1 Wednesday, 11 July 2007
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.03 a.m.
6 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
7 I would like to welcome the Prosecution as well as the Defence
9 Good morning, Witness.
10 This morning, the Presiding Judge is not able to sit. I will,
11 therefore, temporarily be the Presiding Judge under Article 13 bis of the
12 Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Chamber believes that it can sit in
13 the interest of justice with two Judges, and so, therefore, we will resume
14 the hearing of the present witness.
15 I will now hand the floor to Mr. Sachdeva from the Prosecution who
16 will continue his cross-examination.
17 Mr. Sachdeva, you have the floor.
18 MR. SACHDEVA: There seems to be a problem with the microphones.
19 Good morning, Mr. President, good morning, Your Honour.
20 WITNESS: KOSTA KOSOVIC [Resumed]
21 [Witness answered through interpreter]
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Sachdeva: [Continued].
23 Q. Good morning, Mr. Kosovic. I hope that you had a good rest last
25 A. Thank you.
1 Q. I shan't be too long with you today, so you will be able to leave
2 hopefully quite soon.
3 I just want to start off with what you were saying yesterday about
4 -- you remember you were talking about how the other side also opened
5 fire on the area where you lived in Alipasino Polje. You remember talking
6 about that?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And just so we -- just so there can be no confusion, when you say
9 "the other side," I presume that you speak about the Bosnian Serb forces,
10 the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps forces?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. And you remember yesterday when you were asked that question and
13 your answer -- I think you indicated that you were -- you were able to see
14 where some of the shells had landed in Alipasino Polje. Did I understand
15 correctly that's what you said?
16 A. You mean from the Serb territory?
17 Q. Yes, I'm talking about how -- I'm talking about the shells that
18 came from the Serb territory into Alipasino Polje.
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. If -- and you remember that you marked -- you made some markings
21 on a photograph yesterday. You remember that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. If I was to ask you to mark on that photograph where you saw
24 or where you noticed the shells landing in Alipasino Polje from the
25 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, would you be able to do that? Would that be an
1 exercise that you could do?
2 A. I can do it.
3 Q. Okay.
4 A. But ...
5 Q. I'll just ask for the photograph to be brought up on the screen.
6 MR. SACHDEVA: If we could have Prosecution Exhibit 812 brought
7 up, please.
8 Q. Mr. Kosovic, sir, the photograph is just coming in a second,
9 so ...
10 Now, do you see the photograph on the screen, sir?
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. And I understand that the top of the photograph beyond the red
13 line, that's the apartment complex you lived at, isn't it?
14 A. The part of the town where I resided was behind this line, behind
15 these high-rise buildings that you can see in the photo.
16 Q. And is it the case, sir, that the shells that came from the
17 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps side landed within that complex, within the
18 complex you lived at?
19 A. Let me first explain the configuration and the position of the
20 neighbourhood where I resided.
21 Behind these white or high-rise buildings that can you see in the
22 photo there is the so-called B-phase of Alipasino Polje and I resided in
23 B-phase in Zavnobih square. Below that square going towards the high-rise
24 buildings that can you see in the photo, there is a free space with the
25 children's playgrounds, a park and so on and so forth. And then there is
1 my street, i.e., Zavnobih square. I resided on the 7th floor. Since the
2 7th floor is somewhat larger and commands a good view of the high-rise
3 buildings, that's why I had an opportunity to observe what I described for
4 you yesterday.
5 Q. Very well. So what you said yesterday was that the -- the
6 artillery fire or the shells that came from the Bosnian Serb side landed
7 -- is it your evidence that they landed or they hit the area where the
8 park was, the area where your flat was. Is that correct?
9 A. Correct. Most of the shells fell precisely in the area around the
10 park, the playground or across the buildings and landed in the very large
11 Zavnobih square. I remember only one shell hitting the house itself.
12 Q. And I recall yesterday that you -- you said -- you told the Court
13 that in that area, in those buildings, largely civilians lived there. In
14 other words, women, children, elderly persons. You recall telling the
15 Court that yesterday?
16 A. Correct.
17 Q. Now --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness's microphone, the right hand
19 microphone be turned off, please.
20 MR. SACHDEVA:
21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
22 A. I told you that civilians resided in these buildings here. What
23 happened was when there was shelling when the war started, the buildings
24 that are exposed towards the territory of Nedzarici from which the Serbs
25 shelled, that there were no longer any civilians there.
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Could the witness be taken care of.
2 Could the microphone of the witness be taken care of, correction.
3 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In other words, there were no
6 Maybe I please continue?
7 MR. SACHDEVA:
8 Q. Let's just try and take this slowly, sir.
9 You see the blue circle here that you drew yesterday?
10 A. Yes.
11 MR. SACHDEVA: I see counsel rising.
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
13 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, yes.
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President before your
15 intervention the witness said that when the conflict started the civilians
16 moved out from these buildings and this has not been recorded in the
17 transcript. Page 5 line 2, he said that when the conflict started the
18 civilians moved out from these buildings, however, this has not been
19 recorded and this was before your intervention, immediately before your
20 intervention, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. Now it is
22 in the transcript.
23 You may go on, please.
24 But the microphone of the witness, is it taken care of, Mr.
1 Very well. Please go on.
2 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you.
3 Q. Sir, you recall the blue circle, the apartment blocks within the
4 blue circle. Remember we did that exercise yesterday?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And I also asked you while you were living in Alipasino Polje or I
7 -- yes, I asked you whether civilians lived in those apartment complexes
8 and you told the Court indeed that was correct. You remember that?
9 A. Yes, but ...
10 Q. I wanted to ask you. You said that the -- the fire from the
11 Bosnian Serb side came from Nedzarici?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And I take it, it was common knowledge amongst the people that
14 lived in Alipasino Polje that that was where the fire was coming from. In
15 other words, Nedzarici, the Bosnian Serb army in Nedzarici were firing
16 upon Alipasino Polje. I take it that was common knowledge?
17 A. I assume that, although I did not see exactly where the shells
18 came from. They sometimes came from other directions, but from Nedzarici
19 as well.
20 Q. And apart from the -- the unfortunate situation that you had
21 to deal with with respect to your detention, living in that area, I take
22 it you and just as the other civilians, irrespective of ethnicity that
23 lived in Alipasino Polje, were suffering from the regular fire that was
24 coming from the other side during the conflict. Is that right?
25 A. That is correct. We all suffered. But if you will allow me, we
1 have not finished with this neighbourhood. I would like to provide some
2 more explanation. Yesterday I told that you civilians resided here. I
3 meant that they had resided there before the war as I already told you.
4 Those were all civilians, family -- families, and when the operation
5 started, the civilians moved out. I had an occasion to see civilians
6 coming back to their apartments later in the day probably to take some
7 provisions and then they would leave. Apart from that, the civilians did
8 not reside there anymore during the war. And I can also tell that you
9 this white block of buildings that is called Alipasino Polje, this was no
10 longer a residential block. This was a front line. This is where troops
11 and policemen with infantry weapons were deployed. There were also some
12 machine-guns. I could see, personally, men in twos carrying machine-guns
13 up the stairs, and when the shooting started from these buildings, that
14 would result in return fire, of course.
15 Q. But, sir, let's -- let's be clear here. The area where you lived
16 in during the conflict up until May 1994, you are not surely telling the
17 Court that in that apartment complex no civilians lived there? You're not
18 saying that, are you?
19 A. There were no civilians who resided in this neighbourhood and in
20 the white buildings that you can see in the photo. The white high-rise
21 buildings, that is.
22 Q. Sir, the -- the buildings that we can see behind the red line, I
23 take it that there are roughly 15 to 20 floors on each building. Is that
25 A. Yes. Between 15 and 20, I would say, roughly.
1 Q. And on each floor, and again I'm suggesting roughly, on each floor
2 there must have been about five to six apartments on each floor?
3 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the witness said
5 between 10 and 15 which has been recorded as between 15 and 20 in the
6 record. This is a major difference.
7 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, that's quite right. I also
8 heard from 10 to 15 floors.
9 Is that right, 10 to 15 floor, sir?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
11 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. So now, it's in the
13 Mr. Sachdeva.
14 MR. SACHDEVA:
15 Q. Sir, I asked you with respect to the apartment buildings, I
16 understand that on each floor there must have been about five or six
17 apartments -- flats on each floor, is that right, roughly?
18 A. Approximately four apartments or five. It depended on the design
19 of the building.
20 In my building, on my floor, there were four apartments.
21 Q. So, roughly, for each of these buildings and we see a whole line
22 of them on the photograph, there would have been space for about 40 to 60
23 households. You would agree with that?
24 A. Well, this would not be an exact number, but it is possible.
25 Q. Yes, roughly. And so in -- in the buildings we see above the red
1 line, of course I can't see completely, but I take it there were about
2 seven to eight of these buildings, is that right, or maybe there were
4 A. I don't know exactly how many buildings there were. Those were
5 blocks which are interrupted here and there. I never counted them.
6 Q. But we can agree that there were more than five.
7 A. Well, yes.
8 Q. So that would be, in my calculation, space for roughly 300 to 350
9 households. You would agree with that?
10 A. Well, let me say I agree, although I'm not sure about the number
11 of residents or households.
12 Q. Yes, but this is just an approximation, of course, sir, I
14 So we're agreeing that possible 300 to 350 household could have
15 been accommodated in those apartment blocks. Now --
16 A. Perhaps.
17 Q. Sir, I suggest to you that during the conflict if not 350 or 400
18 households, certainly well above 200 households, including women and
19 children continued to live in those buildings during the conflict. Are
20 you still saying that that is not correct?
21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
23 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] The witness answered and drew the
24 line. He spoke about life behind these buildings and he said precisely
25 that in the buildings immediately behind the red line, there were no
1 civilians at all. That people who moved out because these buildings were
2 the positions of those people who did what they did. And he said,
3 categorically, that in the first line in the first row of buildings there
4 were no civilians. He was talking about the life of the people who
5 resided behind that line.
6 The question that my learned friend is putting to the witness now
7 should be put in the perspective of the witness's previous answer.
8 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Sachdeva I'm listening to you.
9 MR. SACHDEVA: With respect to my learned friend, I don't accept
10 the objection. I'm speaking about the apartment buildings beyond, in
11 other words, at the top of the photograph where the witness lived. And I
12 understood that the witness has been saying that -- that no civilians
13 lived there. So I'm just probing the witness and I'm trying to really
14 understand on what basis he is saying that and I'm suggesting obviously
15 something different. And in my submission, this is the normal course of
17 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] I believe that we understand each
18 other. You may continue.
19 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 Q. Mr. Kosovic, I'm sorry about the interruption but if we could just
21 go back to my question. What I'm suggest to you, sir, is the buildings
22 beyond the red line, in other words on the top of the photograph where you
23 lived, I'm suggesting to you that during the conflict, during the time you
24 were in Alipasino Polje, civilians continued to live there?
25 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, you can see I'm
3 sure, that the witness put a circle beyond the line, and that he said that
4 he resided in the building beyond the line. The house where he resided
5 was behind these buildings. Not for a single moment did he say that he
6 lived anywhere in front of that front line. He resided behind it.
7 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I have been --
8 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] One moment, yes go ahead, please.
9 MR. SACHDEVA: In my submission, Mr. President I have been
10 extremely clear. I said -- and I'm talking about that very area. I said
11 with respect -- I'm speaking about the apartment blocks beyond, in other
12 words, at the top of the photograph where the witness lived. At the top
13 of the photograph is, in my submission, beyond the red line, which is
14 where the witness has said he lived.
15 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, the witness told us
16 clearly that he lived above the red line or beyond the red line, because
17 we do have that red line that's on top of the page and then above the red
18 line there's a circle, if you will, with a blue line, or under the red
19 line, rather, you have a blue circle and he did not live there. This is
20 what the witness said and we all agree on that fact.
21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, ask the witness he
22 said it categorically, and this has been recorded that he resided behind
23 the front line. Behind the high-rise buildings in the back. He said it
24 categorically. That's why you put a circle marking a building behind the
25 line. He marked a whole block of lines which held the positions of the
1 BiH army and he never said that he resided in any of these buildings.
2 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] But I think that the confusion
3 stems from those words beyond and behind and in front. But it's not
4 really useful to put the question to the witness. It's all very clear.
5 We have circles. We do understand. But yes, go ahead, I'm listening.
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Judge Mindua, in the
7 record an indication is made of the lines and we're talking about
8 buildings here. In the record, it says lines all the time. It doesn't
9 say buildings anywhere.
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: Can I suggest we stop this and continue, Mr.
12 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you. Thank you, Your Honour, Judge Harhoff.
13 Q. It's, in fact, it's not even in my submission important where the
14 witness lived.
15 I'm simply suggesting to you, sir, these buildings on the
16 photograph, sir, you see the buildings on top of the photograph. You
17 can't see them completely, but we see a set of apartment complexes. You
18 see those buildings?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And it was in reference to those buildings that I asked you
21 questions about the space in those buildings, how many apartments there
22 were on each floor. And I understand we came to agreement that there must
23 have been space for 250 to 300 households, roughly. And we agree on that,
24 don't we?
25 A. Well, this might have been the case, or maybe not, I don't know.
1 I never really counted head. To be honest, I was more interested in
2 something else, the Defence counsel said it very well. Behind the white
3 high-rise buildings was my neighbourhood, the second phase of Alipasino
4 Polje. In this neighbourhood, there is the so-called Zavnobih square
5 where I resided on the 7th floor. And I can tell you that the
6 configuration of the terrain was different than the configuration of the
7 terrain where these white high-rise buildings were. I was on the 7th
8 floor and I had an occasion to see everything, when residents entered the
9 house, when sniper shooters entered the house, when they were bringing
10 weapons, and when civilians came late in the afternoon, individually,
11 probably to take things out of their apartments, the things that they
12 might have needed.
13 Q. Sir, thank you for that. I'm still putting my question to you
14 that in those buildings and in the area where you lived during the time
15 you were there at the conflict, I'm suggesting to you that civilians
16 continued to live there. Now, are you saying that -- are you saying that
17 that is not right, that no civilians -- that the whole complex which could
18 hold up to about 500 families, no one lived there? Is that what you're
19 saying? Is that really your evidence, sir?
20 A. I personally heard or I -- stories from people who used to live.
21 There they never went there by day. They were at Zavnobih square, life
22 went on there, because this was sheltered because of the high-rise
23 buildings and nobody fired on that area. The shells from the Serb
24 territory fell where the military -- where the troops were deployed and
25 not here where I was. As I have already told you, throughout the war I
1 only saw one shell hit a house and nobody was killed there. There were no
2 victims. And I heard from the people who lived there --
3 Q. I'm not asking you about the shelling. I'm simply asking you
4 about who lived in Alipasino Polje and in your area, and I'm suggesting to
5 that you civilians lived there. You told me, yes, that they lived there
6 or are you saying now that that's not correct. Or are you saying that
7 civilians continued to live there, women, children, elderly persons?
8 A. I said it and I will repeat it.
9 In 1992, sometime from May, I don't know the exact date, when the
10 war broke out, when the shelling started, there were no civilians there
11 anymore. There were just the military and the police. They were armed
12 and they engaged from those positions. And as I said, the civilians went
13 there one by one late in the day. They crossed the playground that I
14 mentioned to go to their apartments to fetch things that they needed. And
15 I personally saw them carry the things that they had taken and cross the
16 Zavnobih square and go back to the areas where there was no danger to
17 other parts of the town.
18 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Sachdeva could, it be that those families who
19 actually left those buildings were living facing the front line, and so if
20 you were living in a high-rise building that faced the front line then you
21 might wish to move out?
22 In any case, I think we should move on and get on to another
23 subject, because we have dwelled long enough on this matter.
24 MR. SACHDEVA: Very well, Your Honour, if I may respond to that.
25 The Prosecution's position is that all the space in Sarajevo that was--
1 there was lack of space in Sarajevo. There were refugees coming in from
2 other parts of the country. And so our position is that, in spite of the
3 fact that it may have been close to a confrontation line, and in Sarajevo
4 we had those circumstances in many other areas, civilians continued to
5 live there. That's our position.
6 So maybe -- maybe ten, 15 families might have moved if they had
7 the ability do so, but our position is that civilians continued to live in
8 Alipasino Polje in all available housing that was there.
9 But I will move on.
10 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Sachdeva, in respect of your
11 cross-examination you were allowed 30 minutes. You've already used 32
12 minutes in actual fact you owe me two minutes.
13 But, tell me, how much more do you need?
14 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I seek your leave to have another
15 ten minutes.
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Well, thank you. Maximum of ten
18 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Q. Witness, you remember when I was asking you questions about the
20 civilians and you spoke about a park and children playing, you remember
21 talking about that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And just to confirm you lived in Alipasino Polje until May 1994.
24 Isn't that right?
25 A. That's correct.
1 Q. And so while you were there you must have been aware of, or in
2 fact you may have even seen the incident on the 22nd of January, 1994,
3 when six children were killed by a shell from Nedzarici playing in the
4 snow. You remember that incident, sir?
5 A. No.
6 Q. You did not -- you did not hear anything about that incident?
7 A. No, I did not. Because in 1992 my freedom of movement was
8 restricted and I never learned anything about that.
9 Q. Sir, I'm talking about 1994. January 22nd, 1994. In fact, these
10 children were killed in the very playground that you speak of. And you're
11 telling the Court that did you not hear about this incident where six
12 children were killed playing in the snow?
13 A. I did not hear about this incident.
14 Q. So when I asked you the question, you seemed to hesitate. Is it
15 that you do remember and you just don't want to say it, or you're trying
16 to recollect your thoughts?
17 A. I'm trying to recollect whether anything of the sort happened. As
18 far as I know, as far as I can remember, this did not happen. And I
19 think that this did not happen in this part of the town. Perhaps
20 somewhere further away, not in this neighbourhood.
21 Q. So you're asking the Court to accept the evidence that you, from
22 the 7th floor of your building, while you were under, as you say, house
23 arrest noticed the particular movements of what you say were
24 sharpshooters, notice the movements of cannon fire, and yet -- and yet in
25 that very same playground that you speak about, you know nothing about the
1 death of six children by shelling. You continue to maintain that
2 evidence, is that what you're saying, sir?
3 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I believe that some
5 claims of this sort should be substantiated in some other way. The
6 witness does not rule out the possibility that this may have happened in
7 some other part of the town. But he says that it didn't happen here. I
8 don't know why counsel is insisting on this point. If he is indeed
9 insisting on this point, perhaps he could produce something here in court
10 to refresh the witness's recollection.
11 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Well, the Prosecutor put the
12 question, and I don't feel that he really insisted. But, all right,
13 proceed, Prosecutor, we'll see.
14 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'll move on.
15 Q. Unless, Mr. Kosovic, you want to answer my last question. You're
16 still maintaining that you didn't hear anything about the death of six
17 children playing in the snow?
18 A. I maintain that I did not hear, I did not learn anything about the
19 death of six children in this area that you're talking about.
20 Q. Very well. Sir, you said you were detained for 31 days. Am I
22 A. That's right.
23 Q. And what month was that?
24 A. I was detained on the 18th of June, 1992, in two basements where
25 the prison was. I was there until the 19th of July, 1992.
1 Q. And then I understand that after that you went back to your flat
2 on the 7th floor?
3 A. I went back to my flat, and I was under house arrest for eight
5 Q. Sir, when you say "house arrest," I take it there were guards
6 outside your door day and night for eight months? Is that right?
7 A. Yes, for the most part.
8 Q. For the most part. You mean sometimes they weren't there?
9 A. Well, on some days, they sat on the 6th floor. I could hear them
10 talking, but for the most part the guards were stationed in front of my
11 door and nobody could get in or out.
12 Q. So I take it that when you wanted to buy food or collect
13 provisions, the guards would do that for you. Is that right?
14 A. No, no. That's not right. My wife did that. There were no shops
15 in that period. We would get rations. It was similar to what is -- what
16 the system is in the military. It was very difficult. We all went
17 hungry, not just me. Everybody went hungry.
18 Q. Everyone. So you're saying that for eight months you were not
19 allowed to leave the house. You stayed in the house for eight months, in
20 the flat?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. And how many windows did your flat have?
23 A. Well, six windows.
24 Q. And so from this flat for the eight months, it's your evidence
25 that you were able to -- to notice the movements of the -- as you said,
1 the cannon gun and the ABiH sharpshooters within your area. You saw all
2 of that happen from your flat on the 7th floor. That's what you're saying?
3 A. Yes. And if you would allow me, I can explain.
4 You must not take this to mean that I stood at the window or on
5 the balcony. That's not the case. When I heard the troops talking in
6 this park that I mentioned earlier, I would crawl out from the living-room
7 to the balcony, flat on my stomach and then I would watch things from a
8 small opening that was between the balcony and the wall of the building,
9 lying on my stomach, because somebody would surely have killed me if they
10 saw me; the BH army troop would say have shot at me if they had saw me --
11 if they had seen me. They couldn't see me from this position that I
12 assumed because they were lower down there, low -- down below.
13 Q. But presumably the BiH army knew you were there because they were
14 keeping you under house arrest, weren't they?
15 A. That's correct. The soldiers didn't guard me. It was in fact
16 some kind of civilian protection service. They had the weapons, they got
17 them from the police and the military and they guarded me. But the
18 soldiers knew that they put me under house arrest. They beat me, they
19 tortured me. They knew everything.
20 Q. Are you perhaps talking about the civil defence, sir, is that who
21 you are talking about?
22 A. Yes. Civil defence, civil protection. They wore half civilian
23 clothes, half uniforms and the real troops and the police they wore proper
24 uniforms. But they were armed, they had automatic weapon, they had
25 pistols, rifles, everything, just as the military did.
1 Q. And of course they allowed your wife to go and get her rations,
2 isn't that right, the rations that would you given to all people that
3 lived in Sarajevo?
4 A. Yes, that's right.
5 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, I'm finished now. I just, with
6 your leave, would ask to be allowed to play a video of the incident that I
7 was speaking about, with respect to the children. I accept that it was
8 not on my list provided to the Defence beforehand. But if Your Honours
9 think it's not necessary, then that's fine.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 MR. SACHDEVA: I make the submission because the Defence did
12 suggest --
13 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] I can see Mr. Tapuskovic is
14 standing up.
15 Would you like to say something, Mr. Tapuskovic?
16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, precisely this. Of
17 course, it may have been prepared and it may have been shown to the
18 witness, but we didn't see it. We don't know when it happened, where. We
19 don't know anything about it. The video itself, I don't know what that
20 might prove.
21 So I think that the Prosecution should not be allowed to play it
22 because we would just waste time and the Prosecution's time is up
23 already. And I don't see how this can be shown now, given that we had not
24 seen it before, and because this also relates to a time-period that
25 precedes the time relevant for the indictment.
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Prosecutor, you said yourself
2 that this video-clip was not on your list; and in addition, you've used up
3 your time, and the Defence is against it. So for these reasons the Court
4 decides to reject your request. And now you can put your question, your
5 general question or concluding question, if you like, to wrap up your
7 MR. SACHDEVA: I'm guided, Mr. President, and just for the record
8 I would like to state that the video was -- the clip was indeed played at
9 the opening -- the opening statement of the Prosecution. And therefore,
10 in my submission, the Defence is not -- would have not have been
11 prejudiced if we played it.
12 But, in fact, that concludes my cross-examination.
13 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Well, thank you very much indeed,
14 Mr. Sachdeva.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic, have you got
17 any questions, re-direct?
18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have just one
19 topic and it's related to what the witness had been talking in his
21 Re-examination by Mr. Tapuskovic:
22 Q. [Interpretation] You said that this flat and this part of Sarajevo
23 that was controlled by the BH army that you left it on the 28th of May,
24 1994. Is that correct?
25 A. Yes, that's correct.
1 Q. You said that throughout this period you saw this tank that would
2 get out and move about as you described this.
3 A. Well, that was not a tank. It was --
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, Your Honours, my
5 question --
6 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Sachdeva.
7 MR. SACHDEVA: [Previous translation continues] ... Has in fact
8 clarified that. The witness never said he saw a tank. The witness said
9 he saw a cannon on a lorry.
10 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed, it was a cannon, a gun
11 on a truck.
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I have to correct myself.
13 It was a mistake on my part.
14 Q. This lorry with a cannon mounted on it, you saw it until the very
15 end of this time-period?
16 A. Until the end of May.
17 Q. Yes. Now, did you see it in February, March, April, May?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And in this time-period, I --
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, yes.
21 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Sachdeva.
22 MR. SACHDEVA: [Previous translation continues] ... Does not arise
23 out of cross-examination. Mr. Tapuskovic had put these questions to the
24 witness in examination-in-chief, and my questions did not dwell on this
1 In fact, my reference to the cannon was in respect to -- to the
2 witness not knowing about the incident but yet being able to talk about
3 the movements of this cannon from his 7th floor flat.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours ...
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Sachdeva, I think we can all
7 agree with the fact that the Defence counsel has to limit himself to what
8 you said in your cross-examination. But in your cross-examination you
9 talked about this gun moving around, so how can you be against the fact
10 that Mr. Tapuskovic brings up the subject?
11 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, my questions regarding the gun went
12 to the witness's credibility. And the questions my learned friend is now
13 asking is whether he saw the gun being fired on certain months, which is
14 what he did in his examination-in-chief. In my submission, it's a
15 different -- it's a different process. And these are questions that he
16 should have asked the witness in examination-in-chief. He asked the
17 witness what did he see in that area, the witness answered. The normal
18 follow-up question would be, well, what else did you see and how many
19 times did you see it being fired and so on and so forth. But now have a
20 second bite at the cherry when I was referring to the tank purely for
21 credibility reasons is, in my submission, inappropriate.
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: I think we should move on. If the Prosecution did
23 indeed mention the gun-firing, then you may put a single question to that,
24 Mr. Tapuskovic. But the reason I took the floor was that I would like to
25 appeal to both parties to allow the proceedings to move on without these
1 many interruptions all the time. It makes it very difficult for the
2 witness, as well as for the Chamber, to have a good flow of proceedings.
3 So, please, restrain yourself a bit on both sides.
4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well.
5 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. You are
6 in the right, and you may have noticed that I take less time than I am
7 allotted deal with some of the witnesses. But Mr. Sachdeva, my learned
8 colleague, did not ask about the cannon firing. He asked about the
9 response to the firing of this cannon by the Serb side and alleging that
10 the Serb side then fired artillery weapons. And my own question is within
11 this time-period, February, March, April, May, as you said that this tank
12 or, rather, this cannon also went out into the street, was there any
13 response, any artillery response on the Serb side?
14 A. Well, this cannon that I talked about that was mounted on the
15 truck, it was active until the very last day that I left. That was the
16 28th of May, 1994, but we did not get any response fire from the Serb
17 territory. Let me corroborate that. We were able to move freely around
18 the neighbourhood.
19 Q. Thank you. Thank you.
20 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Well, thank you very much, Mr.
22 Witness, we are coming now to the end of your testimony. The
23 Court would like to thank you very much for your contribution to this work
24 of international justice. And I have the pleasure to express you our best
25 wishes in the rest of your life and your career and your country.
1 You're now released.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
3 [The witness withdrew]
4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] All right. Now, I would like to
5 inform you that we had something left pending from yesterday. I don't
6 know whether it was a protected witness or not, so I'm not going to
7 mention his name.
8 Was he protected? No, apparently not. It is Borislav Kovacevic.
9 And his testimony had not been completed, and we had to return to the
10 transcript issue. I think that we can do it now, and Mr. Tapuskovic can
11 then continue his questions.
12 Yes, please, go ahead.
13 [The witness entered court]
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] First, just a few questions and
15 then my colleague will deal with the procedural issue related to the
16 transcript and possible tendering or admission.
17 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] All right, fine. Thank you.
18 Good morning, Witness. We're going to continue with this
19 procedure, and the floor is to the Defence to proceed.
20 WITNESS: BORISLAV KOVACEVIC [Resumed]
21 [Witness answered through interpreter]
22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I will
23 be very brief, bearing in mind the time. I have just a couple of
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Just a minute, Mr. Tapuskovic.
1 Mr. Sachdeva.
2 MR. SACHDEVA: [Previous translation continues] ... So we're very
3 clear any questions or any evidence that relates to the witness
4 from Galic must be in closed session, with your leave.
5 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] You're perfectly right. You're
6 perfectly right, Prosecutor. I was just going to ask this.
7 So, registrar, I believe that we have to go to closed session.
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No, no, I'm sorry, Your Honour.
9 Your Honour, I will not be mentioning the witness at all. I have just a
10 couple of questions. I will not be mentioning the witness at all. I have
11 questions related to the problem. Yes.
12 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] So you want to do this in open
13 session; is that what you're saying?
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, because I will not be
15 mentioning this witness in any way. I will ask him about his general
17 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] All right. Fine. So, registrar,
18 we stay in open session.
19 And, Mr. Tapuskovic, be very careful and do not mention anything
20 that we talked to earlier on.
21 Re-examination by Mr. Tapuskovic: [Continued]
22 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Kovacevic, yesterday, you spoke about the
23 place called Breza. There was a lot of discussion about it?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And you said you knew where Breza was?
1 A. Yes, I did.
2 Q. During the conflict in 1991 to 1995, were you aware -- you said
3 that you knew what the town looked like before the conflict. Is that
5 A. Yes, that's correct.
6 Q. Do you know anything about what the situation was like in this
7 town or village during the conflict?
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Sachdeva has an objection.
9 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Sachdeva.
10 MR. SACHDEVA: Mr. President, again, I apologise for rising, but
11 my understand was that the re-examination which had started yesterday
12 was -- Mr. Tapuskovic was entitled to re-examination on issues outside of
13 the delicate issue of the Galic witness, and that the reason why the
14 witness was brought back taught was so Mr. Tapuskovic could apprise
15 himself of the testimony; and, therefore, the questions in re-examination
16 today are to be solely involved with the Galic witness.
17 So, in my submission, this is going beyond the ruling.
18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] You're perfectly right, Prosecutor.
19 Mr. Tapuskovic, the reason why the witness is back here this
20 morning is in respect of the Galic witness, because the other questions
21 have been exhausted already yesterday. So when you asked for the floor to
22 speak in open session, well, it shouldn't be to come back to things that
23 have already been exhausted. Can you agree?
24 So we're going to proceed with the questions regarding the Galic
24 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] We shouldn't mention the Galic
25 case at all in a nutshell, you're saying?
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, can you prepare the
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, I'm coming back to
5 what I said earlier on. The reason why this witness is here is to discuss
6 the matters that we know about, not to return to things that have already
7 been said.
8 We're going to go to a private session, and you will have a few
9 minutes at your disposal to put the questions you want to put, and you're
10 dealing with a matter at hand for questions related to the reasons why
11 this witness is here this morning. All the other issues have already been
12 covered yesterday.
14 [Private session]
11 Page 8034 redacted. Private session.
25 [Open session]
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
2 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, registrar.
3 So, Prosecutor, so what do you think? In respect of the tendering
4 of this exhibit.
5 MR. SACHDEVA: Thank you, Mr. President for giving me the floor
6 and perhaps this might resolve some of the issues that we're dealing with.
7 The Prosecution -- it was never the intention of the Prosecution
8 to, in fact, tender the transcript, and what the Prosecution did was put
9 specific parts of the transcript of the evidence to the witness which was
10 then read out verbatim, and, therefore, is recorded in this case, in the
11 transcript in this case. The -- from what I can recall, the suggestion to
12 tender the transcript came from His Honour Judge Robinson and the Bench,
13 and at that stage the Prosecution accepted or was in a position to say it
14 didn't object to that.
15 However, it is -- if it was down to the Prosecution, it is not the
16 Prosecution's position that the transcript should be tendered or admitted
17 into evidence. And that's the position.
18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Fine. We give the floor to the
20 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honours.
21 So now it is very clear. This is what the Defence had in mind as
22 well, because the Defence fully agreed with the Presiding Judge Robinson
23 in principle, if you ask to tender, either it is in total or nothing at
24 all. So we believe that we should tender or nothing at all and I'm going
25 to explain this.
1 The Prosecutor --
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] The Prosecutor used the transcript
4 of a witness that appeared and whose testimony lasts five days, if I'm not
5 mistaken. Now I know that there were many procedural questions that were
6 also dealt with in the course of these five days, but it was a rather
7 significant testimony, and so the Prosecutor deemed useful to use this
8 testimony before you. And in the course of the cross-examination of Mr.
9 Kovacevic, the Defence witness present in this room.
10 Now, in -- the Defence thinks that since Mr. Galic's defence was
11 against the position of this witness because for Mr. Galic's defence the
12 Defence submission was that this part or this area of Sarajevo was indeed
13 part of Sarajevo. That was the point. And so the testimony of that
14 witness was accepted on this point by the Defence of Mr. Milosevic,
15 because we believe that this issue is part of our submissions. We would
16 not be against the idea of a witness testifying the fact that this part of
17 Sarajevo, and I will not mention the part of Sarajevo to protect the
18 identity, and I don't think it's important for this particular procedural
19 issue concerning the tendering of the transcript.
20 Well, the thing is that this testimony is very important because
21 it complies with the defence of Mr. Milosevic. And the Defence of Mr.
22 Milosevic is against tendering this transcript in this case for different
23 reasons; and those reasons are the protection of the right of the Defence.
24 And I will further explain this.
25 The statute in its Article 21, the Statute of this honourable
1 jurisdiction in paragraph 4(E) provides for --
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: I think the Prosecution has waived its claim to
3 have this testimony from the earlier case admitted into evidence in this
4 present case. So I don't think you need to argue very strongly that --
5 that the earlier testimony should come into this case. We have decided
6 that it will not, and that's the end of it.
7 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, thank you very much, Judge
8 Harhoff. But I thought, I understood, that the Prosecutor was maintaining
9 his idea to tender part of the transcript in this file.
10 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Let's listen to the Prosecutor once
12 Prosecutor, what is your position?
13 MR. SACHDEVA: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. President,
14 our position is we do not move to tender this transcript evidence, in
15 whole or in part. That's the end of the issue. His Honour Judge Harhoff
16 is correct in stating our position.
17 MS. ISAILOVIC: [Interpretation] All right, perfect. Perfect.
18 Thank you. So the Defence welcomes the wisdom of the Prosecutor, and in
19 this way is going to spare us a lot of efforts because I read about 400
20 pages last night to prepare for this, well, at least I can spare you the
22 Thank you.
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Previous translation continues] ... Cooperation
24 between the two parties. The Chamber salutes that.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] All right then. Since the parties
2 have come to an agreement, the Court is not going to insist on this issue
3 regarding the tendering of an exhibit. So now we can conclude, conclude
4 hearing this witness.
5 Mr. Witness, I would like to thank you on behalf of the Court and
6 on behalf of all the parties. Thank you for coming to The Hague to
7 testify and to bring your contribution to the work of international
8 justice. On behalf of this Court, I would like to wish you a safe trip
9 back home, and also success in your endeavours. Thank you very much.
10 You're released and can you leave the room.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. And it has been my
13 [The witness withdrew]
14 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, we have ten minutes
15 left and we're going to use them. Have you got another witness?
16 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. This is T-56,
17 Mr. Simo Tusevljak.
18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] There are no specific protective
19 measures regarding this witness, are there?
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] No, none.
21 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] So, registrar, please call in the
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] The registry has just told me that
1 the witness is not ready. He is not in the waiting-room for the time
3 So what we're going to do is we're going to take the break a bit
4 earlier, we're going to take it now. And so we'll come back there 20
5 minutes' time. In the meanwhile, the registry is going to try and find
6 the witness.
7 The session is closed.
8 --- Recess taken at 10.21 a.m.
9 [The witness entered court]
10 --- On resuming at 10.41 a.m.
11 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Good morning, Witness.
12 I would like to make sure that you can hear in your own language
13 what I'm telling, so if you do understand, please tell me that you
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Previous translation continues]...
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well.
17 Could you please read the solemn declaration that the clerk will
18 hand you.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
20 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
21 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you very much.
22 You may sit down.
23 It is the practice of this Trial Chamber that the party which
24 called you will proceed to the identification of your identity. So I
25 would now like to ask the Defence to ask you the necessary questions in
1 order to identify you and then the examination-in-chief will start.
2 Mr. Tapuskovic.
3 WITNESS: SIMO TUSEVLJAK
4 [Witness answered through interpreter]
5 Examination by Mr. Tapuskovic:
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
7 Q. Before I begin, I would like to draw your attention to the fact
8 that might arise some problems. Some of the documents that were disclosed
9 to us by the Prosecutor did not reach us before yesterday or maybe the day
10 before yesterday. We have put them on the list of documents that will be
11 presented to the witness. And another thing that might be a problem,
12 since we are experiencing some problem with the e-court, I may have to use
13 the ELMO in order to show some documents if we are not able to locate them
14 in e-court, although we did have them downloaded in e-court. This might
15 take some more time, but I will have to use the documents that I received
16 only yesterday from the Prosecution.
17 Having said that, I would like to start my examination-in-chief.
18 Q. Witness, as you know, I defend General Dragomir Milosevic, and we
19 have already spoken about certain issues that we will discuss.
20 Could you please introduce yourself to the Judges. Can you please
21 tell them your name and your last name.
22 A. My name is Simo Tusevljak.
23 Q. You were born on the 12th of February, 1965?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. In Sarajevo, Centar municipality, and you resided in Nedzarici?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. You completed elementary school and grammar school in Sarajevo?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And you attended the safety faculty in Skopje in the former
5 Macedonia in 1988, that is when you graduated from the school of safety?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Up to the beginning of the conflict, you worked as a coordinator
8 for white-collar crimes in Sarajevo, in the former republic of Bosnia and
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. During the conflict, between 1992 and 1995, can you tell the
12 Judges what you did during that period of time?
13 A. From the outbreak of the tragic events in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
14 first, I was the coordinator for crime prevention for the town of Sarajevo
15 in the MUP and then the chief of security in the Serbian Sarajevo police.
16 Q. What did your work entail throughout those war years?
17 A. The crime prevention department that I was the head of
18 investigated general crimes, white-collar crimes, and crimes that were
19 persecuted pursuant to Article 15 of the former Socialist Federative
20 Republic of Yugoslavia that were mostly crimes of genocide and war crimes.
21 Q. Can you explain for the judges you worked -- you said that you
22 worked in the police and you mentioned crime of genocide and war crime.
23 What did those crimes imply during the times of peace when these things
24 were not happening in the territory of the former Yugoslavia?
25 A. This was prescribed by the law -- the chapter in the law that
1 referred to those crimes bore that title and that is why the Article
2 contained the words "war crimes and genocide." That was the qualification
3 that was reflected in the title of that Article.
4 Q. During the conflict, which lasted from 1992 to 1995, can you tell
5 us exactly what you did, what was your job? What kind of cases did you
6 investigate and deal with?
7 A. As I have already told you, in addition to the duties pertaining
8 to general crime prevention and prevention of white-collar crimes our job
9 was also to investigate war crimes which means that we investigated the
10 civilian victims of war that suffered during the operations in the
11 territory covered by the MUP Sarajevo, as well as the investigation of
12 crimes against civilians in Sarajevo of which we learned from the
13 civilians that had left Sarajevo during the war operations and immediately
14 came to us and spoke to us -- to the police and other security organs that
15 were active in our area. Through them we learned about those crimes and
16 based on the knowledge that we gained, we submitted official reports to
17 the Prosecutor's office in charge.
18 Q. You have to slow down, sir, because nothing is going to be
19 translated if you go on speaking so fast.
20 A. In addition to that, whenever the event happened in the territory
21 that was covered by my centre, operatives and crime technicians would go
22 to the site and they would participate in investigation together with the
23 investigating judge. And based on those on-site inspections, official
24 reports were filed to the Prosecutor's office in charge.
25 Q. Were you able to deal with the civilian victims of war in the part
1 of Sarajevo which was under the control of the BiH army?
2 A. No. Because the security service centre of Serbian Sarajevo did
3 not cover that territory. If there had been an incident, we were often
4 willing and ready to intervene through UNPROFOR and other international
5 organisations that were active in the area. We were willing to extend our
6 assistance to the other side, but the other side was never interested in
7 our assistance.
8 Q. First of all, can you tell us whether you had a special position
9 in your service at the beginning of the conflict or during the events that
10 took place between 1992 and 1995?
11 A. No. All the time I was the head of the crime prevention
12 department in the territory of the security services centre of eastern
13 Sarajevo, which means that, in addition to my regular tasks, I also
14 drafted reports and reported about the war crimes that were committed in
15 my territory. I investigated those crimes together with my operatives.
16 Q. Thank you. As a police officer, did you personally ever
17 participate in combat activities undertaken by the army of the Republika
19 A. No, I did not. My job was of a civilian nature, which means
20 crimes committed by civilians or civilian victims of those crimes.
21 Q. During that period of time and also between August 1994 and the
22 end of the conflict, given the nature of your job, did you have to do
23 field inspections as well?
24 A. Yes. I did that everyday. First of all, the headquarters of the
25 security services centre eastern Sarajevo was in Lukavica which was very
1 close to the enemy lines. And we were often targeted by sharpshooters and
2 other artillery weapons. My direct superior was killed by a sniper right
3 in front of the centre building. When the centre was moved to Ilidza, we
4 were again very close to the separation line. And it is only normal that
5 I could observe every day all the activities, the falling of the shells,
6 sniper activities and everything that was happening in the territory of
7 Lukavica and in particular the territory of Ilidza.
8 Q. In the course of your movements, and you say that you were in
9 Lukavica for a while and then you were in Ilidza after that, during those
10 movements of yours when you performed your duties and when did you your
11 job, were you ever at a risk from those combat activities that were going
13 A. Every day we were at a risk, both I and all of my colleagues. The
14 risk came from the combat operations of the BiH army.
15 Q. Can you tell the Judges during that period of time between 1992
16 and 1995, was there a period of time during which these combat activities
17 subsided somewhat?
18 A. The activity subsided in the second half of 1994, and in the first
19 half of 1995, all the way up to the beginning of the BiH army offensive
20 when they tried to take the territory that was inhabited by the Serbs.
21 Q. When did this period start and how would you describe that period,
22 the period that lasted up to the end of war?
23 A. Well, I would say that was one of the most horrible periods of my
24 life. Sometime in mid-June until the signing of the Dayton Accords,
25 Ilidza and all the territories under the control of the VRS inhabited by
1 civilians were shelled every day. We were all -- we were also exposed to
2 sharpshooter activity all the time. My operatives were busy everyday
3 because they would go to the sites, they would investigate and they would
4 report -- they would submit official reports on all those activities.
5 Q. I'm going to show you a document that I received from the
6 Prosecutor's office.
7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I hope that it is already in
8 e-court. This is DD00-4217.
9 Your Honours, I received this document yesterday. It hasn't been
10 translated. I received it from the Prosecutor. It is in e-court. The
11 witness is able to see it. The document is short. I would kindly ask the
12 witness to explain the nature of this document. And if he can, I would
13 like to ask him to read the contents of this document, the date of the
14 document and what document refers to. And also I would like to ask him
15 who drafted the document.
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] We're waiting to see the document
17 on the screen.
18 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, we were able to see it on
19 our screen, but now we can't see it on the screen that you have in front
20 of you. Perhaps we will be forced to use the ELMO after all because it is
21 -- after all, it is not translated.
22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar.
23 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, it will be a bit tricky
24 now, but we have been forced to resort to this.
25 Q. Witness, could you please look at it, look at the heading, the
1 date, what is this, and could you please tell us who wrote this document?
2 A. Well, the heading says the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and
3 Herzegovina, the Ministry of the Interior, Sarajevo. The date is the 15th
4 of May, 1992. It's a list of operatives in the territory of the city of
5 Sarajevo, and now on this list, Simo Tusevljak is listed as the
6 coordinator for the territory of the city of Sarajevo.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MS. EDGERTON: And just for the record, Mr. Registrar.
9 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
10 MS. EDGERTON: The document is in e-court. It bears the number
11 03409. And there should it be, if you use that number, a translation
12 available to help everyone.
13 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, since you now have
14 the number you may perhaps try to find the document, locate the document.
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, it would have been easier
16 if we had received the translations from the Prosecution in time. But we
17 have simply not been aware of the fact that the translation existed.
18 But be that as it may --
19 Q. Witness, can you tell us who drafted this document?
20 A. From what I can see, I don't want to go to the second page.
21 JUDGE MINDUA: Ms. Edgerton.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honour. I should note that the
23 document was disclose in the language of the accused as soon as we
24 uncovered it. And last night, as people were -- the team that works for
25 us translating the documents, as the team was collating and translating
1 the document we were able to come up with a translation for the document,
2 so that translation is uploaded in e-court for everyone's benefit.
3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, we have huge
4 difficulties --
5 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] We have it on e-court now, Mr.
6 Tapuskovic. We have it.
7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honours, well, this
8 causes huge difficulties for the Defence, I have to tell you,
9 insurmountable difficulties, but we do our best to do as much as we can.
10 Q. So, Witness, you have seen this document then. Could you please
11 turn to page 2. But I don't want to dwell on this because I don't want to
12 waste any time.
13 Can you please tell us who drafted this document?
14 A. This document was drafted by my chief at the time.
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I would like this --
16 to tender this document as a Defence exhibit.
17 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] But you did not tell us what this
18 document is exactly. What is this document pertaining to? We saw the
19 document, but how do you interpret this document?
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, you see, this document
21 contains a list of operatives doing the kind of work that
22 Mr. Simo Tusevljak described. We have groups for Vrace, for Kula, for
23 Ilidza, for Vogosca, for Pale. I didn't think it was necessary for us to
24 read all of it but at any rate these are people who were under his
25 control, and they were working to shed light on the crimes that he
1 mentioned to us.
2 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well, thank you very much.
3 The document is admitted.
4 Mr. Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be admitted as D296.
6 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
7 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Now if we could look at document
8 DD00-4185. I don't know if this document has a translation or not. If
9 not, then I would have to use the ELMO again.
10 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Waespi, I'm listening to you,
12 MR. WAESPI: Can I just make a general point because the Defence
13 just said that these are insurmountable problems. These documents which
14 we gave to the Defence last night or the days before, these are disclosure
15 items, because we feel that these kind of documents might be helpful for
16 the Defence in preparation of the witness and we disclosed them as soon as
17 we receive these disclosure fruits from the ISU. But it is the job of the
18 Defence to have a document translated into the languages of this courtroom
19 if they want to use it as an exhibit. That's not the job of the
20 Prosecution and I really insist that the Defence is aware of that. They
21 can always come back to us and tell us we don't have translation
22 resources, please help us as they did in the past. But it is not really
23 our job, wholesale translation of the documents that the Defence might use
24 as an exhibit and not the Prosecution.
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic, I believe the
1 Prosecutor is right. In each case the Prosecutor receives hundreds, if
2 not thousands of documents. I do not believe it is up to them to
3 translate all these documents, but after the disclosure is made, the
4 Defence who would like to use a document has the obligation to make sure
5 that the document is translated. However, I would like to draw the
6 attention to the OTP that I understand with a lot -- with a great deal of
7 difficulty that documents were only disclosed last night. Documents that
8 are going -- were going to be presented to the Trial Chamber today, but we
9 may close the brackets there, if you wish.
10 Mr. Tapuskovic.
11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Judge Mindua, that's
12 precisely the problem. We received this yesterday afternoon. And it is
13 simply impossible. If I had two days, I may have asked some translation
14 expert services in Belgrade to translate it. But I have to proof my
15 witnesses and I can't really do anything about translating a document that
16 I received only yesterday. I know that my learned colleague, Mr. Waespi,
17 is a very fair and able Prosecutor, but he knows that if we had been able
18 to do so we would have done that. We have submitted to them days ago,
19 months ago, a list of our witnesses and they could have done something
20 about it and produced the results of this search earlier.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: I think the point is taken. Let us move on.
22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour, Judge
24 So this document, DD00-4185.
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] The document is not on the screen.
1 Maybe we better use the ELMO to save time.
2 MS. EDGERTON: If Mr. Tapuskovic could stipulate the date of the
3 document and perhaps a one-line description, we could see whether or not
4 we have a translation.
5 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, you may do so.
6 MS. EDGERTON: If it is one of our documents, an ERN would allow
7 to us find it immediately.
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes.
9 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Do you have the ERN number, Mr.
11 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] 03 -- yes. 03392095, the
12 document is dated the 6th of October, 1992.
13 MS. EDGERTON: I can't assist with any translation on this one.
14 We have no translation.
15 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well.
16 So please place the document on the ELMO.
17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Now, sir, could you please read the heading, the date, and the
19 first two passages in this text.
20 A. Republika Srpska, Ministry of the Interior, Romanija Birac centre
21 of the Security Services, crime fighting division, Sarajevo, date 6th of
22 October, 1992. Subject, report on the work for the period of July to
23 September 1992 of the crime fighting sector of the CSB in the period
24 between July and September 1992, the crime division -- crime investigation
25 division of the Romanija Birac CSB intensified its activities by engaging
1 its operatives on crime prevention and crime fighting activities and
2 prosecution of perpetrators.
3 Despite all the problems, first of all in terms of lack of staff
4 or staff which is not adequate, in this period, a total of 469 crimes were
5 recorded. Out of this total, 168 serious crimes, mostly aggravated
6 robbery, 18 murders and one attempted murder. Three cases in which
7 general danger was caused.
8 Q. Thank you. Could we please look at last page.
9 Who is the author, who wrote this document, who signed it?
10 A. I drafted this document and I signed it, and this is indeed my
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we go back to page 1.
13 Q. Here you mention 18 murders in this period, that's July to
14 September 1992. Can you tell us what kind of murders were you dealing
15 with? Could you explain this to the Judges, please?
16 A. These were just run-of-the-mill murders that had no ethnic base.
17 The ethnicity of the perpetrator or the victim were not a factor, so this
18 was perhaps caused by some property disputes between the victim and the
19 perpetrator or some other cause of this nature.
20 Q. And if we were to look at it in the context of the victims in
21 light of their ethnicity, was it possible to draw the distinction -- to
22 distinguish various victims on the basis of their ethnicity?
23 A. Well, in most cases the victims were Serbs. As far as can I
24 recall there were two murders with the Croats and Muslims as victims and I
25 think that the perpetrators were apprehended, prosecuted and sentenced to
1 a prison sentence.
2 Q. And who were the perpetrators in general terms?
3 A. Well, for the most part, Serbs were the perpetrators.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Witness, are we to conclude that the crimes
5 described in your report were unrelated to the war?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 18 murders, yes, that's true.
7 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] And since we have this passage on
9 page 2 -- could we perhaps turn to page 2 now.
10 Q. Paragraph 2, could you please read what you wrote here.
11 A. The documenting of crimes that relate to genocide and war crimes
12 against the Serb people is a particular issue the sector is making great
13 efforts --
14 Q. Slow down, slow down, please.
15 A. The sector is making great efforts to provide adequate documents
16 for these crimes too despite great difficulties that we encounter. In
17 this respect, the competent Prosecution offices already received 7 crime
18 reports against 33 persons for whom there are grounds for suspicion that
19 they committed the crime of genocide and war crimes against the Serb
21 Q. Let's just make one thing clear. When you use the word
22 "genocide," let's clear this up. This is a legal qualification. This
23 is part of the penal code it doesn't mean that you actually were able to
24 establish anything in relation to this particular term genocide that is
25 used here?
1 A. Yes, I absolutely agree with you. This is just a legal term and
2 nothing -- it's no prejudice was meant by its use.
3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I would like to tender this
4 document into evidence.
5 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, but there is a
6 problem. We don't have a translation.
7 Ms. Edgerton.
8 The document can be tendered but only as an identification
9 document, pending its translation, so we will give it a MFI number.
10 Ms. Edgerton, yes.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour it is unusual that I rise in this
12 regard vis-a-vis a document, but I would actually question the relevance
13 of this document to the case at hand. Because the witness has spoken with
14 respect to 18 murders, set out in this document, which he stipulated were
15 run-of-the-mill murders unrelated to the conflict. And further, made it
16 quite clear that in terms of the investigation of war crimes he was only
17 involved in war crimes against the -- the investigation of war crimes
18 against the Serb population. When he made the qualification on the basis
19 of ethnicity he was only referring to the so-called run-of-the-mill
20 murders that he had discussed earlier in his testimony, the 18. And I
21 would submit, when we're dealing with war crimes against the Serb
22 population, it's actually, unless it is inside Bosnian-held territory of
23 Sarajevo completely unrelated.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: That could be a matter for to you raise during
1 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Judge Harhoff.
2 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] That's clear now. So
3 Mr. Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document will be marked for
5 identification as D297.
6 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
7 Mr. Tapuskovic.
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. Witness, could you please tell us first, since you were doing this
10 job as you described to us, whether in April 1992 you took part in an
11 investigation that pertained to a war crime. Could you please tell us
12 briefly yes or no. Don't mention any names, because I would have to move
13 into private session after this answer.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Could you please tell us what it was all about, without mentioning
16 any names?
17 A. It was a crime against eight members of the Yugoslav People's Army
18 who were killed in Sarajevo.
19 Q. You dealt with that problem at that time. Is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And are you in fact working on this problem even today within the
22 federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. What are you right now in this case that is shedding light on
25 there crime?
1 A. Well, I am a member of the prosecution team for war crimes.
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Could we please move into closed
3 session now, because I would like to deal with this document that is
5 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Private session, please, Mr.
7 [Private session]
11 Pages 8057-8061 redacted. Private session.
17 [Open session]
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
19 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
20 Can we raise the curtains, please.
21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, you have told us what prevailed in your work during
23 your activities in the course of those four years when it came to
24 elucidating these criminal events, and I'm not ever going to use the word
1 A. We investigated the civilian victims of war, the civilians who
2 suffered from artillery weapons, snipers, and other weapons in the
3 territory that was covered by the centre for security of Serbian Sarajevo.
4 The second part of our activity had to do with the investigation
5 of war crimes, and those crimes that happened in the territory that was
6 covered by the BiH army.
7 Q. Thank you very much. Let's stick to the people who fell victim to
8 war operations.
9 How many of the cases that you worked on in which the victims were
10 civilians under the control of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, how many of
11 these cases were accompanied by the documents being submitted to the
12 Prosecutor's office in The Hague?
13 A. In keeping with the rules, we submitted to The Hague Tribunal 217
14 official reports.
15 Q. I don't have the translation, of course. I don't know how the
16 Prosecutor's office worked. Can you confirm that this is the list of the
17 criminal reports that were submitted to The Hague Tribunal. I would like
18 to show you on the ELMO just the title of the book, and I would like to
19 ask you whether this was submitted to the The Hague Tribunal, the book
20 containing all the criminal reports about the civilian victims of war
22 A. This is a list of criminal reports on war crimes that the Security
23 Services Centre of eastern Sarajevo submitted to the Prosecutor's offices;
24 and from the Prosecutor's offices and the Committee on Cooperation with
25 The Hague Tribunal, those criminal reports have been submitted to The
1 Hague Tribunal.
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, can the title page
3 of this document, after having been read by the witness, can this be
4 admitted into evidence as a Defence exhibit, please.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: What for, Mr. Tapuskovic?
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Well, Your Honour, I can wait and
7 I can first present several other written documents in order to be explain
8 my reasons. Maybe I have tendered this prematurely because now I'm going
9 to list a number of cases, some of which have been translated by myself.
10 Some have already been entered -- as exhibit, and I'm going to talk about
11 the investigations conducted by the witness. All of them have been
12 submitted to the Prosecutor. There were 270 of them, maybe even more,
13 containing the complete documentation of the civilian victims under the
14 territory under the control of the Republika Srpska army, and this shows
15 the intensity of the fighting.
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: I was asking because I would not know to make any
17 use of a front page without any context, but you have made your point and
18 let us proceed.
19 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Edgerton.
20 MS. EDGERTON: If the issue is to establish whether we've received
21 this book or the complete set of allegation which may be set out in the
22 index to this book, we can certainly check that for the Defence counsel
23 and provide him with the information.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: Let us see what use Mr. Tapuskovic himself can
25 make of the contents.
1 Mr. Tapuskovic, please, proceed.
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] It was entered prematurely, and
3 Judge Harhoff is right for the book be -- being admitted only with its
4 title page. It is really pointless.
5 Now I am going to place on the ELMO two documents which have been
6 translated, which concern the period of time that is relevant for the
8 The first document is DD00-0135, but let's look at the second page
9 of this report on on-site investigation.
10 Q. Can you please tell us what this document is? Can you tell us who
11 issued it, on what date, and what the first paragraph is about?
12 A. Republika Srpska, Ministry of the Interior, Sarajevo Public
13 Security Centre, crime police department, Sarajevo. Number 15-02-445/95,
14 dated 18 June 1995. On-site investigation record, compiled on 18 June
15 1995 by an authorised official of the Sarajevo CJB: "At the scene of an
16 incident in the village of Samin Gaj, Racovic [phoen] local commune,
17 Ilidza municipality, where on the day in question, the following bodies
18 were found: Vlajko Lakic, born in 1978; and Jugoslav Miskovic, born in
19 1981, who were killed at 1330 hours, the day before on 17 June 1995, by an
20 exploding artillery shell of an unknown calibre, fired by members of the
21 BiH army from the direction of the Godusa village, Visiko municipality."
22 Q. Please tell me, you know when the BiH offensive started, how many
23 days into the offensive did this incident happened?
24 A. This was two days from the beginning of the enemy offensive.
25 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at the photo
1 document. Can we look at two photographs on page 8.
2 Your Honours, the photos have not been translated. There's just a
3 brief remark below the photo which will not be a difficult to translate,
4 but let's first look at the photos, or rather the photo.
5 Q. This photo was taken where, sir?
6 A. The photo was taken on the site of the incident where these young
7 men had been killed by the shell.
8 Q. Tell us please, in all the cases that you investigated, did you
9 make an effort to take the photos of the bodies while the bodies were
10 still on site?
11 A. Yes. According to the police practice and procedure, and also
12 according to the Law on Criminal Procedure, it requires for the photos of
13 the bodies to be taken because otherwise the traces could not be recorded
14 and no detailed investigation could be carried on.
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would like to ask
16 for page 2 of DD00-3135 to be admitted into evidence as a Defence exhibit.
17 But these photographs, all of the photographs that with contained in the
18 document that is part of e-court now, I wouldn't like to show other images
19 because they may be distressing. There is no need for that. But the
20 document itself shows how a serious investigation of such a case, where
21 you have human victims, how it is conducted.
22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar.
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, you're asking to
25 tender this report, along with all the photographs, and the photograph we
1 looked at in, in particular. Is that what you're asking for?
2 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I didn't want to
3 bother you by showing all those photographs. I believe that showing one
4 photograph here in court would be enough, but I also think that admitting
5 all -- the entire photo file that is attached to this report should be
6 tendered into evidence by the Defence because this document, in its
7 entirety, shows how an investigation was conducted.
8 Bodies were first photographed on the site; and then once they
9 were removed to the morgue, a post-mortem was carried out just as it is
10 done in any serious investigation.
11 JUDGE MINDUA: Yes, absolutely, quite right. So we will tender
12 the whole document. Thank you.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be admitted as D299.
14 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Registrar.
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have two more
16 examples. It will be beside the point to bring up more examples than
17 that. I don't have enough time.
18 I would now like to show you document DD00-3153.
19 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, could you please look at this document. What kind
20 of a document are we talking about? What is the subject of the report?
21 And then I would like to ask you a couple of questions.
22 A. Republika Srpska, Ministry of the Interior, Sarajevo Public
23 Security Centre, crime police department, Sarajevo. Number
24 15-02/2-225/95, dated the 2nd of May, 1995. Official report: "On the 1st
25 ever May, 1995, after receiving the news that a boy was wounded in front
1 of the Cultural and Sports Centre in Ilidza by an enemy sniper shot, the
2 duty crime officer of the Sarajevo CJB, Public Security Centre, informed
3 the duty investigating judge of the Basic Court in Ilidza, Vladomir
4 Jankovic, about the incident, after which the on-site investigation
5 commission was established."
6 Q. Thank you. You don't have to read this. But could you please
7 tell what was established? Who were the victims? It says so in the last
9 A. "A boy, Bojan Stijak, was wounded; and as soon as he was wounded,
10 he was taken to the Zica hospital in Blazuj. Milan Mandic was driving the
11 vehicle; and at the time when Bojan Stijak was wounded, Marin Stipanovic,
12 another student, was with him.
13 Q. Thank you. What happened to this boy later on?
14 A. The boy, Bojan Stijak, as far as I can recall, he either survived
15 or he succumbed to his wounds. I can't really tell you because a long
16 time has passed.
17 Q. Well, all this is related in the medical record and indeed the boy
19 But let me ask you something that I think is important in this
20 case. According to the photo file in this case, what do you do when
21 somebody is wounded? What do you do?
22 A. Well, as soon as the boy was wounded, he was taken to the Zica
23 hospital and the crime scene investigation team carried out an
24 investigation on the site. And on the basis of the site where the boy was
25 wounded and carrying out a ballistics analysis as well as it could be done
1 on the spot, the site from which the bullet was fired was determined. And
2 also if a victim is able to communicate a statement is taken for the
3 record from the victim immediately after the wounded so as to determine
4 the movements of the victim and the exact position where the victim was
5 when he or she was wounded. And the easiest way to determine that you
6 have the blood-stains, pieces of clothing and if it is a through and
7 through wound, you can also find in most cases a bullet which ends up in a
8 structure nearby.
9 Q. Precisely what you said. You take blood samples. Why is it
10 necessary to take blood samples from -- or blood traces from the site?
11 A. Well, in order to be able to determine whether the blood really
12 belonged to the victim.
13 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I don't think there
14 is any need for me to show you the photo files. This has all been
15 translated and I would like to tender this document as a Defence exhibit
16 in its entirety, the way it is now, because I don't want now to go into
17 what the witness said this last things, this is really of great importance
18 for the Defence.
19 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Well, all right. How many pictures
20 in this document?
21 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Three sheets, six photographs.
22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Ms. Edgerton, no objection
23 from your part?
24 MS. EDGERTON: No.
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] So, fine. The document is admitted
1 along with the photographs.
2 Mr. Registrar, please.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will be admitted as D300.
4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
5 Mr. Tapuskovic, can you proceed.
6 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] There is an item that had been
7 marked for identification earlier. It's a film. Your Honours, this
8 video-clip was shown earlier. It's the death of the two girls on the 11th
9 of March, 1995.
10 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Edgerton.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, since the film has been shown in court
12 before and the film was widely disseminated in the media immediately
13 following the incident, I'm wondering why we have to play it again in
14 court today?
15 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I'm not insisting
16 on playing this video. The video was tendered through a general, another
17 witness, an UNPROFOR monitor, and it was marked for identification. I
18 don't want to show it in public again. What I want to do is, I want to
19 lift the embargo from it which was placed on it. It was marked for
20 identification because the witness could not say anything about it
21 directly, but we can ask this witness whether he knows anything about the
22 death of those two girls on the 11th of March. And then I would like to
23 show you an UNPROFOR report that I received from the Prosecution
24 yesterday, to ask the witness what he thought of it. And this UNPROFOR
25 report is in English.
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] All right, fine. Since you don't
2 insist on showing this video, we're not going to run it again.
3 So you can now put your question to the witness.
4 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. I don't want to show you now all the documents that I could. I
6 want to ask you whether you took part in this investigation and do you
7 remember when it was, the death of two girls Natasa Ucur and Milica
8 Lalovic. One was born in 1984 and the other in 1985. Do you know
9 anything about that event?
10 A. Yes. I think it was in March 1995. I can't recall the exact
11 dates. If I would be able to look at the investigation report, then I
12 would be able to ascertain that, but my investigation team and the
13 investigating judge went to the crime scene and was able to determine the
14 circumstances of -- in which those two girls had died and there were also
15 UNPROFOR representatives there is on site. We submitted an official
16 report to the competent Prosecutor's office about this evident crime, a
17 war crime against civilian population that had been committed, and the
18 crime report was filed against an unknown member of the BH army.
19 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I would now like to
20 show now -- I don't know whether this is already in e-court or not, the
21 Prosecution Exhibit --
22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Edgerton, have you the floor.
23 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you, Your Honour.
24 I have just consulted with Ms. Bosnjakovic and Mr. Waespi to
25 confirm, I believe my friend is referring to United Nations and UNPROFOR
1 report which was disclosed yesterday, inadvertently one might say, because
2 it has not been cleared with the United Nations, so -- its disclosure has
3 not been cleared with the UN. If my friend feels it is necessary for the
4 defence of his client, I would ask at a minimum we go into closed session
5 to deal with the document.
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: But was that the reason why the document was
7 marked for identification when we saw the document first, or are we
8 talking about a completely different document?
9 MS. EDGERTON: We're talking, Your Honour, about a completely
10 different document. The marked for identification issue was the film that
11 Mr. Tapuskovic was discussing. Now I believe he is referring to an
12 UNPROFOR report which was released in fact, mistakenly on our part without
13 having secured the proper clearances at first.
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour.
15 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, we're going to go
16 to private session in order to discuss this document.
17 [Private session].
11 Pages 8073-8077 redacted. Private session.
24 [Open session]
25 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, Your Honours, we're back in open
2 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Thank you.
3 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
4 And I have agreed that the film should not be shown featuring the
5 two girls that were killed on the 11th of March. That video-clip has been
6 marked for identification. I would kindly ask you to have that video-clip
7 admitted as a result of the evidence of the witness, D26 is the number.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Interpretation] Mr. Tapuskovic, can you remember
9 the reason why this exhibit was under seal? Excuse me, not under seal,
10 was an MFI number.
11 MS. EDGERTON: I can direct -- to the page.
12 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Edgerton.
13 MS. EDGERTON: The pages are 1018 and 1019. 1018, beginning at --
14 I'm not sure where, but it's specifically referred to at page 1019, line
15 9. It may have -- the marked for identification designation may have had
16 something do with my colleague Mr. Docherty's objection on the basis of
17 relevance, foundation, and untimely disclosure, and Judge Robinson then
18 ruled accordingly.
19 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, this is about
20 something entirely different. The witness who testified about that, I can
21 mention his name, was not sure about the date, and that was the only
22 reason why the document was not admitted in the first place because the
23 witness was not aware of the date. Now, after the report that we have
24 read in the courtroom together and after the evidence of the witness who
25 investigated the incident, I believe that the date is no longer in dispute
1 it was on the 11th of March, 1995. The time pertains to the time-period
2 relevant to the indictment.
3 JUDGE HARHOFF: As you will recall, we will admit documents and
4 other pieces of evidence only if there is some sort of a relation to the
5 witness through whom the evidence is sought to be admitted. And I'm
6 satisfied that this witness can provide the necessary relation for this
7 document to be admitted.
8 Let me just confer with Judge Mindua.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 [Trial Chamber and legal officer confer]
11 [Prosecution counsel confer]
12 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] All right. Fine.
13 Mr. Tapuskovic, the Court has decided to admit this exhibit.
14 So, Mr. Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Thank you, Your Honours. This was marked for
16 identification as D26, and now becomes Exhibit D26.
17 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I'll
18 try and bring my examination-in-chief to an end, within the next ten
19 minutes, if at all possible.
20 I will not go on showing anything on the screen. I don't have any
21 more time. We have listed the three incidents that happened in May, June
22 and March 1995. I have shown you the front page of the book that was
23 delivered to The Hague Tribunal. The 270 cases that you have mentioned
24 and that concern the victims of combat activities, were they investigated
25 in the same way as the first two cases that we mentioned, that happened in
1 May and June 1995. Would you say that the 217 cases that are listed in
2 the book of criminal reports were done identically or in a similar way in
3 keeping with the practices of your profession?
4 A. The cases were covered in the same or identical way. I would like
5 to point out that among the 217 reports there are not only 217 victims.
6 Some reports encompass, in some cases, as many as up to 100 or even more
8 Q. How many civilian victims were there approximately in the 217
9 reports that you filed during the war and during the time of the
10 indictment against Dragomir Milosevic?
11 A. The MUP of the Republika Srpska team that I am still the head of
12 at the moment is still carrying out investigations together with the
13 commission for Sarajevo in the Prosecutor's office for Bosnia-Herzegovina.
14 So far my team has compiled 2.999 files containing the names of the
15 victims of war in Sarajevo. Out of that number, some 2.000 were killed as
16 a result of terror in the territory under the control of the BiH army.
17 The remaining victims were killed by snipers and artillery in the
18 territory of the MUP of the Serbian Sarajevo.
19 THE INTERPRETER: Can the counsel please repeat the question.
20 A. 3.299 so far.
21 Q. Thank you very much.
22 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I have no further questions.
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: Witness, can you just clarify that in the report
24 to which you have just referred, you mention that 2.999 files containing
25 the names of the victims of war in Sarajevo. What is not quite clear to
1 me is whether these 2.999 victims are Serb victims and so that the number
2 only includes the number of persons wounded or killed among the Serbian
3 civilian population, or whether it includes all cases of killing and
4 wounding regardless of ethnicity.
5 And, secondly, I would also like you to indicate, if you can,
6 whether the 2.999 persons were civilians all together, or whether that
7 also includes combatants.
8 Can you clarify these two questions for me?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can.
10 The interpretation was not correct. I said 3.999 victims who were
11 all civilian victims and victims who were killed.
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Again, a mistake, he said 3.999
13 -- 3.299 and it says 3.999. The record has to be cleared it has to state
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Tapuskovic, it was my mistake and I see that
16 the figure 3.299 is already in the transcript. So you do not have to
18 Mr. Witness, please continue your answer.
19 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] However, Your Honour, Judge
20 Harhoff, it has been recorded that he said 3.999 to your question which is
21 a mistake the witness said 3.299 which is the correct figure, 3.299.
22 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, but it was just corrected.
23 You may continue.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These were all Serb victims when
25 we're talking about the territory under the control of the BiH army. Also
1 the names of the victims were recorded for the territory of
2 Serbian Sarajevo which means that we have members of all ethnic groups who
3 were killed during the war. This number exclude any numbers of the VRS
4 army members who were killed in combat. These were exclusively civilian
5 victims of war who were killed between 1992 and 1995. So the combatants
6 are excluded from this list.
7 JUDGE HARHOFF: Very well. I thank you very much.
8 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
9 Mr. Tapuskovic, I presume that you have finished your
10 examination-in-chief. I will now hand the floor to the OTP for the
12 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
13 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes.
14 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I would just like to clarify
15 something about the figure in order to finish this business. What
16 remains unclear in the witness's answer even after my -- Judge Harhoff's
17 justified intervention, he mentioned 3.299 victims, but he has not
18 clarified how many victims fell to the combat activities and how many were
19 killed in different ways. This is what has not been clarified with regard
20 to the figure.
21 A. The number of civilian victims that were killed by combat
22 activities, I can't give you the exact number, but approximately 1.500 who
23 were killed as a result of combat activities and over 2.000 were killed in
24 any other way in the camps, in the prisons, in the makeshift prisons as a
25 result of torture and in any other number of different ways.
1 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
2 Ms. Edgerton.
3 Cross-examination by Ms. Edgerton:
4 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, thank you.
5 Q. Mr. Tusevljak, I wonder if I could actually ask Mr. Registrar, if
6 he could move the projector of the ELMO down so that Mr. Tusevljak and I
7 could see one another a little bit more clearly.
8 Thank you.
9 Mr. Tusevljak, you know my name, because you have heard me speak
10 over the course of the morning and I would like now to ask you some
11 questions on, among other things, the testimony that you have given here
12 today, but if for some reason I'm unclear or you don't understand, please
14 A. Fine, okay.
15 Q. You've given evidence this morning on a number of sad occasions
16 relating to the killing of young people on Bosnian Serb-held territory
17 surrounding Sarajevo at various times during the conflict. And I'd like
18 to ask you: You accept, don't you, that the same sort of thing was
19 happening on Bosnian-held territory within Sarajevo throughout the
20 conflict as well?
21 A. The question is not clear to me. What do you mean, that I should
22 accept? What should I accept?
23 Q. That the same sort of killings that you testified about this
24 morning were happening on Bosnian-held territory in Sarajevo throughout
25 the conflict as well.
1 A. Well, probably there were victims. People were killed. I wasn't
2 in Sarajevo at that time, but my assumption is that people did get killed
3 there. That's my assumption.
4 JUDGE MINDUA: One minute.
5 [Interpretation] You may continue, Ms. Edgerton.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
7 Q. And your assumption, I take it, is founded on a number of things.
8 The media, for example. Am I correct?
9 A. Well, quite often in the areas where I was, we didn't have
10 electricity, which means that we didn't really follow the media all that
11 much. But I know that the media covered the events in a very biased
12 manner. Even including the incidents that I myself investigated, so I
13 really, as a professional, I could not credit the reports that were
14 published in the media at all.
15 Q. So when you agreed with me, what did you base that on? How do you
16 know that people in Bosnian-held territory, young and old were killed or
17 injured by small arms, sniper, as well as shell fire, throughout the
19 A. Well, I don't remember that I agreed with you. I said that these
20 were merely hypotheses and I cannot know about the fact of what was going
21 on the other side of the line. I can talk about what I saw with my own
22 eyes in the investigations that I participated in or investigations that
23 were conducted by the personnel of the crime police.
24 Q. So you're saying that even though you worked in detail in the
25 areas around Sarajevo, you have no knowledge of the fact that civilians
1 within the city were regularly falling victim to various types of fire.
2 A. Not for all the cases, but I know for a fact that in conversation
3 with the Serbs that had left Sarajevo and in the statements and that are
4 on the record in the Ministry of the Interior, that Serbs were often used
5 as a human shields in operations launched by the BH army they were pushed
6 to the front lines.
7 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... Was not my question at all,
8 was it?
9 A. You asked me if I knew about the suffering of the civilians in
11 Q. No --
12 A. And my reply to you --
13 Q. Sir, sir, I did not. My question to you is whether you have
14 knowledge of the fact that civilians within the city were regularly
15 falling victim to various types of gun-fire. Do you have knowledge or
17 A. No.
18 Q. Well, and that answer sounds to me rather surprising, sir, since
19 you seem to have detailed knowledge about 3.299 victims that I'm sure you
20 didn't personally involve yourself in the investigations of.
21 A. This was investigated by a team that was under my direct
22 management. I was -- I am in daily contact with them, I work with them
23 everyday and as I began to explain to you about the suffering that I know
24 of, the victims that I know of you, you interrupted me. I think that
25 these people who were killed when they were used as human shields and when
1 those people who were in work platoons who were shot in the back when they
2 were in the front lines digging trenches and I think they were also
3 citizens of Sarajevo, and there were also victims of the war in Sarajevo.
4 Q. Sir, have you read the indictment against the accused in this
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. So you know that the accused in this case is specifically charged
8 with shelling and sniping civilians in Sarajevo, don't you?
9 A. We have two degrees here. I mean, I have a degree in law. One
10 thing is the indictment, and the other thing is a conviction. So as far
11 as I know, he has been indicted and now whether things that alleged in the
12 indictment are true it is not up to me to judge that.
13 Q. Knowing that he's specifically charged with a campaign of shelling
14 and sniping civilians in Sarajevo then and with a degree in law, sir, on
15 what basis are you bringing evidence of maltreatment of Serb victims being
16 used allegedly as human shields or in work platoons. These aren't my
17 questions, sir.
18 A. I think you asked me about the suffering of civilians in Sarajevo,
19 and I am saying again these are civilians in Sarajevo. They lived in the
20 territory controlled by the BH army. They were civilian, citizens of
21 Sarajevo and they, too, are the victims of the war. You asked me about
22 them and this is part of my answer to you.
23 Q. Can we focus on the allegations that the accused is charged with,
24 shelling and sniping by way of a campaign, all right?
25 Let's go back to my original question. You insist you have no
1 knowledge of people, civilians killed by small arms sniper as well as
2 shell fire within Bosnian-held Sarajevo, do you? Did I understand your
3 answer correctly?
4 A. Legally speaking, I don't, because I or any of my police officers
5 never took part in any of the investigations of any such incidents, if
6 there were such incidents. So as a police officer in that time-period, we
7 did not have the authority to investigate to go over to the other side and
8 to investigate what happened.
9 So if I am to tell what you I heard and what I didn't hear, I
10 don't think that it is necessary. I can only talk to you about what I saw
11 with my own eyes and what I learned from the official report that I
12 received from my operatives.
13 Q. You say legally speaking have you no knowledge. Is there a
14 difference between legal knowledge and actual knowledge in your mind? I
15 don't quite understand what you're saying.
16 A. What are you implying? I don't know what you're trying to tell
18 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] I see that Mr. Tapuskovic is on his
19 feet. He probably wants to intervene.
20 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] [Previous translation continues]
21 ... Did not talk about legal knowledge but factual knowledge. He said
22 that he knew only about things that he himself was able to establish, and
23 he cannot say anything about any facts that he himself was not able to
24 establish. So he didn't mention legal knowledge.
25 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Edgerton.
1 MS. EDGERTON: Although, I see "legally speaking" in the
2 transcript at page 89, line 7, if I may, I'll just move on, please, to
3 another area, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] If you wish, you may put the
5 question to the witness once again. You may clarify this term, "legally
6 speaking," if you wish.
7 MS. EDGERTON: No, thank you, Your Honours for the opportunity.
8 I'm happy to move on.
9 Q. Sir, in 1992, and later on in the war, you testified, you said,
10 that your function was coordinator for crime prevention in Serb Sarajevo,
11 and eventually head of security for Serb Sarajevo police; and your
12 responsibilities included the investigation of war crimes and crimes
13 against civilians. Is that correct?
14 A. Yes, head of the criminal crime police department, not security.
15 And its task is to investigate crimes against property, crimes against
16 persons, and war crimes.
17 Q. So you had the power to launch or initiate investigations into
18 crimes against property, crimes against persons, and war crimes. Is that
20 A. Not against persons charged with war crimes. On the basis of the
21 knowledge that we gained and the evidence collected, we submitted crime
22 reports to the public prosecutor, and then they decided whether all the
23 elements were in place or not, and then the crime report that we wrote was
24 then submitted to the investigating judge, and then they were able to
25 either open the investigation or decide not to do so on the basis of the
1 evidence that we gathered.
2 So I did not have the power to open an investigation. The job of
3 the police is to gather evidence and to submit it to the competent public
4 prosecutor and investigating judge.
5 Q. Did you ever throughout the course of the conflict undertake
6 investigations of persons of Serb ethnicity for allegations of firing,
7 sniping, or shelling on to areas of Bosnian-held Sarajevo?
8 A. As far as I know, nobody was charged for any such acts because, I
9 have to stress, that the Public Security Centre, the police, at that time
10 had in its jurisdiction the investigation of civilians under the laws as
11 they were at the time, not against the troops of the VRS.
12 There were military security organs that dealt with the VRS
13 troops. There was a military prosecutor's office, military court. We, as
14 members of the civilian police, legally had no authority, no powers over
15 personnel of the VRS.
16 Q. So your answer is no?
17 A. Yes, or rather, no, because we did not have any powers over the
18 personnel of the Republika Srpska army; so we, in the police, we never
19 conducted any such investigations because legally we could not do so.
20 Q. Now, your present function, I understand, is to investigate crimes
21 against Serbs, is that correct, people of Serb ethnicity?
22 A. Every order that the Ministry of the Interior receives from the
23 Bosnia and Herzegovina prosecutor's office, or any other prosecutor's
24 office inside Bosnia and Herzegovina, must be carried out by the relevant
25 police organs. So I have complied with the orders I received from the
1 prosecutor's office in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Naturally, my subordinates
2 do this job, and they do it regardless of the ethnicity of the persons in
4 Q. Can I ask you, again, is your function to investigate crimes
5 against people of Serb ethnicity, yes or no?
6 A. Yes, against all those who have been indicted or who are under
8 Q. Sir, you give a different weight to the allegations of crimes
9 against non-Serb, don't you?
10 A. No, absolutely not. My team, and I myself, we cooperate in our
11 investigations with at least five or six prosecutor who are not from
12 Bosnia and Herzegovina, who have come to Bosnia and Herzegovina. And we
13 have worked together for two years, and my team and I never had any such
14 complaints or remarks made.
15 Q. From 1992 to 1995, you, sir, I put it, never investigated
16 allegations of crimes against non-Serbs, did you?
17 A. I will deny your suggestion. The first criminal report that was
18 written in the Ministry of the Interior of the Republika Srpska was a
19 criminal report against a Serb who had killed a Muslim and a Croat at
20 Grbavica. He was remanded in custody and was later tried and convicted.
21 At Ilidza, we have several cases where victims were members of another
22 ethnic group. We were able to identify the perpetrator, to file criminal
23 reports against him, and they were prosecuted and convicted.
24 I have in my personal experience an investigation into a Ukrainian
25 member of UNPROFOR who was murdered. This investigation was conducted.
1 So we have evidence of all that in the files, relevant files of the
2 archives of Republika Srpska, so I would definitely disagree with you.
3 Q. From 1992 to 1995, what proportion of the investigations you
4 undertook, the investigations into war crimes, were investigations into
5 allegations of crimes against non-Serbs?
6 A. I really can't give you the percentage.
7 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. Tapuskovic.
8 MR. TAPUSKOVIC: [Interpretation] I think that my colleague must
9 make a distinction in order make the witness understand between the area
10 of responsibility of the Republika Srpska army and the area of
11 responsibility of the 1st Corps of the BH army, because the witness will
12 never understand what Counsel is asking him in order to be able to explain
13 anything. So have you to really stress this, make a point of it in the
14 question, because the witness will never understand the question the way
15 it is put to him.
16 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, indeed.
17 Ms. Edgerton, in order for the witness to understand clearly your
18 question, could you be more explicit.
19 MS. EDGERTON: Let me try and add the following detail then.
20 Q. From 1992 to 1995, what proportion of the investigations into war
21 crimes that you undertook were investigations into the allegations of
22 crimes against Bosnian Muslims?
23 A. The percentage. If we talk about investigations, I'm telling you
24 that the Security Services Centre, eastern Sarajevo, covered the
25 municipality where Serbs lived from 1992 until 1995. The percentage of
1 persons against whom criminal reports were filed for war crimes may be
2 about 70 or 80 per cent of them were -- they were Muslim, but a large
3 percentage of the criminal reports by far most of the criminal reports
4 were filed against persons unknown. So unknown perpetrator from the BH
5 army or unknown perpetrator, sharpshooter, sniper, because in most cases
6 when an official report was filed, we will not identified the perpetrator
7 of the crime. We knew that the had been committed, that the child had
8 been killed, a civilian. But we --
9 Q. Let me stop you there, sir. Let me --
10 A. -- didn't know, so we had the criminal reports against unknown
12 Q. My question was go crimes against Bosnian Muslim, Bosnian Muslims
13 as victims. What percentage of the investigations into war crimes that
14 you undertook were investigations of crimes against Bosnian Muslim as
15 victims, crimes in which the victims were Bosnian Muslims?
16 A. Well, I can't give you the percentage. But wherever it was
17 determined that the crime was committed not only a war crime, we're
18 talking about murders, rapes, robberies --
19 Q. Excuse me, sir. The question was about war crimes.
20 A. -- it was filed.
21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... War crimes.
22 A. There was a number of crimes other than war crimes.
23 Q. That's not my question, sir.
24 A. So whenever we knew that the crime was committed a criminal report
25 was given. Okay, if you want a percentage, I can't give you a percentage
1 because I would have to go through all the reports and then tell you
2 whether it was five per cent, 10 percent or 25 percent.
3 I think it was over 25 percent of the cases.
4 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Mr. Witness, because this is your
5 field of expertise and have a law degree and I believe that the question
6 of the counsel for OTP is very clear. She's talking about crimes, war
7 crimes, that were committed against Bosnian Muslims. That is the question
8 that is being asked to you. Now, you're going to answer in terms of
9 percentage. You know the percentage or either you don't know the
10 percentage. But the question was very clear, so can you try to answer the
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know the percentage.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Witness, I'm a bit unsure about the authority
14 to investigate war crimes, because I thought that your answer just a short
15 while ago was that war crimes committed by members of the SRK on Muslim
16 victims would be investigated and prosecuted not by your office, but by
17 military authorities.
18 Is that correctly understood or --
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Previous translation continues] ... In that case,
21 I don't understand why you are now telling us that some percentage of your
22 cases were, in fact, war crimes committed against Muslims. Because either
23 these crimes were investigated and prosecuted by military authority,
24 presumably there was a military prosecutor and military courts, perhaps.
25 So war crimes committed by members of the SRK would -- would be dealt with
1 in military circles and not by your office. So how is it now that your
2 office apparently also investigated and prosecuted a number of war crimes
3 committed by the SRK against Muslim victims?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't say that those were crimes
5 committed by the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps. There has been a
6 misunderstanding. These are war crimes because the people who lived in
7 the area controlled by us -- SRK who were of different ethnic background,
8 they were also -- they fell victim to the snipers and shells that was
9 fired from -- that were fired from the other side. And in every such
10 case, we went to the crime scene, we conducted a crime scene investigation
11 and filed a criminal report against an unknown perpetrator in the same way
12 as if the victim were a Serb. In most cases, the victims were civilians
13 and when my team, when my crime investigation police went to the team, the
14 only condition was for the victim to be a civilian and not a member of the
15 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps. If you had victims who were from the
16 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps, then a military investigator and the member of
17 the security organ from the SRK would go to the site and investigate. So
18 I had authority to conduct investigations only when civilians were the
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: But you seem to be suggesting that war crimes were
21 also being committed from Serb-held territory against Muslim victims by
22 persons who did not belong to the SRK, that is to say, by Serb civilians.
23 Is that what you are saying?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. You have misunderstood me
25 again. I apologise.
1 The perpetrators of war crimes that were documented by us
2 committed crimes against civilians, civilians were killed by shelling, by
3 snipers. And if there were individual cases of murders of civilians, if
4 this was done by a member of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps in the territory
5 covered by the Security Services Centre of east Sarajevo, when we learned
6 about the perpetrator of the crime if he was a member of the SRK, we would
7 inform their security organ, their investigating Prosecutor or judge and
8 we would hand over the whole file to the military prosecutor's office.
9 In this case we're talking about the victims of shelling and
10 sniping carried out by members of the BiH army. And as I already told you
11 the majority of those official reports were sent to Prosecutor against an
12 unknown perpetrator because at the time we could not establish the
13 identity of those who had committed those crimes on the other side. We
14 were only aware of the incident, we had to put together documentation and
15 we had to submit that documentation to the official bodies. That's what
16 we did.
17 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Ms. Edgerton.
18 MS. EDGERTON: I'd just like to follow on from some of the answers
19 that you have begin to His Honour Judge Harhoff.
20 Now, you said that with respect to war crimes, crimes against
21 civilians, you said if this was done by a member of the Sarajevo-Romanija
22 Corps in the territory covered by your Security Services Centre and you
23 learned about it, you would inform the SRK security organ. Is that
25 A. Not the security organ of the SRK, the main SRK security organ
1 acted as police. It was under the authority of the military prosecutor's
2 office and the military investigating judge.
3 Q. Well, I'm glad you clarified that, because you just told Judge
4 Harhoff you would inform their security organ, so I'd actually like to
5 know who you informed? What was their name?
6 A. The procedure was this. There was a security organ in the
7 Sarajevo-Romanija Corps with whom we communicated directly and we informed
8 each other about various events. When it came to the procedure, the
9 authority for processing members of the Republika Srpska army were -- was
10 in the hands of the military prosecutor's office and the military judge.
11 Or the military court.
12 Q. Who did you inform? What was their name?
13 A. The military prosecutor's office and the military court.
14 Q. Do they not have names, sir?
15 A. What do you mean names?
16 Q. What was the name of the military prosecutor, what was the name of
17 the investigative judge? Who were the people you informed?
18 A. Really don't know their names as I sit here, because save for
19 the written communication. We did not have any other communication with
20 them. We did not participate in joint investigations; therefore, I can't
21 remember the names of the military prosecutors. I could only speculate at
22 the moment.
23 Q. When you say "speculate," sir, is that because you might recall a
25 A. I'm really trying very hard to remember. There were two or three
1 prosecutors. I'm trying to remember their names. They were members of
2 the Republika Srpska army, and in 90-plus per cent we worked with a
3 civilian prosecutor and civilian courts. Our communication with the
4 military prosecutor was very, very -- a rare event. We did not
5 communicate with them that much.
6 Q. So I take it from your answer, then, that it was is a very, very
7 infrequent thing for you to take action on an allegation against a member
8 of the Sarajevo-Romanija Corps and refer the case onward. Is that
10 A. No. What I'm saying is this: Whenever a crime is committed -
11 this is what you have to know - usually, those crimes are committed by an
12 unknown perpetrator. The investigation is carried out but the Ministry of
13 the Interior of Republika Srpska; and as a result of the investigation, we
14 find out who the perpetrator is. And if we establish that he was a member
15 of the Republika Srpska army, then we would inform the military prosecutor
16 and the military judge, and they would take over the entire cases file
17 from us.
18 In other words, we stopped working together with them or we never
19 work together with them from the moment when I hand over the file to
20 them. From that moment on, I don't have any more insight into what
21 happens to the file.
22 Q. How often did you have a file like that, that you needed to hand
24 A. Believe me, I don't know. I've never given it a second thought
25 because, in addition to myself as the head of that service, there were
1 also departments; and at the level of the departments, there could have
2 been cooperation because each of these department had their bosses, their
3 superiors. So, if there was such a case file, it did not have to reach me
4 at all. It could have been any of my associates who could have handed the
5 file over to the military prosecutor.
6 What my department did was to establish whether the perpetrator
7 was a member of the Republika Srpska army, and then such a case file would
8 be handed over to the military prosecutor's office of the VRS.
9 Q. I take it from your experience, then, these occasions were so
10 seldom, you actually don't recall how often it happened?
11 A. If I were to remember one, then I would remember five. But I'm
12 telling you that the first stage is an on-site inspection establishing who
13 the victim is, whether they were a civilian or a member of the VRS. If we
14 establish that the victim is civilian, then together with the
15 investigating judge and the public prosecutor we continue investigation.
16 If it's a member the of VRS then investigation is taken over by
17 the military judge and the military prosecutor. When we establish that
18 the victim is a civilian, and then in the further investigation, we
19 establish that the crime was committed by a member of the VRS, then again
20 we inform the Prosecutor and the investigating judge there, and the
21 complete case file is handed over to them. In any case, we are whenever
22 VRS member is involved, that person fell under the authority of the
23 military prosecutor and the military judge. How many cases there were, I
24 really wouldn't be able to tell you .
25 Q. Thank you. You absolutely, by your last answer, you absolutely
1 don't recall the number any longer, do you?
2 A. I can't recall the exact number, no.
3 Q. Thank you. To move on to another area, and it was with respect
4 to -- regard to the testimony that you gave relating to the incident near
5 the sports centre in Ilidza, the exhibit that you put into evidence was
6 D299, if I'm not mistaken.
7 You talked about photographs of the victims. Do you recall that?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Now I'd like to ask you this, sir. You're an extremely
10 experienced police officer, working in a large variety of conditions, some
11 of them obviously very dangerous. But would you agree with me that if
12 somebody is injured as a result of shelling or sniping and there's a risk
13 that the area would come under fire again, you would only take photographs
14 as part of your forensic investigation if there was no risk of you getting
15 shot or shelled?
16 A. The basic rule, which was confirmed most obvious during the war,
17 was that the on-site inspection could not be done immediately. Firstly,
18 we tried to secure the place of the incident. You would inform the
19 UNPROFOR that oversaw the situation, and then they would carry out the
20 investigation together with us, or we would wait if -- if more fire was to
21 be expected.
22 If it was obvious that the person was dead, then we wouldn't put
23 ourselves at risk. If that person still showed the sign of life, then our
24 priority would be to get to the victim as soon as possible in order to
25 attend to the victim, to take it to hospital.
1 I have told you that my office was maybe two or 300 metres away
2 from the front line, that there was shelling every day in all of Ilidza
3 and Lukavica, that my office was pierced with numerous bullets and shells,
4 and my life was at danger and at risk every day.
5 Q. Sir, I was asking you about the photographs now; if we could focus
6 on my question, and you anticipated my next question. You indicated that
7 if there was a possibility that -- if the victim was alive or the
8 possibility of saving the victim, you wouldn't actually occupy yourself
9 with taking photographs of the scene, would you? You would work on
10 getting the victim to the hospital as quickly as possible?
11 A. Of course.
12 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, I see by my watch, and the computer,
13 it's 1.44.
14 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for the Presiding Judge, please.
15 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] [No interpretation]
16 MS. EDGERTON: Then I would ask this question.
17 Q. Would you agree with me that you have come across situations
18 following a shelling or sniping incident that sometimes friends, relatives
19 or passers-by who were on the scene would actually themselves rush the
20 victims to the hospital, the morgue, or even their homes before you
21 arrived on scene?
22 A. This happened very rarely. Very rarely did it happen that a
23 person who had been killed would be moved from that place. Every time
24 when somebody was wounded or showed a sign of life, then his members,
25 members of the police or the armies, would take that person to the
1 hospital. It was very rarely, if at all. In my archives, there are a lot
2 of photographs showing where certain people killed, and you could see them
3 lying there dead or dismembered. That was the only possible way for us to
4 subsequently prove that a crime had indeed been committed.
5 MS. EDGERTON: I could go on, Your Honours, but I note I have used
6 up my minute.
7 JUDGE MINDUA: [Interpretation] Yes, quite right. Now the time is
8 a quarter to 2.00, so we are going to close our hearing until tomorrow
10 Mr. Witness, as you will notice, the Prosecutor has not completed
11 her cross-examination, so we want you back tomorrow.
12 The session is closed.
13 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
14 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 12th day of July,
15 2007, at 9.00 a.m.