1 Tuesday, 22 October 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.07 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone in and around the
7 Madam Registrar, could you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning. This is Case Number IT-98-29-T,
9 the Prosecutor versus Stanislav Galic.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Before we continue the
11 examination of Witness DP4, there are two pending issues on which the
12 parties asked a decision of the Chamber. First there is the issue
13 whether the summaries provided by Defence are of sufficient precision.
14 In general terms, the summaries are precise enough. That means if, for
15 example, it stated in the summary that the witness will testify about the
16 confrontation lines where he was at, it needs not further specification
17 as to say exactly near to his position, the confrontation lines were on
18 these and these streets or these and these buildings.
19 So in general terms the summaries are specific enough. The
20 second issue is that we, the Chamber and the Prosecution has not been
21 provided with all the, I would say, extended summaries, because the
22 initial summaries were insufficient, and, therefore, we received some six,
23 seven, or eight extended summaries. And when I said that the summaries
24 were specific enough, I was talking about these extended summaries, but
25 they are available only in respect of a small number of witnesses. And as
1 the Chamber indicated before, they have to be provided at a very short
2 notice for all the witnesses that will be called.
3 If the Prosecution feels that in a specific -- on a specific
4 issue the summary is not precise enough, the first thing the Prosecution
5 would have to do is to ask for further details to the Defence. And if
6 this would not solve the problem, the Prosecution may address the
7 Chamber. That is also one of the reasons why the Defence really has to
8 provide these summaries soon now so that the Prosecution, while preparing
9 its cross-examination, can find out whether it contains, in the view of
10 the Prosecution, sufficient information. If not, that they can ask for
11 additional information to the Defence, and if this is not provided, the
12 Prosecution can address the Chamber. The Chamber can decide on whether
13 further more specific information should be contained in the summary.
14 Finally, I said before that in general terms the summaries were
15 specific enough. Where the summaries refer to specific incidents,
16 especially the scheduled incidents, and where the summaries say that the
17 witness will testify on the relevant facts related to that incident,
18 there it is not clear what these relevant facts are. Sometimes the words
19 used say on the basis of the foregoing, and then we have some general
20 information. This information is relevant for specific sniping
21 incidents. The Chamber understands this as to mean that this general
22 information might be of relevance for assessing what happened at specific
23 incidents. Sometimes the words are used that the witness will testify on
24 relevant facts in relation to certain incidents. There it has to be
25 clear what these facts are. Let me just try to give you an example.
1 If, for example, the Defence expects the witness to testify on
2 the line of view from certain positions to the place where someone was
3 hit by a bullet, then it should be clear that that is -- that these are
4 the facts. It could be a different thing. It could, for example, be
5 that a relevant fact might be that one of the incidents that the Defence
6 has spotted someone who, by accident, fired a weapon. That is a totally
7 different but might be relevant fact or an investigation has shown that
8 no shots were fired from the positions where the Prosecution says that
9 from that position a fire came and the investigation has shown that there
10 was no one at this position during three days. That is -- so it should
11 be clear what kind of relevant facts the witness will testify about in
12 relation to specific incidents.
13 That is as far as the summaries is concerned. Then the second
14 issue we dealt with yesterday was about questions inviting a witness to
15 speculate on certain aspects. In cases like these, one cannot always
16 avoid to ask a witness to draw conclusions within his specific knowledge
17 based on his specific experience. But it should be clear that first this
18 knowledge has to be established before a witness can be invited to draw
19 whatever conclusion or to tell us what on the basis of his experience
20 could have been the case. So, therefore the knowledge of the witness
21 first has to be established. And second, it should be perfectly clear on
22 the basis of what experience and on the basis of what facts the witness
23 comes to certain conclusions.
24 For example, if a witness would be asked to tell us whether
25 damage was done intentionally or by firing errors, it should be first
1 established before you can ask such a question to a witness what he knows
2 about specific weaponry, what he knows about the margin of error, what
3 actually he observed that caused him to believe that it was either an
4 error or specifically not an error. So we first need to establish
5 experience, knowledge, facts, and only then we might come to whatever
6 conclusions. Otherwise, such conclusions as we all know that witnesses
7 are mainly witnesses of facts, but sometimes on the basis of their
8 experience within a limited area they could draw some conclusions. We
9 should avoid that it becomes mere speculations because speculation does
10 not assist the Chamber in making the determinations it will have to make.
11 These are the two issues that were still pending. And,
12 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you are on your feet. I know that the witness is
13 standby waiting outside. So if there is any observation you have to make
14 at this moment, please --
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very briefly. Your Honour,
16 thank you, first of all. And regarding this issue, the witness issue. I
17 do not think that Mr. Ierace will contradict me because he received two
18 letters that I sent last night. But unfortunately for some -- because of
19 the time constraint, it is impossible for us to furnish this extended
20 summary for all the witnesses. What we propose to do is that we
21 submitted our witness to two grids of questioning. First of all,
22 Ms. Pilipovic is -- was asking these questions and secondly, there was a
23 cross -- criss-crossed questioning and so we asked some questions of that
24 saw it last night and around 11 p.m. I believe, we made sure to send to
25 the Prosecution what we had -- we simply discovered it was a letter
1 representing a supplementary complementary letter. I do not believe that
2 Mr. Ierace can say something against it. So this is what we decided to
3 do. That was one observation.
4 And secondly, regarding your decision, we thank you for your
5 decision, but the Defence would like to underline the following: Is that
6 during the trial during the prosecution case, they often asked witnesses
7 if they witnessed some firing and if they were present during some random
8 shelling. We have seen that very often these witnesses did not know
9 where these places were situated --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, of course, the Chamber has taken
11 into consideration what happened during the Prosecution case. It is not
12 at this moment in time to comment specifically. If there are any further
13 submissions to be made in this respect, it can be done at a later stage.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Your Honour, thank you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then the Chamber has noticed that the Defence
16 indicates that it cannot provide the more extended summaries for all of
17 the witnesses. The Chamber will consider, because there was, I think, an
18 oral order that it had to be done on short notice, and I think it would
19 have been appropriate to inform the Chamber, but perhaps this is the
20 information the Defence now gives the Chamber, that they cannot do it.
21 We will consider whether the existing order will be replaced or mitigated
22 or changed after the Prosecution has been in the position to give its
23 view on that.
24 I would now like to -- unless there is something that should be
25 dealt with at this very moment before the witness comes in. So that it
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 is relevant for this witness --
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I must
3 say that sometimes we can discover certain things, and that is why I am
4 saying, we at times discover very important facts. We have discovered
5 for instance, last night and I can say it now that this very famous tall
6 building that we were talking about, which was situated in Dobrinja was
7 not usable to shoot from. We discovered this only a few hours ago. The
8 second examination that we submitted our witness to reveal this, and we
9 shall apply it. Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: The disclosure of statements and the summaries of
11 witness statements is intended to prevent trial by ambush. The Chamber
12 is aware that sometimes at a later stage surprises come up, but we have
13 to consider whether it is acceptable that new facts come up always or
14 frequently the day before the examination of the witness but we will have
15 to give this further consideration. It is also a matter of case
17 Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness into the
19 [The witness entered court]
20 JUDGE ORIE: If the Defence is ready to continue the examination,
21 they may do so. And may I remind you, Mr. DP4, that you are still bound
22 by the solemn declaration you gave at the beginning of your testimony.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 WITNESS: WITNESS DP4 [Resumed]
25 [Witness answered through interpreter]
1 Examined by Mr. Piletta-Zanin: [Continued]
2 Q. [Interpretation] Very well. Witness, good morning, once again?
3 A. Good morning.
4 Q. Could you come close to the microphones. I have a feeling that
5 we cannot hear you very well. Thank you. Very well.
6 Witness, I would be -- I would appreciate it very much if you
7 would be able to answer shortly. If you could just say yes or no, that
8 would help us greatly.
9 A. Very well.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 Witness, have you personally while you were a soldier, have you
12 personally seen shelling? Yes or no.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Have you personally witnessed shellings that took place on
15 Nedzarici, in that area?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now, regarding your own experience, could
18 you please tell this Chamber if you can if those shellings were frequent,
19 rare, numerous, or something else? What can you tell us? How can you
20 describe those shellings, according to your own experience?
21 A. They were numerous.
22 Q. Very well. Now, these shellings, sir, were they targeting some
23 very precise military or -- pardon -- objectives or were they directed
24 towards all the Nedzarici neighbourhood, according to your own experience,
25 of course?
1 MR. IERACE: I object, Mr. President. That is not something that
2 the witness could possibly respond to on the basis of his personal
3 knowledge. I say that given the evidence in relation to this witness so
5 JUDGE ORIE: I think this should not be too much of a -- Mr. DP4,
6 may I ask you the following? Did you observe that specific buildings
7 were more frequently hit or were hit at all while others were not, or
8 while observing the shelling, could you see no distinction in buildings
9 being hit or not being hit?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, the buildings that
11 were hit were the buildings on a larger area. So it is not the same
12 buildings on many occasions but rather various buildings. It is a very
13 small neighbourhood, and it is not difficult to see where the shell fell
14 if it is not right next to you.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But the question was not whether the was
16 difficult to see but for example, if I say were shops were hit than
17 houses or were your headquarters of the military hit more shops or tall
18 buildings more than small buildings? Or was there any -- could you make
19 any -- could you see any difference in the type of buildings that were
20 hit or the frequency with which some constructions were hit?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. I was not able to see a
22 difference. And if I may I will explain, if you allow me to do so.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I shall give you an example. For
25 instance, there was a building called Samo Stan and it's actually the
1 convent. It is a building of a few floors. I cannot say that it's a very
2 tall building, but it consists of a few floors. And the houses that are
3 situated around this convent were hit more often than the convent itself.
4 So I cannot say they were targeting those houses or were they maybe
5 targeting the convent but they were not able so they hit the houses.
6 But I will give you a few examples. My house for instance was hit
7 and in front of the house two shells had fell. On the first time a mother
8 died. She was the victim of this incident. And on the second occasion my
9 aunt was wounded. Now, the house right next to my house -- I don't want
10 to give you any names unless we go perhaps in closed session -- right, so
11 the house right next to mine was hit by a Howitzer shell. And just -- it
12 was like an old villa. It was situated across the street from the
13 convent, and it was hit on a few occasions by mortars. The people who
14 used to live there had gone to live somewhere else and they also owned a
15 house not far from that one.
16 So there were no casualties. That house did not -- was not used
17 for military installation or anything like that. Now the house that was
18 on the same side, on the same side as the convent on the street Aleja
19 Bosne Srebrene was hit as well. It was a mortar hit. And the garden
20 that was situated behind the house was also hit by a very heavy weaponry
21 which had a very great destruction power. And those shells were thrown
22 from the bottom, from the foot of the Mount Igman in the direction of
23 Hrasnica. This is why I am telling you that I cannot tell you what they
24 wished to do, what the Muslim forces tried to target but these were the
25 houses and these were the targets that were targeted.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I stop you there --
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] And the intersection was also hit.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, your answer was clear. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, as
4 you might have noticed, I asked for facts. The witness explained what he
5 has seen. Please proceed and keep in mind the answer of the witness.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
7 Q. Witness just one observation. In the transcript we could read
8 that a mother died. It was your mother who died, if I am not mistaken?
9 Can you please be more precise?
10 A. Yes, it was my mother. She died.
11 Q. Thank you very much.
12 Now, let's pursue this line of questioning, Witness. During your
13 war experience, were you ever able to see the weapon called a mortar?
14 Have you ever seen a mortar?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. Thank you. Did you have the opportunity to discuss
17 with your soldiers this type of weapon?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Do you therefore, know from your personal experience
20 if this type of weapon implies the possibility of error when it is used?
21 I mean, error in targeting?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
23 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, again, no proper basis has been
24 established to ask that question. To save time, could I simply make this
25 observation: I understand that in due course the Defence will be calling
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 an expert and that is the way to deal with this issue.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, may I be
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] This witness has quoted a
6 number of examples of destruction which took place and knew something
7 that he call as convent, a monastery --
8 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... in the presence
9 of the witness. I will put a few questions to the witness.
10 Mr. DP4 do you have specific technical knowledge on the weapons
11 just mentioned to you, mortars?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am not an expert. All I can say
13 is what I either saw or went through. If you want to mean -- when our
14 side fired shots we were warned to get away, if possible, in case to
15 avoid casualties on our side when firing. So they were afraid of errors,
16 but I can't say.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I would like you to respond to my questions and
18 these will be very specific questions. Do you have any experience in
19 firing mortars?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Were you ever given theoretical training in the use
22 of mortars?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have any specific knowledge of the margin of
25 errors when firing mortars?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. But I can give you examples of
2 errors that I know about, errors committed -- made by artillery weapons.
3 JUDGE ORIE: If you give me one example, I will then see whether
4 there are any additional questions to be put to you in respect of that
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I will quote to you the example,
7 which, to my mind, was not deliberate because it happened to the French
8 Battalion during rapid intervention. On that occasion an artillery
9 weapon, an artillery projectile hit in front of -- hit the Zica hospital.
10 And in this vicinity there are neither military nor even civilian
11 structures. Since the French Battalion certainly did not intend to do
12 it, I guess it was a calculation error or something.
13 JUDGE ORIE: This is a conclusion. You were not present when
14 the -- this projectile hit in front of the hospital? Is this what you
15 heard, what other people told you?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, on that occasion, two
17 men, two people were killed, Mr. And Mrs. Knezevic. I know their son,
18 Zeljko Knezevic who for a while was deployed in Nedzarici. I attended
19 their funeral.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you. I do understand that you knew
21 persons that were victims of this mortar firing. Is that correct?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You told us that since the French Battalion
24 certainly would not have targeted a hospital, it must have been a firing
25 error. Do you know what the French hospital -- the French Battalion
1 targeted when they fired the shell that finally landed near the hospital?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is assumed that the French
3 Battalion --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you. I would like to ask you whether
5 you know personally or not, I mean, what you heard from other people or
6 what can be assumed is a different matter. Do you have --
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I do not have such knowledge,
8 not any positive knowledge.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you have any specific experience which
10 would allow you to make a distinction between shells that landed as a
11 result of a firing error or shells that landed specifically on the spot
12 targeted by those who fired that shell?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know that some shells fired from
14 our weapons hit our targets, and I think that those must have been firing
16 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just see whether I understand you well. You
17 say that caused by firing errors your own shells did hit targets in an
18 area controlled by your own armed forces? Is that -- so, by accident you
19 did hit your own positions or people's or objects? Is that how I am to
20 understand your last answer?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: When you gave this answer, is it about mortars?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That was the most frequently the
24 case, mortars, because they were the most widely used.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I understand since you have no experience
1 in firing mortars yourself, that this is what you heard from your
2 colleagues, that they hit targets within the territory controlled by your
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I heard that from my colleagues who
5 had been barely missed, who could have been killed.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Were you informed about what was targeted and
7 what was hit or were you just informed that your own positions were hit?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, we were not informed about what
9 the actual target was.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, please proceed and keep in mind
11 the -- to what extent the witness has knowledge and experience on which
12 he could draw any inferences.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Of course, Mr. President.
14 But the Defence takes the liberty of noting for the transcript that one
15 of the questions that you asked seemed practically impossible to answer.
16 It is the question of -- which had to do about the difference between
17 firing error and targeting -- and hitting a particular target. Because
18 it is impossible to answer such a question.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, could you please indicate to what
20 question you are referring.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, but I have to look it
22 up, I have to look at it.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Is it page 13, line 9 or 8?
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I will check it,
25 Mr. President. Yes, it is the question on page 13, line 8.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I asked the witness about experience not about
2 distinction to be made. I asked him whether he had specific experience
3 that would allow him. Please proceed. And --
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you very much.
5 Q. Witness, in one of your answers that you gave now you said that
6 when there was firing you would be warned to leave certain areas, that is
7 what you said. Why were you told to leave certain areas? Will you tell
8 us that please.
9 A. I suppose so as to best take care of the lives of our men in the
10 area of a possible error. I guess that would be it.
11 Q. Thank you. Witness, did you ever hear in Sarajevo from the other
12 side of the line about the use of sirens that is, of -- sounding the
14 A. No.
15 Q. Thank you. Witness, I would like to go back to the destruction
16 in Nedzarici. Can you tell us, if you can of course, how many houses
17 approximately remained intact in Nedzarici?
18 MR. IERACE: I object Mr. President. Perhaps my learned
19 colleague could indicate by which time, having regard to the indictment
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, this objection
22 needs to be denied because we know well that this witness was there
23 throughout the war. And I am asking him a question from September 1992
24 until the end of the war, and, therefore, we are talking about the years
25 that we know very well. So there is absolutely no need for this
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 objection because it is only wasting the time that the Defence has.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The objection is denied. The question was:
3 "How many houses remained intact?" And that is the situation, I would
4 say, at the end of your observation whether there were still -- how many
5 houses were still there that were not -- that remained intact, were not
6 damaged? You may answer the question.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The area that we are talking about
8 is very small, and it is surrounded by tall buildings. So all the
9 buildings were hit by different weapons. There were no houses that had
10 not been hit at least from infantry weapons, if nothing else.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
12 Q. And as for mortar hits or other types of shells, projectiles of
13 this kind?
14 A. The same applies.
15 Q. Thank you, Witness. Let us try to be precise. In time you were
16 in this war from the beginning. This destruction, did it happen mostly,
17 for instance towards the end of 1994 that is towards the end of autumn,
18 in autumn, or did it happen at some other time, at the beginning of the
19 war or some halfway through the war? I don't know. I am talking about
20 the main -- the chief destruction.
21 A. The chief destruction approximately took place between the end
22 and mid-1992 or end of 1992 until the end of the war. So it was only at
23 the very beginning of the war that they mostly applied infantry attacks.
24 But later on they changed their method.
25 Q. Thank you. Witness, we shall now move on to a different set of
1 questions. Did you receive any instructions concerning the objects that
2 you could target or specifically did your company receive -- or perhaps
3 it didn't, I do not know -- receive any instructions concerning the types
4 of targets that you were right in taking on? Please answer with yes or
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you. And what were the instructions that you received?
8 A. The instructions were: Return the fire, take care not to target
9 civilians, women, children.
10 Q. You stopped here. You told us not to target civilians, women, and
11 children. By "civilians," do you also include the elderly amongst these
13 A. All the unarmed and un-uniformed individuals.
14 Q. Thank you very much. And were those instructions sent to you
15 through the channel -- chain of command?
16 A. We received the instructions from the company commander.
17 Q. Thank you. I am re-reading the transcript. I believe that you
18 said, to make it quite specific that you received them from the company
19 command. Is that correct?
20 A. It is.
21 Q. But that is not the same thing as the "command chain." Do you
22 know where did your company command receive its instructions from?
23 A. The company command received its instructions from the battalion
24 command, and they were receiving their instructions from the brigade
25 command. I am not familiar with the chain of command further up.
1 Q. Thank you, Witness.
2 Witness, I would like you now to be shown a map which has the
3 number, it is the map of the incident number 23.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] And we have copied this and
5 we would like to give these copies -- to distribute these copies. Excuse
6 me just a moment.
7 [Defence counsel confer]
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] This is a set which was
9 supplied -- which was shown to a witness who was a Corps Commander. And
10 whilst this document is being distributed --
11 Q. Witness, can you confirm that what you just called "the convent"
12 or the monastery, at times it's the same building, is the building which
13 is at times called the School of Theology.
14 A. Yes, that is one and the same building.
15 Q. Thank you. Witness, you have before you -- you have before you a
16 map. Can you -- you read this map?
17 A. I can, yes.
18 Q. Witness, can you tell us, according to you, which is -- what is
19 the building which is next to number 75?
20 A. It is the School of Theology.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, perhaps the
23 usher could help us. [In English] On the ELMO. Would you please put it
24 on the ELMO. Okay.
25 JUDGE ORIE: May it then be put on the ELMO.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] There. Thank you. For the
2 transcript this is Exhibit P3728, but we have produced a copy, of course.
3 Q. Witness, do you see a point to the -- on the right-hand side of
4 the map towards 23, with a kind of an arrow pointing at 23?
5 A. Yes, I do.
6 Q. You have this red triangle before you and it literally represents
7 the firing trajectory, that is the theoretical possibility of a shot
8 coming from the School of Theology and being fired at point 23. Having
9 said that, and in view of your knowledge of the area was it technically
10 possible, according to your experience to effect one shot from point
11 indicated towards number 75, targeting number 23 and why?
12 A. If you have infantry weapons in mind --
13 Q. I have in mind a shot from so-called light weapons, as opposed to
14 heavy weaponry.
15 A. The distance between these two points under the most ideal
16 conditions is simply too big to be -- to use infantry weapons and to have
17 this point hit by -- from an infantry weapon.
18 Q. Do you know if along the trajectory ideal trajectory, that is a
19 hypothetical trajectory which is represented by this red triangle, are
20 there any topographic elements or structures which would be an obstacle
21 to a direct hit from a light weapon?
22 A. There are structures which obstruct the view. There are
23 buildings, there are houses, private houses, and taller buildings which
24 obstruct the view. Besides, both parties to the conflict throughout the
25 war put up screens made of vehicles, carpets, tin plate and so on, to
1 protect their respective side from being seen or hit by the other side.
2 Q. Witness, inside the red triangle and since the map does not
3 provide that information, would there be any buildings, any structures,
4 that is, obstacles obstructing the direct view?
5 A. Yes, there are such buildings.
6 Q. Very well. Witness, did you yourself go to this place which is
7 called 75, on the map, that is to the school?
8 A. Yes, before the war.
9 Q. And during the war, at whatever time, did you have from this
10 school, could you see directly the point number 23 indicated on the map,
11 if you remember? Could you see it?
12 A. I did come to the convent on a couple of occasions, mostly
13 because of our medical corps which was on the ground floor. It was not
14 safe to go to upper floors. They had large windows. The convent was hit
15 by a Howitzer shell and two floors were also pierced vertically. So I
16 did go there, but I did not go to upper -- to the upper floors. I would
17 only be on the ground floor.
18 Q. Very well. But then from the ground floor could you see 23, the
19 point 23, could you see it?
20 A. No, I couldn't.
21 Q. Thank you. Witness, we have seen that at times questions,
22 hypothetical questions can be asked, so my question is as follows: Had
23 you been on the first floor? I am talking about a possibility. Would
24 you have been able to see point 23? Could you answer that question?
25 A. No.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 Q. What does this mean, that you cannot answer or that you wouldn't
2 have been able to see it?
3 A. I wouldn't have been able to see that place.
4 Q. Very well. And from an upper floor, what would have been your
5 answer? I think that the building has two upper floors. Is that
7 A. I am not quite sure. But I do not think you could see it from
8 the second floor.
9 Q. Very well. So your answer is that, according to your experience,
10 you think that one would not be able to see it from upper floors? Is
11 that it?
12 MR. IERACE: I object. Perhaps for the same reason,
13 Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. This is -- you are asking for speculation,
15 unless there are specific reasons why the witness would have the knowledge
16 or experience. So let me just ask you: What made you believe that you
17 could not see from the first or from the second floor point number 23?
18 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I apologise for interrupting you with
19 the question. But in fact the witness's answer was equivocal as to the
20 second floor.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, he said --
22 MR. IERACE: He said he did not think --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You said that you did not think you could see
24 it. So you were -- certainly, as far as the second floor was concerned,
25 uncertain. Could you explain this on the basis of what you would draw
1 these conclusions, because these are conclusions.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will show you what I
3 am talking about, to be on the safe side. The location of the School of
4 Theology is lower than the rest of Nedzarici, that is, you go uphill
5 towards Mojmilo and Alipasino Polje. Private houses which you can find
6 here, around here, are mostly two-storey buildings. So if we look from
7 the same altitude, from the position of the convent, that the School of
8 Theology, any of the houses around it is at the same level, plus a roof.
9 So it is yet another storey then. So they are about the same height, and
10 therefore it screens off the view, it obstructs the view, you cannot look
11 over them, probably from the third floor. But I cannot say about the
12 third floor, but from the second floor, I am quite positive, because it is
13 only logical.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. On the basics of logics, did you ever
15 specifically measure the height of point 23?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I am not talking about houses. That would be the
18 next question. Do you know exactly what is the elevation level of point
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Point number 23, that point is for
21 sure higher than the Faculty of Theology. I grew up in this area, and I
22 know that area very well. It is possible to prove this in many different
23 ways. You can, for sure, know if I am lying. There is some maps. You
24 also have data that you can examine.
25 JUDGE ORIE: You say that point 23 is higher. Is it considerably
1 higher than the -- where the ground where the School of Theology is?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I couldn't really tell you if it
3 was considerably higher. But with respect to the Faculty of Theology,
4 when we look at here, the level becomes slightly inclined. So it goes
5 slightly higher up. And as soon as you get closer to Mojmilo because of
6 the hill, the inclination is greater. So it is close to the reservoir
7 points which we discussed earlier.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Q. Witness, I would like you to go back to point 75. Could you
11 please point the pointer on number 75 on the map.
12 A. [Indicates]
13 Q. No, leave the pointer on the dot, please, on the same spot.
14 Thank you.
15 Witness, with regards to this area that you are indicating right
16 now, that is to say right or to the right of the Faculty of Theology,
17 were there any buildings, any structures, and if so, at what distance
18 with respect to the facade of the Faculty of Theology.
19 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the question as translated refers to
20 buildings to the right of the Faculty of Theology. And the pointer is,
21 as I understand it, to the left. Perhaps I am mistaken. Perhaps that
22 might be clarified if that is to the left or the right that
23 Mr. Piletta-Zanin wants his answer to relate to.
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I would like
25 this objection to be rejected. We know very well -- we all know very
1 well what is right and what is left. I asked the witness to stay on
2 number 75. The right-hand side corresponds to west -- east -- sorry. I
3 would have said that. But I think that this question is so clear. And I
4 cannot accept such an objection.
5 JUDGE ORIE: The question is not clear. What is right and left
6 always depends on the direction of view. So would you please clarify the
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well.
9 Q. To the east, please. Witness, have you heard my question?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. My question was with respect to the east of the buildings, so you
12 are showing to us now an area, you are using the pointer to show us an
13 area. Were there any buildings in that area, and if so, what was the
14 difference -- the distance of these buildings with regards to the facade
15 of the faculty?
16 A. The convent was here, but right next to the convent there were no
17 bigger buildings or bigger structures or houses. Along the river here,
18 the Dobrinja River, there was an alley of trees here in this area.
19 Q. Were there any other trees in the area that is within the
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Would you please show us where, with the pointer.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Would you please do so.
25 A. Right here there was a house. It was the house of the family
1 called Sucur and it was approximately right here. Now, right there, was
2 this line of old trees and here as well.
3 Q. Thank you very much for stopping.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] For the transcript, the
5 witness showed us the presence of a house that is situated immediately
6 above a dot to the right of number 75, that is, to the east of 75, and
7 then using the pointer the witness showed us a treeline or tree barrier,
8 if you will, situated right above number 75 and above the dot the black
9 dot previously mentioned.
10 Q. Now, Witness, were there any other constructions --
11 A. May I just add something?
12 Q. Yes, for sure.
13 A. The south side of the convent, I am showing you this area now,
14 was one floor lower. It was just right after the war, because the
15 convent was so damaged, one floor was added after the war. So before the
16 war and during the war, this part here was only composed of three
17 storeys. So it was only a three storey-building at that time.
18 A. Witness, would you please be a little bit clearer, if you may.
19 What is the exact part of the convent which was one floor lower? Could
20 you tell us what it is? Could you show us? Could you show us clearly on
21 this map.
22 A. [Indicates]
23 Q. Very well. Thank you.
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The witness just showed the
25 facade situated to the south-west, that is to say the facade representing
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 the side if we -- which has a direct view on the area or the
2 neighbourhood called the airport neighbourhood. Thank you very much.
3 Q. Witness, could we now talk about something else please.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I don't think
5 that it is necessary to produce this map because it was already tendered
6 and I think that we were clear enough for the transcript. But I see Mr.
7 Ierace on his feet.
8 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I may be mistaken, but the
9 description given by my learned colleague as to the southern wall of the
10 convent, I don't know that that reflects the evidence. In particular,
11 the words "which has a direct view on the area of the neighbourhood
12 called the airport neighbourhood." I am not sure if the witness has said
13 that wall had such a view.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please --
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, if I may, we
16 were talking theoretically. This is a view, if we look at the map, but
17 if you protect the wall, the facade, what is right in front of this wall
18 or the facade is the airport neighbourhood.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then perhaps you say that "on the map this
20 wall faces the area," which is a different thing whether you had a view or
21 not. But I do understand that this is a mistake and the precision has
22 been corrected now.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
24 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr.
25 Piletta-Zanin this witness has been scheduled for two hours. Yesterday
1 you used 65 minutes. The Defence used 65 minutes. Today we used 55
2 minutes. So there is not much time left, I would say. Could you give us
3 an indication of how much time you would still need? And let me just
4 indicate to you that the Chamber has discussed that we will be rather
5 strict on times indicated, especially after the experience of last week.
6 Could you give us an indication how much time you would still need?
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Five minutes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Q. Sir, do you know if there were any defence structures such as
11 trenches situated around Nedzarici?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Witness, have you ever seen people working on those trenches?
14 Yes or no.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Witness, when and where have you seen people working on those
18 A. In the area right across of my position, we called it Sevula
19 Kuca [phoen], Cenex, it was destroyed after the war. Now this structure
20 does not exist any longer. But this is where I would see them dig
21 trenches and make fortifications. However, we know from the Serbs who
22 were either exchanged or who had run across, those were imprisoned Serbs,
23 so we never fired on them. We never opened fire on them.
24 Q. When you say "these people who were digging trenches" you are
25 talking about the people who were digging the trenches, is that it?
1 A. Yes, yes. Those were very risky areas because this -- and this
2 is why they, those captured people were digging.
3 Q. Do you know or had you ever -- have you ever heard that those
4 Serbs were either civilians or soldiers?
5 A. Those were civilians people.
6 MR. IERACE: I object. Mr. President, again, for the third
7 question in a row, the witness is giving information without giving
8 evidence, without a proper basis for that evidence being laid.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would you please create a factual basis.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Witness, could you please tell this Chamber, what is your
12 personal knowledge of this? How did you come to find this out? How did
13 you know that those were civilians? Could you tell us how did you
14 personally find out these facts?
15 A. Yes, of course, I will explain. People whom we would see dig
16 trenches and make fortifications or fortified positions were people who
17 were not armed and they were wearing civilian clothes. Furthermore
18 people who were either exchanged or who had escaped were always called to
19 go and have some discussions with the authorities in the police station.
20 And they would communicate interesting data that were of interest for us,
21 that is to say they were to tell us where the artillery weapon was
22 deployed. They were able to tell us, for instance, where the army was
23 moving, how they were moving, where they were going. And those people
24 would testify as to what happened to them personally during that time.
25 Q. Thank you. Witness, you also told us that consequently you were
1 not firing on these people. Could you please repeat what you told us say?
2 I remember hearing something similar earlier.
3 A. Yes. We would not open fire on them for those same reasons.
4 Q. Witness, with regards to your personal knowledge, do you know if
5 the facts that you just described regarding Nedzarici, do you know if
6 those facts happened somewhere else, those situations happened somewhere
7 else on other parts of the line?
8 MR. IERACE: I object.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. IERACE: So far we have the witness saying that the escapees
11 were debriefed by the police. We don't know how this witness learned that
12 information from the police, whether it was on the media, whether someone
13 told him that, whether the police told him that. And now the witness is
14 being invited to speculate about what might have happened in other areas,
15 again with no proper foundation.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, if you ask the witness --
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President --
18 JUDGE ORIE: -- something he did not observe himself would you
19 always ask him from whom or by what means he got this information.
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. This was my
21 second question. I was just getting to it, Your Honour. Let me ask
22 the first question please. Since Mr. Ierace made an objection, we would
23 like this objection to be denied since he made an objection with regards
24 to my question. And I believe that my question was perfectly admissible.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think, as a matter of fact, that the proper
1 way of questioning would be that you ask the witness whether, and by what
2 means, he obtained any information on what would have happened elsewhere,
3 and then the second question, what was the content of this information.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. But may I just
5 ask my first question, Your Honour?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Your first question was about the content, as far as
7 I can see, and not about the source of knowledge.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you. So
9 you give me the permission, therefore.
10 Q. Witness, do you know if what you just told us, that is to say the
11 fact that civilians were working on the trenches, if this happened in
12 other areas along the line, and if you know so, Witness, how did you find
13 this out? How were you made aware of these facts?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin you now combined the two questions.
15 Mr. DP4, did you ever receive knowledge on similar situations
16 elsewhere, and how did you get that information?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I found out about this and about
18 other areas because for a very short period of time -- I cannot remember
19 his name exactly -- but if you want me to remember it, I will. There was
20 a man who was a Serb, he was from Hrasnica, and he was doing some forest
21 labour. He was digging a tunnel under the airport tarmac and he didn't
22 stay there very long because he had psychological problems. Now with
23 regards to the information and the people who were debriefed by the
24 police, the escapees who would leave Sarajevo, those informations were
25 communicated to us pending on the area in which those people worked. So
1 it means that the people who were digging trenches around Nedzarici were
2 -- gave statements and then this information would get to the Nedzarici
3 unit through our chain of command. And then the commander of the company
4 would come to tell us the relevant information -- the relevant information
5 communicated to that person through personal knowledge of the person in
6 question who communicated the information.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand that the relevant information for the
8 Nedzarici was related to you as a result of the debriefing?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Through a personal conversation with
10 that man from Hrasnica and also through statements.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Reports. I am sorry.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Witness, do you know the name of the people or the person you
17 A. I cannot recall the man in question, the name of the man. I am
18 sorry. But during -- but when I come back, when I go back home, I can
19 try to find him because he is in that area. So I may find his perhaps
20 statement and I could communicate it to this Tribunal.
21 Q. Was there somebody who was with him and can you tell us some
22 other name?
23 A. No, not with regards to the position I held.
24 Q. Very well. Thank you very much.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] For the transcript, I
1 mentioned a few people with you, were there any people with you who would
2 be able to find or to tell us his name and not with him. Thank you.
3 That is all.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, is the Prosecution ready to
5 cross-examine the witness?
6 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know what your first subject would be. If
8 it takes more than five minutes, I suggest that we have a break now. If
9 you have a subject that could be covered in five minutes, please proceed.
10 MR. IERACE: I will proceed, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 Cross-examined by Mr. Ierace:
13 Q. How many were there in your company?
14 A. In our company there was over 100 men.
15 Q. What equipment, apart from rifles, pistols and machine-guns, did
16 you and your fellow company soldiers have?
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I object to
18 this question because this question implies undoubtedly the following
19 fact: That these soldiers absolutely had other weapons in their
20 position. If the word "if any" was added, it would have been acceptable.
21 To me, it is just the way the question is formulated and this is why I
23 MR. IERACE: Indeed in examination it would have been a
24 prerequisite to add those words but not in cross-examination,
25 Mr. President, in my respectful submission.
1 JUDGE ORIE: As a matter of fact Mr. Piletta-Zanin, we discussed
2 before leading questions. And one of the elements that would make a
3 question a leading one would be that the answer is suggested in the
4 question itself. That would make a question a leading one. This
5 certainly is a leading question, but as we also have discussed before,
6 leading questions are not impermissible in the cross-examination where
7 they generally are in chief.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
9 MR. IERACE:
10 Q. What weaponry, apart from small arms up to and including
11 machine-guns, did you and your fellow company soldiers have, and let's
12 say, as of December 1992?
13 A. Other than from what you just mentioned because of course we were
14 an infantry company, let's not forget that, we only had an anti-tank
15 light weaponry. We had hand-held rocket launchers and hand -- that is to
16 say, those cannons against anti-tank cannons.
17 Q. Were there any mortars in your company?
18 A. In my company, no.
19 Q. Having regard to the frontline that you drew yesterday, and for
20 the transcript, for the record, that is on Exhibit D7169, I take it that
21 the former JNA barracks were near your section of the frontline. Is
22 that correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Were there soldiers outside your company operating at any stage
25 between September 1992 and August 1994 from those former barracks?
1 A. Where my company was situated, so that is in the whole barracks,
2 no other soldiers came there except that at one certain point in time
3 there was a commandment in the upper wing and it was also the kitchen
4 which served food to the soldiers.
5 Q. What was the commandment in the upper wing?
6 A. The command of our company, our battalion.
7 Q. When you drew the frontline yesterday you took it up to, but did
8 not include, the Institute for Blind Children. Is that correct?
9 A. The institute used to belong to our company, yes. So it
10 represented the border. It did belong to our company, yes.
11 MR. IERACE: I notice Mr. Piletta-Zanin is on his feet,
12 Mr. President.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour, what I
15 wanted to say is that my colleague is going to ask questions with regards
16 to what the witness said yesterday. It would be fair to show the witness
17 that he himself annotated so that he can check it and testify with the
19 JUDGE ORIE: I think in general terms, Mr. Ierace, especially since
20 the witness might not have in his mind specific -- with high precision
21 what he marked on the map yesterday, it would be preferable to do so. The
22 witness has now answered the question. I think we have to have a break
23 anyhow. If you would like to ask further questions on the markings the
24 witness made on the map yesterday, would you please provide him with a
1 We will adjourn until 11.00.
2 --- Recess taken at 10.32 a.m.
3 --- On resuming at 11.07 a.m.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, please proceed.
5 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. Might we start off in
6 private session.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will turn into private session. Or closed
8 session, that is the same in this courtroom.
9 MR. IERACE: Yes. It will only be for about five minutes.
10 [Closed session]
13 Pages 14205-14207 – redacted – closed session
6 [Open session]
7 JUDGE ORIE: We are in open session again. Please proceed.
8 MR. IERACE:
9 Q. Yesterday, you told us that the first commander of your company
10 was Bozidar Cvijetic and he remained in that position, you think, until
11 mid-1993. Is that correct?
12 A. It is.
13 Q. You said that he was followed by a young man with the nickname
14 Gasi. Do you recall his full name?
15 A. No, I don't.
16 Q. When did he cease to be your company commander?
17 A. He was there for about half a year. I cannot remember exactly
18 because it was a very long time ago. And then until the end our
19 company's commander was Mr. Ljubo Cvijetic, as I have already said.
20 Q. Do I take it, therefore, that Ljubo Cvijetic became your
21 commander from around the end of 1993?
22 A. If my memory serves me well, that is so.
23 Q. Before the break this morning, you said that at one stage there
24 was a commander in the former JNA barracks in Nedzarici, and you went on
25 to say it was the commander of your company, of your battalion. Was it
1 your company commander or your battalion commander or both?
2 A. Be precise. Whom do you have in mind?
3 Q. You told us that in the barracks there was a command post. Is
4 that correct?
5 A. It is. The command post of both battalion and companies, but not
6 one in the same man.
7 Q. Did that command post operate from -- I withdraw that.
8 Was that command post in existence in September of 1992, and if
9 so, for how long after that?
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The witness has just said
13 that there were two command posts. So Mr. Ierace should be more precise
14 and say battalion command, company command.
15 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr. Ierace.
16 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President.
17 Q. Did the company command post exist in that position in September
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So that's where Bozidar Cvijetic had his command post in that
21 month. Is that correct?
22 A. It is.
23 Q. Did the battalion command post exist there in September 1992?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. How many battalions were there in the brigade?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. I don't know.
2 Q. Was there only the one battalion operating in Nedzarici?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. So that was the command post for the battalion commander for the
5 whole of Nedzarici in September 1992, correct?
6 A. It is.
7 Q. Who was the battalion commander in September 1992?
8 A. Radivoje Grkovic.
9 Q. And when did he leave that post?
10 A. Towards the end of 1992 or in the beginning of 1993.
11 Q. Who replaced him?
12 A. Then we joined with the airport locality and part of Kasindolska
13 in one and we became one battalion. And Svetozar Guzina nicknamed Seso
14 then succeeded him as commander in that whole area?
15 Q. When did that happen?
16 A. Early 1993. I can't be more precise.
17 Q. Who was the commander of that new one battalion?
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I know that things are going
20 through at night, but in case our possible additional -- cross-examination
21 could we have the name of the commander clearly. We want to know who is
22 this about. I am talking about line 41 -- page 41, line 22.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please slowly repeat the name of the
24 commander who came in early 1993 on -- of which you said his nickname was
25 I think Seso.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Svetozar Guzina.
2 MR. IERACE:
3 Q. To be clear on that, was he the commander of that new single
4 combined battalion?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Were his headquarters also in the barracks?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Where were his headquarters?
9 A. At the beginning of Kasindolska Street.
10 MR. IERACE: Might the witness be shown map D1764.
11 Q. On the map, would you please point to the position of those
12 headquarters with a --
13 MR. IERACE: I think it is a blue pen, Mr. President?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Blue for the Prosecution, black for the Defence.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You told me to point, not to draw?
16 MR. IERACE:
17 Q. No, no, that is correct. But would you now please take a fine
18 blue point pen, fine blue pen and place a cross at the position of those
20 A. [Marks]
21 MR. IERACE: Perhaps the ELMO can pan back so we can see the
23 Q. All right. Would you please place the initials "HY" alongside
24 that cross.
25 A. [Marks]
1 Q. All right. Now, just to the right of the headquarters we see a
2 yellow road running up and down the screen. What was the name of that
3 road in 1992? It passes through the number one that you wrote yesterday.
4 A. This is the highway from the airport to Sarajevo.
5 Q. All right. Now, did the headquarters stay in that position until
6 at least August 1994?
7 A. The headquarters remained in that place until the end of the war.
8 Q. And for what period of time did that commander stay in that
10 A. Until the end of the war, too.
11 Q. All right. Now, between September 1992 and August 1994, were
12 there civilians living in Nedzarici?
13 A. Yes few, but there were because our numbers were declining.
14 Q. Was there any particular reason as to why the civilians were not
15 moved out of that area, given your evidence this morning that all of the
16 buildings in Nedzarici had been hit?
17 A. Civilians by and large had nowhere to go. Because this whole
18 area was exposed to operations and they preferred to be killed when at
19 home than as refugees. Those people who stayed behind, of course.
20 Q. Did you understand that in the areas controlled by the ABiH, on
21 the other side of your frontline there were also civilians living?
22 A. One could assume that, yes.
23 MR. IERACE: Might the ELMO pan back, please. Is it possible for
24 the ELMO to pan back. Thank you. Further. Further. Thank you.
25 Q. Now, a few moments ago you pointed out the highway that ran from
1 the airport to Sarajevo. Would you please run your pointer along that
2 road from the UN post up to where it joined the boulevard? In the other
3 direction from the UN post that you marked yesterday, heading north.
4 A. [Indicates]
5 Q. All right. Now, would you please move the pointer along that
6 yellow road from the UN position as marked on the map up to the main
8 A. [Indicates]
9 Q. Please stop there. All right.
10 Now, along that road on the ABiH side of the confrontation lines,
11 did you know there to be residents, that is, civilians living on either
12 side of that road?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We didn't have any precise
16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... Mr.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. The question seems
19 contradictory to me. Because first it is talking about the ABiH army's
20 side, which should be to the east, and then answer by the two sides.
21 Therefore, the question somehow seems to me contradictory. Could it be
22 made more precise.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I do agree with you that the question started
24 with the ABiH side and then continued on both sides. I do not know
25 whether it would create great confusion. But, perhaps, Mr. Ierace, if
1 you ask about the line, perhaps not use "one side" and "both side" in the
2 same question. Although I take it that the witness would have understood
3 that it is civilians living on both sides of the line.
4 Is that how you understood the question, Mr. DP4?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, with regards to the
6 situation that prevailed on the lines that were further away from our
7 lines meaning behind the enemy lines, we can only assess or infer
8 things. I do not have any particular knowledge. But I can tell you with
9 regards to the lines that were in front of me I was -- I could tell you
10 it was the market, nobody lived there. And then the circle indicates new
11 constructions that were right in front of us. So these were newly
12 constructed buildings, businesses actually, commercial buildings. But
13 they were not finished. And so I was not able to see on the other side.
14 So I can only infer.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please continue, Mr. Ierace.
16 MR. IERACE:
17 Q. And what did you infer?
18 A. I think that I was quite clear. I can only -- or I could only
19 assess or guess what was on the other side. But with regards to what was
20 in front of me, I think exactly what was there, and I know that it was
21 not inhabited directly.
22 Q. You told us that you received orders to not target civilians. Is
23 that correct?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. How many times between September 1992 and August 1994 did you
1 receive such orders?
2 A. On many occasions. Because we were always told that we were
3 being watched by the International Community like under a magnifying
4 glass, and that we were always -- we were always accused of doing things.
5 And this is why we had to protect our military pride.
6 Q. When you say you were always accused of doing things, do you mean
7 accused of deliberately shooting and shelling civilians?
8 A. We were receiving the informations as to what we should not do.
9 We didn't know what we were accused of. And we were told that we should
10 defend our military pride. And it is obvious that we wouldn't do what a
11 normal man wouldn't do.
12 Q. Sir, you said a few minutes ago: "We were always accused of
13 doing things and this is why we had to protect our military pride."
14 What did you understand you were always accused of doing?
15 A. I was referring to the fact that the medias could take advantage
16 and say whatever they want to with regards to what was going on in that
17 area. If something happens by error, one can always say that it was made
18 on purpose. Or if there was a bullet, a stray bullet all of a sudden
19 that was shot and it is quite possible that a stray bullet may kill
20 somebody or may injure someone. And in order to avoid this precisely this
21 is why it was defended to open fire if it was not necessary and only to
23 Q. To your knowledge, was there any investigation carried out in
24 Nedzarici in relation to the -- an allegation that civilians had been
25 deliberately targeted by Bosnian Serb forces in that area?
1 A. We did not receive information that somebody was hit somewhere,
2 and this is why they were not able to carry out an investigation.
3 Q. So I take it that you are not aware of any such investigation
4 being carried out between September 1992 and August 1994. Is that
6 A. No, not personally.
7 Q. All right. Now, you have told us that those orders were given
8 during that period and you said, "on many occasions." How frequently?
9 Once a week, once a fortnight, once a month?
10 A. At least once a week.
11 Q. Did you ever receive any orders in writing during the period,
12 that is, orders on anything between September 1992 and August 1994?
13 A. No position of the line wherever there were soldiers at that
14 post, nobody ever received a written order. It was always orally made.
15 Q. All right. Now, did you have command over any soldiers
16 underneath you?
17 A. No, never.
18 Q. So we are talking about orders given to you by voice at least
19 once a week for some 23 months to the effect that you must not shoot
20 civilians. Is that correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And I take it therefore that given you were armed with a rifle,
23 that --
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. -- when you used your rifle shooting across the frontline, you
1 understood you had to be very careful not to shoot a civilian correct?
2 A. Yes. But I will repeat: In the zone in question, there were no
3 civilians. Our position was near the flower plant and it was just
4 impossible to shoot in such a way that the bullet would go any further.
5 Q. Were you in exactly the same position on the frontline for the
6 entire 23 months between September 1992 and August 1994?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Point again, please, to where that position was.
9 A. This is the installation. It is inside the nursery and that is
10 where it was.
11 Q. And were there some greenhouses in that nursery?
12 A. Yes, there were.
13 Q. So in your case, you could shoot safely in terms of avoiding
14 civilians. Is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now --
17 A. But we did take the order seriously, so we did not shoot for any
18 unnecessary reason.
19 Q. All right. Did you understand Nedzarici to be strategically a
20 very important part of the frontline around Sarajevo?
21 A. We considered it to be an important position strategically,
22 especially for us who grew up there and who were born there. So it was
23 an emotional, it was an emotional importance for us.
24 Q. Apart from the emotional importance to those who came from the
25 area, it was a part of Bosnian Serb territory that extruded into the
1 Bosnian government side, wasn't it? It was an outpost, if you like?
2 A. I am sorry. Are you referring to the Muslim forces in Sarajevo?
3 Is that what you mean?
4 Q. What you would call the Muslim forces --
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I am trying to
6 follow the instructions that you gave us earlier, so I would like to make
7 an objection. The question, as it is asked by the Prosecution, has to do
8 with a strategic notion. The question is, what was the strategic
9 importance. But with regards to what was said earlier, it would be more
10 adequate to first see if there were any strategically important places.
11 This man was only a soldier, I would like to remind you, and this is why
12 I think this question should be rephrased.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, could you please find a factual basis
14 for the assessment of strategical aspects of the conflict by this
16 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I rely on the fact that he was a
17 soldier there throughout the period on the frontline and the nature of
18 the frontline that is it extruded into the opponent's territory. And
19 as we have seen, was exposed -- and from this witness's evidence alone --
20 was exposed on at least three sides.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, Mr. Ierace is
23 not telling us how could this witness know any specific facts about the
24 military art. He is asking some questions with regard to strategy, but
25 strategy is something that people learn in military schools. For
1 instance, he could ask the witness whether he went through a military
2 training, for instance, if he took part in some war games, as they are
3 taught in those schools.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, at least on your first question about
5 strategic aspects, part of the answer of the witness was about
6 emotional -- or how they experienced emotionally that and that might show
7 some -- well, at least some confusion as to what exactly strategic
8 position is. Could you please try to make it as factual.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
10 MR. IERACE: I am sorry. The question I asked at page 49, line
11 13 acknowledged the witness's answer as to its emotional importance to
12 him and then directed his attention to the extrusion of the territory
13 into the Bosniak territory, and invited him to agree that it was in that
14 sense, an outpost.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 MR. IERACE: I can approach it a different way, Mr. President. I
17 am very conscious of the time.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you would approach it in a different way,
19 please proceed.
20 MR. IERACE: All right.
21 Q. Please look at the map to your right which is Exhibit D1764.
22 Please point to the Institute for Blind Children.
23 A. [Indicates]
24 Q. The frontline falls away to the south-west from that institution
25 and also falls away to the south-east. Is that correct?
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. So here we have the Institute for Blind Children at the point of
3 an arrowhead, if you like, into your opponent's territory. Is that
5 A. One could say this, yes.
6 Q. I don't know how it is translated, but are you familiar with the
7 word "salient" that this was a salient on the frontline?
8 A. I could not say that it was like a nail. Our positions were
9 surrounded from all sides. Now, if you are talking about that, I am not
10 quite sure if I can answer this question.
11 Q. All right. Well perhaps it doesn't translate too well.
12 For what period of time did your company control the Institute
13 for Blind Children?
14 A. Throughout the whole period.
15 Q. Why did you not draw the frontline, therefore, in such a way as
16 to include those buildings?
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, Your Honours,
18 I am not quite certain and would like to check something on the map.
19 Just a moment, please. Yes Mr. President, this map seems to be
20 slightly -- not to -- not sufficiently precise or insufficiently precise.
21 We know that the institute is comprised of three buildings, and I have the
22 impression that we cannot draw a conclusive evidence from in view of the
23 map and in view of what is shown here. Thank you.
24 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, that is extraordinary given that it's
25 a Defence map, given that the witness has just pointed to the buildings of
1 the Institute for Blind Children, and given what the Trial Chamber knows.
2 There is nothing wrong with that question and there is no room for
3 misleading the witness by asking it.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yesterday, you stopped drawing a line just before
5 the Institute for Blind Children. The question of the Prosecution is why
6 you stopped there?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Without any particular reason, I
8 was a little confused, the thickness of the felt pen was confusing me.
9 And I thought it was more important to draw the line where it was most
10 present. It is a 2-kilometre long area. And you could never walk along
11 this line because you would just die. And during the war, I was not all
12 that much present up there.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber noticed that the opposite
14 frontline of the ABiH forces was drawn a bit longer. So, Mr. Ierace,
15 would you please proceed.
16 MR. IERACE:
17 Q. Would you please take the blue pen the fine-point pen, and
18 continue the northern end of the frontline, that is the frontline of
19 your company so that it reflects the full length of the frontline that
20 was operated or manned by your company.
21 A. [Marks]
22 Q. All right. You have now extended the frontline through to the
23 intersection of Aleja Bosne Srebrene Street and Lukavicka Cesta. Is that
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. All right. Now, did you go to any of those buildings between
2 September 1992 and August of 1994?
3 A. Only once, escorted by the commander of the company during the
5 Q. When was that?
6 A. It was somewhere early 1995. I am not quite sure.
7 Q. The question was whether you went there between September 1992
8 and August 1994. Are you now telling us that you didn't go there at all
9 in that period?
10 A. Yes, that is what I am saying.
11 Q. At any stage in that period, did you see amongst your fellow
12 soldiers anyone with a rifle equipped with a telescopic sight?
13 A. With regards to this line, no. Because it was visually
14 impossible to hit something, any target, from the basement of the
15 installations we were based at because we were defending the line.
16 Q. All right. Please listen carefully to the question and I will
17 repeat it. At any stage in that period did you see amongst your fellow
18 soldiers, and by that I mean soldiers anywhere in Nedzarici, Bosnian Serb
19 soldiers, anyone with a rifle equipped with a telescopic sight?
20 A. No.
21 Q. When you were handed your weapon in 1992, you have told us that
22 weapons were handed out by the Civil Defence which the neighbourhood
23 community staff somehow procured, did you see then any weapons with a
24 telescopic sight?
25 A. No. The weapons handed out by the Civil Defence was old. Some
1 rifles, M-48, for instance it is only later that I received an automatic
2 rifle, sometime in the summer of 1992.
3 Q. And is that a new rifle?
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Your Honour, what I wish to
5 say at this point is the following: My objection goes back to the two
6 previous questions, I believe it was not admissible. The first question
7 began "at any stage of this period." When the witness clearly answered
8 "no," he was asked a second question which goes as follows: When the
9 Civil Defence gave you or handed you questions. It is the same question
10 but asked in two different ways. And basically if the Defence did the
11 same thing, I wouldn't think it would be allowed.
12 JUDGE ORIE: It is not quite clear to me to what question you are
13 referring. I see one question starting with: "At any stage of that
14 period." That is on page 54, line 2, is that correct? Or is there --
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I was referring to page 2,
16 line 54, question 54. And I was referring to the next question on page
17 7, question 55. And I was also referring to question on page -- there is
18 a question on page 12 so, I was basically talking about these three
19 questions. The first question, question number 12, invites the
20 witness -- or rather, the Prosecution asked the same question even though
21 the witness answered, "no." So the Defence deems it is not an admissible
23 JUDGE ORIE: I am totally confused, I must say. Could you just
24 tell me precisely what the content of the question was you are --
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we may not
2 have the same pages, but there is a question on page 54, I repeat, page
3 54, line 7. The question reads as follows: [In English] "At any stage in
4 that period did you see amongst your fellow soldiers --"
5 JUDGE ORIE: Okay that is the first question. And the second
6 question was?
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, and the second
8 question is: [In English] "When you were handed your weapon in 1992"
9 [Interpretation] A few questions lower. And then the same question is
10 asked over again. Since the first question was saying: "At any point in
11 time in that period, did you," and then after that the same question is
12 asked in different words. So I believe that it is not admissible.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, would you please respond.
14 MR. IERACE: They are different questions, Mr. President. It
15 doesn't canvas the same issue. It is a different aspect, that is whether
16 in 1992 when weapons were handed out he saw then any rifles or whatever
17 with a telescopic sight, whether or not they were handed to his fellow
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The objection is denied. Please proceed.
20 MR. IERACE:
21 Q. All right. I think I was asking you about the new rifle you
22 received in 1992. Were new weapons distributed generally in 1992 at that
24 A. Yes. New weapons were distributed to trenches. So I didn't
25 always know what the others received. But with regards to us, we did not
1 receive those weapons because we didn't have positions to shoot from.
2 Because visually, we were impaired with regards to the Muslim soldiers.
3 Q. Are you talking about rifles with telescopic sights?
4 A. Yes. We were not handed those weapons because we couldn't use
5 them. That's probably why we didn't receive them.
6 Q. All right. And are you saying that you would expect those rifles
7 to go to soldiers who were in a position to use them, in other words, who
8 had a wider view of targets?
9 A. I couldn't guess these things.
10 Q. But you have made an assumption as to why you didn't get them.
11 A. Yes. But I cannot guess, I could not tell you with certainty why
12 somebody would not receive them and why others would. I am talking to
13 you about what I know.
14 Q. Now during the period that we have mentioned, September 1992 to
15 August 1994, were there times when you observed artillery and mortars
16 being used by your side to assist you in conflicts?
17 A. Yes. Artillery was used in order to help or to answer when there
18 was an artillery fired, fired. I can give you some examples, if you
20 Q. That's all right. But the situation was that your side was
21 outnumbered by the other side, correct? They had more soldiers?
22 A. Yes. It is only an assumption.
23 Q. And in Nedzarici the frontlines were very close. I think you
24 said yesterday, a matter of 50 or 70 meters, correct?
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. You and your fellow soldiers when machine-guns and rifles,
2 therefore, needed the support of artillery --
3 A. Yes --
4 Q. And therefore needed the support of artillery and mortars in
5 order to hold the line, is that so?
6 A. In front of our lines there were some areas that were mined. And
7 we were well fortified. It is only an exceptional circumstances when we
8 were attacked heavily or when we had to pull out the wounded or the dead,
9 we would ask through the commander of the company for some interventions.
10 Q. From time to time --
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, Your Honour, I
12 must say that I was not following the English text in the headphones. I
13 must say that the way the question was asked on page 57, line 16, does
14 not make any sense. On the one hand it was interrupted, and on the other
15 there is no verb. I must say, I cannot follow very clearly.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the witness was interrupting
17 counsel for the Prosecution when he put that question. So I do not think
18 that the Prosecution can be blamed for only finishing its question after
19 the interruption. The question is finished on lines 19 and 20.
20 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
21 MR. IERACE:
22 Q. On occasions, tanks would come in and offer you support. Is that
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Do you remember one of those occasions being on the 24th of
1 September 1992?
2 A. I cannot recall the date. It was very long -- very long time
3 ago. I cannot really -- I cannot really say which tank came out to fire.
4 Q. In any event, the artillery and some of the mortars that gave you
5 that support were located well back from Nedzarici, weren't they, not in
6 Nedzarici itself?
7 A. No that is not correct. In front of the convent or the School
8 of Theology, there were mortars, 60 and 80 millimetre mortars.
9 Q. I appreciate that. Perhaps my question wasn't fully interpreted.
10 I said artillery and some of the mortars. All right. So we have 60 and
11 80 millimetre at the convent or Institute of Theology. There were mortars
12 at the barracks as well, were there not?
13 A. I am not aware of any mortars in the barracks.
14 Q. Where else did you see mortars apart from the convent in
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I am
18 completely -- the interpreter's completely lost me. I am talking about
19 58:23, and I do not know what is it that the witness could have said in
20 Serbian because I wasn't listening very carefully. But I know that in
21 that place, the French interpretation talks with reference to
22 Mr. Ierace's question about the convent. That is what I heard, the
23 convent. I don't see it in the transcript, and I was not following
24 Mr. Ierace. I don't know whether they were talking about convent or not,
25 but I heard it in French. And that really sounds odd.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I -- the witness answered: "In front of the
2 convent or the School of Theology." Do I understand you well that you
3 are using indistinctively the words "convent" and "School of Theology"?
4 Is that the same for you?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that seems to be rather clear from the answer
7 of the witness. Please proceed, Mr. Ierace. And, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, if
8 it really is necessary to make an objection, could you do it in two or
9 three lines.
10 MR. IERACE:
11 Q. Was the convent the only place that you saw mortars in Nedzarici?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Yesterday you mentioned a particular weapon used by the ABiH
14 which you pronounced as a Zolja. What is that?
15 A. It is an anti-armour rocket launcher for a single time use.
16 Q. All right. Now, please look again at the map to your right.
17 This morning we heard mention of the Airport Settlement. Would you
18 please point to the area known as the Airport Settlement.
19 A. [Indicates]
20 Q. Thank you.
21 MR. IERACE: And for the benefit of the transcript, the witness
22 has pointed to a complex of streets, many of which are parallel,
23 immediately to the north-east of that part of the map, identified as the
24 Aerodrom Sarajevo.
25 Q. It was suggested to you or it was suggested that the southern
1 wall of the convent overlooked that area. Is that correct?
2 A. It is the lower part of the convent faces this locality.
3 Q. When you use the phrase, "the lower part of the convent," what do
4 you exactly mean?
5 A. What you asked me about means this part that we already mentioned
7 Q. Perhaps you could point to it, that is the part you mean by "the
8 lower part."
9 A. [Indicates]
10 Q. All right. Do you mean the wall that faces south-west -- I am
11 sorry -- south-east? The wall that faces towards the Airport Settlement?
12 A. That's right. The Airport Settlement and Dobrinja.
13 Q. Now, it seems from your evidence this morning that the institute
14 or the convent was obviously quite a target for the ABiH, that they
15 repeatedly either hit it or tried to hit it. Is that correct?
16 A. It is, like all the other places in Nedzarici.
17 Q. Well, except that you have told us that there were mortars there,
18 and you have also told us that it had a number of storeys correct?
19 A. I said that in the uppermost part of this building, and it is
20 this part here, had four floors then a wing that was mentioned, which was
21 a 3 storey wing. And this part here, lower, which housed the kitchen, the
22 canteen and where our medical corps was during the war.
23 Q. Let me make sure I understand this. The northern corner was four
24 storeys, the side facing south-west was three storeys. Is that correct?
25 A. It is.
1 Q. And the side that faced towards the Airport Settlement had how
2 many storeys?
3 A. Three.
4 Q. So that was actually quite a good building to look over a large
5 area, including into enemy territory, wasn't it?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Why not?
8 A. Because one cannot say that it is a tall building because it
9 isn't and because it wasn't safe to go to the upper floors because they
10 are not all that high, high up. And around us -- around it were six or
11 18 storey buildings. So as for the visibility, it was impossible to have
12 a good visibility. Then, and I will show it to you here on the map,
13 there were -- this is a row of buildings in Dobrinja V -- no, sorry --
14 here. Here you have a neighbourhood of private houses, there is a mosque
15 there. And it also obstructs the view of this area. Here we have
16 high-rise buildings and they can -- from them you can very clearly see
17 this whole area, if you follow what I am saying. And there is also the
18 distance that has to be taken out, which is a kilometre to a kilometre and
19 a half to 2. One can measure it. One can look at the map scale and if
20 one wants to establish the exact distance, one can easily do that.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, in the examination-in-chief it has been
22 established that the witness never went up to the first or second floor,
23 and that a lot of his observations are the results of his logic. When
24 adding any questions in this respect, perhaps you could keep in mind to
25 what extent it would assist the Chamber to have more logic and less
1 observation. Please proceed.
2 MR. IERACE: Excuse me, Mr. President. Might the witness be
3 shown Exhibit P3259. I will keep that in mind, Mr. President. Perhaps
4 while that is being done, I appreciate that much of that last answer will
5 make little sense, given the witness hasn't described precisely where he
6 was referring. But unless you wish it, Mr. President, I don't propose to
7 bring out that detail. I will, if you wish it.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether, on the basis of a map, where
9 we all know that lines of view and sight are relatively complicated. If
10 we just have to assess them on the basis of a map, whether that would be
11 of great assistance.
12 MR. IERACE: Perhaps the reason --
13 JUDGE ORIE: If you think it is -- I asked you to keep in mind to
14 what extent it would be of assistance. So if you would keep that in
15 mind, proceed with the issue.
16 MR. IERACE: Perhaps this will assist.
17 Q. Sir --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it seems to
20 the Defence useful to put in the transcript what the witness showed
21 because he was pointing at certain areas to say that there were
22 structures there so that one couldn't see beyond them, behind them. And
23 I would like it to be precise. We think that it should be in the
24 transcript. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I think the witness transferred mainly to the built
1 up areas close to the dotted line the last part where it goes in
2 north-easterly direction. If that would be a correct way of stating it
3 for the transcript. Then please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
4 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. Now, sir, I think the last few minutes you have been looking at
6 two photographs in front of you. Is that correct?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Could it be put on the ELMO, if possible. Usher,
8 could you please assist. Mr. DP4, we ask the photographs to be put on the
9 ELMO so that we can see the same as you do.
10 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
11 MR. IERACE: Perhaps the usher could assist us with the last
12 digits of the ERN on the photograph which is presently on the ELMO.
13 Thank you. I think it is 4244.
14 Q. In that photograph, do you recognise the convent, otherwise known
15 as the Institute of Theology?
16 A. I do. Yes, you can see the top of the convent's building.
17 Q. Would you please point to it.
18 A. [Indicates]
19 MR. IERACE: The witness points to a white building which
20 presently has a -- what appears to be a black circle placed on it. Is it
21 black? Yes, thank you. All right. Would you now please, Mr. Court
22 Usher, show the witness the second photograph. All right.
23 Q. Now, in the background of the photograph in front of you which
24 ends in ERN 4245, do you see Nedzarici? Perhaps, sir, you could look at
25 the photograph in front of you rather than the screen. That will give
1 you a better view.
2 A. It is not clear. It is not clear.
3 Q. Well, don't look at the screen look at the photograph. Do you
4 recognise in the background, Nedzarici?
5 A. I do.
6 MR. IERACE: That might be returned. Those photographs can be
7 returned. Thank you. And might the witness be shown -- excuse me -- the
8 map that he was shown this morning. I think it is Exhibit P3728 relating
9 to sniping incident 23.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Do you intend to tender that or would you --
11 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, they already are in evidence.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but I mean so you are using the original one
13 and not the copies?
14 MR. IERACE: Oh, I am sorry.
15 JUDGE ORIE: We have been provided with copies, I take it for our
16 convenience. No markings are necessary
17 MR. IERACE: No markings are necessary so I suppose it is the
18 Defence copy of P3278. Thank you.
19 Q. Now, on this map, you see a dark green and light green parallel
20 lines around Nedzarici, not entirely, but largely, do you see that? And
21 again, sir, could you please look at the map rather than the screen.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. DP4, on the map the colours are better, I take
23 it. Your attention was drawn to the dark green lines and the brighter
24 green lines.
25 MR. IERACE:
1 Q. In particular, would you look at those green lines in the area of
2 the Airport Settlement. Do those green lines show the frontline positions
3 in the Airport Settlement?
4 A. They do.
5 Q. All right.
6 MR. IERACE: Might that be returned.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can add that I was not at that
8 frontline, and, therefore, I cannot affirm positively which was building
9 to the left, to the right and who lived where.
10 MR. IERACE:
11 Q. Now, between September 1992 and August 1994 were there any
12 ceasefires on your part of the frontline?
13 A. There were several ceasefires on our side. At the time when
14 ceasefires were signed we to be ordered not to open fire unless our lives
15 were in danger.
16 Q. You said that there were several ceasefires. During that period,
17 would there have been more than ten or less than ten or about ten?
18 A. Less than ten.
19 Q. What was the longest period of ceasefire that you recollect in
20 that period?
21 A. All of them lasted for a very short time because whenever there
22 was a ceasefire, people would get relaxed and then invariably there were
23 woundings and killings. What I am trying to say is that the enemy side
24 did not comply with these ceasefires.
25 Q. My question is, what was the longest period of ceasefire and you
1 said all of them lasted for a very short time. What do you mean by "very
2 short time"? Hours or days or weeks?
3 A. I mean one day or less.
4 Q. All right. Thank you for that.
5 Now, you told us that you had some information that a Serb
6 prisoner or a Serb civilian was involved in the digging of a tunnel. How
7 did you come by that information?
8 A. Concretely, as I have already said.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President, one needs
11 to be more precise than this. A moment ago we were talking about Serb
12 civilians in plural, so a number of persons, not as the question says,
13 Serb civilian involved in the digging of a tunnel.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I see the single form in the transcript, and that is
15 how you intended the question to be? So the question was about "a Serb
16 individual" being forced to participate in digging a tunnel. Would you
17 answer the question how this information got to you.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The gentleman concerned was
19 assigned to us. He was a man younger than 55. So he was assigned to us
20 as reinforcement as a replenishment. But since he was mentally disabled,
21 we could not switch off the lights at night because he was traumatized.
22 He was afraid of the dark. And a few days later, he left our lines, so
23 this information I received directly from him.
24 Q. When did he join your company?
25 A. It was in late May that is, late May, early June 1995. And the
1 whole period before that he spent in captivity in the Hrasnic prison and
2 taken to do forced labour.
3 Q. Did he ever tell you when it was that he came over to the side of
4 the confrontation lines controlled by the Bosnian Serbs?
5 A. Right before getting to our line, that is joining our combat
6 order, he had been exchanged.
7 Q. So I take it that was sometime in 1995. Is that correct?
8 A. That's right.
9 Q. What was his name?
10 A. I cannot remember exactly, but if Your Honours need it when I go
11 back, I can send you his name and another particulars. He lived in
12 Hrasnica, worked at Famos and it was their settlement in Hrasnica. I saw
13 him after Dayton at a new location in Serb Sarajevo.
14 Q. Now, in Nedzarici, was there a tram terminal?
15 A. I didn't hear the question clearly. I mean, I couldn't hear the
17 Q. I will repeat the question. I am asking you about something else
18 now. In Nedzarici, was there a tram terminal?
19 A. There was one such.
20 MR. IERACE: Might the witness again be shown map P1764.
21 JUDGE ORIE: While this is being done, Mr. Ierace may I ask you,
22 we are close to the time where we usually have a break. How much time
23 would you still need.
24 MR. IERACE: Just a few minutes, Mr. President. I anticipate that
25 I can finish this witness subject to a reflection over the break in the
1 next few minutes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Okay, then please proceed and we'll then continue.
3 MR. IERACE: Could the ELMO be zoomed in.
4 Q. Please point to the position of the tram terminal in Nedzarici.
5 A. [Indicates]
6 Q. All right.
7 A. Thereabouts.
8 Q. Now, have you just pointed to an area where, for a different
9 purpose, yesterday you wrote the number "6"? Is that correct?
10 A. No.
11 Q. All right.
12 A. Yes. I mean, number "6" marks students' hostels which are right
13 beneath number 6.
14 Q. So the tram terminal is beneath the number 6. Is that correct?
15 A. No. Student hostels are beneath number 6.
16 Q. Student hostels are in the circle indicated by number 6. Is that
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... blue pen and place a cross to
20 indicate the position of the tram terminal.
21 A. [Indicates]
22 Q. All right. Now, as indicated by the map, was it the case -- I
23 withdraw that.
24 Before the war, did trams travel right along the boulevard into
25 Ilidza and then turn around?
1 A. That's right, some trams.
2 Q. Yes. Of course, that wasn't possible during the war. So did the
3 trams within the city instead turn around in the vicinity of the
4 Oslobodjenje building? If you don't know, please say so.
5 A. I don't know. There was no electricity so I think they were not
6 in service, but I can't say.
7 Q. So you don't know whether trams ran in the city between September
8 1992 and August 1994; is that correct?
9 A. As I said, I do not know.
10 Q. Before the war, immediately before the war, were trams stored at
11 the terminal? In other words was there a shed where the trams were kept
12 on that spot or near that spot?
13 A. No. They were parked on Grasova [phoen] which is where the shed
14 was, where the tram depot was.
15 Q. Does that appear on the map above the word "boulevard" -- please
16 look at the map. I think you can see the word "Gras."
17 MR. IERACE: The map will need to be moved. Perhaps the ELMO can
18 pan back a little. Move to the right. Thank you. All right.
19 Q. So that is where the tram carriage was stored. Is that correct?
20 A. That's right
21 MR. IERACE: Witness indicates the area of the word "Gras."
22 Q. Would you please circle that.
23 A. [Marks]
24 Q. Please put a circle around the tram terminal buildings or
1 THE INTERPRETER: I am sorry. I could not hear the witness.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Marks]
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MR. IERACE: Nothing further, Mr. President. I would be grateful
5 for it opportunity to confirm that immediately after the break. At this
6 stage I don't anticipate any further questions.
7 JUDGE ORIE: We will then have a break until five minutes to
9 --- Recess taken at 12.35 p.m.
10 --- On resuming 1.00 p.m
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
12 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. There is one further
13 issue. I don't think it will take longer than a few minutes.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Okay, then, please proceed.
15 MR. IERACE:
16 Q. Sir, you told us yesterday that the UN occupied two positions in
17 Nedzarici. First of all, in relation to the position on the
18 intersection, on the airport road, what was it exactly? Was it a
19 building or a vehicle on the road? What?
20 A. It was some sort of a control checkpoint.
21 Q. Did it -- did you ever see it operating? In other words, did you
22 see what they did, if anything, as vehicles went along that road, through
23 that intersection?
24 A. For the main part they would communicate or get in touch with
25 their own members with vehicles that were going from the airport towards
1 Sarajevo. But I couldn't really tell you with precision what it was all
3 Q. Essentially, it seemed to be part of the communications route
4 between the airport and the city. Is that correct?
5 A. Probably.
6 Q. All right. Now, the other position you marked on the map, I
7 think you described it as an old people's home. Is that correct or not?
8 A. Correct.
9 Q. And did you ever go there?
10 A. No.
11 Q. When were there UN people in that building?
12 Sorry, I withdraw that question. If you never went there, how do
13 you know about it?
14 A. I heard about it from other members of our unit. And I was also
15 able to see when they were bringing humanitarian aid for the tenants of
16 the old people's home.
17 Q. At some stage those tenants were moved out weren't they?
18 A. As far as I know, no. A lot of them died, were killed, but I
19 don't know if during the war they were moved or they had moved away or
20 were transferred anywhere. There were many different nations living
21 there together.
22 Q. Did you ever meet any UN officials?
23 A. No.
24 Q. I suggest to you that if there was a UN post in that -- I withdraw
1 Let's be a little clearer on exactly what you say happened there.
2 I think you said you heard about it from other members of the unit, and
3 you saw when they brought humanitarian aid in for the tenants. Is that
4 all that you heard about the UN in that building?
5 A. I heard from the director, Milena Mucibabic she was a director of
6 that place, that they were coming in to bring in humanitarian aid and food
7 and other supplies.
8 Q. So you don't know what their function was in that building, apart
9 from bringing in humanitarian aid. Is that correct?
10 A. I can only assume that they were a surveillance unit --
11 Q. I am not asking you what you can assume. I am asking you what
12 you know. In terms of what you know, it goes only as far as bringing in
13 humanitarian aid. Is that correct?
14 A. I know that they stayed there, but I don't know if they only went
15 there for that purpose.
16 Q. I suggest to you that if they stayed there, they only did so up
17 until early 1993. What do you say to that?
18 A. I think that that is incorrect.
19 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I have no further questions. There
20 is something I wish to raise in the absence of the witness. It need not
21 be done now. It could be done at the conclusion of the witness's
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then perhaps we will first see whether the
24 Judges have any questions unless the cross-examination would have raised
25 an issue that the Defence would like to touch upon.
1 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Thank
4 Re-examined by Mr. Piletta-Zanin:
5 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, in answer to a question put to you by
6 the Prosecutor, you mentioned that there was a mosque in the neighbourhood
7 of Dobrinja. Do you remember this?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Thank you. With regards to that mosque, was it ever, during the
10 period that we are interested in, was it ever shot at --
11 MR. IERACE: I object, Mr. President.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I will rephrase the question.
13 Q. What can you tell us, sir -- I will rephrase my question again.
14 And I withdraw the question as well.
15 JUDGE ORIE: The object was about the formulation of the
16 question --
17 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, it was to the substance of the
18 question. Firstly, the mention of the mosque was not given in response to
19 a question asked by me; secondly, it was not mentioned in the context of
20 the issue that my friend now seeks to raise for the first time.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Would you respond to that, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
22 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please use the microphone.
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I am terribly sorry. I do
25 not know whether it was in answer to a question by myself or the
1 Prosecutor but all I know is that -- rather, I believe, Mr. President,
2 that it was following an intervention by the Prosecutor. I remember
3 having asked that we put in the transcript the fact that the witness had
4 shown small constructions, small buildings or family homes, and I
5 described also the fact that he had indicated a mosque in the background.
6 So, I do not remember if you recall this, but I believe it was following
7 a question put to the witness by Mr. Ierace. And secondly, since the
8 witness mentioned himself the existence of a mosque and since the
9 Prosecution is saying that it was a campaign made to destroy cultural
10 installations and objects, this was not the question --
11 MR. IERACE: I object. I am very concerned about my learned
12 colleague's choice to go into that sort of detail in front of the
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. How many questions would you have in mind,
15 Mr. Piletta-Zanin?
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Are we talking about the
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Only one with regards to the
21 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... I am not
22 telling you that it will go this way always, but usually an objection
23 takes more time than a question. Please put the question to the witness.
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
25 Q. Witness, what can you tell us, if you can tell us anything, about
1 the physical state in which the mosque was during the war, if you know?
2 A. I didn't hear that the mosque was ever targeted or hit. I do not
3 know that fact. But it is certainly something that can be verified.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... question about
6 the mosque, Mr. Piletta-Zanin. Any other issue to be -- I saw in the
7 transcript, as a matter of fact, that in response -- I don't know whether
8 it is true or not -- but that you said I will reformulate my question, I
9 will withdraw that question. So that is the reason why I thought we
10 could be fairly quick on this issue.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] May I pursue -- may I
12 continue? I have some more questions to ask the witness.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it depends on what subject. The mosque has
14 been dealt with, I take it --
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, of course.
16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... what would be
17 there that came up during the cross-examination.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Of course. The Prosecution
19 asked that two pictures be placed on the ELMO, those were two pictures
20 showing some people linked to incident number 23. Could we please ask
21 the usher to put these pictures back on the ELMO and I would like to ask
22 some questions with respect to those pictures.
23 We have two pictures, this one where we see -- may I please have
24 them, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We have one overall picture and the other one
1 is a close-up.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
3 Very well. I would like to ask the technical booth to zoom in the area
4 where we can see the convent, as much as you can. Thank you, thank you.
5 That's it. Stop.
6 Q. Sir, let's focus on the so-called convent. How many walls do you
7 see here, that is my first question?
8 A. One wall and we can only see something, a whitish surface, and it
9 is the lower wall right here.
10 Q. Very well. I am talking about the white building. Do you see
11 here one wall?
12 A. Yes, I do. But partially only.
13 Q. Second question: Is this the floor that would have been
14 destroyed during the war and consequently the one that was rebuilt later.
15 MR. IERACE: I object, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. IERACE: That is a leading question, Mr. President --
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well then.
19 Q. Can you tell us --
20 MR. IERACE: -- and contradicts the evidence.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That would be -- if you'd like to -- you put to
22 the witness that a storey -- that a floor that had been destroyed during
23 the war. Could you please indicate where the witness said that before
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I may search
1 for the relevant passage, but from memory, I can tell you that the
2 witness said --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, it is in the presence of the
4 witness we are not going to repeat what it was you who would like to
5 have a direct quoting of --
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. I shall find it.
7 In the meantime, would Mr. Ierace be so kind enough to tell me if what I
8 said earlier with regards to mosque was right or not.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I am
11 searching, but I am experiencing some technical difficulties with my
12 system. I am not such a good operator, I must admit. So in order not to
13 waste any time, I propose to ask the following question.
14 Q. Witness, the building, did it have all its floors during the war?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Thank you. Witness, what can you tell us, since you are telling
17 us now that the building did not have all its floors during the war, what
18 can you tell us about it?
19 A. After the war, the convent was rebuilt, renovated. It became
20 operational again. And one extra floor was added and also some other
21 rooms were also added in the base -- on the ground level.
22 Q. Thank you very much. The wall that we see on this picture, does
23 it correspond to one or the other of the parties -- sorry -- one of the
24 other rebuilt areas or parts of the building?
25 A. I am not quite certain, but I think that this is the renovated
1 area. So what is to the left on this picture.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, with your
4 leave, I would like to ask the witness to be shown the map covering
5 incident number 23, but I would also like that the picture be kept on the
6 ELMO or on the screen, that is to say maybe Mr. Usher can just superimpose
7 the map --
8 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, before that happens I would be
9 grateful if we could have for the benefit of the transcript the
10 description by you of the portion indicated by the witness as the
11 renovated area.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think it is of vital importance for the
13 questions you put to the witness at this moment. So you perhaps could
14 try to find it all and see whether what the witness testified about it at
15 an earlier stage. I think it was during the examination-in-chief
16 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, what I mean is the portion just
17 indicated by the witness just a few moments ago.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, the portion of the building in the photograph.
19 MR. IERACE: Yes, he said, it is on page 78 line 20, "I am not
20 quite certain but I think this is the renovated area, so what is to the
21 left on this picture." At that point the witness indicated the left
22 corner of the convent building.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You would say left from the circle? Yes. That's --
24 he indicated that it was the left part, that as far as he knew, that is
25 clarified now for the transcript.
1 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, please proceed.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. Could the map be
3 put on the screen. [In English] All right. This way.
4 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, you just told us that there is only one
5 wall. If we now take a look from the place where the photography was
6 taken which corresponds to point 23, isn't it true to say that we should
7 at least see two walls, meaning one angle indicating two walls and one
8 wall behind? This is if we take into account that we are talking what we
9 can see from point 23.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
11 MR. IERACE: Again it is a leading question. Secondly, it is a
12 question that makes no sense, given what appears on the map which is on
13 the ELMO by way of a depiction of the building, which is, at best, a dot.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Now, I do take it that you are referring to the
15 white large building and that -- could the parties -- could I just ask
16 the witness to take his headphones off.
17 [Interpretation] Is it possible that the parties may agree on the
18 fact that from point number 23, it is possible to see not only one wall,
19 but since there is an angle, that one could see two walls forming an
20 angle? And when I am talking about a wall, I am referring to the Faculty
21 of Theology. That building. Or belonging to that building.
22 MR. IERACE: Perhaps if the witness has his headphones removed
23 and perhaps if he could not look at the screen.
24 JUDGE ORIE: What we could do is in order to prevent the witness
25 to -- could perhaps the -- Mr. DP6, do you speak or understand any
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't understand French.
3 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... headphones on,
4 could he be put on channel five and could both parties speak English.
5 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, perhaps the usher could press the
6 video evidence button on the witness's --
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: I think that is the best solution,
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps it is suggested to me by one of my
10 colleague Judge's that it is better that the witness leave the courtroom.
11 Because it becomes too complicated and the risk of failures and complex
12 solutions always involve a risk. Would you please leave the courtroom
13 just for a short while.
14 THE WITNESS: [In English] No problem.
15 [The witness stands down]
16 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, might I
17 invite you to look at as well DP1764, which is the other map that depicts
18 this building in symbolic form. And when one compares them --
19 JUDGE ORIE: They are different.
20 MR. IERACE: They are different, and therefore, it seems to me it
21 is unreliable to rely on either, in terms of what one would expect to see
22 in the photograph in terms of whether it is one wall or more than one.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, of course, on both shapes one finds at least
24 two walls, one going from south-east to north-west, and the other one
25 going from south-west to north-east. The difference is that in -- on the
1 map specifically relating to scheduled sniping incident 23, the walls are
2 coming together at the corner, where on the other map, they do not.
3 MR. IERACE: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Can there be any agreement on whether from such a
5 distance you would certainly see more than one wall? On both sketches, I
6 would think that you see at least more than one wall.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it seems there
8 is a great contradiction here between the map. Whatever the map may be,
9 we were talking about the map presented by the Defence or the map
10 presented by the Prosecution and the picture also. The problem was
11 raised, and the only thing that you should do is to see if this picture
12 is a possible representation of what we can see from that other point.
13 So that would be enough. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: It is not quite clear to me. Could you please
15 repeat that last part of your -- I will try to change to French.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Mr. President, what the
17 Defence wishes to say here is the following: That of course it is not
18 the same thing that we see the evidence presented, exhibits of the
19 Prosecution of the Defence were not the same. On one picture we only see
20 one wall whereas on the other map, if we see something, we should at
21 least see two walls. We agree with this. We are satisfied with this
23 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... established that
24 one sees only one wall? Can we take that as a fact. I am just
25 wondering --
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. Present, I have one small
2 request. Since I am listening to two channels and they are not always in
3 sync. It is not also a channel in which you are speaking -- so if you
4 speak to me --
5 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Yes, did I understand correctly that
6 you understand as it being a fact that we only see one wall? Is that what
7 you are telling me?
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Yes, I am listening to you.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] What I only am trying -- the
11 only thing I am trying to say is that there is a contradiction in the
12 exhibits produced by the Prosecution. There was one picture that is
13 supposedly taken from this part of the incident, and that shows only one
15 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Yes, but you are telling us that
16 this picture only shows one wall; is that correct? On the basis of what
17 can we accept this?
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The testimony of the witness.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I better understand you now.
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The picture only shows us one
21 wall and my eyes also enable me to see only one wall.
22 JUDGE ORIE: [In English] Does the Prosecution agree that we only
23 see one wall?
24 MR. IERACE: Mr. President. And it seems -- perhaps this could be
25 clarified that my friend is now disputing that the building on that
1 exhibit marked on the photograph is the Institute of Theology. Is that in
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, whether it is
4 the position of the Defence that the white building with a black marking,
5 circle marking on it, is not the Faculty of Theology? Is that how I have
6 to understand the position of the Defence?
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] What I am trying to say, and
8 I shall not say anything more, is that there is a great deal of
9 contradictions with what we can see on the picture and the presentation
10 of the map presenting incident number 23. It cannot be reconciled. I do
11 not know how to reconcile the problem. I don't if it's the faculty, the
12 monastery or whatever it is but I know that these two do not concur. I
13 don't know if the evidence was proven by the Prosecution, but one
14 contradicts the other.
15 JUDGE ORIE: That is the position of the Defence.
16 Now, what would you like to ask to the witness as the next
17 question because that is what -- why we were asking the witness to leave
18 the courtroom.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
20 I have only one and that will be my last and definitively last
21 question. It has to do with the tram.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. No more questions about the Faculty of
23 Theology. Then we could ask the witness to enter the courtroom again.
24 [The witness entered court]
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for your patience. There is one more
1 question to be put to you.
2 THE WITNESS: No problem.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes.
4 Q. Witness, I want to be sure about one thing. You were asked about
5 the tram. And my question to you is the following, and very precise: Do
6 you remember until when until when did you personally see the tram
7 travel to and from Nedzarici for the last time? When was the last time
8 that you saw the tram get to and from Nedzarici?
9 A. [Interpretation] I cannot remember exactly when, but shortly after
10 the conflict broke out problems with electricity started on their side and
11 on our side alike. So I suppose that it was right then that in 1992 they
12 could not travel already, but I can't be quite sure.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,
14 Mr. President. I have finished.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you Mr. Piletta-Zanin. Judge Nieto-Navia has
16 one or more questions to you.
17 Questioned by the Court:
18 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Thank you Mr. President. Could we put the
19 map 1764 ...
20 Would you use the pointer to point at the Airport Settlement.
21 A. [Indicates]
22 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Now, with the green pen would you circle the
23 area and put the letters "AS" for Airport Settlement.
24 A. [Marks]
25 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Thank you. Now, could you describe the type
1 of construction of buildings houses or high-rise buildings, what was the
2 type of construction there?
3 A. In the Airport Settlement where a low residential buildings, such
4 as ground floor and one floor, and they were in rows. So these were low
6 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Now, can you see the dotted line going
7 north-west, the one on the map, the one that you drew?
8 A. Yes.
9 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: What was the type of construction there in
10 that area where it says Branislava something. Are you following me?
11 A. Yes, yes, I do.
12 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Yes, that area.
13 A. Your Honour, do you mean buildings on our side towards Nedzarici?
14 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Yes.
15 A. Inside, in the interior -- in the interior behind the Serb
17 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Sorry. South of the road which bears the
18 name Branislava.
19 A. Nusica, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Yes, that area.
21 A. This area. In this area are again private family houses. As a
22 rule, usually one-storey building, that is a ground floor and one floor
23 above. Just one-storey houses.
24 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Thank you. No more questions.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Nieto-Navia also has a question for you -- I am
1 sorry, Judge El Mahdi. I apologise.
2 JUDGE EL MAHDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
3 [Interpretation] I would like you, please, if you remember, to
4 tell me the following: You were talking about the issue of rifles with
5 telescopic sights which was in 1992. Could you be more precise and tell
6 us which month was it? Was it towards the end of the year or when or
7 perhaps early summer?
8 A. In my reply when I was asked by the Prosecutor, I said that I did
9 not see those weapons being distributed. So I cannot really say when and
10 how they were issued, but we got new weapons in the summer of 1992 and
11 then onward gradually.
12 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. I am not talking about
13 you. I am not talking about the rifles that you received. I was
14 referring to the issue of new weapons which also featured the telescopic
15 sights. And you said that they were also issued in 1992, perhaps I am
16 wrong, so perhaps you could put me right in that regard.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I am sorry. But I just
20 received instruction from my colleague. I do not know that this witness
21 said that. Perhaps we are failed, but it would really surprise me if
22 there was any mention of rifles with telescopic sights.
23 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] It is page 56, if that helps
24 you. And I would like to seek information --
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much and my
1 profoundest apologies. I am sorry.
2 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] And I can also be more precise
3 and I can say that the rifles, that is this type of rifles, were not
4 issued to them because in view of the positions that they held, isn't it?
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, we completely agree and
6 I was -- I was wrong. My apologies.
7 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes, Witness, please.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I did not say that this type of
9 weapons was ever distributed in our area, and such weapons were not.
10 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] I am not talking about yourself.
11 I am not talking about your company. I am speaking in general.
12 A. In general in the area which I knew as far as I knew it, I did
13 not see anyone being issued with such a weapon. Because in that area, it
14 could not really be of any use, and I do not know whether and when it was
15 issued to people in some other areas, so I can't say.
16 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I have got one question for you as well that's about
18 the Faculty of Theology. I read part of your testimony of this morning.
19 You said, according to the transcript: "The south side of the convent, I
20 am showing you this area now, was one floor lower. It was just right
21 after the war because the convent was so damaged, one floor was added
22 after the war. So before the war and during the war, this part here was
23 only composed of three storeys. So it was only a 3-storey building at
24 that time."
25 That's what the transcript says about your testimony this
1 morning. Is my understanding correct that one part of that building was
2 added with one floor after the war, or was the whole building added with
3 one floor?
4 A. Only one part of the building was added, Your Honour. You
5 understood it correctly.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that was the part of the building facing,
7 I would say, south-east, the map is still -- even if the building is not
8 entirely correct on the map, but is that part of the building facing the
9 Airport Settlement?
10 A. Correct.
11 JUDGE ORIE: If you say a 3-storey building, do you mean ground
12 floor and three upper floors, or do you mean three floors altogether, so
13 ground floor and two upper floors?
14 A. Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: So, do I understand you correctly --
16 A. I mean, a ground floor and two floors above it.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So the -- this building, the southern part
18 consisted of one ground floor and two upper floors after the war, that
19 part that was facing south-east; is that correct?
20 A. That's right.
21 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask the witness to be shown Exhibit P3279T.
22 This photograph. And perhaps before doing so -- this photograph first.
23 And that is the same series ending with 1A. So first the -- first the
24 building from a distance. Yes.
25 Mr. DP4, do you recognise a white building at a far distance just
1 between the two apartment blocks?
2 A. Yes, I do, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell me what building that is.
4 A. This is the building of the School of Theology. Its tallest part
5 which wasn't changed after the war.
6 JUDGE ORIE: This is the part which was not changed after the
7 war, is that what your testimony says?
8 A. Yes, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Could the other photograph be put...
10 This is the same picture, but in more detail. Could you confirm
11 that this part of the building consists of a ground floor and two upper
13 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object to that. Might I draw your
14 attention to the fourth row from the left, at least as it appears on the
15 computer screen.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes. But let me just, Mr. Ierace, perhaps my
17 next question might be about that.
18 A. On this building you can see the ground floor and three floors
19 above it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is this the School of Theology?
21 A. Yes, it is.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for your answers. The picture may be
23 removed. I will give the other ones, two pictures, back to the
25 Mr. DP4, this concludes your examination in this courtroom. We
1 know that you same from a far distance. You answered all the questions,
2 both from the Defence, the Prosecution, and from the Bench. The Chamber
3 is aware, having listened carefully to your testimony, that it certainly
4 will have brought back in your mind also painful moments of the past. We
5 thank you very much for having come to The Hague and to give us your
6 testimony and I wish you have a safe trip home again.
7 We will adjourn --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. But
9 before I thank you, may I just say something. I remember the name of the
10 man that I spoke about, and said that he had dug a tunnel under the
11 runway. His first name was Milan. His last name still escapes me. But
12 I would like to thank you and the personnel who took care of us during
13 these last few days. And I hope that my testimony will help you and the
14 truth. Thank you very much.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, I do remember that you asked --
16 MR. IERACE: In the absence of the witness. But it doesn't
17 require the witness to stay.
18 JUDGE ORIE: It doesn't require the witness to stay. That is
19 clear to us. Well, once again, thank you for coming. Mr. Usher, could
20 you escort Mr. DP4 out of the courtroom.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 [The witness withdrew]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, if you could raise the issue very
24 briefly. I know that the clock in this courtroom is a couple of minutes
25 before clocks elsewhere. So we are close to a quarter to 2.00.
1 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, very quickly this witness gave
2 evidence in chief that there was some sort of UN post in the old people's
3 home which is on the frontline as it happens, drawn by DP6 for which he
4 was the company commander. DP6 was asked no questions about that. The
5 existence of UN posts was not included in the summary of facts, and so it
6 came as a complete surprise by the Prosecution to hear this witness give
7 that evidence, especially given that it had not been brought out by the
8 Defence when DP6 was in the box.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. IERACE: Therefore, if DP6 is still in the Hague, in my
11 respectful submission he should be recalled for further cross-examination.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Are we talking about DP6 --
13 MR. IERACE: In closed session I could indicate what the evidence
14 is in relation to that in the Prosecution case and whether or not it had
15 been put. That is, by the Defence, this account.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. First question: Is DP6 still in The Hague?
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I do not know. I do not
19 JUDGE ORIE: Does Ms. Pilipovic know?
20 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I do not know if DP6
21 left today. We could check in the Victims and Witnesses Unit, whether he
22 left this morning.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I will ask the Registrar to check with the Victims
24 and Witnesses Unit whether Witness DP6 is still in The Hague, and if so,
25 of course, we still have to look at the objection. We don't have to
1 hurry if Witness DP6 is not in The Hague any more. So we will first
2 check that and see what should be done in respect of this objection.
3 Is there any other issue to be raised at this very moment that
4 could not wait until tomorrow?
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, but --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so. That cannot wait until tomorrow.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] One, the Defence did not know
8 what this witness was going to say. There are things which witnesses say
9 like this without informing us about them previously. Secondly, the
10 witness did not speak about -- one he simply said that the UN personnel
11 were there. He knew that -- he said that he knew -- he knew that because
12 he saw them bring in the humanitarian aid, and he believed there was also
13 something else and that was it. He did not say he had a military
14 observation post at that place. I mean, if every witness tells us every
15 time what he knows, we shall never get out and if every time the
16 Prosecution raises questions about this, we shall never get out of this.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try to avoid too much emotion. One of the
18 first things of course that had to be checked, whether there was a
19 specific question in that direction, that of course would suggest that
20 the Defence would have expected such an answer, but if it came up
21 spontaneously, it might be totally different.
22 We will look at it and we will adjourn now until tomorrow morning
23 in this same courtroom. But not in the morning, we will sit in the
24 afternoon tomorrow. So a quarter past 2.00.
25 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.50 p.m.,
1 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 23rd day of
2 October, 2002, at 2.15 p.m.