibility of Dobrinja, we rejoiced. We thought and believed that
17 this was the end of the war. Even people rushed out into the street from
18 their flats -- flags [as interpreted]. They were applauding and hailing
19 the aircraft carrying out the air-strikes against the Serbian forces in
20 Dobrinja and Lukavica.
21 Q. I'm talking about the 5th of August, 1994. I'm not talking about
22 the end of the war, but, rather, the 5th of August, 1994.
23 A. Mr. Tapuskovic, if the Serbian forces would attack us, we would
24 defend us, which is a classic example of how our area of responsibility
25 operated. Throughout the war, except for some certain changes, we firmly
1 held to our lines and defended our area of responsibility. If the Serbian
2 forces tried to penetrate our area, we would try to repel them and push
3 them back, and we upheld all the cease-fires 100 per cent because they
4 were in our interest.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can we have this
7 document, DD00-1259, be tendered as a Defence exhibit, since we have both
8 versions, English and the B/C/S one.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
10 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D111, Your Honours.
11 JUDGE HARHOFF: Counsel, the last paragraph of the letter that you
12 have shown on the screen seems to suggest that all the mortars held by the
13 BiH army inside Sarajevo should have been rendered -- or should have been
14 surrendered to the French bat or to the weapon collection point. And
15 this, of course, raises the question whether the BiH army held these
16 mortars, two to four mortars per battalion, in violation of the obligation
17 to surrender all weapons -- all heavy weapons to the weapon collection
19 Could you please clarify this with the witness?
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm going ask the witness the
22 Q. This is a working map of the 1st Corps from March 1995. Was is
23 entered in these maps signifies active weapons. If that had not been the
24 case, then we would have had exactly the situation described by His Honour
25 Judge Harhoff at the collection points for heavy weapons. Do you deny
1 that on the 3rd of March, a year after the exclusion zone was introduced,
2 these weapons were deployed?
3 A. Mr. Tapuskovic, whatever our command signed with international
4 forces was honoured, and we strictly abided by that.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Tell me, Witness, I'm putting my question directly
6 to you then. Does this mean that the two to four 60-millimetre mortars
7 that you have told us were in the possession of each of your battalions,
8 that they fell under the minimum limits of the international agreement so
9 that you could told them lawfully. Is that what you are saying? Do you
10 understand my question?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I fully understand your question and
12 precisely so. We abided by whatever was prohibited, and we didn't have
13 any of those things in our possessions. Whatever the command in charge of
14 the 1st Corps signed with international forces, we observed to the letter.
15 Whatever, however, was allowed, we kept.
16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Judge Harhoff, if
17 I -- when I come to the final stage of my cross-examination, I have,
18 however, to raise an objection that was passed on to me by the accused,
19 and I would like to say and ask the witness to explain this.
20 This is not a trig point. These were coordinates, and they were
21 provided by the UN and only they knew what they signified. Therefore, I
22 could not ask the witness anything about it because these coordinates had
23 been provided by the UN.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, I was alarmed to hear you say
25 when you come to the final stage of your cross-examination. You are in
1 the final stage of your cross-examination, and you must bring it to an end
2 within two minutes.
3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, given the
4 importance of this witness, this directly infringes the right to a fair
5 trial, and I would like you to allow me to show to the witness at least
6 another two documents; but, anyway it is up to you to decide, and the
7 direction of this is in your hands.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: You can show the witness the other two documents.
9 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] There's another letter sent by
10 Van Baal; there's no translation of that letter. And its number is
12 Q. Yet again, on the 13th of August, 1994, Mr. Van Baal writes to
13 General Divjak. So I'm going to read it: "Addressed to the
14 Brigadier-General Jovan Divjak. "General, attached here with, you will
15 find a report by the Sajo airport commander, concerning the shooting on
16 the 11th of August, which was -- directly caused the closure of the
17 airport and delay of flights.
18 "Although you reassured this command that the airport will be
19 freely and used without any hindrance, it seems that the three shots fired
20 from the territory held by the BH army resulted in the air lift, otherwise
21 used to provide for people, to close. Basically, that was an irrational
23 "It is obvious that only by taking a very firm and resolute
24 attitude towards such elements can such incidents be prevented in the
25 future. The solutions can be jointly reached between the BH army and
1 UNPROFOR, especially in the period when the airport is in use."
2 My question is as follows: If these bullets or these three shots
3 were fired from ordinary weapons, that could only have come from the
4 positions, because this was not a rocket or anything else, these were
5 rifle bullets, and Dobrinja was under your control. Were those three
6 bullets fired from the area under your direct command?
7 A. Mr. Tapuskovic, the airport and the area around it was partly
8 under the respective responsibility of three Bosnian brigades, so any of
9 them could have fired those shots. But the question is why should they be
10 shooting at the aircraft bringing in food and good things. Why should we
11 hinder or hamper anything that was to our benefit? If anybody did shoot,
12 it could not have been from the area of the 155th Brigade or any other
14 Q. Thank you.
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: Can we have this document, DD00-1257, be marked
16 for identification? I believe that the Prosecution has it, and I don't
17 have a translation because the original is in English. But can we have it
18 marked for identification, please.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be marked for
21 identification as D112.
22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. And now the last document, even though I have about a dozen more.
24 It's another letter written by Mr. Van Baal to General Divjak, and we have
25 a translation of this document into B/C/S.
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it seems that I did
2 not put it on the list. But may I be permitted to use it anyhow since it
3 has been translated, and I will use this to conclude my cross-examination.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
5 Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: Yes. The English version doesn't correspond to
7 the -- to the B/C/S version. It's a different document.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: It doesn't seem to be the same.
9 MR. WAESPI: In fact, the English translation on the left appears
10 to be the English translation of the first document we had discussed at
11 length, which had the grid reference.
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have no
13 translation for the document of the 13th; however, I do have the
14 translation of the 15th document. That one was previously marked for
15 identification, and the other one dates the 15th and I have its
16 translation. By your leave, I just wanted to ask for your permission to
17 tender that; and pursuant to your decision, I would conclude with my
18 cross-examination. Perhaps, the witness could read it. I have the
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: The witness is reading it.
21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps, he can read it out loud.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The 15th of August, 1994."
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: There is not French interpretation. Are we going
24 to have French interpretation?
25 THE INTERPRETER: There is a technical problem, Mr. President.
1 We're going to solve it.
2 Would counsel mind repeating the question.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please repeat the question.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I actually asked the witness to
5 read out the document. I have it in English. Perhaps the interpreters
6 could be provided with a copy of that, or it can be put on the ELMO as
8 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, since preference is given to the
9 interpreters, which is fine, for the only English translation, which
10 document are we now talking about? The one I see on the screen has the
11 13th of August, 1994. Is that the document that we're talking about, or
12 is it a different one?
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic --
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Waespi, it has already been
15 marked for identification that. That was not what I was talking about.
16 It is another document dated two days after that, the 15th.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is that the document which the witness is now
19 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, maybe that document should then be placed
21 on the ELMO.
22 Have you read it, Witness?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let it be placed on the ELMO so we can hear an
25 interpretation of it, if it is necessary.
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] There is a translation already.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the question that you wish to put to the
3 witness about this?
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. That fire was opened at an aeroplane immediately or shortly
6 afterwards. And, again, the general was warning the army of
7 Bosnia-Herzegovina not to open fire at aeroplanes, but this one testifies
8 that they indeed continued.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: What paragraph indicates this? I would just ask
10 the interpreter to interpret it.
11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I can read it out as well. I
12 have it on the ELMO now.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, go ahead.
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] We have provided the English
16 "On the 15th of August, Brigadier-General Jovan Divjak. Dear
17 General, today on the 15th of August, 1994, at approximately 1.100 hours,
18 an UN aircraft was hit by a single small arms round. Not 24 hours has
19 passed since your representative publicly condemned the practice of
20 shooting at aircraft during yesterday's Sarajevo airport meeting.
21 "Once again irresponsible elements have hit one of our aircraft.
22 It is obvious to me that only through close cooperation between
23 UNPROFOR/air base command and your army and police forces that we can
24 succeed in stopping these attacks."
25 My question is this: Was that bullet fired from your area of
1 responsibility, as it was the only area from which one could open fire at
2 the planes landing at the airport as stated here by Mr. Van Baal?
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Waespi.
4 MR. WAESPI: I'm sure that is a misstatement of the situation.
5 The airport has two sides; one is Dobrinja, the other one is Butmir.
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm convinced that
7 UNPROFOR did its job conscientiously, and they had good foundation for
8 such categorically claims. There is no space for any doubt as to where
9 the fire came from, from which side. They would be familiar with the
10 consequences of that, so perhaps the witness could answer.
11 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I wasn't talking about which side,
12 which forces. I was talking in a geographical sense.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, there is a
15 translation in existence.
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Where is the translation? Is there an English
18 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: May we have the English translation on the ELMO?
20 Apparently, it has been given to the interpreters.
21 Mr. Waespi.
22 MR. WAESPI: Yes. The only point I was making was that I didn't
23 dispute that it says here it was the ABiH or come from ABiH. My only
24 objection was to counsel putting to the witness that it must have come
25 from his side, which is Dobrinja, rather than from the Butmir side, where
1 other ABiH air forces were stationed. That was my objection.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, we have the letter on the ELMO, the English
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Tapuskovic, as I read this letter, it does not
5 say that the shots came from the areas held by the BiH army. At best, the
6 letter suggests that the shots could have come from the BiH army, but
7 there's obviously a possibility that it could also have come from the
8 other side.
9 I see General Van Baal's letter as a warning basically to both
10 sides that they should control so-called irresponsible elements from --
11 and prevent them from shooting at incoming or outgoing aircraft.
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Could I please be handed the
14 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Tapuskovic, are you saying that in the
15 version of document that you have, there's an indication that the shooting
16 came from the BiH army? Because there is no such indication in the
17 English translation.
18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, let us be clear.
19 They were very clear in their terms used in the previous letter when the
20 three shots were fired. This is yet another warning that they should stop
21 doing what they had done 24 hours before that. In the previous document,
22 it is clearly stated who fired. This one is merely a protest. The other
23 side was never forwarded such a letter. They are yet again protesting
24 with the army.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me hear the question and --
1 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] And putting these two letters
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let me hear the question that you wish to put to
4 the witness.
5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] My question is this: Both these
6 events, that is rifle or light machine-gun fire, that that fire was fired
7 from Mr. Hadzic's area of responsibility, and I believe the witness can
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, what do you say to that?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will use this pointer
11 to try and show you the area of responsibility around the air strip.
12 Let say this is the air strip. One third was in the Serbian
13 hands. This part, from the Serbian forces to the last third, was my area
14 of responsibility and, then, again we have the Serbian forces. And the
15 same goes for the other side of the air strip; Serbian forces, army of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and then Serbian forces, and both ends of the airport
17 were in the Serbian hands.
18 Had we opened fire at that time, the French Battalion, with which
19 we had excellent cooperation, would have come to warn us. Never have we
20 been warned during that period that someone opened fire from our area of
21 responsibility at aircraft.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: We thank you. So what is your answer to the
23 question that was put?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We did not open fire at that
25 aircraft. It could have been anyone.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Tapuskovic.
2 Any re-examination?
3 MR. WAESPI: No, Mr. President.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, the document of the
5 15th of August, I would like to tender it as a Defence exhibit.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
7 THE REGISTRAR: That will be admitted as Exhibit D113, Your
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Hadzic, that now concludes your testimony.
10 We thank you for giving it. You may now leave.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
12 [The witness withdrew]
13 MR. WAESPI: If I may be excused, Mr. President.
14 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Docherty, you're going to marshall the
16 evidence from the next witness.
17 MR. DOCHERTY: I am, Your Honour, and the Prosecution's next
18 witness will be Mr. Per Anton Brennskag.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with your leave, I
21 would ask to be excused.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, certainly.
23 Let the witness make the declaration.
24 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
25 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
1 WITNESS: PER ANTON BRENNSKAG.
2 JUDGE ROBINSON: You may sit and you may begin, Mr. Docherty.
3 MR. DOCHERTY: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Examination by Mr. Docherty:
5 Q. Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name, and by way
6 of introduction tell us what you do for a living.
7 A. My name is Per Brennskag. I couldn't hear the other part.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: What do you do for a living.
9 THE WITNESS: Please say again.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: What do you do for a living. What is your
12 THE WITNESS: Today, I'm retired from my home municipality as
13 chief of administration.
14 MR. DOCHERTY:
15 Q. And before you were chief of administration of your municipality,
16 what did you do?
17 A. I was in the Norwegian army from 1970 to early 2002.
18 Q. What rank did you hold when you retired from the Norwegian army?
19 A. My rank was lieutenant-colonel?
20 Q. Did your career with the Norwegian army also include service with
21 the United Nations in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Between what dates, please? When did you begin and when did you
25 A. I arrived Zagreb early, early 1995, early March.
1 Q. I'm sorry, and when -- when did you leave?
2 A. I left in 1996. I left Sarajevo mid-September 1995.
3 Q. And what was it that you were doing while you were in Sarajevo?
4 What were you doing with the United Nations?
5 A. I was an armed military observer.
6 Q. Mr. Brennskag, have you on two occasions given statements to
7 investigators from the Office of the Prosecutor of this Tribunal?
8 A. Yes. Once as far as I remember, 1996; and the last time in
9 October last year, 2006.
10 Q. And since coming to The Hague to give testimony a few days ago,
11 have you had an opportunity to read both of those statements over?
12 A. Yes, I have.
13 Q. In what language did you read them?
14 A. I wrote them in English.
15 Q. And when you read them, did you find those reports to be accurate
16 summaries of what you had said to the investigators?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. If you were asked the same questions today, would we get the
19 answers that are in those reports?
20 A. Yes, you would.
21 MR. DOCHERTY: Your Honour, at this time, I move the admission
22 into evidence of 65 ter number 2858, which is the witness' ICTY statement
23 of October 2006, and I also move the admission of 65 ter number 2859,
24 which is the witness's statement from May of 1996.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: We admit both.
1 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 2858, the statement of October 2006,
2 will be admitted as Exhibit P345. 65 ter number 2859, the statement of
3 May 1996, will be Exhibit P346.
4 MR. DOCHERTY: And may I ask the court officer to bring up the
5 Sarajevo map that has been used many times in these proceedings, 65 ter
6 number 2829.
7 Q. Mr. Brennskag, while we're waiting for the map to appear, from
8 your service in Bosnia, are you familiar with the term "modified air
10 A. Yes, I am.
11 Q. What does that term mean to you, or what sort of device does that
12 term describe to you?
13 A. It's normally a ballistic missile put on rockets device, so it
14 will not be ballistic anymore. It could be an air bomb, or up to my
15 knowledge, it also could be an artillery device.
16 MR. DOCHERTY: And I apologise, Mr. Court Officer, I asked for the
17 map under the wrong 65 ter number. It should have been 2872. I
19 Q. Mr. Brennskag, the modified air bombs that you have been
20 describing, were you ever in a position to see one launched or to see --
21 excuse me, to see one in flight?
22 A. Yes, I was.
23 Q. And when you see such a thing in flight, how can you tell that it
24 is a modified air bomb and not something else? How can you look at and
25 say, Oh, there goes a modified air bomb?
1 A. It has a smoke tail from the rocket device.
2 Q. And is there anything else that is distinctive about it?
3 A. I'm not able to answer that question.
4 Q. That's fine. Now, on the monitor in front of you is a map, and
5 I'm going to be asking you some questions about a specific day, the 28th
6 of June of 1995. Were you on duty as a United Nations Military Observer
7 on the 28th of June, 1995?
8 A. Yes, I was.
9 Q. On the map, can you tell us whereabouts you were on June the 28th
10 of 1995?
11 A. Yes. I was on the observation post of the Pofalici team. It was
12 located in the area of Vitkovac.
13 Q. And do you see on the map the area of the observation post from
14 the Pofalici team?
15 A. Yes, I do.
16 MR. DOCHERTY: Could I ask the usher to assist the witness, and
17 I'll ask you to mark the observation post with the letters OP for the
18 English "Observation Post."
19 Q. Put an X at the spot and label it OP, please.
20 A. [Marks]
21 Q. While you were on doubt at the OP that day, did you see anything
23 A. I'm not sure of the question.
24 Q. All right. You've testified a few minutes ago that you have seen
25 modified air bombs in flight. Did you have occasion to see a modified air
1 bomb at any time on 28th of June, 1995?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. All right. And where were you when you saw this modified air
5 A. I was on the OP marked on the map on Vitkovac.
6 Q. Describe, please, what you saw when you saw this modified air
8 A. I saw it was launched and I saw the flight, and I also pretty sure
9 to see where it was going to have the impact.
10 Q. All right. Let's take those up in turn. First of all, where it
11 was launched from. Can you indicate on the map in front of you the area
12 from which you saw this modified air bomb being launched?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Would you take the pen from the usher and mark the area of launch,
16 A. This would be a wide area from Ilidza, and I mark it like this.
17 Q. All right. During the time that you were in Sarajevo, did you
18 become familiar with which of the warring factions controlled what
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And did you know at the time that you were in Sarajevo who
22 controlled the territory that you have just drawn a circle around in
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Who did?
1 A. It was BSA.
2 Q. And the initials "BSA" stand for what, sir?
3 A. Bosnian Serb army.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.
5 We'll take the break now.
6 --- Recess taken at 10.30 p.m.
7 --- On resuming at 10.52 a.m.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Whiting.
9 Mr. Docherty.
10 MR. DOCHERTY: Thank you, Your Honour. I think.
11 Q. Mr. Brennskag, just before the break, you had been making some
12 markings on the map, and I just direct your attention to the circle in the
13 lower right, because on the break I was noticing - lower left, excuse me -
14 that there was a river running through that circle. Were you able to tell
15 from which side of that river the air bomb was launched on the 28th of
16 June, or can you not be more precise than the circle?
17 A. Taken in consideration that it was 12 years ago and I don't have
18 the exact report from that time, I don't want to be more accurate.
19 Q. That's fair enough, thank you.
20 Describe the flight of this air bomb, please.
21 A. I'm not sure what you want me to do.
22 Q. I'm just asking to you tell us in words, no need to mark on the
23 map and I apologise for not being clear, just tell us in words what you
24 saw when this air bomb flew through the air. What did its flight look
1 A. Well, in the first time of the flight when the rocket engine was
2 on, it's like a striped mark on the air; and afterwards when the motor is
3 off or burned out, it's not possible to see, if you are not lucky to see,
4 the shell until it's -- having its impact.
5 Q. Now, you said in your last answer that --
6 A. Sorry, I can't hear.
7 Q. Sorry. I hadn't turned my microphone on; I have now.
8 You said in your last answer that it was a straight mark on the
9 sky. You have seen -- or have you seen artillery shells in flight during
10 your military career?
11 A. I have seen mortar shells during exercise when they are -- have a
12 very high altitude, and you have everything under control. You can see a
13 black mark on the sky going up and going down.
14 Q. Is there anything different about -- between the flight of a
15 mortar shell and the flight of a modified air bomb?
16 A. Yes. If you are not lucky to look directly at where the mortar or
17 the artillery is launched, you can't see anything. If you are lucky to
18 look directly look at it, you can see the smoke from -- from the weapon,
19 but just short.
20 Q. I'm sorry. I was trying to ask was is there something different
21 between a modified air bomb, on the one hand, and an artillery shell or a
22 mortar shell, on the other hand, about the kind of path that they make
23 when they are travelling through the sky. Do you understand that
24 question, sir?
25 A. I understand. Mortar or an artillery shell have a ballistic way.
1 The rocket has not.
2 Q. When you say "a ballistic way," is it possible for you to describe
3 a bit more fully what you mean by "ballistic way"?
4 A. A mortar or an artillery shell don't have any other way of putting
5 themselves through the air than from the Howitzer or from the motor. But
6 the rocket gives - what should I say in English? - gives it power through
7 the air after leaving the Howitzer or the mortar.
8 Q. How many times during your service in Sarajevo, did you see
9 modified air bomb launches, approximately? I know it's been some years.
10 A. Approximately, four or five times.
11 Q. And were you able to, by what you saw, know that you were looking
12 at a modified air bomb launch rather than artillery or mortar or something
14 A. After the first time, you are very certain what you are -- the
15 difference between mortars, artillery, and modified air bomb.
16 Q. Let's go back to the 28th of June then. After you saw this
17 launch, did you observe an impact of a modified air bomb?
18 A. I saw an impact, yes, and it must be the modified air bomb.
19 Q. Where did you see that impact?
20 A. The impact was in the so-called TV building in Sarajevo.
21 Q. Are you familiar with the position of the TV building; and if so,
22 could you mark that on the map with an X and labelling it "TV?"
23 A. Yes. I know where the TV building is in Sarajevo, and I mark it
24 on the map.
25 Q. And if you could just label that "TV," please.
1 A. [Marks]
2 Q. When you said a minute or two ago, "it must have been the air bomb
3 that impacted the TV building," what are your reasons for making that
5 A. The conclusion comes to me because of what I saw was launched and
6 the impact just after I couldn't see the rocket smoke anymore.
7 Q. All right. Now, during your service in Sarajevo, did you ever
8 meet a Danish colleague, an UNMO named Thomas Hansen.
9 A. I can't remember the name, but for sure I could have met him.
10 Q. Okay. But no recollection as you sit here today.
11 A. No.
12 Q. To your knowledge, was that officer, Mr. Hansen, ever at the
13 Pofalici OP, where you've testified you were on duty on the 28th of June?
14 A. You mean the Vitkovac OP?
15 Q. Yes, I do.
16 A. As far as I know, I have never seen Hansen on the Vitkovac, but
17 for sure he could have been there when I was not there.
18 Q. When you were not there, of course.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not clear to me what the witness is saying.
20 Do you know Mr. Hansen.
21 THE WITNESS: No, I don't know Mr. Hansen. I could have met him,
22 but I can't remember.
23 MR. DOCHERTY: That's the point I'm trying to elicit,
24 Mr. President. I am going somewhere with this.
25 JUDGE ROBINSON: Okay, let's see.
1 MR. DOCHERTY: If I could have 65 ter number 00536, please. Oh,
2 I'm sorry.
3 Yes, could I tender the map as marked, please.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
5 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P347, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Ms. Isailovic.
7 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
8 But I have a problem with the list of documents that was
9 supposed -- that will be used with this witness. I only have three
10 documents on the list and the map. I didn't raise any objection because I
11 have the same map on my own list, but I really do not know what documents
12 we're talking about. I don't think they were supposed to be used today by
13 the Prosecution.
14 MR. DOCHERTY: May I respond, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Docherty.
16 MR. DOCHERTY: The document I have just called for is Captain
17 Hansen's special report of the 29th of June, and it is on the Defence list
18 which was released to me at the beginning of the witness's direct
19 examination. It is not on the Prosecution's list of exhibits; however, it
20 is it on the Defence list of exists. It is UNMO HQ Sector Sarajevo
21 special report on impact on TV building, I believe, it is cell number 9.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well. Let's proceed.
23 MR. DOCHERTY:
24 Q. Mr. Brennskag, do you see an United Nations report in English on
25 the left-hand side of the monitor in front of you?
1 A. Yes, I do.
2 Q. And do you see that this is prepared by a Captain T. Hansen?
3 A. Yes, I do.
4 MR. DOCHERTY: And if I might ask the court officer to go to the
5 second page of this document, in both English and B/C/S.
6 Q. And, Mr. Brennskag, I'm going to direct your attention to the
7 second-to-the last paragraph in Mr. Hansen's report. I will read it out
8 in English. "The UNMO team that normally man OP4 that looks into the area
9 was taking cover in the shelter because of shelling at the time of the
10 incident, so no information is available from the OP."
11 Have I read that accurately?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. The reference there is to "OP4," and in your testimony you have
14 spoken about the Pofalici or the Vitkovac OP. What is the relationship
15 between OP4 and the Vitkovac OP that you have been -- I'm sorry, I see
16 that is confusing you.
17 The Vitkovac OP, did it have a number?
18 A. Yes. It had OP4 and was the OP for the Pofalici team.
19 Q. All right. Going back to Captain Hansen's report, were you in
20 fact taking shelter at the time that this air bomb was launched, as it
21 says in this report?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Was there a shelter at OP4?
24 A. It was normally a family house with a basement for potatoes and
25 vegetables, and this is what they called the shelter.
1 Q. Had you ever taken shelter during your time at OP4?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Did you ever tell Captain Hansen that you were taking shelter at
4 the time of this air bomb incident regarding the TV tower?
5 A. Not as I remember.
6 Q. And, lastly, this paragraph that we've been concentrating on for
7 the past few minutes, is it in your opinion correct or incorrect?
8 A. I would not speculate in the report. For me, it's looks some
9 incorrect, yes.
10 Q. Was there anyone else on duty with you at OP4 that day when you
11 made these observations?
12 A. Yes. We were always two observers on the OP.
13 Q. All right. Had the other observer taken shelter?
14 A. No, as far as I remember.
15 Q. And who was the other observer?
16 A. I'm not able to remember it.
17 Q. And, lastly, if we could go back to the map that we had on the
18 screen, I understand it will be --
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Can he say how many soldiers were in OP4.
20 MR. DOCHERTY:
21 Q. Mr. Brennskag, can you tell us how many UNMOs were in OP4.
22 A. Two.
23 Q. Now, do you mean by that two at any given time were on duty, or
24 maybe two out of six or two out of eight, or what have you, were on duty.
25 How big was the team from which those two came?
1 A. The teams normally was eight or nine observers. On the OP, there
2 were only two at each time.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: And did he say who those two were whether he knew
4 those two.
5 MR. DOCHERTY: He was one, and he cannot recall the name of his
6 colleague, given that it has been ten years. But there was a second with
7 him that day, and I believe his testimony was neither one of them had
8 taken shelter.
9 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is it possible that some other members of the
11 UNMO team of eight might have taken shelter there without your knowing?
12 THE WITNESS: No.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Why would you say that?
14 THE WITNESS: Because the Pofalici team had their accommodation
15 fairly long away from the OP. So the OP just consisted of the house and
16 always two UNMOs when we were able to be at the OP.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: OP stands for what?
18 THE WITNESS: Observation post.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Observation post, and this house was the
20 observation post?
21 THE WITNESS: The house was the observation post; the upper floor
22 of the house was the observation post.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: And is that where you were at the time of the --
24 the flight of this air bomb?
25 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Docherty.
2 MR. DOCHERTY: Excuse me one moment, Mr. President.
3 [Prosecution counsel confer]
4 MR. DOCHERTY: I just wonder if it's possible to have the marked
5 map put back up.
6 Okay. Thank you.
7 Q. Mr. Brennskag, in front of you is the map that you marked a little
8 bit earlier - it's now in evidence - did you look at Captain Hansen's
9 report before coming to court today?
10 A. Yes. I was shown the report for two days ago.
11 Q. And in that report there is a map grid reference; do you recall
13 A. Yes, I do.
14 Q. The map that is on the screen does not have the numbers that are
15 necessary to plot a map grid reference. Am I correct in that, sir?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. All right. Were you able to work out on this map that is on the
18 monitor where a particular map reference point would be?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Could you describe to Their Honours how you went about figuring
21 out where a map reference point would be, given that this map does not
22 have the necessary numbers.
23 A. Yes. I used the map with a grid reference and found where the --
24 the spot were and compared it to this map shown on the screen, and it's
25 fairly no problems to know where it is on this grid.
1 Q. I'm going to -- since I don't want to take this map off the
2 screen, I'm going to read to you a portion of Captain Hansen' report.
3 This is one that contains the map grid reference.
4 "Heard and saw an outgoing projectile across the parking place and
5 road from grid BP 866-587." That -- you were able to plot that grid on
6 the map on the monitor?
7 A. Yes, fairly accurately.
8 Q. Could you please mark that spot with an X; and then I'll ask you
9 to label that X, "TH" for Thomas Hansen.
10 A. [Marks]
11 Q. Do you have any opinion as to the feasibility of launching a
12 modified air bomb from the spot labeled "TH" towards the TV tower or at
13 the TV tower?
14 A. I have no education how they launched the improvised air bombs.
15 But as far as I can recall, this would be a big problem.
16 Q. Why would it be a big problem, Mr. Brennskag?
17 A. It's the distances that directly hit, directly sight, a very short
19 Q. And why is it -- I'm sorry. I'm not entirely clear. Why is it a
20 big problem to fire a modified air bomb at a target that is a relatively
21 short distance away?
22 A. As I said, I have no education about how to fire it. But for me,
23 I think it would be a big problem?
24 MR. DOCHERTY: Mr. Usher. Thank you. We're finished with marking
25 the map.
1 Your Honour, I'll tender the second version of the marked map as
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: It says that he thinks it would be a big problem.
4 Why do you think it would be a big problem?
5 THE WITNESS: I don't know the answer to that, sir.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: You can't answer it. Because, as you say, you --
7 you have, as you said in your own words, no education about how who fire
8 it. Are you able to tell us what that area is that you marked "TH"? What
9 is the locality?
10 THE WITNESS: It's near the railroad and it's a main road on the
11 knot of the railroad, and there are some factory buildings or railroad
12 buildings very close to it.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is the name of the -- the district or the
14 village or the town?
15 THE WITNESS: I can't -- I can't tell you, sir. On the map, it's
16 Alipasin Most.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE ROBINSON: Can you tell us the distance between the point
19 marked "TH" and the TV tower that was hit?
20 THE WITNESS: Yes. Approximately, about 500 metres or slightly a
21 little bit more.
22 MR. DOCHERTY: May I tender the map, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P348, Your Honours.
25 MR. DOCHERTY: Mr. Usher, we're through with marking. Thank you.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Prosecutor.
3 MR. DOCHERTY: I'm sorry.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Since you are still examining in chief, I'm
5 putting my question through you, which I think is the correct thing to do,
6 and I want you to put the question to the witness so that the Chamber can
7 understand what it is the witness saw. What he has told us was that he
8 saw a modified air bomb being launched from the circle in the Ilidza area,
9 and then, as I understood it, in the straight line to the TV building.
10 And I would like you to ask the witness to confirm that this is what he
12 MR. DOCHERTY:
13 Q. A couple of questions, Mr. Brennskag. Just would you tell the
14 Chamber again in as much as detail as possible, please, what you saw of
15 this modified air bomb -- what you observed - I don't want to limit it to
16 "saw," because you may have heard things or what have you - what you
17 observed of this modified air bomb from launch to impact.
18 A. I saw a modified air bomb launched from the Ilidza area towards
19 PTT building, TV building, and I saw the rocket smoke and just afterwards
20 an impact in the TV building.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: And was it a straight line from the launching
22 point to the impact point?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: So the implication of your answer is that the
25 modified air bomb that you saw could not have passed over the point
1 identified by Captain Hansen; is that correct?
2 THE WITNESS: That's correct, sir.
3 MR. DOCHERTY:
4 Q. Now, I just want it turn back for a moment or two to this
5 question. When we asked why this would be a big problem, you said
6 partly --
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Sorry. Judge Mindua.
8 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, sorry, Mr. Prosecutor.
9 I just want to make sure of one thing. Did the witness himself
10 reach a conclusion, whatever it may have been, as to the armed group that
11 launched the bomb, because in his report he said that the modified air
12 bomb left from the Ilidza zone.
13 However, did he manage to reach a conclusion as to who launched
14 the bomb?
15 THE WITNESS: It was launched from the BSA area, Bosnian Serb army
16 area, held area.
17 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you. That's all I wanted to
18 know. Thank you.
19 MR. DOCHERTY:
20 Q. Just a couple of more questions, Mr. Brennskag, and then we will
21 be finished.
22 A few minutes ago you were answering the question about why it
23 would be a big problem to launch this air bomb from the spot marked "TH"
24 to hit the spot marked TV, and you said a couple of different things. You
25 said that you didn't have knowledge of how these things were launched, but
1 at one point you also said it was too short. When you saw four or five
2 air bombs being launched, as you've testified you saw during your time in
3 Sarajevo, can you describe the kind of flight path that you observed on
4 those four or five occasions?
5 A. Yes, I'll try.
6 They were launched in a, let's say, 45 degrees and had a fairly
7 long path. I'm not sure if I'm answering you correct.
8 Q. Let me -- let me put it this way: If an air bomb was launched
9 from the spot marked "TH," which at least on my version just went off the
10 screen. But if it was launched from the "TH" point in the direction of
11 the TV point, when it reached the TV point, what would such an air bomb be
12 doing, if it acted like the other four or five that you saw? That was
13 long question.
14 Do you understand what I'm asking?
15 A. I understand. The launch must have been horizontal, horizontal,
16 if that is the correct English word. So it would go 90 degrees towards
17 the wall or something like that.
18 Q. Did you ever observe an air bomb launched horizontally of the four
19 or five that you saw?
20 A. No.
21 Q. You testified a moment ago that they went up at about a 45 degree
22 angle. Was that true of all four or five of them?
23 A. Yes, fairly correct?
24 Q. And, lastly, did you ever see modified air bombs on the Bosnian
25 Muslim side of the confrontation lines? I mean unfired - I know you
1 investigated and saw them after they had landed - but unfired air bombs on
2 the Bosnian Muslim side.
3 A. I have never seen unfired modified air bombs on either of the
5 Q. Oh. And the air bomb incidents that you -- did you investigate
6 air bomb incidents during your time as a military observer?
7 A. Yes, two times.
8 Q. All right. And were those incidents were the impacts on the
9 Bosnian Muslim or Bosnian Serb side of the lines?
10 A. On the BiH side, the Bosnian Muslim side.
11 MR. DOCHERTY: I have no further questions, Mr. President. Thank
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic.
14 Cross-examination by Ms. Isailovic:
15 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. I am Branislava Isailovic, a lawyer at the Paris Bar, and I defend
17 the accused General Dragomir Milosevic.
18 First of all, Mr. President, I would like to address the Chamber
19 for to you decide on the use of documents offered during
20 examination-in-chief. Indeed, the Prosecutor believes he is entitled to
21 use documents offered by the Defence, and he wants to use them during
22 examination-in-chief. So I would like you to decide, is this proper, is
23 it in keeping with the rules or not, before I start with my
25 Thank you.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: It's not an objection that you raised at the
2 time. Why didn't you raise that objection at the time when it was being
4 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I waited because I
5 didn't want to interrupt the examination-in-chief. I did raise an
6 objection. I said that it was not a document on the list, and the
7 Prosecutor answered that the document was part of the Defence list, which
8 is true. Therefore, I waited until now and as for future reference,
9 because I believe this is a relevant issue.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, but you may be caught by leges.
11 Let me hear from the Prosecutor on this technical point.
12 MR. DOCHERTY: Well, in general, Mr. President, we will always put
13 on our list all of the documents that we intend to use. This, I trust,
14 will be an exception. The document was on the Defence list. I understood
15 Ms. Isailovic's objection at the time to be founded on the grounds of
16 unfair prejudice, and therefore my response that it was on the Defence
17 list was meant to say that, Well, this is a document with which the
18 Defence may be expected to be familiar.
19 I certainly would have led the evidence with or without the
20 document regarding the launching sites and so forth. So I don't know that
21 even had the submission been made and been accepted by the Chamber, it may
22 have made the chief a little by the more awkward and a little by the
23 longer. But I don't know that there would have been any more substantive
24 effect than that.
25 But, as I say, this was an exception, given that the document did
1 appear on the Defence list; and, as I say, I perhaps misunderstood counsel
2 for the Defence at the time. I was responding to what I perceived be an
3 objection premised upon unfair prejudice.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: What about their position of principle in
5 proceedings of this kind? Why shouldn't a party be able to use a document
6 that is on the exhibit list of another side? I'm not sure why not.
7 MR. DOCHERTY: I confess that I'm not sure why not either, Your
8 Honour. If the --
9 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, because -- may I --
10 may I make my submissions?
11 First of all, the Defence is under the obligation to disclose its
12 list when the witness is going to start his or her examination. So the
13 Prosecutor is not supposed to know the Defence exhibits beforehand; and to
14 say that anyway, it's in the list, in the Defence list, that is not an
15 argument because it is an erroneous argument. It may be true for us, for
16 us as, in the future, also for the Prosecution.
17 This is true for the cross-examining party, because 48 hours
18 beforehand I'm aware of the Prosecutor' list. So I do not have in my list
19 the documents that the Prosecutor is going to use in his list because any
20 way I could, and I do this systematically. In my own list, I do mention
21 this just to warn them of my interest in all these documents.
22 So here we found ourselves in a situation in which the Prosecutor
23 is asking us to protect the Prosecution's rights to allow them to use
24 documents of the Defence for examination-in-chief without prior warning.
25 Because, you see, Mr. President, Your Honours, I get prepared as we do any
1 Defence counsel, based on what is going to be put forward in the
2 examination-in-chief, and that is the way I organise my cross-examination,
3 in addition to other documents for my own case. So here --
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Sorry. But what prejudice would you suffer,
5 because this document was on your list. So that, in any event, you have a
6 familiarity with it.
7 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, yes, fortunately it
8 is the case now, but in the future it could be different. This is why I'm
9 interested in your opinion in principle; for instance, I was interested in
10 this and I prepared beforehand whilst this document was not part of the
11 Prosecution list. I, too, am interested in the subject. That is why I
12 have it in my list. Let us not forget that this witness is a 92 ter
14 We had two lengthy prior statements, including a lot of details,
15 many chapters still to come. So we're now focussing only on those
16 statements, or at least we -- we did not say a word on the statements but
17 there was an investigation. Just as well I got prepared because this is
18 what I would do as well.
19 But I want to avoid this in the future. That's why I would like
20 to know what you think. Does the Prosecutor -- or is he under the
21 obligation of disclosing or indicating to the Defence which are the
22 documents he is planning to use during examination-in-chief or not? I
23 just want to know to be on the safe side.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: But I think the answer has to do with an
25 examination of the nature of the proceedings here. The proceedings are
1 essential adversarial; but even in the classical adversarial system, I'm
2 not sure that an objection of this kind would be upheld. And it seems to
3 me that over the years the strict adversarial procedure here has been
4 modified with the adoption of many features from the inquisitorial system.
5 Because this wouldn't arise in the system with which you are familiar in
6 Paris. This issue wouldn't arise at all, I take it?
7 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we're talking about
8 the inquisitorial system which is originally mine mean and also that of
9 the accused. We have the investigating judge as an institution;
10 therefore, everything that is in the file is in the trial record. So when
11 I appear before you, everybody knows everything. There is no surprise.
12 We have the file and the file has been established by the
13 investigating judge, and it's followed to the letter. It's not up to any
14 party. Even if parties have suggestions, they must have put them to the
15 investigating judge. They must ask for various steps to be taken; and if
16 the court insists, if you your own witnesses, you have to forewarn the
18 I think the time-period is one week ahead of the hearing, so
19 everyone knows everything once you appear in court. So I believe that
20 this is precisely where the problem lies.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: We'll consider it.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, regrettably, the Chamber is not
24 with you on this point. I had described it as a technical point, because
25 what -- that may be a little unfair. You are relying on the practical
1 procedures, which the Chamber itself had set out and which we expect to be
2 followed. But those procedures are more of guidance than rules, and it is
3 always within the discretion of the Chamber to deviate from it if it
4 considers that doing would advance the interests of the case that we are
6 And I would not expect the Prosecutor to be doing this frequently;
7 but in this case, the Chamber is quite prepared to allow him to utilise
8 the document, even though it was not on his list, and for that reason to
9 that extent had you no forewarning of it. But we allow on the basis that
10 it was on your list. Therefore, we cannot see what prejudice you would
11 suffer, because would you have developed a familiarity with it, sufficient
12 to conduct your examination or to react to anything that the Prosecutor
13 led in examination-in-chief.
14 So we'll allow it. But it is not to be taken as meaning that the
15 guidelines which we set have no value. They do have value, and we expect
16 both parties to adhere to them, subject to the qualifications we have set
18 MR. DOCHERTY: Mr. President.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON Yes.
20 MR. DOCHERTY: I don't mean to unnecessarily prolong this, but I
21 do I think it is important for me to put one or two things on the record
22 in case this should ever be looked at by a different Chamber. I want it
23 to be of record that we did file a proofing note. Your Honours have not
24 seen it, but the Defence did. The contents of the proofing were
25 exclusively about the observations from OP4 on the 28th of June, of 1995.
1 And I'll also note for the record - and the transcript is page 21
2 and 22 of the last witness, Mr. Hadzihasanovic - that the last document
3 which Mr. Tapuskovic used was also not on his list, and there was no
4 objection from the Prosecution. That being said, I take Your Honours
5 point, and that is why I described it as an exception, I think, three or
6 four times.
7 This is not something to made a habit of. We understand the
8 Chamber's guidelines, and we, I think, have followed them very, very well.
9 This was one exception, and I believe it was justified by the fact that,
10 as we have said, it was on the Defence list.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is this proofing note that you filed.
12 MR. DOCHERTY: It's a short note, Your Honour. If anything -- if
13 we meet with a witness and something is -- during proofing that we feel
14 need to be disclosed, then we type up what we call an information report
15 and we send it by e-mail to counsel for the Defence. And in this case,
16 after meeting with Mr. Brennskag, I typed up such a note, and I sent it to
17 the Defence through the case manager and it concerned exclusively the
18 events of 28th June.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: When you say "filed," you mean that you sent it
20 to the Defence, not through the registrar.
21 MR. WHITING: I used the term too loosely, but it concerned the
22 did Captain Hansen ever talk to you about being under shelter. That was
23 the subject of the nature.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: So you're saying that any event the Defence did
25 have some warning of this issue.
1 MR. DOCHERTY: That is not to be taken as an excuse for not having
2 the document on the list but again it was an exception, and in this case I
3 believe a harmless one.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let us proceed, Ms. Isailovic.
5 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just one thing.
6 Mr. Docherty said something after your ruling. Can I use the same right
7 as Defence?
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: Very well, yes. But I closed the issue, but very
9 briefly. Very briefly.
10 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] So putting documents on a list, it
11 is hard for the Chamber, not only for the Defence but also for the
12 Chamber, because you also get the list of the documents that will be used
13 by both parties. We -- systemically, we send to the Prosecution and to
14 the Chamber. And regarding this report, I also placed it on my own list
15 because I plan to use it. And that way --
16 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, I have already ruled on it, and
17 you're just regurgitating arguments that we have already heard.
18 Please proceed with the cross-examination.
19 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes. Okay. To save time, I
20 prepared the two statements that have already been tendered by the
21 Prosecution, and I have hard copies because I believe it will be easier to
22 use hard copies on the screen. I have four copies. Prosecution confirmed
23 they already have their own hard copy. So I have three copies for the
24 Judges and one for the witness, and they're -- these are statements that
25 are in English.
1 Q. So first, I would like, Mr. Witness, to start with the map we have
2 on screen, number 348. I think this map is still on the screen.
3 Witness, please, on this map with a blue pen - and I would like
4 the usher to please help the witness - could you please draw the
5 trajectory that you observed from where you were in your OP; the flight
6 path, please, on the day that the impact actually occurred. Can you
7 please draw the flight path.
8 A. [Marks]
9 Q. This is the flight path, but I don't think you get the target
10 here. So maybe we should re -- re-draw the flight path because you said
11 that the target was the TV building, and the TV building is on the map
12 next to the cross that you put. And, obviously, the flight path does not
13 end on the TV building. Do you see what I mean? Do you see the TV
14 building on this map, Mr. Witness?
15 A. Yes, and I understand what you mean. Maybe my drawing is a little
16 bit too uncorrect. Okay. It's 12 years ago.
17 Q. Yes. But what you observed from OP4 is a flight path that was of
18 that distance?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Witness, what exactly did you see, except for the white smoke
22 A. Because of the smoke trail, I could clearly see from where it
23 would -- it was launched, and I could see a part of the flight path
24 because of the smoke from the rocket; and just afterwards, I saw the
25 impact in the TV building.
1 Q. But my question was whether you saw anything else other than this
2 white smoke trail.
3 A. Not as far as I remember.
4 Q. Witness, you confirmed the content of the two statements you made
5 on May 2nd, 1996 and October 25th and 26th, 2006. I'm sure that you
6 remember that you confirmed the content of these statements. Could you
7 please answer with a yes or no, so that it can be noted on the transcript?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Can you please take your 2006 statement and find page 5, paragraph
10 28. And please tell me what this paragraph means to you.
11 A. It means the same as I tried to explain. I watched the smoke of
12 the trail almost all the way, but I didn't see the smoke -- or the smoke
13 from the rocket was not all the way down to the TV building.
14 Q. Are you sure that that's what you are reading in paragraph 28?
15 A. Yes. The --
16 Q. Where did you see the word "smoke"?
17 A. No. I mean the "smoke" when I was stating I watched it almost all
18 the way.
19 Q. Witness, unfortunately, I don't speak English but what is written
20 here is "I watched it." "It" is the projectile rather than the smoke,
21 because the word "smoke" is not in your statement, or maybe I'm wrong.
22 A. I have no other answer other than I mean that I saw the smoke from
23 the projectile.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: I think what the counsel would want you to
25 explain is why you didn't say that when you gave your statement, because
1 there's no reference to any smoke in paragraph 28.
2 THE WITNESS: I have no answer.
3 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Could you please keep this paragraph on hand, and take the
5 statement of 1996. Unfortunately, the paragraphs are not marked here, but
6 I'm looking at page 4 in this statement in the middle of the page, about
7 in the middle of the first -- of this statement.
8 "[In English] The projectile was launched from the Ilidza area,
9 sure from VRS-held territory. I can be sure about this because I know
10 from where the projectile was launched."
11 [Interpretation] That's all you said. So, Witness, please, can we
12 agree to say that your knowledge of the incident increased greatly after
13 seeing the Prosecutor on March 7, 2007? Is it true to say that? Is it
14 fair to say to say that?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Witness, please, did you make a report on what you say that day?
17 A. I can't remember.
18 Q. This is extremely interesting, what happened on the TV building.
19 At first, it didn't sound like it was going to be interesting, but it's
20 getting more and more interesting.
21 So let's talk about Captain Hansen, if you allow me. You don't
22 remember his name. You might have seen him somewhere. I think that's as
23 far as it goes.
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Witness, does the name Mibub Il Alem [phoen], a
1 lieutenant-colonel, ring a bell. I believe his name is Ul Alem [phoen].
2 A. No.
3 Q. What about -- I think I'm going spell is out for the transcript,
4 S-u-n-d-q-u-e-s-t, it would be a major.
5 A. I'm not sure.
6 Q. What about Tarak Alam [phoen]?
7 A. I know a name Tarak, I think.
8 Q. Witness, please, your observation post was OP4, right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. I'm sure you knew that there was an UNMO HQ located in Sarajevo.
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Could you tell us where that HQ was located?
13 A. It was located in the former television -- no, telephone and -- or
14 we wall the PTT building, Post and Telephone building, in Sarajevo.
15 JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute, please.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, please continue.
18 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Witness, please, so there was a HQ. There were officers working
20 in that HQ. I'm sure you know that?
21 A. Yes, I know.
22 Q. Did you ever encounter these people in the PTT building?
23 A. Of course, I did.
24 Q. During your stay in Sarajevo, did you ever have to write reports
25 and hand them over to the people working in the HQ?
1 A. Yes, but not during my time in the Pofalici team. I was not a
2 senior then. So I didn't deliver reports when I was in the Pofalici team.
3 Q. Witness, could you tell us today the name of this senior person
4 who wrote those reports and handed them over to the officers in the HQ of
5 UNMOs in the PTT building?
6 A. I'm not sure if I understand your question.
7 Q. Among the members of your team at OP4, you're saying that there
8 was a person, your senior manager or something, who went to the PTT
9 building to give the reports. Could you tell us the name of your senior
10 officer in the Pofalici team?
11 A. I don't have the names at remembering here. It was different
12 senior officers, at least two times changing, while I was in the Pofalici
14 Q. We're talking about the period -- the day -- the period of June
15 28. I think you started with this position early in June. Is that it?
16 A. Earlier in June, yes.
17 Q. And when did you leave that position, that team?
18 A. Let me think. Last part of August, yeah. Maybe, yes.
19 Q. So that's a three-month period?
20 A. Yeah.
21 Q. Who was -- who were the senior officers who contacted the HQ at
22 the beginning of your stay in the Pofalici team ?
23 A. Excuse me. I have to correct myself, because I left Sarajevo in
24 the middle part of September, so it must have been earlier than the last
25 part of August that I left the team.
1 Q. Mm-hm.
2 A. Could you please ask the question -- the last question again.
3 Q. Well, when exactly did you stay in OP4? Could you give us the
5 A. We were talking about the 28th of June.
6 Q. Reformulate everything. You arrived on June 2nd at OP4. Is that
8 A. No. I arrived at Pofalici team at around the 2nd of June.
9 Q. Mm-hm. And you left -- left it before August. Is that what you
11 A. No. I said I left it before the late part of August, so maybe in
12 the middle part of August. I'm not sure of the date.
13 Q. Fine. So it's a short period of time. We're talking about two
14 and a half months. Did your senior officer who was in charge of
15 communication of the HQ change over that two-month period?
16 A. I'm not sure of your question. The senior officer or the team
17 when they were working were in contact with the UNMO HQ in the PTT
18 building very often.
19 Q. Witness, please, yourself, personally when you had something to
20 say, when you had observed something, who did you talk to? Who did you
21 report to?
22 A. It depended on what work we were on. When we were on the OP, we
23 normally reported by radio immediately. If not, it was made a statement
24 by the senior on the observation post when we left the OP and then went to
25 the PTT building.
1 Q. So regarding June 28, 1995, according to your memory, did you tell
2 what you have just explained to us here in this courtroom to anyone?
3 A. As far as I know today, yes.
4 Q. And this person that you told it to, was it a person who was
5 supposed to report this information to the HQ?
6 A. Today, yes, I suppose so.
7 Q. When you started testifying this morning, on page 34 in today's
8 transcript, line 25, you mentioned a report. You said - I'm not quoting
9 exactly - but you said: "I don't have the report with me." Were you
10 thinking of a very specific report that someone might have drafted after
11 having learned from you what you had seen on June 28, 1995?
12 A. I have no knowledge about that, so I can't answer you.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: I don't understand why you said you have no
14 knowledge. What the counsel is saying is that in your earlier testimony
15 you had mentioned a report, and she wanted more information about the
16 report. Can you -- do you remember that, when you were being questioned
17 by the Prosecutor?
18 THE WITNESS: I did not make any written report about the
19 incident, and I suppose that it was made a report, but I have never seen
20 the report.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Would you have been required to make a report in
22 the normal course of your duties about this incident?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes. Normally, yes. But I did not make the written
24 report, and I have not seen the report, until I saw the report from the
25 UNMO HQ two days ago made by the Officer Hansen.
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Do I understand then that you did make an oral
3 THE WITNESS: Yes. As far as I remember, yes.
4 JUDGE ROBINSON: To whom?
5 THE WITNESS: I can't remember.
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: How? Was that by your radio?
7 THE WITNESS: Either by the radio or when I was in PTT building.
8 JUDGE ROBINSON: On what day would that have been? The same day
9 as the incident or after?
10 THE WITNESS: It must have been the same day.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Ms. Isailovic. Sorry.
12 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Witness, please, was it sufficient
13 just to make a radio report? I imagine that seeing an air bomb was
14 something that didn't happen often. It was pretty novel for an UNMO.
15 Don't you think that would have deserved to be specifically reported in a
16 specific way?
17 THE WITNESS: It should have been, but I'm not sure if this
18 happened at this time.
19 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you Your Honours.
20 Q. So maybe we can refresh your memory. Because after what happened
21 that day, a huge investigation was launched within the UNMOs. So is that
22 helping you refresh your memory?
23 A. Yes. I know it was an investigation at the TV building because of
24 the shelling. I was not a part of the investigation, and I am not sure if
25 there were any UNMOs or other UN units who did the investigation.
1 Q. Yes, Witness, but I think we're not talking about the same thing.
2 Could you please look at paragraph 16 in the statement you gave on
3 October 2006.
4 A. Excuse me, did you say paragraph 16?
5 Q. [In English] 16. [Interpretation] Yes, 16.
6 A. From my statement 26th October 2006?
7 Q. Yes.
8 A. Yes, I see it.
9 Q. You mentioned a couple of names here that drew my attention;
10 Captain Nermen and Captain Edbu. Well, there's three names; there's also
11 Captain Goro. Do you see these three names? I don't think you had the
12 best of times with these people. This is not the best memory that you
13 have of Sarajevo.
14 A. I -- I know the names, yes, and I was working -- this was our
15 liaison officer officers from the ABiH.
16 Q. In the statement, you say that these people placed restrictions on
17 you. Do you see that in the statement, in paragraph 16?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. So I'd like to know exactly how they placed restrictions on you.
20 Can you explain?
21 A. Yes. They told us where we were not allowed to go, either on
22 investigations or to -- to check if something had happened, and we had
23 to -- not to go there, where they told you we were not allowed to go.
24 Q. Witness, you're not the first UNMO here telling us about these
25 restrictions, so could you tell -- tell us exactly how you were restricted
1 from doing whatever?
2 A. Yes, I'll try.
3 We were supposed to have freedom of movement, but we were always
4 to announce in advance where we intended to go. Normally, this was a
5 message through the liaison officers, and then if they were -- they could
6 put restrictions on us. And, normally, as I stated, they called it safety
7 measures for ourselves for our own safety. That was the reason they said.
8 Thank you.
9 JUDGE ROBINSON: What kind of relationship did you have with these
10 liaison officers?
11 THE WITNESS: Some of them had their office in the PTT building,
12 so we had to meet them sometimes.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes. But what -- what kind of relationship did
14 you have with them? Did you get along with them? Was it a good
16 THE WITNESS: I would say that they were officers, and we had a
17 normal professional officers' relationship. So we had a good talk when we
18 were talking together. No hostilities.
19 JUDGE ROBINSON: Notwithstanding the restrictions they placed on
21 THE WITNESS: No. I believe it was their job to hand over to us
22 their orders from the their subordinates.
23 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic.
24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. So, Witness, you know, I'm always thinking in legal terms. But,
1 you know, when there's a rule, if you transgress the rule, there is always
2 a sanction. So according to you, what could have been the sanction if
3 someone was not obeying the restrictions?
4 A. I would not speculate on that. I don't know.
5 Q. Personally, you always obeyed the rule.
6 A. Yes. I didn't have the arm; they had the arms.
7 Q. I forgot to ask you that question. So they were armed on top of
9 A. Normally, in the army they are armed.
10 Q. Witness, earlier, when I asked you about the investigation, I was
11 not talking about the investigation after the incident with the crater
12 analysis and so on. All this has been done, I know. But I was talking
13 about an investigation conducted within your institution, the-- within the
14 UNMO institution, investigation among different officers after June 28th.
15 I think this investigation lasted a week. Do you have any
16 recollection of this inquiry, of this internal inquiry, at the centre of
17 which was Captain Hansen?
18 A. I -- as far as I remember, I was not a part of this internal
19 investigation. And I didn't -- and today I don't remember if it was an
20 internal investigation.
21 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, we'll adjourn now for the break.
22 --- Recess taken at 12.21 p.m.
23 --- On resuming at 12.47 p.m.
24 JUDGE ROBINSON: Before you continue, Ms. Isailovic, I'll just
25 give a decision on the Prosecution's partly confidential motion for
1 protective measures for witnesses W-32, W-57, and W-95.
2 In that motion, the Prosecution requested that each witness be
3 assigned a pseudonym, be allowed to testify with image distortion, and
4 that W-57, in addition, be allowed to testify with voice distortion. The
5 Prosecution attached a confidential Annex setting out the circumstances
6 supporting the requests for protective measures. The Defence did not
7 respond to the motion, but the Defence has on certainly occasions
8 indicated that as a matter of principle, it does not object to the
9 granting of protective measures, so long as such measures do not
10 completely exclude the public.
11 In light of all the circumstances, including the submissions made
12 by the Prosecution and the contents of the Annex and also in light of the
13 relative provisions of the statute and its Rules, the Chamber grants the
15 Please continue, Ms. Isailovic.
16 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Witness, before the break, we mentioned this internal
18 investigation of which you say you were not a part of; is that right?
19 A. As far as I remember, I was not a part of it.
20 Q. Were there possibly rumours circulating among the UNMO soldiers,
21 since - how shall I put it? - some kind of force was used against your
23 A. No, not that I remember.
24 Q. Do you remember that among the officers in the UNMO HQ, there was
25 an officer in charge of relationships with the PO teams?
1 A. No, I only know about the liaison officer. I called the liaison
2 officer -- offices in the PTT building. I don't remember and I don't
3 understand what you are meaning.
4 Q. What I mean is this: Among the UNMO people working in the
5 headquarters, there was somebody who was in charge of giving instructions
6 to the people manning the POs, including yours. Is that right? A kind of
7 operational officer.
8 A. Oh, yes. It was an operational officer in the UNMO HQ, yes.
9 Q. Do you know his name by any chance?
10 A. For two days ago, I wrote a statement from 1995 where it was
11 stated that Hansen was the operational officer, but I couldn't remember it
13 Q. Let us return to what you saw on that day. It can be said today
14 that all you saw was this white smoke, the white trail of smoke?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. More specifically, you saw the white trail of smoke coming from a
17 specific direction; is that right?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. On that day, did you see only one white smoke trail?
20 A. I can't remember. It was more shelling that day, but I can't
21 remember more than one smoke trail.
22 Q. Do you remember at what time you saw the white trail of smoke?
23 A. Not -- no. Not until I saw the HQ statement of the 29th of June,
24 where it was said that it was in the morning, but I couldn't myself
1 JUDGE ROBINSON: Is your evidence that you did not remember the
2 time when you saw the white trail of smoke until you saw the HQ statement
3 of the 29th, which said it was in the morning?
4 THE WITNESS: The statement said it was, I think it was 9.20 in
5 the morning, and that of course I couldn't remember before.
6 JUDGE ROBINSON: What is that you can't remember? That it
7 occurred in the morning or the time at which it occurred?
8 THE WITNESS: In which time of the day it occurred. If it was
9 9.00, 10.00, 11.00, I simply couldn't rather.
10 JUDGE ROBINSON: I see, okay.
11 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation].
12 Q. Precisely. Going in the same direction, what statement are you
13 speaking of? When did you state that it was at 9.20?
14 A. When I saw the report from the UNMO HQ two days ago, it was dated
15 9.20, and this is not my remembrance.
16 Q. So here before the Chamber, it can be said that in the two
17 statements used here you never made any mention of the exact time when you
18 saw the bomb as it was launched from Ilidza?
19 A. I can't remember that I have stated the exact time. I can't
21 Q. And I do take note of this. In your statements, there's no
22 mention of that.
23 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the witness be shown the
24 map, P348. I started annotating or marking with you. I want to keep it,
25 or save it, please, Mr. Registrar.
1 Mr. President, I'd like it tender this map into evidence with the
2 additional marking made by the witness.
3 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
4 THE REGISTRAR: As D114, Your Honours.
5 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] I will ask my case manager to
6 display 65 ter document 297.
7 Q. Witness, please, have a look at your statement made in 1996, and
8 please go to page 3, third paragraph.
9 Did you find the paragraph? It starts with: "We could see."
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And you mentioned the air bombs that were launched from the
12 VRS-held territory. Further on, you speak about mortars which you saw
13 fired from the Bosnian government's side. Is that so?
14 A. Sorry, could you please say again?
15 Q. The second sentence in this paragraph starts with the following
16 words: "What concerns what I could see."
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Mm-hm. Further on, you state that close to your OP there was an
19 ABiH T55 tank, and you say that you never say it fired -- or fire?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. This is my first question. Did you always keep an eye on this
23 A. No. But what I say, I never saw it being firing.
24 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we now zoom in to enlarge the
25 map so as to see the central part of it. Could we take it down a little,
1 scroll it down, yes.
2 Q. You, as an officer, can you find your way on this military map?
3 A. Yes. It's a little by the unclear on the screen, but of course I
4 can find my way.
5 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Now, could we scroll it down a
6 little and then enlarge the part where we see 102. Yes, the part that is
8 Q. Do you recognise -- can you see Sarajevo?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Around the word "Sarajevo," can you see various markings?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Can you maybe see one mention indicating heavy weaponry?
13 A. It's unclear for me. Is it possible to scroll it more down,
15 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, scroll it down, but also
16 zoom in just to enlarge it.
17 Q. Look at these markings, the various signs on this -- or icons on
18 this map.
19 A. What kind of marking do you mean?
20 Q. I mean all these markings. Among them can you find any showing
21 the positions of heavy weapons, mortars, tanks, and so on.
22 A. I'm not familiar with those markings, so I can't say for sure
23 if -- if I have a pen, I could --
24 Q. Mm-hm.
25 A. I'm not certain because I'm not familiar with the -- with this
1 kind of military markings. But over here it's stated "155," and I'm not
2 sure if this is a 155 military -- artillery. So I can't say. I can't
4 Q. Well, let's move on.
5 In your prior statement, in paragraph 24 to start with, this is
6 the statement you made in 2006 where the various paragraphs are numbered.
7 The first words of that paragraph are: "The Bosnians often fired."
8 A. Yeah.
9 Q. 24. Indeed, you speak of mortars here that were positioned close
10 to the -- or near the PTT building. Is that correct?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. Towards the end of that paragraph, you say this: "[In English]
13 Military position within civilians areas, which is something they should
14 not have done."
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. [Interpretation] As an officer, could you be more specific. What
17 does this mean to you?
18 A. It means to me, if you, for example, establish a smaller HQ in a
19 flat or a basement where civilian people are living, I would not be
20 allowed to do that, and I should not do that. That's what I mean here.
21 Q. During your tour in Sarajevo, in the part of the territory held by
22 the ABiH, did you realise there was such positions of HQ in civilian
23 buildings or as you say here in this paragraph that there were mortars
24 positioned near the PTT building? Were you able to see, to observe that?
25 A. I was able to see firing from -- mortars from this car junkyard.
1 Q. In the last sentence of paragraph 24, which military positions
2 specifically are you speaking about?
3 A. I'm talking about small HQs. That's what I remember. That I
4 was -- when I was stating this, it is fairly close to where people are
6 Q. So between these HQs, as you say, were there soldiers that would
7 circulate between them?
8 A. I don't understand what you are meaning.
9 Q. Military personnel, ABiH soldiers, say, would they go to these
11 A. I have no personal knowledge, but I suppose so.
12 Q. During your tour of service, as of the 2nd of June, were you able
13 to observe the presence of soldiers in the centre of Sarajevo, in the part
14 that was held by the ABiH?
15 A. Excuse me. Do you mean soldiers in uniform or soldiers battling
16 or in positions?
17 Q. Well, Witness, you know what a soldier is. A soldier, in my view,
18 is somebody carrying a weapon. He may not necessarily be wearing a
19 uniform, but uniform, weapons, anything that is -- shows that a person is
20 not a civilian individual.
21 A. Yes. During my time in Sarajevo, I saw several times soldiers in
22 uniform, yes.
23 Q. Witness, do you recall a time during your mission, so starting on
24 the 2nd of June, and that would be around the 15th of June, do you recall
25 intense military activities throughout the territory of Sarajevo held by
1 the ABiH, but also on the territory held by the VRS, or BSA?
2 A. I'm not sure of the date. I'm not sure.
3 Q. Still, around that time, in that period from the 2nd of June
4 until, as we established, mid-August 1995, was that a period of more
5 intense military activities?
6 A. It escalated and the military activity was very high up to the
7 middle part of August, I think.
8 Q. Witness, do you remember that during that period UNMOs were not
9 authorised to go on their own initiative to the Sarajevo hospitals or in
10 that part of Sarajevo that was controlled by the ABiH?
11 A. No, I don't remember.
12 Q. Well, go to your first statement, the one made in 1996. The
13 paragraphs are not numbered. That is towards the end of page 3.
14 We're going to speak about this: I quote: "I investigated two
15 impacts of these modified air bombs. [In English] We were not allowed to
16 go to the hospital."
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. [Interpretation] Did that happen only once? Were you not allowed
19 to go to the hospital only once?
20 A. I don't remember, but this special occasion I remember because I
21 was a part of it.
22 Q. Precisely, Witness. Let us speak about this incident that
23 occurred on the 22nd of June, 1995, in the Geteova Street. This is what
24 you said. Do you remember the name of that street?
25 A. I'm not sure the name of the street, but it's in the vicinity of
1 Alipasino Polje.
2 Q. Do you have a more specific recollection of this incident?
3 A. Yes. I was not on OP that day, so me and I think two of my
4 colleagues were designated to investigate the impact in Alipasino Polje.
5 Q. Witness, you speak about this incident in both statements. We've
6 just seen this in the first statement, and now this has jogged your
7 memory. Your second statement in paragraph 25, there's also reference to
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 Microphone, please.
11 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Before moving to the second
12 statement, could the witness tell us why he was not authorised to go to
13 hospitals. That's page 3 of his statement.
14 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel, please. Counsel,
16 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Witness, you heard the question put by Judge Mindua. So in your
18 view, and as far as you recall, what was the reason: Why weren't you able
19 to visit hospitals?
20 A. At that incident, we were not allowed to go to the hospital as far
21 as I know, and I don't know why, and I don't know the reason.
22 Q. So who told you not to go there?
23 A. As far as I know, it was the local Sarajevo police who were also
24 investigating the same incident.
25 Q. Is it the members of this local police who forebade you to go to
1 the hospital?
2 A. As far as I know today, I think it was the local police at the
4 Q. Witness, please, I know this -- this dates back a long time, but
5 do you remember the moment you arrived on site? First question: Did
6 anyone call you there?
7 A. Yes. We were called to do the investigation by the UNMO HQ.
8 Q. When you arrived on the site, do you recall anything -- or rather,
9 do you recall the people that you might have seen on the site?
10 A. When I arrived the site, they were just about to take away a girl
11 under a blanket and I remember her father. He was very upset.
12 Q. Witness, do you remember the people who carried that little girl
13 under the blanket?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Do you -- did you see what was under the blanket, or did you just
16 see the blanket that was covering the body?
17 A. No. I saw it was a young girl.
18 Q. In your statement, you say that you were not allowed to take
19 photographs on the site. Is that true?
20 A. That's true.
21 Q. Witness, that day, did you see anyone else taking photographs on
23 A. Yes. The Sarajevo police, who made also a parallel investigation,
24 had photo on the scene.
25 Q. Do you remember the marks that this air bomb might have left on
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Where were they located?
4 A. On the -- on the road, asphalt road or tarmac road.
5 Q. Witness, did you see the marks of the impact on the wall of the
6 building that was located close to that impact site that you just
8 A. Not as far as I remember.
9 Q. And after your investigation on the site, you noted that this bomb
10 that fell and left markings on the -- in the asphalt definitely killed
11 people who were in the building. That was the result of the
13 A. No, not the result of our investigation. We investigated the
14 impact on the road.
15 Q. But as a person involved in the investigation, do you find it
16 feasible that the shrapnel of a bomb that would have fell outside a
17 building would kill people that would be inside a building located close
18 to the first impact site?
19 MR. DOCHERTY: Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Docherty.
21 MR. DOCHERTY: I object to the question that was just put as
22 misstating the witness's answer. The sequence of questions was: Did your
23 investigation show that people were killed inside the building; the answer
24 was no. And then as though the answer had been yes, counsel puts the
25 question; is it feasible that the impact on the road would have killed
1 people inside the building, when the witness has said that his
2 investigation did not show such a thing.
3 So I object to the question being put, because there's not an
4 adequate predicate for it in the witness's first answer.
5 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic. Perhaps you should reformulate
7 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, maybe I will
8 reformulate the question on the possibility that this witness would be
9 able to actually investigate anything, because I based myself on what --
10 on his own experience.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, reformulate the question then.
12 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. So, according to your experience, you carried out investigations
14 on impact sites. How -- according to your experience, how can fragments
15 or shrapnel coming from a projectile kill anyone who was located behind
16 some kind of barrier, for example, behind a wall?
17 A. I would not speculate on -- on that. Because on this scene, we
18 were investigating the impact and what we saw around the impact, and I saw
19 one girl being taken away. Thank you.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Surely, Mr. Brennskag, maybe I should put my
21 question through counsel. If you could please put the question do him
22 that if he were to determine the direction of the origin of the fire, he
23 would have had to examine also the marks left on the wall, of the
24 shrapnels. I think the witness has already said that he did not do that,
25 so that's one point of clarification.
1 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Judge Harhoff. That
2 was exactly my line of questioning.
3 Q. So you heard the question from Judge Harhoff. During your
4 investigation to determine where the shot came from, did you also take the
5 impacts that might have existed on the walls located around the place
6 where the projectile landed?
7 A. I understand the question. As far as I know, of course, when you
8 are investigating an impact, you have to look for shrapnels in the nearby
9 areas so you are very sure of -- from where the direction -- the direction
10 the impact is coming. I can't remember what -- if we did that on the
11 walls at this incident. I can't remember.
12 JUDGE ROBINSON: Ms. Isailovic, one hour and 20 minutes had been
13 allocate the for you. You have about another five minutes left of that.
14 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, if I -- by your
15 leave, if I could please have little more time to finish off. I don't
16 really have many topics to cover.
17 JUDGE ROBINSON: You haven't waited for me to grant the request or
18 to decide whether to grant it. We will grant it, but on no account are we
19 going to have this witness carried over.
20 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you. I apologise for this.
21 Q. So, Witness, regarding this very specific incident, we, in this
22 courtroom, have really looked into this incident, and this is what I'm
23 interested in: If victims were behind a wall, would the fragment have to
24 go through that wall, penetrate the wall and go through the wall in order
25 to injure the people who were located on the other side of the wall?
1 A. This will only be speculation. Yes, of course, it could be a
2 mirror, a thin wall, depends. This is only speculations, and I don't like
3 to make speculations.
4 Q. From what I understand, the fragment will have to penetrate the
5 wall, in the first place, to hit someone that would be located behind the
7 A. I don't want to answer because this is speculations. I don't know
8 anything about it, at that specific location.
9 Q. Witness, what exactly did you do on the site?
10 A. Briefly, we made a crater analysis; and through these analysis, we
11 could find from where the region from where the bomb was launched, just
12 the direction.
13 Q. Did you draw these conclusions on that very day?
14 A. Oh, yes. We draw the conclusion of the direction on the scene.
15 Q. Did you do this jointly with the civilian police?
16 A. No. We made our own investigation without inference with the
17 Sarajevan police. Afterwards, we were talking together, of course, and
18 they had the same conclusion. So we were not interfered with when we were
19 doing our job.
20 Q. Regarding the little girl, did you know whether she had been
21 killed or injured only?
22 A. For my own knowledge, she could -- because I didn't see the
23 injuries under the blanket, from my own knowledge, she could only have
24 been - well, only - had been injured. But afterwards through -- I know
25 that she was killed.
1 Q. On the site, did anyone tell you where that little girl was when
2 the incident occurred?
3 A. Yeah. Her father, of course.
4 Q. What did he tell you?
5 A. He told us that her girl -- his girl was killed.
6 Q. Did he tell you where she was when she was killed?
7 A. I can't remember now exactly, but I -- so I can't say.
8 Q. But maybe someone else might have told you afterwards?
9 A. I don't understand the question. I -- I said that her father, of
10 course, was talking and said that his girl were killed, but I didn't see
11 it myself that she was dead.
12 Q. Maybe you remember that you were told she was in her bed.
13 A. No.
14 Q. Now, one last topic. When you took over your position, when you
15 started working in Bosnia, you were first in Pale. Is that true?
16 A. That's correct.
17 Q. In the two statements that you gave you're also talking about
18 this. And regarding Pale, you -- your impressions were not very good,
19 rather bad.
20 A. Hmm. I have no bad, especially bad memories from my time in Pale.
21 So I don't know what you are up to -- asking me for.
22 JUDGE ROBINSON: Let's move on and conclude now, Ms. Isailovic.
23 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. First, in your statement of 1996 on page 2, on paragraph 3, you're
25 talking about your experience in Pale. But at the end of the -- middle of
1 the page when talking about the heavy weapons collection points, do you
2 know -- did you find that? It's on the statement of 1996, second page,
3 and it's the third paragraph.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You're talking on that second page about the heavy weapons
6 collection points --
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. -- located on the Serbian side. And are you saying: "[In
9 English] From collection points, weapons were not removed."
10 A. Yes. It is so that when we were supposed to inspect the weapon
11 collection points, we have to make an announcement in good advance; and
12 the times when we were able to inspect the weapon collection points, the
13 weapons and the vehicles that should be there were there then.
14 Q. But you were not really free to move around. You had restrictions
15 imposed on you, like what happened on the BiH side?
16 A. Yes. We had a lot of restrictions, so we -- and especially we had
17 to make announcement in good time advance before we had to move or make
18 our inspections.
19 Q. You're also talking about the helicopter that was supposed to
20 evacuate the seriously wounded people towards -- to Serbia or to Belgrade?
21 A. This is one of the tragic memories. At that time, it was no-fly
22 zone, but there was agreement that the Bosnian Serbs could take their
23 seriously sick people who needed treatment to Belgrade. I think it was
25 And in my location, we had a small hospital in Pale; and then it
1 was a bigger hospital - I think it was originally for mentally sick
2 people - in Sokolovic, and on announcement to the UN, the Bosnian Serbs
3 had a helicopter taking the patients from Pale. They were landing
4 sometimes at Sokolovic and taking patients to Belgrade. I think it was
5 Belgrade. And our mission was to -- to check that this transport was in
6 order to the agreements.
7 JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.
8 Ms. Isailovic, you have to end now.
9 Any re-examination?
10 MR. DOCHERTY: None, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ROBINSON: None. Thank you.
12 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Witness.
13 JUDGE ROBINSON: Witness, that concludes your evidence. Thank you
14 for coming to the Tribunal to give it.
15 We will adjourn now and you may leave with us. We'll resume on
16 Monday at 9.00 a.m.
17 [The witness withdrew]
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.42 p.m.,
19 to be reconvened on Monday, the 12th day of March,
20 2007, at 9.00 a.m.