1 Thursday, 10 October 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 2.21 p.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Case Number IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus
7 Stanislav Galic.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
9 I first informed the parties that we continue to work under Rule
10 15 bis since Judge Nieto-Navia is still ill. Nevertheless, the
11 expectation is that he would return in the beginning of next week so that
12 we would not go over the limit of three days. Before I ask the Defence to
13 call its next witness, I would first like to go into closed session.
14 [Closed session]
12 Pages 13471 to 13499 – redacted – closed session.
6 [Open session]
7 JUDGE ORIE: We are in open session now. May I take it that the
8 Defence is ready to examine its next witness, to call its next witness?
9 Madam Usher, can you please bring in the next witness. Could the
10 technicians take care that when the witness enters the courtroom, that the
11 facial distortion will be effective.
12 [The witness entered court]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Again, good afternoon, Mrs. DP3, as we will call you.
14 First, I inform you about the decision of the Chamber, that the protective
15 measures that have been requested have been granted. That means that
16 facial distortion is effective and we will use a pseudonym.
17 Before giving testimony in this court, the Rules of Procedure and
18 Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that you will speak the
19 truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The text will now be
20 handed out to you by the usher. May I invite you to make that
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. I solemnly declare that
23 I will speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think that
1 the witness will be disconcerted by the fact that she can see only two
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the previous witness saw first the three Judges,
4 and so he might have noticed a change. You might be a bit surprised that
5 there are only two Judges where there are supposed to be three. One of
6 the Judges is ill and for a limited period of time we may continue.
7 Everything you say is recorded both video and audio and is written down so
8 he will read every single word you will tell the Chamber.
9 Ms. Pilipovic, is it you who is going to examine the witness?
10 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will examine the
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
13 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] But with your leave, my colleague
14 might want to ask some questions as well. Again, only upon your
16 WITNESS: WITNESS DP3
17 [Witness answered through interpreter]
18 Examined by Ms. Pilipovic:
19 Q. [Interpretation] Madam, in view of the fact that the Chamber has
20 granted you protective measures, we will address you as DP3. And before I
21 start examining you, I would like you to take a look at this document and
22 tell us what you think of it.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So you are telling us that all of this information is correct?
25 A. It is correct.
1 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence would
2 like to turn into private session so that the witness can give personal
3 information about where she lived and worked.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will then turn into private session.
5 [Private session]
12 Pages 13503 to 13504 – redacted – private session.
20 [Open session]
21 JUDGE ORIE: We are in open session now.
22 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Madam, you told us about where you lived and where you worked.
24 Can you tell me, please, how long did you stay in your job?
25 A. To be precise, my last working day was the 16th of April, 1992.
1 Q. Can you tell us why is it that you worked only until April 16?
2 Has something happened to cause you to start working?
3 A. Starting on Saturday, the 4th of April, and up until the 16th of
4 April it was a security risk to go to work. Life wasn't normal. It
5 wasn't as usual. So on the 16th I ceased going to work due to my personal
6 safety concerns.
7 Q. When you say, "starting on April 4th," can you tell us whether
8 something happened that you were able to observe yourself, and that
9 indicated that your safety was jeopardised?
10 A. On Friday, April 3rd, and the night into 4th April, Saturday, was
11 Ramadan and there was a lot of shooting in town both in my neighbourhood
12 and in other parts of town. It was very clear what was going on.
13 Q. When you say, "it was clear what was going on," could you clarify
14 that for us? What was actually going on and who was shooting?
15 A. This was something that all of us expected because we were told
16 explicitly that once the Ramadan came, there would be shooting. However,
17 this was not typical for Muslims. I was 32 at the time, and that was the
18 first time in my life that I heard them shooting on their religious
20 Q. When you say that that was something to be expected in view of the
21 previous events, can you tell us whether in town, and in the neighbourhood
22 where you lived, there was something else going on that indicated that
23 shooting was to be expected? Were there any incidents prior to April 4th
25 A. I suppose that the event of March 1st is well known to everybody
1 else, and there is no need to go into details regarding that.
2 Q. Thank you, Witness. When you tell us that you ceased going to
3 work on April 16th because your personal safety was jeopardised, can you
4 tell us, whether in your neighbourhood, you noticed something that was
5 unusual, that was not typical for that part of town?
6 A. Well at that time, nothing was usual, nothing was typical, nothing
7 was as it was before. The stores had been plundered, the organisations
8 and companies stopped working. There were people with arms in the
9 streets. Some of them had pistols. Some had rifles. It was a very
10 chaotic situation. So nothing resembled a typical city life.
11 Q. When you tell us that there were armed people walking about town,
12 can you tell us whether they were just individuals, or were those groups
13 of people and can you tell us how they were dressed?
14 A. Well, on the way to my apartment, I would meet individuals, but I
15 would also meet groups of two or three people. And that was something new
16 for me.
17 Q. In your neighbourhood, do you know or did you personally observe
18 that certain families were evicted from their apartments by armed people?
19 What I am interested in --
20 MR. IERACE: I object. Leading.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, would you please rephrase your question, Ms.
23 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Madam, did you see certain families being harassed by armed
1 A. After the shooting of that night, the one that I mentioned, so on
2 April 4th, the situation in my neighbourhood was such that I believed that
3 it was not good for my children to remain there. And the same is true for
4 my acquaintances, for my family. All of them were leaving their
5 neighbourhoods and going towards suburbs, towards New Sarajevo and
6 Lukavica, specifically.
7 Q. When you say they were leaving town do you know whether families
8 were leaving other neighbourhoods in town due to such situation?
9 A. My sister and her family left her house on foot, the house located
10 in Pofalici with just one travelling bag. The same is true of my uncle
11 and my aunt who left Hrasno and the other neighbourhood, the same applied
12 to other acquaintances and friends of mine. They all believed it was
13 unsafe for them to remain in their neighbourhoods.
14 Q. Madam, can you tell me in your neighbourhood, what was the
15 composition, ethnic composition, of the inhabitants?
16 A. In my neighbourhood, the majority of the population was Serbian.
17 Q. When you tell us that people were leaving Pofalici and Hrasno
18 neighbourhoods, can you tell us what was ethnic composition there?
19 A. The Muslims were in majority in Pofalici, and we all know what
20 happened later on in Pofalici. Hrasno was also a Muslim neighbourhood.
21 Alipasino Polje was also a completely Muslim neighbourhood. Svrakino Selo
22 was also a Muslim neighbourhood. This is where my mother-in-law lived.
23 So all of these people started leaving those neighbourhoods and going to
24 the parts of town where there was a Serbian majority. This is how it
1 Q. Madam, and this movement of population from one neighbourhood into
2 another, did this, according to you, mean that people were trying to move
3 into areas where there was a majority of people that were of same ethnic
5 A. Yes, that is what we did. My children and I left our
6 neighbourhood because we felt that our security was jeopardised and we
7 were in fear for our lives.
8 Q. Can you tell us who did you feel you were at risk from?
9 A. In view of the events of March 1st, and in view of the fact on
10 that same weekend on Ramadan, a Serb policeman was killed by in New
11 Sarajevo police station, by his Muslim colleague and the authorities did
12 nothing regarding that, and again in view of the fact that there were
13 armed people in the streets with Patriotic League insignia and there was
14 shooting going on without any sanctions by authorities when there was
15 plundering going on, then I guess all should be clear.
16 Q. Madam, after these events in town, the events that you just
17 described to us did something else take place in your neighbourhood? Did
18 you try to organise yourselves in a way?
19 A. It was clear to us that we had to change our lifestyle. The man
20 attempted to organise patrols in order to protect their women and
21 children. And then there was that murder in the police station, the one
22 that I described, and all of this involved people that I knew, including
23 my late husband, the best man at our wedding, our neighbours, my late
24 husband's childhood friends.
25 Q. Madam, I apologise, but I would like you to give brief answers to
1 my questions. When you just told us that your late husband and the bast
2 man from your wedding and friends took part in neighbourhood watches, are
3 you trying to tell us that they organised themselves?
4 A. Well, what else could they have done? The police wasn't doing its
5 job. It wasn't prosecuting offenders, so what else was there for them to
7 Q. Madam, can you tell us, did the men in your neighbourhood go and
8 report somewhere? How did they organise themselves?
9 A. Well, a while ago I started telling you that the only proper place
10 where they could go was the Territorial Defence in that neighbourhood
11 where we were.
12 Q. When you tell us, "Territorial Defence," could you clarify what
13 the Territorial Defence could offer to the men in your neighbourhood?
14 A. An organisational structure.
15 Q. When you say "an organisational structure," can you tell us
16 whether they received certain weapons or uniforms, or did they simply go
17 and report to Territorial Defence?
18 A. In our country, all men of military age were members of reserve
19 forces of the army or police. And all of them had their assignments, the
20 places where they had to go and report. And they normally were regularly
21 called to report for exercises, military reserve exercises. All of them
22 also had -- were issued uniforms that they normally kept at home.
23 Q. Madam, you told us that all of them had reserve forces uniforms,
24 regardless of their ethic origin. Are you telling us, in fact, that men
25 of all nationalities in your neighbourhood were organised in Territorial
1 Defence or was the situation different?
2 A. Territorial Defence was an organisation. It existed even in April
3 of 1992, and at that time, everybody reported there.
4 Q. Are you telling us that in the part of town where you lived, in
5 the Territorial Defence there were Serbs, Muslims and Croats?
6 A. At that time, yes.
7 Q. When you say, "at that time, yes," was that the case throughout
8 the conflict? Was it in 1992, 1993, 1994, or did something happen which
9 was different to what you just described?
10 A. When we are talking about the period mid-April, from then on it
11 was clearly defined, territorial in every way, who's on whose side. The
12 city was divided.
13 Q. When you say that it was clearly defined territorially as well,
14 and that whose side was which, and that the city was divided, what did you
15 mean by that?
16 A. For instance, specifically, for this part of town that I was,
17 there was a majority Serb population and there was the Serb population,
18 Serbian inhabitants who had arrived from other parts of town. And that
19 means that they stayed there. So that is how it was, that is how it was
20 in Ilidza. There were people who were there from before. Then there was
21 the Novo Sarajevo municipality where I was. So these young men didn't go
22 to Bascarsija or Hrasno or Pofalici. They stayed where their houses were,
23 where their families were. And throughout, that is how it was.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
25 MR. IERACE: I would be grateful for the opportunity to raise an
1 issue in private session, if I could. I apologise for interrupting.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would it --
3 MR. IERACE: It would probably be better in the absence of the
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then I would like the escort, the usher, out of the
6 courtroom. We will ask you to leave the courtroom just for a second.
7 [The witness stands down]
8 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. I think the estimate for
9 this witness is approximately two hours in chief which means that we may
10 get to cross-examination tonight. The Defence was required to provide to
11 the Prosecution the names of witnesses and clearly, it is anticipated by
12 all that --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, I am sorry. I forgot that we had to turn into
14 private session. So we were not. But until this moment, I don't think
15 that there are any accidents that happened. I apologise.
16 [Private session]
12 Pages 13513 to 13514 – redacted – private session.
6 [Open session]
7 [The witness entered court]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please be seated again. Yes, Ms. Pilipovic, please
10 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 Q. Witness, before we had a break in the examination-in-chief, you
12 were telling us about the situation in the part of town where you lived.
13 You said that in your opinion, the city was divided. Did you continue to
14 live in that part of town? Did you stay there, you and your husband, and
15 your children?
16 A. With the children we went to the part of town, municipality
17 Novo Sarajevo. It is a suburban part of town and it is in Lukavica.
18 Q. When you tell us that you went to another part of town with the
19 children, are you telling us that you no longer lived in that part of town
20 and in the street - please don't mention the street - or did you continue
21 to live there?
22 A. It was -- there was no security. It was not possible to live
23 safely in that street in that part of town with the children.
24 Q. Are you telling us that your husband also went?
25 A. My husband, as I already said, went to report to the Territorial
2 Q. Could you tell us whether your husband, as member of Territorial
3 Defence, did he have any specific tasks?
4 A. He was an ambulance driver.
5 Q. When you say that he was an ambulance driver, could you tell us if
6 your husband as an ambulance driver, did he have certain duties, and was
7 he on duty in certain locations?
8 A. We were -- when I say "we" I mean women, children and the elderly,
9 we were in this village in houses, and they, the men that is, had their
10 positions in the watches, the guards, the patrols. That is what I know.
11 Q. When you say that they had their positions in the guards and the
12 patrols, were there any incidents at that time in that part of town? Is
13 there anything that was happening at the time that wasn't usual?
14 A. There was sporadic shooting coming from all directions. Everyone
15 knows that. That is what was also reported in the media, and we could
16 hear it ourselves. So it was a situation which stopped being peacetime, a
17 long time ago.
18 Q. Do you have any personal knowledge, and we are talking about April
19 1992 were there any important incidents where there were also casualties,
20 wounded? Do you know and do you remember when that was?
21 A. Well, the worst thing that happened to me was the morning of the
22 21st of April 1992 in the early hours of the morning. I had already got
23 up. That was 4.00 in the morning at dawn. I was awoken by horrific
24 shooting and it was quite clear that there was combat activities going on.
25 And in the morning, at about 7.00, at that time, we still had telephone
1 lines that were operating. I called my neighbour from the -- from my
2 building, and I asked her what was happening. She literally told me that
3 there were many dead people in the street. The news reported that morning
4 that the building Unioninvest was on fire. That day on the morning, I
5 learned that my husband had been killed. He was driving the ambulance and
6 he went -- drove to the Belgradska Street to get a person that was
7 wounded, a wounded man.
8 Q. When you tell us that the media reported on that day, 21st of
9 April 1992, that there were combat activities, and that the Unioninvest
10 building was on fire, did you learn who were these clashes between? What
11 were the sides in the combat?
12 A. It was clear that the Serb forces were on one side, and that on
13 the other side of Miljacka river, on the other side of town. These were
14 the Muslim forces.
15 Q. Did you learn, considering that that's when your husband was
16 killed, did you find out whether on the side of the Muslim forces, were
17 there some Special Forces or was it Territorial Defence?
18 A. All the information that I ever got, and there was much that I got
19 from the people who were there at the time, was that the forces of Vikic,
20 Commander Vikic, forces at that time were--
21 MR. IERACE: I am sorry, Mr. President. This is evidence which is
22 hearsay, and I appreciate that hearsay is not prime facie inadmissable but
23 it relates to the incident of this witness's husband's unfortunate death,
24 and she wasn't present at that. It is essentially at least it would seem
25 secondhand hearsay, if not even further removed from that. And therefore,
1 in my respectful submission, it is of little assistance to the Trial
2 Chamber if the relevance of it is to attribute responsibility for the
3 death of the witness's husband.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, would you please respond.
5 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, it is to be expected
6 that the witness was able to find out what happened. But considering that
7 in this operation, in this combat, this fighting, her husband was killed,
8 it is to be expected that the witness certainly learned information that
9 would be best possible information regarding their accuracy. So she found
10 out about it. And we believe that the witness obtained the information
11 and that she had checked them, and that they are accurate, regardless of
12 the fact that she wasn't at the scene of the incident.
13 You will understand that we did mention that she wasn't there.
14 This is only what she heard. But considering there was combat and there
15 were official announcements and there were also -- there is also
16 information in the media. And the information that she got must be
18 JUDGE ORIE: Your last remark is a conclusion. There are two
19 issues. The first one is the -- whether this hearsay would be admissible,
20 of any assistance, and the second issue is the relevance. May I urge you
21 to keep both in mind. Until now, what we heard about the sources was of a
22 very general nature. And I don't think that the Chamber, even keeping in
23 mind the specific circumstances, could just assume, on the basis of these
24 specific circumstances, that what the results of the findings were,
25 without knowing in great detail about the source of knowledge, that it
1 must have been true what the witness found out.
2 Please proceed.
3 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
4 Q. Witness, could you tell us, who told you that in the operation and
5 in the fighting that took place on the 21st of April that Vikic's units
6 was involved?
7 A. Do you mean the names of the people who told me about this?
8 Q. If you do not wish to tell them the names in public --
9 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Perhaps we can go, Your Honour, in
10 closed session so that the witness could tell us who told her.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Let me first ask you: Do you know the names of those
12 who told you?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] These people were, at the time, at
14 the scene where my husband was and these were the people who got my dead
15 husband out from where he died.
16 JUDGE ORIE: My question is whether you know their names. If you
17 say, for example, these were colleagues of my husband, I don't know the
18 names, then it is no reason to turn into closed session. If you say I know
19 the names, but I would rather not tell them in public -- but first I would
20 like to know, do you know the names?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know the names of at least three
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then we will turn into closed session.
24 [Closed session]
12 Page 13520 – redacted – closed session.
12 [Open session]
13 JUDGE ORIE: It is confirmed on my screen. Please proceed.
14 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Witness, you told us that you left your apartment in April. Did
16 you go back to that part of town and to your apartment after your husband
17 was killed?
18 A. I went back to the apartment occasionally to take necessary things
19 for myself and for my children. And I went to Grbavica to work, to the
20 building, at that time this was a building called Mis and this is where
21 authorities were in that building.
22 Q. Could you tell us did you and until when did you stay at that
23 place of employment in that building?
24 A. Specifically in that building, we remained until - possibly -
25 until the end of October 1992 and because of -- it was unsafe, the
1 building we were often fired at, there was a flat roof, and the offices
2 moved to the premises, the ground floor premises of the forestry faculty
3 which is also in Grbavica, in the immediately vicinity of that building.
4 Q. You told us that you left the offices where you had worked because
5 it was unsafe. Could you tell us when that was, and what contributed to
6 these conditions? First tell us when that was when when did you leave the
8 A. I first told you that we left at the end of October, but we did
9 interrupt our work on a daily basis. There would be an attack, shooting
10 would start. There would be bullets falling on the roof. And, of course,
11 we would scatter wherever we could. So it would happen that on one
12 particular day we wouldn't continue work sometimes, a few hours would
13 pass, and then we would go back to work. So we never knew when the date
14 of employment when we started of work, if it would be finished at all.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
16 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object to this evidence on the basis
17 of relevance. It is not apparent to me at all the relevance of evidence
18 of firing at buildings, civilian or otherwise, occupied by civilians or
19 otherwise, on the side of the confrontation lines controlled by the forces
20 of the Bosnian Serb army. That is not relevant to the counts in the
22 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic.
23 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the testimony and the
24 answer of the witness, we believe that it is relevant. Because there
25 witness spoke about her place of employment, about the part of town where
1 she says there was daily shooting. So, I believe that Mr. Ierace stopped
2 the testimony and our examination-in-chief at the time when the witness
3 had already answered. And as the Defence was going to ask another
4 question following from the witness's answer. But the witness herself
5 said in her answer that this building where she had worked and where she
6 had left -- she said they left because it was unsafe. I asked her why was
7 it unsafe and she said there was daily shooting. So I don't know from
8 which part of town and who had fired.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I think, as a matter of fact, Ms. Pilipovic, when I
10 do understand the Prosecution well, that it is not in dispute in whenever
11 way that there was regular shooting, especially in that period of time in
12 areas where people, we are not talking about whether they were civilians
13 or not, were working. So you, until now, took a lot of effort to
14 establish something, as you just explained it to us, which is not
15 contested by the Prosecution.
16 So, therefore, you said you would just go now to another -- to
17 some other questions. May I just ask Mr. Ierace if the next question
18 would be whether the firing coming from the other side of the
19 confrontation line, would that be contested, if the answer would be yes.
20 MR. IERACE: The question would be contested, Mr. President. We
21 are talking about territory on the Bosnian Serb army side of the
22 confrontation lines.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. IERACE: And I don't see any relevance in that evidence.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You are not saying this did not happen and
1 whether it came from the other side of the confrontation lines would even,
2 if true, would still be irrelevant in your view?
3 MR. IERACE: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, it is not contested that there was
5 regular firing at -- in the place where the witness lived or worked.
6 Please keep that in mind when you continue.
7 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
8 Q. Witness, you told us at which -- what was your employment. Could
9 you tell us, you, as a person who is competent considering your profession
10 and your job description, could you tell us what was necessary in order to
11 issue a death certificate?
12 A. Yes, I can. The fact of death of any person in legal terms, in
13 legal procedure, is always proved by death certificate. Except from the
14 register of dead people. In order to issue this certificate, certain
15 public documents are needed. First of all, the main document would be the
16 relevant birth certificate, then a marriage certificate, and a document
17 that would prove the identity of that person, that would mean a document
18 with a photograph. And also of the person who is reporting this fact to
19 the authorised organ.
20 Q. Witness, having answered my question, what is necessary to issue a
21 death certificate for a person who had died, and you said also that
22 confirmation is needed. What does it entail?
23 A. It is a public document which, in its contents, tells about the
24 personal details of the person who died, the deceased, date of birth,
25 cause of death, and the most important, signature and seal of coroner and
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 the person who has to be a medical physician who has certified,
2 established the death of that person. So that would be authorised doctor,
3 authorised physician, who is authorised to issue such confirmation,
4 Q. Would you accept a confirmation of death as a document, as a valid
5 document, if it did not have a seal and a signature of the physician of
6 the coroner?
7 A. No. I would not be authorised to enter information into the
8 registry of dead persons if the document was invalid.
9 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, we would now like to
10 show to the witness document P738. These are death certificates, and they
11 have been marked as A, B, C and D. The Defence has a number of these
12 documents, but we don't know the exact chronological order of them. But
13 with your leave, we would show these to the witness.
14 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Are these exhibits already admitted into evidence,
16 Ms. Pilipovic, or are these new exhibits?
17 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, Your Honour. These are
18 exhibits of the Prosecution, P738.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please next time indicate beforehand, at
20 least to the Registrar, I don't know whether the Prosecution was informed
21 about it --
22 MR. IERACE: No. Nor it is referred to in the summary, no
23 reference to it at all.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Ms. Pilipovic, the mere fact that an exhibit
25 has already been admitted into evidence does not take away your duty to
1 inform the other party and the Registrar, that you will present that
2 document to a witness. So it is -- would you please --
3 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. It was just a
4 matter of time.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] That worked against the Defence,
7 in this case.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] And this is why we were unable to
10 prepare this in advance. I think that with your leave it would be
11 sufficient just to show this to the witness so that she can just take a
12 look at it.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Let's first try to get it clear. You just mentioned
14 a number. Did you retrieve the document, Madam Registrar?
15 THE REGISTRAR: No, it is possible that the document is numbered
17 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] That is what I said, P3738, P.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It appears under a different number in the
20 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I can see that in the
22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, at some stage, I have an objection to
23 this line of questioning. I would like to be heard on that very briefly.
24 JUDGE ORIE: You would like to make that objection now?
25 MR. IERACE: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
2 MR. IERACE: The evidence is that the witness became a registrar
3 of the department of social services three months after her husband was
4 killed. It is not at all clear to me what expertise that gave her to
5 comment on death certificates issued by authorities on the other side of
6 the confrontation line, in war conditions. In particular, how they
7 authorises or equips her to comment on the sufficiency of death
8 certificates produced in those circumstances.
9 Secondly, the relevance, I take it is to whether certain
10 individuals were killed. It is not clear from the question so far for
11 what purposes the death certificates are said to be complete or
12 incomplete. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, especially on the last issue, what is
14 it that the Defence wants to establish, that death certificates were
15 irregularly given or that the person who was on the death certificate
16 might not have died, or what is the aim of this exercise? What do you
17 want to establish? If you should tell us in the absence of the witness
18 because it might influence the statement, please do so. But --
19 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in view of the fact
20 that this witness had a job of registrar, we wish to submit that the
21 Defence doesn't know whether the people mentioned in the death
22 certificates brought here by the Prosecution are alive or dead. All we
23 are trying to do is challenge the authenticity of these documents because
24 the Defence was pointing or challenging this before, while the Prosecution
25 presented its case, because these documents lacked a seal and a signature
1 that are required. The Defence believes this to be a very relevant item,
2 and this is why we are bringing this up with this witness.
3 We can also put the following question to this witness: We can
4 ask her whether the work procedure for registrars was uniformed for the
5 entire Bosnia-Herzegovina or was it different for certain parts of Bosnia.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just ask you, Ms Pilipovic -- let me just
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, you asked the witness whether a death
10 certificate could be given if it was not -- if there was not a signed and
11 sealed document underlying it. So if documents have been accepted into
12 evidence, it is of no use to give it to this witness. I mean, everyone, I
13 take it could see whether there are signatures or seals on it. So it
14 might be clear that, in the view of this witness, but I would just like to
15 have a look at the document you wanted to show to the witness because then
16 I would have a better --
17 THE REGISTRAR: Ms. Pilipovic, could you please confirm the letter
18 associate would the number of the document? Was it 3738A?
19 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] There is A, B, C, and D. One of
20 these documents. Whichever one.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could I just see.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, the Chamber thinks it is of no use to
24 ask this witness to establish that there is no seal or no signature of
25 doctor on these documents. I think we went through these documents in
1 quite some detail. And the Chamber is of the opinion that it would not
2 add very much, that other persons who would come to the same conclusions
3 as to the content of these documents. So, therefore, would you please
4 come to your next subject.
5 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: And I have another request both to you and to you,
7 Mrs. DP, could you please make a short pause between every question and
8 answer because every word you say has to be translated. You are speaking
9 the same language. It goes a bit too quick for the interpreters. If you
10 would just wait until after the answer. It may be of help if you look at
11 your screen. When you see as soon as the text stops moving, then you see
12 it is up to you to answer. Yes.
13 Please proceed.
14 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
15 Q. Witness, you told us about the building where you worked. Now,
16 can you tell us this: Did you have to travel, and if so, how long from
17 the apartment where you lived to your place of work?
18 A. I walked, and the time I needed varied due to what was going on
19 while I went to work.
20 Q. Can you tell me whether you had to pass through a settlement on
21 your way to work?
22 A. Yes. I went through residential areas. There was shooting going
23 on daily. It was very risky and difficult to move about. And we had to
24 use special passages and special locations to get to other parts of town.
25 Q. When you say that you had to use special passages and special
1 routes, could you be more specific?
2 MR. IERACE: I object.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
4 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the simple issue is this: What has
5 this evidence got to do with the charges against General Galic? This is
6 the reason that we filed the tu quoque application, motion. Whether or
7 not there was firing in the civilian areas of the territory controlled by
8 the Bosnian Serb army is of no assistance to the Trial Chamber in
9 determining whether the accused was ultimately responsible for sniping and
10 shelling of civilians on the other side of the confrontation line.
11 If we hear hours or weeks of months of this sort of evidence, it
12 will not assist the Trial Chamber in determining those issues.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic.
14 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has
15 pointed out that we are not going to use or rely on tu quoque principle as
16 a defence for General Galic, but bearing in mind the content of the
17 indictment which has count 2, which goes on to say that the Serb forces in
18 and around Sarajevo blocked the town and took strategically important
19 locations, positions. Therefore, count 2 of the indictment says that in
20 and around Sarajevo important strategic positions had been taken.
21 We are now referring to the part of the town in which this witness
22 resided. My learned friend said today that the Prosecution doesn't
23 dispute that there was fighting going on in that part of town. The other
24 count of the attack pertains to campaign and it says that the Sarajevo
25 Romanija Corps had a campaign of daily shelling and sniping of certain
1 parts of town. The Defence wishes to prove that there was no campaign
2 going on. There was not a strategy of campaign there either, but there
3 was a conflict, a combat going on in a certain territory, that it involved
4 two sides and that in this specific part of town, there was daily shooting
5 going on.
6 Now, who was behind this shooting is not relevant, but it is
7 evident that there was combat going on, and we do not know who and where
8 did the shooting.
9 MR. IERACE: Mr. President --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
11 MR. IERACE: -- If it is not clear yet to the Defence, I make it
12 abundantly clear, that it is common ground that there was fighting, if not
13 on a daily basis, then certainly on a regular basis, in Grbavica and other
14 areas along the confrontation line. And therefore, this evidence is not
15 needed in order to paint the background to the Prosecution case or the
16 Defence case in that respect.
17 In my respectful submission, there is a danger that if the
18 evidence is not confined to the issues which are legitimately in dispute,
19 then it will unnecessarily protract the trial. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, if the Chamber understand the position
21 of the Defence well, then it would be that, first of all, there was on a
22 daily basis, at least very regular fighting, and certainly the area of
23 Grbavica not being excluded. The second observation I would like to make
24 is that the Defence has indicated that it will not use tu quoque as an
25 argument but perhaps self-defence.
1 So, there is as such no reason to establish the regular combat
2 activity unless there would be a direct link between this combat activity
3 and what is the Defence case, that is, either there was stray bullets or
4 errors. I would say that would be in the context of a combat situation in
5 certain areas which is not contested, as such, by the Prosecution; or that
6 this fighting would have specific significance in respect of self-defence
7 defence. So self-defence defence.
8 So the Chamber cannot say that it is under all circumstances
9 irrelevant that combat was going on but the mere fact that there was
10 regular combat is not relevant as such. And apart from that, it is not
11 contested. So if you would please indicate if you want to continue on
12 this line of questioning, what the specific relevance is in view of the
13 case of the Defence, then you are entitled to do so. And otherwise, I
14 would like to ask you to move to your next subject.
15 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has
16 already explained why this type of questioning is relevant, especially in
17 view of the indictment which claims that there was a campaign and a
18 strategy of sniping and shelling from the positions taken by the Army of
19 Republika Srpska. Therefore, strategic positions.
20 JUDGE ORIE: May I then ask you a question: Even if there would
21 be regular attacks by whenever weapons on the Grbavica area, would that
22 mean that there could be no campaign -- I am not defining at this very
23 moment what a campaign exactly would be -- but would the one exclude the
25 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we are specifically
1 referring to the area of Grbavica. But in addition to that, the Defence
2 will prove that there was combat going on in all parts of town and the
3 surrounding area. Therefore, in all parts of town where there was a
4 separation line. So not only Grbavica, but also Mehurici, and Ilidza, and
5 Hadzici and so on.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you here. Is that contested by the
8 MR. IERACE: No, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: It is not contested by the Prosecution, so there is
10 no need to establish that because the parties agree on that.
11 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when I was putting
12 questions to the witness, and I think my last question for her was, which
13 route did she take to work. She said that she went through residential
14 areas, that she took special passages and areas that were protected. And
15 this goes to prove, in Defence's view, that not only the combat and
16 demarcation lines were in and around Sarajevo, as the Prosecutor claims,
17 but that there was combat going on in all parts of towns. There were
18 parts of town where streets were demarcation lines. As we said in our
19 opening speech, there was even combat going on between two buildings.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Is that contested by the Prosecution?
21 MR. IERACE: No Mr. President. And I can think of an example in
22 the Prosecution case in Dobrinja where we said that the part of the
23 building was occupied by the SRK and another part of the same building by
24 Presidency forces. So it is not in dispute.
25 JUDGE ORIE: It is not in dispute, Ms. Pilipovic, so there is no
1 need to establish something that the parties agree upon.
2 Please proceed, but as I said, if the parties agree, I
3 specifically ask again and again to the Prosecution, whether it is in
4 dispute, and I think as a matter of fact the interpretation of these facts
5 is a different matter. But the interpretation of facts, of course, is not
6 a subject that could be easily dealt with by witnesses of fact. Of
7 course, experts might give opinion on facts that both parties agree upon.
8 But witnesses of fact, if I may stress it in this way, usually cannot, I
9 would not say never, but usually could not assist in the interpretation of
10 facts and especially in the interpretation of facts that they have not
11 seen by themselves.
12 Would you please keep this in mind when you continue.
13 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I just wish to say
14 that the witness believes that fact witnesses, there were people who were
15 present in combat locations and location where there was shooting going on
16 are the witnesses whose veracity cannot be disputed. We believe that
17 expert witnesses will also support this. We were able to listen to the
18 Prosecution witnesses for the past six or seven months who were fact
19 witnesses and testified about directions of fire, without establishing
20 whether one side or the other was behind such firing.
21 We believe that there are fact witnesses who were daily present in
22 certain streets and in buildings and locations, and who are able to tell
23 us, to give us facts that are relevant for this Trial Chamber and for the
24 Defence case.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I am not saying that your witnesses will not be able
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 to give relevant facts, but the facts you want to establish at this very
2 moment - we have asked what you wanted to establish - are not in dispute.
3 So I would say they are already established. At least between the parties
4 there is no disagreement as to the existence of these facts. But whatever
5 new facts, new relevant facts you would like to establish, please proceed.
6 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, before I proceed with
7 examination, I would like the Prosecution to tell us whether they accept
8 the fact that other parts of town which were under control of the Army of
9 Republika Srpska, and specifically we will be talking about Grbavica
10 Nedzarici, Ilidza, Hadzici, Ilijas, Vogosca whether people there had
11 specific routes they had to take protected passages and routes in order to
12 protect themselves from daily combat.
13 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, that is an issue which is not relevant
14 to the indictment. It is not relevant whether or not there were safe
15 passages operating for civilians on the side of the confrontation lines
16 controlled by the Bosnian Serb army.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic.
18 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence believes
19 that this is relevant because the Prosecution claims that there was a
20 campaign behind all of this. This is an argument that supports the
21 campaign mentioned in the indictment.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I have some difficulties in following you. Two
23 questions: Perhaps the first one to the Prosecution, is it the
24 interpretation of the Prosecution that the safe routes and perhaps
25 concrete slabs or sheets hung in streets, is that evidence in support the
1 campaign or is it evidence that would support the frequency of possible
2 attacks on those who would have to pass there? Is it frequency or is it
3 more? Is it that the Prosecution says if there are concrete slabs, then
4 it must be a campaign, or is it just to say well there has been a reason
5 to erect these concrete slabs or to hang these sheets that indicates that
6 with some frequency that people fear that they might be fear if these
7 protective measures were not have been taken?
8 MR. IERACE: I understand the question, Mr. President. The
9 Prosecution case is that the existence of those anti-sniping measures or
10 barricades that were erected on the Presidency side of the confrontation
11 line were erected in order to reduce the risk of civilians being wounded
12 and killed by fire emanating from the Bosnian Serb Army side of the
13 confrontation line. So the facts that the Prosecution has sought to prove
14 by that evidence are that civilians were wounded or killed in those
15 locations by fire coming from the BSA side of the confrontation lines.
16 Secondly, that the election of the barricades reduced the number of deaths
17 and other forms of casualties, thereby allowing an inference that indeed
18 fire had been coming and continued to come effectively to a lesser extent
19 from those same sources.
20 That evidence allows a further inference in conjunction with other
21 evidence that the shooting was part of a campaign. So ultimately, it
22 contributes to an inference that there was, in fact, a campaign of sniping
23 and shelling civilians.
24 Mr. President, the evidence, as I understand it, the Defence
25 wishes to call goes to whether there were similar measures taken by
1 civilians on the other side of the confrontation line. If one
2 hypothetically, and I stress that word, assumes for the sake of the
3 argument that civilians did those things on the other side of the
4 confrontation line, and for the same reason, in other words, to minimise
5 their exposure to deadly fire from the side of the confrontation line
6 controlled by the Presidency army, that fact would, in my respectful
7 submission, be irrelevant to the issues before this Trial Chamber because
8 this is not an inquiry into what happened in Sarajevo. It is a hearing of
9 evidence against the accused. And, therefore, it is irrelevant.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, you stressed several times that you
11 would need this evidence because it would demonstrate that there was no
12 campaign. Could you please clarify that point of view.
13 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we and the witnesses
14 wish to prove that there was no campaign, but that during armed combat,
15 two armies were opposed in combat.
16 JUDGE ORIE: May I just interfere. The translation says that "you
17 and the witnesses want to prove." May I take it, if this is a correct
18 translation, that it is a mistake?
19 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Let me just check with my
20 colleague, co-counsel.
21 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, whilst --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it is on page 65, line 2.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, for technical
24 reasons I will take over. We wish to prove through the testimony that is
25 how this should be understood, and I would also like to say that there is
1 another interpretation error, an important, BSA was read by the French
2 booth, both sides. So this is wrong. This is what I wanted to say.
3 Now, the reason I take over is to say the following, Mr.
4 President, is that the Defence --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, Ms. Pilipovic was argue a certain
6 issue. I asked for a clarification on a certain issue. I would like lead
7 counsel to answer my question and then, of course, if there is anything
8 that should be added by you, you could ask permission to do so.
9 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, could I suggest that the discussion
10 continue in the absence of the witness.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I am wondering if we could do that, although it
12 is of a general nature -- apart from that, we are about to have a break.
13 I would like to give the opportunity to answer to my question, after the
14 witness has been escorted out of the courtroom, we will continue, Mrs. DP
15 after approximately 20 minutes, but I will ask at this very moment you to
16 be escorted out of the courtroom.
17 Madam Usher, would you please assist Mrs. DP3.
18 [The witness stands down]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic --
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, with your
21 leave, I would just ask for a few seconds to clarify a couple of points,
23 JUDGE ORIE: I would invite Ms. Pilipovic first to complete the
24 beginning of the answer she was giving to me --
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, quite. We just need a
1 few seconds to talk with the Ms. Pilipovic -- I was asking between us. I
2 didn't want to address the Chamber. I just wanted to check with
3 Ms. Pilipovic to check the transcript to confer.
4 JUDGE ORIE: One of the things I would like to prevent to happen,
5 is that if counsel is arguing a certain issue that if co-counsel thinks
6 that at very moment that he has got better ideas, that he would interrupt
7 and to take over. That is a situation I would like not to happen. We
8 will adjourn until 6.00, and I will hear the answer from the Defence.
9 --- Recess taken at 5.40 p.m.
10 --- On resuming at 6.05 p.m.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, you certainly are able to answer the
12 question, I take it. Please proceed.
13 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. If I understood
14 my learned colleague correctly, my learned colleague says that the special
15 routes, that is, passages, screens in certain parts of town in Sarajevo
16 under the control of the BH Army were set up at certain locations because
17 there was a campaign by the SRK in order to shoot in certain places. Now
18 the Defence's response is -- sorry, the Prosecution says that it is not
19 contested that there was screens on the other side, there were other
20 routes, passages, and certain location where there was protection for
21 civilians to pass through these places. What the Defence wish to prove
22 that on the other side there were routes, locations, where citizens,
23 civilians had to pass. Therefore, in this situation, we say, and we will
24 prove, that soldiers and the Army of the SRK were operating as in
25 self-defence. Yes, there was shooting in certain places, and in those
1 places there was shooting on both sides. But we will prove that we, in
2 certain places, in operating -- towards certain directions, were operating
3 in self-defence. If there was wounding and if there was some firing
4 causing injury of people passing in certain locations, this was the
5 consequence of a war risk and not a consequence of a campaign, as the
6 Prosecution claims.
7 The Defence is aware of the fact that the Prosecution is not
8 claiming that the BH Army was operating -- and I am specifically talking
9 about Grbavica -- that there was a campaign of Muslims and their army
10 towards the positions of the Republika Srpska Army on the other side. But
11 we will say and we will prove that in certain locations there
12 were -- there was combat and that combat was always a consequence of the
13 Republika Srpska Army acting in self-defence.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, you have answered that question.
15 Perhaps it raises even more questions than it is in answer to my question,
16 such as the fact that they were acting in self-defence, would that exclude
17 a campaign, that would be a question. You said it was rather war risk and
18 not a campaign. Would a campaign exclude the existence of war risks?
19 Well, you could raise a lot of questions in this respect. It also very
20 much depends on the concept of self-defence you would use, how abstract it
21 would be, how concrete it would be.
22 The existence of such measures for self-defence cannot be regarded
23 as under all circumstances irrelevant. So, therefore, you may put some
24 questions to the witness, but let's not forget that, in general terms, the
25 existence of combat in those areas is not in contest. And I think for the
1 defence of self-defence, it certainly would not be necessary to know every
2 single sheets throughout the city in all municipalities or concrete slabs.
3 So ask the witness about facts in this respect, any relevance is not
4 necessarily absent.
5 Madam Usher, could you please escort the witness into the
6 courtroom again.
7 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, before the witness is
8 brought into the courtroom, the Defence would like to bring up a problem
9 in relation to witnesses. Witness DP3 has been here since Monday waiting
10 to testify. And the Defence has a problem that the witness has to return
11 tomorrow because that is how the travelling schedule has been set up. We
12 did not expect the debating to go on for so long and we didn't realise
13 that the witness -- we expected the witness to be only testifying today.
14 And it is obvious that we will not finish the testimony today.
15 JUDGE ORIE: That is obvious.
16 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] When the Defence was making a
17 schedule, we were doing it according to the time that the Defence needed
18 because we did not know how much time the Prosecution is going to need for
19 the cross-examination.
20 [The witness entered court]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just see. Madam Registrar, I am looking at
22 you, is this courtroom tomorrow morning used?
23 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the Defence has to
24 leave tomorrow morning early, the witness -- sorry, the witness has to
25 leave tomorrow morning early. There is just only one plane in the
1 morning. We were just told that by the witness and victim unit. And I
2 will just have one more question for the witness.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's just see how far we come. Please
5 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. Witness, before we had the interruptions, during the examination
7 you said that you used certain routes when you were leaving your work to
8 go home. Could you tell us, why did you use these routes?
9 A. Civilians had to use certain marked routes, there were screens, in
10 order to protect them from sniper fire. From the side of the city, of
11 course, there were places where you couldn't have protection at all
12 because of the ground, the terrain, specifically, in the area of Lukavica
13 where from Mojmilo hill there was daily roving fire and it was that the
14 fire was directed on to a populated location.
15 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the
16 examination-in-chief has ended. I will just check whether my co-counsel
17 has anything to add.
18 [Defence counsel confer]
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, no questions. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, is the Prosecution ready to cross-examine
21 the witness?
22 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mrs. DP3 you will now be examined by counsel for the
24 Prosecution. Please proceed.
25 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I prefer to start off in private
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we will turn into private session and I
3 see that we are in private session now.
4 [Private session]
12 Pages 13546 to 13549 – redacted – private session.
6 [Closed session]
12 Page 13551 – redacted – closed session.
12 Page 13552 – redacted – closed session.
13 [Private session]
13 Pages 13554 to 13569 – redacted – private session.
18 [Open session]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Especially because everyone is entitled to know that
20 I apologise both for the interpreters and the technical staff that I
21 didn't ask their consent when we took nine minutes' time extra. We will
22 adjourn until tomorrow morning and we will then deal with any documents
23 that we have to deal with. Thank you very much for your assistance.
24 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
25 7.09 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday,
1 the 11th day of October, 2002, at 2.15 p.m.