1 Thursday, 7 November 2002
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.09 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to say good morning, for some of you
6 good morning again. Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Case Number IT-98-29-T, the Prosecutor versus
8 Stanislav Galic.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
10 Is the Defence ready to call its next witness? Yes. Yes,
11 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. But in
13 view of the condition of health of my colleague who couldn't speak, I will
14 take on upon myself a part of her work, if I am allowed to do so by her
15 and Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you are allowed to do so, but with
17 her I cannot tell you. Mr. Ierace.
18 MR. IERACE: Good morning, Mr. President. I have given some
19 thought to some of the problems that we have had over the last few days
20 with interventions by myself in relation to 65 ter summaries. And might I
21 put forward a proposal that might ultimately overcome some of the
22 difficulties which the Prosecution and Defence and the Trial Chamber have
23 had in that regard.
24 Might I do that, Mr. President?
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. IERACE: Part of the problems stem from the fact that the 65
2 ter summaries are not contained -- firstly, are not contained in one
3 document; and secondly, come to us in French and in a number of different
4 letters. If I could give an example --
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] May I interrupt, Mr. Ierace?
6 Mr. President, I insist.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, please proceed.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I don't have a
9 transcript. Later on we need to have the exact words of Mr. Ierace. I
10 will not be able to do so --
11 JUDGE ORIE: I did understand you as -- yes, that you would
12 interrupt Mr. Ierace. I was at the same time dealing with my transcript
13 as well. So Mr. Ierace, this is a matter of order rather than an order of
15 MR. IERACE: I have the same problem.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I can ask the parties, it is not always clear to me
17 whether the request to interrupt deals with practical matters or with
18 matters of argument. So would you please indicate if this would happen
19 again, if you say, we have a practical problem with our LiveNote, then it
20 becomes clear to me that it is not an interruption of the argument, but
21 it's an interruption for technical reasons which of course I will always
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I will be glad to do so.
24 I don't think that the Defence has ever interrupted or at least very
25 rarely has it interrupted the opposing party for reasons of argument. But
1 now we have a problem, and if there are precise problems that we need to
2 address, we need to have it on the transcript. And mine isn't working nor
3 is the one to the left or to the right of me.
4 JUDGE ORIE: I think as a matter of fact there is a transcript,
5 but it is not on your laptop.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] That is exactly what I wanted
7 to say.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could we just -- could I just perhaps take some time
9 anyhow for everyone. Yes -- no, I am going to teach the parties how to do
10 it themselves. If the parties would push the button at the right top
11 corner, the cross, so that they get out of LiveNote, yes? One moment,
12 please. So, leave LiveNote as a whole. Do you now have the general --
13 okay, now you take left down bottom, programmes, start. You go up to
14 programmes, you see on the right-hand side, you see LiveNote. Go to
15 LiveNote. Then you find LiveNote to the right of it as well. Double
16 click on that. Yes? We are all there? Okay, then we will click on that.
17 So now LiveNote opens; is that correct? If you are in the beginning of
18 Windows, you put "start" and then "programmes", and then you go to the
19 programme that is called LiveNote, yes? Then you -- if you are on
20 LiveNote, I think there is -- you find on the right-hand side again,
21 LiveNote. Yes? Are you on LiveNote? If you are on LiveNote, does it
22 appear on the right-hand side as well?
23 Does it with you, Mr. Piletta-Zanin? If you double click on
24 LiveNote, what happens? What should happen, as a matter of fact, is that
25 LiveNote programme appears --
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we have
2 obtained the LiveNote, as far as the Defence is concerned.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I will just see whether the Prosecution -- could you
4 please assist at the other side and to see that we come to the point where
5 LiveNote opens as a programme. And if you wait just for a second,
6 Mr. Piletta-Zanin. So, please don't fix the problem, but just go to the
7 point where LiveNote opens. Yes? I don't hear you. Could you please put
8 the microphone on, please.
9 TECHNICAL ASSISTANT: That one is a special case now it will be
10 ready after the break, but he can use it to see the transcript.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, yes, but what I wonder, as a matter of fact, is
12 that the parties can solve the problems themselves just as I did. I had
13 the same problem this morning. So you open LiveNote, and then you go
14 to -- I think it is -- what do you have -- you have LiveNote now on your
15 screen, Mr. Piletta-Zanin?
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: I hope so. I mean --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you can open the case. You now can open the
18 case which is Galic.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: Yes, but it is okay.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Every is working? It is connected as well?
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: Everything is okay. Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: If during the next break -- that system is different?
23 TECHNICAL ASSISTANT: It is just a new one. It's not connected
24 yet. Just we didn't get the last night and we couldn't find time -- that
25 is a special one.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please teach the Prosecution during
2 the next break how to make sure that they are connected, even if something
3 goes wrong. Go out of the programme, start it all up again, and then you
4 can continue. Yes. That saves us, I hope, a lot of time in the future.
5 Mr. Ierace, you were addressing the Court when we were interrupted
6 by the technical problems. Please proceed. The transcript is running.
7 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, even if your laptop doesn't work, then of
8 course the LiveNote is on your main screen.
9 Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
10 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the problems which the Prosecution has
11 encountered with the 65 ter summaries, and they seem -- and I should add
12 that the 65 ter summaries contribute in a substantial way to our
13 interventions, it seems to come down to two or three aspects. Firstly,
14 there are -- the 65 ter summaries are often contained in two or three
15 documents, the one filed in August, various letters since then. To give
16 as an example, the witness to be called after the one about to be called
17 was the subject of a letter which apparently contains further 65 ter
18 information that the Defence faxed to the Prosecution last night and
19 which, therefore, we received this morning in French. I am not
20 complaining at all about the use of the French language. I simply make
21 the point that we have to have it translated. So there are two of the
23 The third problem is that when one considers the evidence which is
24 in fact given by the witnesses, not only does the witness -- do the
25 witnesses frequently refer to significant matters which aren't in any of
1 the summaries, but also they quite often give evidence which bears little
2 relationship to the matters which are in the 65 ter summaries.
3 So I have this proposal: Firstly, that when the Defence provides
4 us with additional 65 ter material, that at the same time, they
5 incorporate all of the material which the witness will give evidence
6 about. I suspect that what happens is that, for whatever reason, when the
7 Defence interview the witnesses closer to the time of their testimony,
8 much of what was contained in the earlier 65 ter summary is no longer, for
9 whatever reason, determined to be the subject of their evidence.
10 To give a simple example of that, in relation to the witness we
11 heard yesterday, the 65 ter summary referred to the witness being at a
12 hospital that we have heard nothing about at all. So at least if the 65
13 ter summaries are updated, then as we receive the latest version, we know
14 we have in one document all of the relevant material and we can better
15 focus our preparation rather than wasting time preparing subjects which
16 ultimately aren't the subject of testimony.
17 That's my first suggestion, updated 65 ter summaries. Secondly,
18 before each witness commences, it would be helpful if the Defence could
19 simply refer to the various letters and filings which contain the 65 ter
20 summaries for that witness, so at least we can make sure that we have in
21 French or in English the relevant documentation.
22 Thirdly, I will refrain, as a general rule, from rising to my feet
23 during the course of the witness's testimony, if the witness gives
24 evidence which is of a significant nature which is not contained in the 65
25 ter material. At the end of the evidence in chief, customarily,
1 Mr. President, your wording when you ask the Prosecution to cross-examine,
2 is, "Is the Prosecution ready to cross-examine?" If we hear fresh
3 material or material falling from the lips of the witness of which we have
4 had late notice and we haven't had a sufficient opportunity to prepare our
5 cross-examination, we will say that. And if needs be, seek an adjournment
6 or for the witness to be recalled for further cross-examination.
7 At the conclusion of the -- either at the conclusion of the
8 evidence in chief or at the conclusion of the witness's testimony as a
9 whole, at that stage, with your leave, I would rise to my feet and point
10 out what significant matters in the evidence of the witness that we have
11 actually heard, were not indicated to us in the 65 ter summaries, and
12 perhaps also what was in there that we didn't hear from.
13 The reason I would do that is, we would then have on the record
14 the situation from the Prosecution perspective, and therefore, the
15 Prosecution would be protected in terms of any appeal point or indeed in
16 relation to any further argument later in the trial. I make this proposal
17 not to be argumentative, but rather to avoid, ultimately, interventions
18 during the testimony of the witnesses, but at the same time, address the
19 various aspects of this issue which are involved. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I also have
22 some suggestions and some responses. My first suggestion would be, if
23 Mr. Ierace could be briefer in his interventions, we would gain a lot of
25 Secondly, it is impossible to bring things up to date. And the
1 reason, we are wasting time. The other day a totally unfounded
2 intervention by the Prosecution --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, we are not going to discuss the
4 past. You said you would like to make suggestions, and you would like to
5 respond to the suggestions. We are not going over the same ground again.
6 So please make suggestions, please respond to the suggestions, but don't
7 come back to -- and I would invite the parties not to spend time on
8 telling this Chamber how the other party wasted time. The Chamber is at
9 every single occasion fully aware of who wastes time.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, thank you.
12 What I want to say, and I think I am entitled to say it, when we have
13 frequent interventions, which seem to us to be hardly founded, we are
14 wasting time. And in two hours, we cannot cover certain points, and we
15 are sacrificing certain questions. If we had the time to cover everything
16 without being interrupted, everything indicated would have been covered.
17 That is what I wanted to point out. Another point is that Mr. Ierace
18 seems to complain of this fact. And I wish to recall that on the part of
19 the Prosecution case, there were many cases when we received statements of
20 dozens of pages -- I am referring for instance to Mr. Abdul Razek --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I think it was clear enough. I
22 allowed you to make suggestions and respond to suggestions, and I said to
23 you that I did not want at this moment want to go over ground again of the
24 past. Would you please follow this instruction.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. Thank you.
2 Mr. President, I have to confer with my client.
3 [Defence counsel and accused confers]
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Concerning the question of
6 letters, Mr. President -- I am sorry?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Concerning the question of
9 letters, Mr. President, that can easily be explained in order to be as
10 effective as possible. Every time that witnesses come here to The Hague,
11 they are submitted to cross-examination by my colleague and myself.
12 Frequently, we discover new elements for Ms. Pilipovic who usually
13 conducted the examination-in-chief, and also for me who interviews the
14 witnesses for the first time. When we discover those elements, we
15 immediately communicate them to the Prosecution and that explains why
16 there are several letters.
17 So surely that is not a difficult -- is such a difficulty that the
18 Prosecution should ask of us to do whatever. We are just specifying
19 things. However, there are cases when witnesses tell us in the courtroom,
20 for example, last time war gas that was used that we had no idea of. And
21 this was new, not just for the Prosecution, it was a discovery for us too.
22 And this was a fact that we didn't know before the testimony of those
24 Consequently, it seems to us that not only are we acting properly
25 with the provisions quoted by Mr. Ierace, but what is more, we have
1 systematized our positions. We have said that for all military witnesses,
2 all these questions can be put to the witness of course within one zone or
3 several zones that the witness may be familiar with. So there is a
4 general stage which is a repetitive pattern and then a more specific part.
5 I don't think we can do more than that. So the suggestion of Mr. Ierace
6 appears to us not to be helpful.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I did hear a response to the suggestions. Are there
8 any suggestions you would like to make yourself, as you indicated?
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, my formulation was that we
10 shouldn't waste time with such long interventions, but I don't wish to
11 repeat myself.
12 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... your suggestion.
13 I hear the clear answer on the first proposal, the first suggestion of the
14 Prosecution that the update would be a consolidated update, if I
15 understand you well. The answer is that the Defence says we cannot do
16 that. The second one was whether you could indicate at the beginning of
17 the examination-in-chief the sources in which the Prosecution could find
18 the elements of the summaries if they are not contained in one document.
19 Is the Defence willing to indicate the sources? That would mean
20 65 ter can be found in this document, that document, that document, that
21 document. That would take I think approximately 30 seconds for each
22 witness. Are you -- is the Defence willing to give the sources at the
23 beginning of the testimony in chief?
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No. I would answer with "no"
25 to that question. I will tell you why. I will explain why.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please explain to us why.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Because if we make a mistake
3 or admit a document, we will be told "you did not fulfill your duty." So
4 we write our letters and let the Prosecution read them carefully,
5 understand them and everything will be fine.
6 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will consider the matter. The third
7 suggestion made by Mr. Ierace I think is not in need of any response
8 because he suggests how the Prosecution will submit their 65 ter
9 complaints at a concentrated moment.
10 Then, are you ready to call your next witness? Is the Defence
11 ready? Yes. Before doing so, I can orally give you as the decision of
12 the Chamber that the protective measures sought are granted. I will not
13 at this moment mention the name of the witness, but I will do that in
14 closed session and then repeat our decision.
15 Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness into the courtroom.
16 [The witness entered court]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Can you hear me in a language you understand?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Before giving testimony in this court, the Rules of
20 Procedure and Evidence require you to make a solemn declaration that you
21 will speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The text
22 will be handed out to you now by the usher. May I invite you to make that
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will speak
25 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much. Please be seated. Since
2 protective measures have been granted in respect of you, I will not use
3 your name, as you will understand. Apart from not mentioning your name,
4 your face will not be visible for the outside world.
5 Ms. Pilipovic -- Mr. Piletta-Zanin, are you ready to examine the
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, willingly, Mr. President.
8 As usual, we are going to start in private session? Are we in private
9 session, Mr. President?
10 JUDGE ORIE: No, we are not at this moment. What we usually do is
11 to first present the pseudonym sheet to the witness and then turn into
12 private session once this matter has been -- yes.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, gladly. This will be
14 Exhibit 1784, I think.
15 WITNESS: WITNESS DP5
16 [Witness answered through interpreter]
17 Examined by Mr. Piletta-Zanin:
18 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, I would appreciate it if you could just
19 answer my answers by saying yes or no -- if you could answer my first
20 question by saying yes or no, after I have said good day to you.
21 The information you have on the page in front of you, is it
22 correct or not?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Thank you very much.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I think we can take this
1 document back. Are we in private session, Mr. President?
2 JUDGE ORIE: We will turn into private session now.
3 [Private session]
12 [Open session]
13 JUDGE ORIE: We are in open session. Please proceed.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
15 Q. Witness, you mentioned the Territorial Defence. Could you tell us
16 how this defence organised -- this defence organisation organised itself
17 at the beginning of the events?
18 A. Before the war broke out, every local commune had men in addition
19 to the reserve police force throughout the former Yugoslavia, and they had
20 people who were responsible for certain things. They were deployed in the
21 civilian protection, they did the same sort of work as the men in the JNA,
22 but within the framework of the civilian protection organisation.
23 Q. From when did this Territorial Defence organise itself, from which
24 date did it organise itself in a military sense? Is there a particular
25 event that you could mention?
1 A. From the time the first barracks were put up in Sarajevo.
2 Q. When did this happen, as far as you can remember?
3 A. I think it was in March.
4 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you, as far as the repetitiousness of the
5 evidence is concerned, is the moment the barricades were created, is that
6 in contest, Mr. --
7 MR. IERACE: There is no particular significance with attaches to
8 it, Mr. President, if I can put it that way. The Prosecution accepts that
9 barricades were erected leading up to the 6th of April, and that obviously
10 would cover March.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I think we heard about the
12 barricades, approximately 25 or 30 times, if not 40. The Chamber has to
13 take care that evidence is not repetitious. It seems to be not in
14 contest, so would you please move to your next subject.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Barricades is not the problem.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I am not saying that that is the problem, but you are
19 asking the witness about barricades and when it was. I mean, if there is
20 any other subject, please, move to that. Come to your point, but this is
21 evidence that is repeatedly given to this Chamber. Yes.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. Chronology is the
23 problem and I am going to turn to it now.
24 Q. Witness, I would like to summarise your testimony in chronological
25 terms. You said that the Territorial Defence organised itself in military
1 terms after the barricades had been put up; is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Thank you. Could you describe the situation to us before these
4 barricades were put up, in a few words, and I am talking about the
5 military organisation, was there such an organisation, yes or no, before
6 the barricades?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Thank you very much. To the extent that this is possible, could
9 you speak a little more loudly. Thank you.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, matters are
11 clear now.
12 Q. Witness, could you now concentrate on the period during which the
13 JNA had to leave Bosnia, and to be more specific, had to leave Sarajevo.
14 Do you know when this happened; yes or no?
15 A. I don't know the exact date.
16 Q. Do you know the month when the JNA withdrew?
17 A. I think it was at the beginning of May, perhaps.
18 Q. Thank you very much. We are now going to concentrate on the
19 period of May. Do you know, Witness, what happened to the barracks, and
20 not just to the barracks, but what was contained within the barracks when
21 the army withdrew; yes or no?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Thank you very much. Do you know it for both sides of the line;
24 yes or no?
25 A. Not fully, as far as the other side of the line is concerned.
1 Q. Thank you. But do you know what happened in a barracks called
2 Viktor Bubanj? I think it is called Viktor Bubanj.
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Thank you. With regard to these barracks, do you know what
5 happened with the equipment and the weapons when had so-called JNA Army
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. What do you know about it and how did you obtain this information,
9 could you tell us, please?
10 A. I was personally acquainted with the commander of the Viktor
11 Bubanj barracks at the time.
12 Q. Thank you. And what do you know about these matters?
13 A. All the weapons in the Viktor Bubanj barracks remained in those
14 barracks. They left with empty vehicles and with the men.
15 Q. What type of weapons are you referring to, sir?
16 A. The weapons that were in the barracks. There were mortars,
17 automatic rifles, sniper rifles, I think a military police battalion was
18 there. I think it was a military police battalion barracks before the
20 Q. Thank you. Was there mobile material, too, mobile equipment?
21 A. Military vehicles, only lorries. There weren't any combat
22 vehicles with weapons on them, as far as I know.
23 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, do you know, do you have any
24 personal knowledge of the situation in other important barracks, in the
25 part of Sarajevo which was under the control of the Presidency, and I am
1 thinking of the Marshal barracks and other barracks in Bistrik?
2 A. I haven't quite understood the question.
3 Q. Witness, do you know whether the situation you have described in
4 the Viktor Bubanj barracks, was the same in other barracks, for example,
5 in the Marshal Tito barracks, in the big Marshal Tito barracks, and in
6 Bistrik, et cetera.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
8 MR. IERACE: Firstly, that is a leading question. Secondly, he
9 invited the witness, my learned colleague invited the witness to indicate
10 whether he had any personal knowledge. The situation in relation to the
11 barracks he has told us about was not personal knowledge, and so that
12 should be made clear as well. Thank you. That is the basis.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, in my opinion,
15 the question is not a leading one because we know the names of the main
16 barracks and the fact that I have named them does not lead. I don't think
17 it is possible to make an error of any kind. As far as the issue of
18 knowing whether the witness has any personal knowledge of these matters,
19 obviously, we can put the question to him.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think the question is first to establish, but
21 I did understand that that was the question, whether the witness has any
22 personal knowledge of -- let me put it in a neutral way -- on what
23 happened in other barracks. No, I must say the last question, was:
24 "Witness, do you know whether the situation you have described --"
25 answer: "Yes."
1 Do you have any personal knowledge of what happened in any other
2 barracks. You told us that as far as the Viktor Bubanj, you learned that
3 since you knew the commander. About the other barracks, what would you
4 know about that?
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know about the Jusuf Dzonlic
6 barracks. I have personal knowledge about that. Because when the army
7 left those barracks, the Patriotic League and the Green Berets, separated
8 lorries -- the lorries often went off in three directions so the third
9 lorry arrived in Nedzarici.
10 JUDGE ORIE: How do you know that? So you said the lorries
11 arrived in Nedzarici. Were you present at these barracks, the Jusuf
12 Dzonlic barracks?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I wasn't in the barracks, in the
14 Jusuf Dzonlic barracks, I was in Nedzarici at the time. And I met those
15 men who were in the lorries.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then perhaps you start asking where he met
17 these people who arrived in Nedzarici. Please proceed.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 Q. These persons who were in the lorry, that's what I heard, who were
20 in the lorry, who were they and where did they come from, to clarify
22 A. They were the soldiers who were in the Jusuf Dzonlic barracks
23 after the agreement.
24 Q. I will stop you there. Did you have the opportunity of
25 personally talking to these people; yes or no?
1 A. Yes, I was among about 10 other men when they arrived.
2 Q. Thank you. Were you able to receive particular information
3 from -- specific information from these persons; yes or no?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Thank you. So, what did these people tell you about the situation
6 in the barracks concerned, and with regard to weaponry?
7 A. All the heavy weapons remained in those barracks, and the personal
8 arms which they took out were taken away from them when they were
9 separated into four parts.
10 Q. Do I understand that people who came to Nedzarici didn't have any
11 weapons on them any more; is that correct?
12 A. Yes. They didn't even have any personal weapons. They had been
13 taken from them, too.
14 Q. With regard to this matter of weapons, do you know whether heavy
15 weapons remained in the hands of the BH forces and did they remain in
16 these barracks that you have mentioned?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Do you know what kind of heavy weapons remained there; yes or no?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Could you tell us what kind of weapons remained there?
21 A. Tanks.
22 Q. I will stop you there. You used the plural. Do you know how many
24 A. I don't know the exact number.
25 Q. Please continue with regard to other weapons.
1 A. Tanks, mortars that were part of the weaponry of each barracks,
2 and mountain cannons.
3 Q. You said -- I don't know whether these are mountain cannons or
4 what we call "field guns." What is the term that you used?
5 A. I mentioned mountain cannons.
6 Q. Very well. That's clear now. You mentioned mortars. Do you know
7 what the calibre of the mortars that remained there was?
8 A. I don't know exactly.
9 Q. Thank you. Do you know whether in addition to the, strictly
10 speaking, military barracks, do you know whether the police barracks
11 suffered the same fate as the two barracks that you have mentioned? And I
12 am talking about the matter of weapons.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Could you provide us with any specific examples? Could you give
15 this Trial Chamber some specific examples?
16 A. Next to Sarajevo, above Bascarsija, there was a warehouse
17 belonging to the Territorial Defence. And likewise, in the Butmir
18 neighbourhood where the special police of Bosnia-Herzegovina had a base,
19 they had a weapons warehouse there.
20 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, do you have any personal knowledge,
21 since you were member of the Territorial Defence, do you know where the
22 Territorial Defence kept its weapons or where it had its weapons
23 warehouses, in general?
24 A. I think the Territorial Defence had some warehouses in the -- as
25 part of the -- within the municipality. And some large warehouses were in
1 the territory of Sarajevo, as least as far as Sarajevo was concerned.
2 Q. When you say "warehouses" do you know where these ware houses were
3 located, geographically? Where they were located physically, which
4 buildings were they located in? Which facilities were they located in?
5 A. As far as the Faletici warehouse is concerned, I don't know
6 exactly, but the Krtelji warehouse next to the civilian airport, yes, I do
8 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, do you know if state companies were
9 asked to play a role within the framework of the Territorial Defence and
10 also with regard to these weapons, and if yes, what was that role?
11 A. Well, just like the local communes, companies had also an
12 organised Territorial Defence within the framework of their companies, and
13 they also had weapons, as far as I know.
14 Q. Thank you very much. I would now like to move on to another
15 subject, that is, the point in time when in your military experience you
16 moved from the Territorial Defence to the army. Could you tell us, if you
17 can remember, as from when you yourself changed your position from the
18 Territorial Defence to a body which became technically a military army
20 A. As far as I know, the structures remained the same, only the Army
21 of Republika Srpska was established. And from the beginning, from our
22 involvement in the Civil Defence --
23 Q. I will interrupt you. As from when do you consider the VRS
24 structure to be established in Nedzarici.
25 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object to the intervention by my
1 learned colleague. The answer was responsive to the question, and I ask
2 that the witness be allowed to complete that answer.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You started answering the question that, as far
4 as I know, the structures remained the same, only the Army of Republika
5 Srpska was established." And then you continued, "and from the beginning,
6 from our involvement in the Civil Defence --" could you please continue
7 your answer at that point. So you said: "Only the Army of Republika
8 Srpska was established" and then you said "from the beginning, from our
9 involvement in the Civil Defence. " Would you please complete the answer
10 you started to give there.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] With the formation of the Army of
12 Republika Srpska, this happened, I think, at the end of May. And then
13 formations were set up and lists. And the period prior to that when we
14 were in the Civil Defence was retroactively counted as military service.
15 So it measures from that that the army was formed on the 4th of April, but
16 in fact it wasn't.
17 JUDGE ORIE: You say it was an administrative measure that the
18 army was there from the 4th of April, but in fact it was only at a later
19 date that the Territorial Defence changed into the Army of Republika
20 Srpska. Is that --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Territorial Defence is an aspect
22 of defence. It is a form of the military, but it is an organisation of
23 the civilian population, you see. First of all, there was the Territorial
24 Defence, and after the Army of Republika Srpska was established, and that
25 was at the end of May, in my opinion, I think it was the end the May, then
1 retroactively they recognised our service as if we had been in the army.
2 When the army itself was being formed, it was -- people were reviewed to
3 see what kind of military specialty they had from their years -- year of
4 military service in the JNA, so that a proper army could be formed.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 Q. Let us now focus on the point in time when you formally became a
8 part of the VRS -- VRS structure. Can you tell us what was your company,
9 and what were your duties. But before you answer my question --
10 [Defence counsel confer]
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Before the witness answers, I
12 would like him to tell us that in private session so that for shouldn't be
13 any problem in view of the position he held.
14 JUDGE ORIE: We will turn into private session.
15 [Private session]
6 [Open session]
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Witness, for the future, I would be grateful if you would not
11 repeat your position for reasons of your own protection. But we know now
12 what your position was.
13 Witness, with respect to Nedzarici, could you tell us what was the
14 extent of the destruction in that area; yes or no?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Can you describe some details for us, please.
17 A. The destruction was considerable because we were fired at with
18 every possible means, except airplanes. Nedzarici is a small area
19 surrounded with high-rise buildings so that we were an easy target
20 throughout the war. The height of the surrounding buildings was between 8
21 and sometimes it went up to 12 storeys.
22 Q. Thank you. This destruction, Witness, mainly, which weapons were
23 used to carry it out?
24 A. Multi-barrel rocket launchers, hand-held rocket launchers of
25 foreign make, not from the arsenal of the former JNA. I mentioned already
1 mountain cannon. There was a tank attack on Nedzarici at the beginning of
2 the war.
3 Q. Please continue.
4 A. And houses were torched at the very beginning of the war because
5 they would send Serbs who had stayed behind in Dobrinja V to run with
6 petrol cans and they would target them. And on one occasion, one man
7 threw away this petrol can and managed to run over to our side.
8 Q. Thank you very much. I am looking at the list of weapons that you
9 mentioned. You mentioned multiple launchers, manual rocket launchers.
10 You mentioned mountain cannon, a tank attack, incendiary devices. Was
11 there anything else?
12 A. And every other artillery and small arms.
13 Q. I will be slightly leading, and I apologise. Were mortars never
14 used against Nedzarici?
15 A. I apologise. I omitted to mention that. I simply can't remember
16 everything contained in the whole arsenal.
17 Q. No problem. Could you please tell us when this tank attack
18 against Nedzarici took place?
19 A. The tank attack on Nedzarici occurred at the beginning of June,
20 the month of June, around the 10th of June.
21 Q. How many tanks were involved in this attack?
22 A. Three tanks.
23 Q. Did you see them yourself, and if yes, did you see them open fire?
24 A. I saw them with my own eyes, and I saw them fire, being opened
25 against us.
1 Q. Did you engage them?
2 A. Yes. We destroyed all three tanks.
3 Q. Thank you. After the destruction of these three tanks, do you
4 know, yes or no, whether the enemy forces still had any such tanks?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you know how many tanks those forces still had?
7 A. I personally know of one other tank.
8 Q. Could you tell us where this fourth tank was positioned?
9 MR. IERACE: I object, Mr. President. The question should
10 indicate a time, at what stage did he know where the fourth tank was
11 positioned, in other words, where was it, when?
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps you could ask the witness to -- ask
13 about the basis of his knowledge. Where he says "I personally know about
14 it," could you please ask him how he knew, and perhaps that could include
15 a place as well, and the time might be relevant as well.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
18 Q. Witness, you mentioned a fourth tank. My first question: How do
19 you have personal knowledge about that?
20 A. It opened fire on or one of the areas of Nedzarici and the
21 position with five shells where my brother was stationed.
22 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, when was this?
23 A. In mid-1993.
24 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, at that point in time what was the
25 place from which fire was opened?
1 A. Sarajevo neighbourhood called Brijesce Brdo.
2 Q. Let us check the transcript. Maybe you will need to spell it --
3 no, no, it is fine. Thank you.
4 Did this tank continue to shoot for a period of time after the
5 date you mentioned, and if yes, until when?
6 A. In mid-1993, I went away for treatment.
7 Q. Very well. When did you get back?
8 A. When I returned, I was no longer in Nedzarici.
9 Q. Very well. Do you have any personal knowledge through contact
10 that you may have had about this matter, that is, whether the tank stayed
11 on -- stayed in that position after these facts?
12 A. Yes
13 MR. IERACE: I object.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
15 MR. IERACE: The question is contradictory. It asks for
16 information based on personal knowledge at the time that the witness has
17 indicated he wasn't there. Through contacts, again, it is an invitation
18 for the witness to give hearsay evidence without any qualification as to
19 how far it is removed from eyewitness observations
20 JUDGE ORIE: It is a bit confusing. I had a few questions in mind
21 to clarify. When you say the place where your brother was stationed.
22 Where was that? Was that also in Nedzarici or was that not in Nedzarici?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Nedzarici, yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No. That was not clear from your answer at that
25 moment. I didn't know where your brother was stationed. Then you told us
1 something about -- you say you left Nedzarici mid-1993. About the
2 activities of this tank firing, was that when you were still in Nedzarici
3 or when you -- after you left?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was active while I was in
5 Nedzarici, but it continued to do so after that because my brother told
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Your brother told you that after you left that
8 the tank continued firing. Yes.
9 Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Those
11 were the questions that I wanted to put to the witness, in fact.
12 Q. From your brother, who was in Nedzarici, did you learn until when
13 this tank remained active; yes or no?
14 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object to the question. I
15 appreciate your earlier ruling as to the admissibility of hearsay, and I
16 appreciate you may say it is a question of weight, but at least I take it
17 objection. Thank you. In other words, whatever the witness tells us will
18 be what his brother told him.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course, he cannot tell us anything else on
20 the basis of --
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. But at
22 least it is important when we know that certain other witnesses told us
23 that this tank was not functioning, that we should know what was happening
24 in a certain area in a certain period of time. This is not distant
25 hearsay, it is his own brother who was armed and exposed to fire at the
1 time we are talking about.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I don't know whether that is the same tank or
3 not that we heard from other witnesses, but this question may be put to
4 the witness. So the question was whether you heard from your brother
5 until when this tank continued to fire? Did he tell you?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Until the end of 1994. And it
7 wasn't just my brother, but I know almost all the people living in that
8 neighbourhood. It wasn't too big. They are all neighbours. I have a
9 large number of relatives and friends among them.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
12 Q. As we are talking about weaponry, you mentioned multiple rocket
13 launchers. Were there several types of these rocket launchers; yes or no?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Thank you. Could you tell us, please, the type or the types that
16 were active in the area that you are familiar with?
17 A. These weapons did not come from the former JNA, because it had six
18 barrels whereas the former JNA had 32 barrels, many more in any event. I
19 am not sure of the exact number.
20 Q. Very well. How can you be certain that those weapons were used?
21 In concrete terms, on the basis of what did you come to that conclusion?
22 A. When they fired at us in Nedzarici, when they make a hit, a part
23 of the rocket remains and one can see what type it is. Also, it has a
24 very specific sound as it flies through the air, as it uses rocket fuel.
25 Q. Thank you. Witness, could you tell us something about the
1 frequency of these attacks on Nedzarici?
2 A. Are you referring just to these weapons?
3 Q. Yes, for the moment. I am just referring to these multiple rocket
5 A. There were four or five such attacks, but I am talking only about
6 the very intensive and frontal attacks.
7 Q. Thank you very much. You tell us now what was the frequency of
8 shelling? And when I use the word, "bombardment" I am referring to the
9 use of mortars.
10 A. Until the -- until September or October 1992, these were very
11 frequent, virtually every two or three days.
12 Q. Thank you. When those attacks occurred, what was the calibre
13 used, if you were able to recognise them?
14 A. 60 millimeters, 82 millimetres, and 120 millimetres.
15 Q. Thank you very much. Specifically, did the shells fall only on
16 the defence lines or did those shells spread out?
17 A. They fell all over the Nedzarici neighbourhood.
18 Q. Thank you. Are you in a position to give us an explanation of the
19 reason why these shells fell all over Nedzarici?
20 MR. IERACE: I object, Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The question is whether the witness is in a
22 position to do so, to explain whether he is or he is not. So the question
23 is not to ask him to explain, but to tell us whether he would have any
24 specific knowledge on the basis of which he could explain that these
25 shells fell all over Nedzarici.
1 So I am not asking for -- Mr. Piletta-Zanin did not ask you for an
2 explanation, but to tell you whether you had any specific knowledge or
3 experience that would allow you to explain this phenomenon. Please answer
4 that question.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I understand
6 that the objection has been overruled.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I did overrule the objection by telling the
8 witness exactly what your question was about.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Q. Witness, what is your competence in this area? What I mean is,
11 regarding the events of shells being -- mortar shells being fired?
12 A. Anyone who was in Nedzarici can explain the sound they make.
13 Q. Very well. But your qualifications as a military man, did it give
14 you more concrete experience regarding problems linked to mortars than
15 others? And your specific qualities which I will not refer to that you
16 had during the war, did this give you greater competence than any ordinary
17 infantry soldier would have, for instance? Infantry soldiers.
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. So could you tell us, as far as you know, why this spread of
20 mortars in Nedzarici -- mortar shells --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin is asking you questions about the
22 fact as you told us that the shells would fall all over Nedzarici. What
23 is it that gives you knowledge or expertise to explain to us why it was
24 that these shells fell all over Nedzarici and not, for example, on certain
25 areas or certain locations? So what would give you the knowledge or the
1 expertise to explain why this happened? That's the question.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Though I must say I don't quite
3 understand the question, I will do my best to answer it. Because I lived
4 through many things that I did not know about. I knew how to recognise
5 the sound of a mortar shell when it is fired. The area of Nedzarici is
6 very small. Factually, it could be measured in square meters not
7 kilometres so that in my opinion it is not possible to hit exactly within
8 a metre with a mortar. They shooting and in doing so they covered the
9 whole area of Nedzarici when there were major infantry attacks, and this
10 was normal fire support accompanying infantry attacks probably so that our
11 soldiers couldn't come to our assistance who were on leave.
12 JUDGE ORIE: What you are telling us is that on the basis of your
13 experience and having regard to the limited area of Nedzarici, that it
14 would be not well possible to respond to infantry attacks without hitting
15 with these shells approximately the whole area of Nedzarici. Is that how
16 I have to understand your answer?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said that when they opened fire,
18 they fired at the front lines, they also fired at the middle. Because
19 these were small houses with narrow streets, and men would have to go
20 along those streets, the men who were on leave. There weren't many
21 soldiers in Nedzarici in a certain period of time during the war.
22 Sometimes there would be one man at one guard post for the whole
23 night. And when the attack start, and usually it would start at dawn,
24 four of these men -- some of them slept in their own homes because we had
25 no accommodation facilities -- to be able to get to us -- the Muslims
1 would cover the whole area with fire so the man couldn't run out. You
2 wouldn't know where the shell would fall.
3 JUDGE ORIE: You very much concentrated on one part of your
4 answer, that was, you said: "When they opened fire, they fired at the
5 front lines. They also fired at the middle."
6 Do I have to understand your answer to be not only the front lines
7 were targeted, but also the middle area, and do I have to understand your
8 answer to be that intentionally they targeted every part of Nedzarici or
9 is this a wrong understanding of your answer?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know whether it was
11 intentionally. Or when you fire 100 or 150 shells, there may be a margin
12 of error. I said, at least that is my opinion, that a mortar shell cannot
13 hit the target within a metre or half a metre. And one further point, we
14 would find the tails of mortar shells, manufactured by various countries.
15 Now, what kind of ammunition they are, some may have a greater charges,
16 some smaller charges. I am not an expert. If you have three shells
17 coming from three different countries, maybe there are differences between
18 them as to their range.
19 JUDGE ORIE: So you are telling us it may have been targeting
20 errors, it may have been intentional targeting of different areas. And
21 targeting errors were acceptable for you because on the differences on the
22 ammunition of which you round the rest on the ground?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The remnants. All three
24 possibilities are valid.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much,
2 Mr. President. In view of the time, I think this is a good moment for the
3 break, in view of the fact that when we return I need to specify something
4 in the absence of the witness. I need to look through the transcript to
5 do that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We will adjourn until 11.00.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 --- Recess taken at 10.30
9 --- On resuming at 11.05 a.m.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I think
12 that we could have the witness come in now. There is only one question
13 that I want to ask, to specify something. And during the break, we would
14 like to ask the technical booth to be ready to show the video.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but before we do so -- yes, Mr. Ierace.
16 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President. Two quick matters before the
17 witness is brought in. You may recall the Defence was required to provide
18 us with father's name and dates of birth of the witnesses. They have
19 provided some. We are at a point now where we only have the relevant
20 information for about the next five witnesses. That is holding up our
21 searches. So could we have the balance of the witnesses fairly quickly.
22 And secondly, we don't yet have the names of the witnesses or the order of
23 witnesses for the next seven days. I think they are in breach of that
24 rule. I would be grateful if perhaps during the next break, Defence
25 counsel could tell us who will be the witness for next Thursday, that is
1 after the videolink, and who will be the witness for Monday and tomorrow.
2 Thank you.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, would you please deal with that during the next
4 break and see whether the information can be given if your -- if there
5 would remain a problem we will see that --
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. We will
7 do that, gladly.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then some suggestions have been made by
9 Mr. Ierace during the first part of this morning -- of this morning's
10 hearing. One suggestion was to receive a consolidated version of the 65
11 ter summary. The second one was to receive at the beginning of the
12 testimony the sources, I would say, the documents in which to find the
13 parts of the 65 ter summary. The Chamber has decided that if the
14 evidence -- if the Defence gives an update on the 65 ter summary or parts
15 of summaries that have been provided to the Prosecution before, that every
16 such update which need not be to be in a consolidated form, although it
17 would be very convenient. But the Defence is not required to give a
18 consolidated 65 ter when it updates its earlier summaries or parts of the
19 summary, but it should indicate where to find any earlier 65 ter summary
20 or part of a summary.
21 It goes without saying that if the Defence would decide to make a
22 consolidated version, that it is not necessary any more to indicate the
23 previous sources. The Chamber has carefully listened to the position
24 Mr. Piletta-Zanin has expressed, that the Prosecution should carefully
25 read the correspondence. It is not only for the Prosecution, it's also
1 the Chamber receives the updates in order to find our way as well. This
2 is, I would say, an intermediary solution. No consolidated versions
3 necessary, but sources to be provided with the update itself.
4 Then, the Defence is also ordered that if it is clear at a certain
5 moment that a certain subject that is mentioned in an earlier 65 ter
6 summary will not be part of the testimony of that witness, if on the basis
7 of the latest interviews that becomes clear, that this should also be
8 mentioned in an update in order to avoid that the Prosecution will
9 unnecessarily prepare for cross-examination on that issue.
10 So if that's clear to the Defence, it should inform the
11 Prosecution of it. Then -- yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, Defence will
13 take this into account and we would like to thank the Trial Chamber for
14 this. Nevertheless, we would like to the specify that in the case of the
15 Prosecution, the Prosecution had been invited to proceed in this manner,
16 and in particular with regard to the last information you provided. And
17 very often we have voluminous information, a lot of information, and we
18 don't know whether the Prosecution is going to make use of this particular
19 information or not. At the time this was not the case. This is just a
20 remark I wanted to make. That is all. The witness can be called now.
21 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has considered this issue and there is a
22 difference which gives advantages and disadvantages between the
23 presentation of the Prosecution case and the Defence case. The Prosecutor
24 is under an obligation to provide written statements of the witnesses to
25 the Defence. The Defence is not in a similar obligation. So the --
1 sometimes the Defence will certainly have received far more information
2 because it has been provided with the statements of the witnesses, whereas
3 the summaries of the testimony is, of course, a different issue.
4 It, as I said, it gives advantages. It also gives disadvantages
5 not to receive the written statements of the witnesses. Yes, Mr. Ierace.
6 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, will the Trial Chamber be giving some
7 consideration to the suggestion that before each witness gives his or her
8 evidence, the Defence indicates or I am happy to indicate what is the --
9 what is the date of the latest notification as to 65 ter material.
10 JUDGE ORIE: We take -- we take it that -- we take it that if such
11 summary is given to the Prosecution, that you only have to look at last
12 one, there you find all the sources for the previous ones. I mean
13 that's -- of course, from a point of courtesy, it would be nice if you
14 say, last update was sent on the 25th of February or something like that,
15 but the Chamber takes that this -- it is not necessary to give an order in
16 that respect to the --
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, for example,
18 could Mr. Ierace tell me whether the last letter that I addressed to him
19 and which referred before your intervention to this, would he say that
20 this is agreeable to him; yes or no?
21 MR. IERACE: That is agreeable, Mr. President. That would be
22 very useful to us.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So it is now --
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It would be accepted.
25 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... tells what, in
1 his view, is the last source of the 65 ter, and if that is not correct,
2 you will respond, Mr. Piletta-Zanin. So at the beginning of each
3 testimony. Now, at this moment, so if it would be a new witness,
4 Mr. Ierace would tell us that, according to his information, the last
5 update of the 65 ter summary was received or is in a letter of the 4th of
6 November, for example. And then if that is not correct, you will say, you
7 are not correct, you overlooked one. Yes?
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. What I wanted to know is
9 whether the form used in the last piece of information that we gave, does
10 this form -- is this form acceptable to Mr. Ierace? And I think that I
11 have understood that he said that it was acceptable.
12 JUDGE ORIE: A form --
13 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I think the last information we
14 received in relation to this witness was in a letter dated the 3rd of
15 November 2002. It referred to this witness and one other. If that's what
16 my friend is referring to, I have no difficulties with the form.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No. I am referring to the
18 letter of the 6th of November, our last letter which concerns two
19 witnesses, the last one is that one, and in that letter we referred to
20 certain general sources. Is this form acceptable to you, Mr. Ierace?
21 This is a letter that we addressed to you personally and we faxed it
22 yesterday on the 6th of November. Ms. Pilipovic and myself signed it.
23 And it regards the witnesses T-1 and T-2. This is the letter I am
24 referring to. The information that is given to you in that letter, does
25 this information suffice, Mr. Ierace?
1 JUDGE ORIE: I would like not to explore this. Mr. Ierace, you
2 have heard the question, whether the proposition made in the letter of the
3 6th of November is, as far as the form is concerned, is agreeable to you,
4 yes or no. Then we will now ask the witness to come in and we will hear
5 you answer, Mr. Ierace, in due course.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We are still -- we are always
7 at the disposition of the Prosecution.
8 [The witness entered court]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
11 Q. Witness, I would like to go back to what you were telling us just
12 before the break. When you were speaking about the shelling of the
13 so-called Muslim part in Nedzarici and with regard to the attacks. Do you
14 remember speaking about this?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, I think I heard you say that this
17 shelling, this large-scale shelling was related to what is technically and
18 militarily termed "preparation for an infantry operation," is that what
19 you were saying?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Thank you very much. Could you tell us what such preparation in
22 technical terms consists of, since you were present during these events?
23 A. First of all, mortar attacks start. They fired from a gun, which
24 was on Mojmilo. It was a B-1 mountain gun, and in four or five cases,
25 they fired from a multiple rocket launcher, as I have said.
1 Q. Please, carry on.
2 A. They also used hand-held rocket launchers which hadn't been
3 produced by the military industry of the former Yugoslavia. They were
4 very strong. They had a very specific sound and they would penetrate
5 walls. It was only once they had penetrated a wall, broken through a
6 wall, that they would explode inside.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Microphone, please.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 Q. When would mortars be used in the course of these preparations, at
11 which stage?
12 A. That was the first fire engaged by the enemy army. They would
13 start with mortar fire.
14 Q. Thank you very much. What was the purpose of such preparation?
15 What was its objective? And when I say "objective" I am talking about the
16 physical objective. What was the intention?
17 A. Well, the intention of such preparations was to get the people
18 removed, all the people who were there. Because when our men returned
19 fire, we had to take shelter because of possible mistakes that might be
20 made during a mortar attack.
21 Q. Thank you very much. Were there any civilians who lived in the
22 area concerned?
23 A. In the Nedzarici area, yes.
24 Q. Thank you. Witness, when we speak about lines could you tell me
25 what the depth of the line was, what we call the depth of the line was?
1 And when I say "line" we are not only talking about trenches, but also the
2 conflict zone and the technical zones right up to the command zone, which
3 I think was established and was at the rear of the line. I think we can
4 say this. What was the depth in the widest sense of the term? What was
5 the depth of this line in Nedzarici? Do you know anything about this?
6 A. As I have already said, Nedzarici covers a very small territory,
7 so everything was in the depth. And the command post was 30 metres from
8 the line.
9 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, I would now like to examine another
10 aspect of the combat which regards military instruction. With regard to
11 the civilian population, did you yourself or your men receive orders
12 concerning the protection of persons and civilian goods, of civilians and
13 civilian goods; yes or no?
14 A. No.
15 Q. So you never received orders, according to which you should be
16 careful, not to fire on civilians; is that what you are saying?
17 A. No, you have misunderstood me, I think.
18 Q. Perhaps there is a problem of understanding. I will reformulate
19 my question: Did you receive such instructions, such orders with regard
20 to opening fire and with regard to civilians and civilian property?
21 A. When I answered your first question, I was referring to civilians
22 in Nedzarici. That's what I was thinking of. But when the Army of the
23 Republika Srpska was formed, every 7 to 10 days orders would be received,
24 and they said that if it was even possible to see civilians, fire
25 shouldn't be opened on civilians. And if there was sporadic fire or
1 provocations from the enemy, fire shouldn't be returned in order to save
2 ammunition. But civilians and civilian objectives shouldn't be fired at.
3 Q. Witness, as far as this question is concerned, the question
4 relating to opening fire, did you receive any specific orders with regard
5 to opening fire; yes or no?
6 A. Only when an attack was in course, only then would we receive the
7 order to open fire.
8 Q. Thank you. Carry on, please.
9 A. As my unit was composed of young men, zitelji, from Nedzarici, and
10 since there were very few men, in the case of an intense attack, we would
11 be the unit that would go to assist and to pull out the wounded.
12 A. Very well. Thank you, Witness.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we are now
14 going to have a look at the tape, but I would like to ask the witness to
15 be very careful, to take note of the extent of destruction, of damage that
16 we can see on the tape, because my questions will concern the damage
17 inflicted, the dates, et cetera. Could you show the tape, please.
18 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, just before that's done, I take it
19 from what my learned colleague has said, he is not relying on the words
20 spoke on the tape, is that correct? If so, the copy which we have been
21 provide with has dialogue and that should not be played in the same way as
22 the Prosecution, when it used tapes obtained from journalist sources,
23 relied on the images, not on the words spoken.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Are there words spoken on the video? Do we have
25 transcript of those words? Could we please stop the video for a while, if
1 it is on its way. It is not, perhaps. Mr. Piletta-Zanin --
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we do have the
3 transcript. I think that everyone has been provided with a copy and the
4 translation booths. So this is part of a whole, what is said is part of a
5 whole. We are not going to cut it up because that would be a matter of
6 censure. What is said, and the images go together. But what seems more
7 important to us is that what one sees is more important to us not what one
8 hears, but obviously what is said --
9 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... text spoken with
10 this video, then the Chamber would like to know what words come to the
11 witness. So either by having it translated -- have the interpreters'
12 booth received copies of the transcript? Yes, I see that they have. If
13 you would have spare copies so that we could read because spoken words --
14 thank you. Yes, then, please -- I see we started already. Could we turn
15 back the tape until the beginning so that we -- are we looking at tape 1
16 at the beginning, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, or is it --
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It was the first image.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then, may the video be played.
19 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, does that mean that it is to be play
20 would the text because I object to that.
21 JUDGE ORIE: You object to that. Is the objection --
22 MR. IERACE: On the basis -- firstly -- a number of bases.
23 Relevance, number one. Secondly, according to the transcript, the
24 speakers don't identify themselves, and therefore, it is not possible to
25 tell whether they are witnesses. If they are witnesses, then they are the
1 ones through whom we should hear the words spoken and so on.
2 JUDGE ORIE: You say, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, that the most important
3 is the images. Shall we then look at the images and not hear the sound.
4 Would that be technically possible?
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] -- once again, the Defence
8 wants to save time and although there is some nice music on this tape, we
9 agree that it can be shown without the text. Thus we will save time and
10 there won't be any problems of any kind.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Is it technically possible to play the video but
12 without the sound? I don't know whether this is possible. Yes. So then
13 we look at the video without hearing any additional text, and we will miss
14 the music as well.
15 Please proceed.
16 [Videotape played]
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the tape
20 continues, but I would like to stop here. Thank you. And then we will
21 continue. We will continue in this manner, but two questions.
22 Q. Witness, what we have just seen, is this a zone that you are
23 familiar with, yes or no, and if yes, which zone is it?
24 A. Yes. It is the zone of the Lukavicka Cesta, Lukavicka road.
25 Q. Thank you, I think we all know where that zone is located. We saw
1 at the beginning of the picture a kind of cover, red or ocher. Can you
2 remember what those were?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Could you tell us briefly what they were?
5 A. They were blankets or rather boards that were at the back of
6 cupboards and they provided visual protection from sniper fire.
7 Q. Thank you very much.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We can now continue with the
9 tape. Witness, will you please pay close attention to the pictures,
10 because we will come back to them.
11 [Videotape played]
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could we stop there with the
13 tape, please.
14 Q. Witness, we saw a moment ago a group of buildings, high-rise
15 buildings, white in colour. Could you tell us what they were?
16 A. The first ones we saw were Alipasino Polje building, the so-called
17 B-Phase, and in the background, the C-Phase. And the other buildings
18 right next to them are those of Vojnicko Polje.
19 Q. Thank you. Do you know whether on these high-rise buildings or in
20 those buildings were there any military positions of the enemy; yes or no?
21 A. Yes, the enemy snipers were there.
22 Q. Thank you very much.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We can continue playing the
24 tape, please.
25 [Videotape played]
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me, don't work. I don't have
2 an image.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No? Mr. Usher, can the tape be rewound a little bit.
4 Perhaps at the end of the white buildings that we start --
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please. Microphone, Your Honour,
7 JUDGE ORIE: Sorry. Perhaps we start at the end of the white
8 building where we turn to the buildings of which the witness said they
9 were in Vojnicko Polje.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, quite.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Then we have to ask the assistance of technicians
12 to ...
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Can we wind back a little bit
14 and then play the tape again.
15 JUDGE ORIE: The problem is that no image appears on the screen of
16 the --
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There was a click and the picture
18 was gone.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Usher, could you please check on whether
20 the transcript appears. It is a matter of the monitor because then --
21 there is nothing on the screen at all. I am afraid that either the
22 connection is gone or the monitor has to be replaced. I see that the
23 Registry has no image on their screens as well, so that means it seems not
24 to be the monitor as such. Because the Judges have images on their
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 [Defence counsel and accused confers]
3 [Defence counsel confer]
4 JUDGE ORIE: I see that on the Registry table, there is nothing on
5 your screens and the same with the witness. So it is part of the system.
6 THE USHER: It says "no signal." Yes, it's back.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's back. Could the technical booth rewind the
8 tape a little bit so that we start with the last picture -- yes, until
9 there. Yes.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Let us play the tape now,
14 [Videotape played]
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Can we play it now? Thank
17 [Videotape played]
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could we stop now, please.
19 Stop the tape, please. Thank you.
20 Q. Witness, where are these buildings, if you know?
21 A. These are buildings in Vojnicko Polje, the neighbourhood of
22 Vojnicko Polje.
23 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, the small opening that we see on
24 this facade, on the screen, what were those small openings, if you know,
25 and what were they used for?
1 A. The small openings to the right were windows. And on the
2 left-hand side in the top left-hand corner, I don't know how the hole was
3 caused, but they would do that often. They would break open a hole on two
4 walls and then they would use a sniper rifle to fire from the corridor
5 through those holes.
6 Q. You are telling us, therefore, that the hole we see on the
7 left-hand side of the screen was a hole that was used by -- that could be
8 used by a sniper?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you very much.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Can we continue playing the
12 tape, please.
13 [Videotape played]
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could you stop there, please.
15 Thank you.
16 Q. Witness, the buildings that we see both the facade in the
17 foreground and the building to the left, further back, could you tell us
18 who was in those buildings? I mean, was it military personnel or civilian
19 population that were in those buildings?
20 A. Those buildings were occupied exclusively by the Muslim Army.
21 Q. Thank you very much.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We can continue with the tape.
23 [In English] Could you please play the tape now. Thanks.
24 [Videotape played]
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: Could you please play --
1 [Videotape played]
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: Could you please stop here.
3 [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 Q. Witness, these white buildings that we have just seen, what are
5 they, please, if you know?
6 A. They are buildings in Dobrinja V.
7 Q. Thank you very much.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Let's continue with the tape.
9 [Videotape played]
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could we stop there, please.
11 Q. Witness, this house, do you recognise it? Where was it?
12 A. Yes. It is a part of Nedzarici, Stupsko Brdo.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Let's continue.
15 [Videotape played]
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Please stop there, please.
17 Thank you.
18 Q. This building that we just saw, could you tell us what it is?
19 A. It is the central part of the Oslobodjenje buildings. There were
20 two additional buildings on either side.
21 Q. What was there at the time of the events?
22 MR. IERACE: I am sorry. I don't follow the question,
23 Mr. President, which events? Does my learned colleague mean throughout
24 the indictment period or some other period or what?
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think that
1 the facts provide an answer to the question. Do you wish me to answer it
2 or is it sufficiently clear?
3 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the picture does not answer the question, but
4 perhaps it's -- it gives us -- it assists us if we know exactly what you
5 are asking the witness.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Witness, do you know before and maybe even after their
8 destruction, but especially before their destruction, and when they were
9 destroyed, who occupied this building? If you do know, say yes, and tell
10 us who?
11 A. Yes, the Muslim Army.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Can we continue with the tape,
14 [Videotape played]
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: Could you stop here, please. Right away.
17 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, do you recognise this building?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Will you tell us what it is.
20 A. One of two identical buildings that constituted the student
21 hostels in Nedzarici.
22 Q. Thank you. Which one was this, could you tell us, the one that
23 was on top or further down the slope in relation to the ground?
24 A. I can't gather on the basis of this photograph.
25 Q. Very well. We will go on. I think we will see the other one very
12 Blank pages inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts. Pages 15277 to 15285.
1 soon. This condition of the building that you see, does it correspond to
2 what you remember of it, up until September, 1994? I am talking of the
3 condition of the facade. Will you please concentrate on the condition of
4 the facade of this building.
5 A. Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
7 MR. IERACE: The witness has already said he doesn't know which of
8 the two buildings it is. In spite of that, he is then invited to comment
9 on whether the condition of the facade is the same up until September 1994
10 and that he told us he left Nedzarici in 1993.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Piletta-Zanin has made a forecast that we
12 would see the second building, and it was the testimony of this is witness
13 that there were two identical buildings. So if we move to that picture so
14 that we -- there is no uncertainty about that.
15 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, there is still the issue of September
16 1994, given the witness left the area in mid-1993.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's first move and then please keep in mind
18 the second observation, as well.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, quite.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Because, Mr. Ierace, the testimony did not stop with
21 leaving in mid-1993. Yes.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Quite. I would be grateful if
23 you could continue showing the tape, please.
24 [Videotape played]
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: Stop. Would you please -- [Interpretation]
1 Thank you.
2 Q. Witness, we have just seen two buildings. Were you able to note
3 that on the screen? Were you able to see it?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could we wind back the tape
7 just a little bit ask then play it again so that we can have a view of the
8 two buildings, please. And I would be grateful to you, Witness, to be
9 very careful in observing the condition of the facade of both buildings,
10 so this is one. And there is the other.
11 [Videotape played]
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
13 Q. For one and the other of these buildings, according to your best
14 recollection and until the end of your stay in the area, were the facades
15 in this condition that we see them in now on the screen; yes or no?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Thank you very much.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Let's continue with the tape
19 and I will put my next question after that, please.
20 [Videotape played]
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Can we stop. Thank you.
22 Q. The building that we see in the background in the centre of the
23 picture, what are those buildings?
24 A. It is Alipasino Polje.
25 Q. Thank you very much. Would you agree with me Mr. -- witness, in
1 saying that the angle of the building, the corner of the building that we
2 see in the forefront is part of the student hostel, that is, the first
3 building closest to Alipasino Polje?
4 MR. IERACE: I object to leading, Mr. President, on these sorts of
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, this is a contested issue. Could you please
7 replay the latter part just for my -- to assist me to perhaps have
8 replayed the last one minute, approximately, of the -- yes. No, further.
9 So on from the ...
10 [Videotape played]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Forward, forward, forward. Yes. We can move fast
12 forward until we get the first big white building. Please stop. Yes.
13 Could we slowly now again see -- could you play the ...
14 Yes, please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
16 Q. To make things quite clear, I will put the question once again to
17 you, Witness: For both of these buildings, the condition of the facades
18 as reproduced on this tape is indeed the condition that you were familiar
19 with during your stay when you were under arms in Nedzarici?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Would you please now concentrate on the next question. From
22 whatever position, that is, no matter from what position on the side of
23 the Serb lines, could one see through the facades of these buildings shown
24 on the screen, through those buildings; yes or no?
25 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, as the question is interpreted into
1 English, it refers -- it invites the witness to comment on whether you
2 could see through the facades of the building quite shown on the screen.
3 We see a little bit of a student hostel. We see a lot of building in
4 Alipasino Polje.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think there was no confusion. But the
6 question put to you from Mr. Piletta-Zanin, whether from any position you
7 could see through the building on the screen, I take it that
8 Mr. Piletta-Zanin referred to the students' building and not to the
9 building you also see on the screen now which is Alipasino Polje. But the
10 question is about the students' buildings. Yes, whether you could see
11 through it.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. We could only see the buildings
13 of the students' hostels. We couldn't see what was happening behind them.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, could you give us the name of the
16 street if we are looking theoretically from Serbian positions, the street
17 that was on the other side behind the so-called student buildings, the
18 main boulevard, what was its name?
19 A. I think it was called Ante Babica Street. I don't know what its
20 name is now.
21 Q. To be more precise, from any position behind Serb lines and at any
22 point in time, could one see through these buildings, that is, the student
23 hostel, could one have a view of the Ante Babica Street; yes or no?
24 A. I have already said no.
25 Q. Thank you for telling us once again.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I think we no longer need this
2 tape, it can be removed, and we can now continue with the questions.
3 Q. Witness, shall we now focus on the question of destruction,
4 particularly in the zone that you were familiar with. Could you tell us
5 when, as far as you know, the bulk of this destruction was done in your
6 area, to buildings in your area?
7 A. Are you referring to Nedzarici?
8 Q. Yes, the zone you were familiar with.
9 A. Throughout 1992. Later on, the intensity was much lower.
10 Q. Thank you very much. If we ask you about other zones of Sarajevo,
11 did you have any knowledge of other zones in Sarajevo, apart from
13 A. Before the war, yes.
14 Q. Thank you very much. I will now move on to another series of
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could we place under the
17 ELMO -- I am sorry, Madam. The Exhibit is P3277. I think it is an
18 exhibit that looks like this. This is just to save time. Perhaps we
19 could place this one and exceptionally this very photograph on the ELMO.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I think as a rule we should use the exhibit admitted
21 into evidence and the quickest way of doing this is to give the number in
22 advance to the Registry --
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, quite.
24 JUDGE ORIE: -- which has been asked for several times.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I think that we did do that.
1 JUDGE ORIE: We have changed registrars, first of all.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] That's it. Thank you.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Witness, could you please look to your right. You will see a
6 photograph. Do you recognise the place; yes or no?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you. The building marked with a "1" is it the building that
9 we just saw on the screen?
10 A. Yes, it is, the second one.
11 Q. Thank you very much. Witness, do you see a street slightly going
12 uphill from what we believe to be the Ante Babica Street, the street going
13 slightly uphill to the left, do you see it?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Could you invite the witness to point with the
15 pointer so we are sure we are talking about the same street. Would you
16 please do that on the right-hand side. Yes. Please point at the street
17 you think the --
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Quite. That's it. Thank you.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] [Indicates]
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Witness, on this road that the witness has pointed to, a road to
22 the left of the screen and going mildly uphill, could you tell us how many
23 barricades there were on this road, if you know?
24 A. There were three barricades, but we could see only one well.
25 Q. Which one was that?
1 A. The one closest to Nedzarici.
2 Q. That's quite logical, indeed. Thank you. Could you show it to us
3 on the photograph where these three barricades were, please, with the
5 A. One was here. The second was there, and the third was around the
6 corner of these buildings, somewhere here.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] For the transcript, the
9 witness has indicated that the first paragraph -- barricade, was slightly
10 behind the first vehicle that we see on that road. Then in the middle and
11 then further up again. The witness saying "around the corner" of the
12 building that is seen to the left of this photograph.
13 Q. Witness, in view of these obstacles, was it possible, and I will
14 be very precise, to have a firing angle of -- on any spot on the Ante
15 Babica Road from Serb lines?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Let me put the question to you once again: Are you positive about
18 that; yes or no?
19 A. Yes, I am positive. It couldn't be seen.
20 Q. Why was it not possible to see anything?
21 A. Well, because there wasn't an elevated point anywhere, a point
22 which was sufficiently elevated along the lines, along our lines. I think
23 that in the distance you can see a building -- you can't see it here -- it
24 was 70 to 100 metres --
25 Q. Witness, thank you. Were you aware of what we call here in this
1 Trial Chamber the house for the blind, blind children? Please answer yes
2 or no.
3 A. I don't see it in the photograph, but it was there.
4 Q. I know that you can't see it in the photograph, but did you
5 personally know this institution?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you very much. From that site -- this is the question I am
8 putting to you now -- was it possible to have a firing line, was it
9 possible to fire at the place that I have indicated to you, that is to
10 say, that Ante Babica Avenue down below, and taking into account the
11 obstacles that we have mentioned; yes or no?
12 A. No, it wasn't possible to see that.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I would like to move on to
15 another photograph. It is Exhibit 3270. That's the one.
16 Q. Witness, can you recognise this place?
17 A. These are the buildings in Vojnicko Polje which is across the road
18 from Nedzarici. I don't know what this part here that has been scribbled
19 over is.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please ignore that.
21 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It is not important. It is
22 not important. Act as if it wasn't there.
23 Q. I am going to ask you a question about the buildings which in the
24 middle of the photograph and in the background, could you indicate them
25 with the pointer, please. Would you take the pointer, please. I don't
1 know if the gentleman has a pointer. Yes. And could you point to it in
2 the photograph.
3 A. [Indicates]
4 Q. That's fine. That's right. At the time that you were familiar
5 with as a soldier, could you tell us who occupied these buildings?
6 A. The Muslim Army.
7 Q. Thank you very much.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We can remove this photograph
9 from the ELMO, and I would now like to place a map on the ELMO. It is
10 Exhibit 1785 and concerns incident 23. It is one of the incidents that
11 concerns Nedzarici. We are going to present this map. Would you hand
12 this out, please.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, just to give you an indication, if
14 you would use two hours for this witness, that would be another 15
15 minutes, approximately, a bit less. Please proceed.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. Just a
18 Q. Witness, do you recognise the photograph on the screen, this map?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you. Witness, I'd like you to take the pointer and point to
21 the red triangle under the word "Nedzarici."
22 Could you do that, please. Can you see a red triangle?
23 A. [Indicates]
24 Q. Thank you very much. But in the red triangle, could you point
25 within the red triangle.
1 A. [Indicates]
2 Q. Thank you very much. The witness has complied.
3 Witness, I don't want to be too specific, but what was there
4 within this terrain? Was this a field, an open plane, were there
5 buildings there or I don't know what? Could you describe the terrain to
6 us within this triangle. What did the terrain look like at the time that
7 you were familiar with as a soldier, naturally?
8 A. We'll start from here; is that all right?
9 In this part up to this road there were houses which were
10 completely destroyed. There were two or three houses at the corner
11 itself. There was a field here.
12 Q. Just a minute.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The witness indicated the
14 exterior part of the triangle behind the word "Nedzarici" and he said that
15 there were buildings in this area.
16 Q. Could you carry on, please.
17 A. There was a field here. This is where the houses started. This
18 is where there were private houses, and then there was a field here, an
19 open field. And this was a theological faculty in Nedzarici. It started
20 from the Mojmilo Brdo.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I think it is important that we have
23 an accurate description of what the witness has just said. Could you
24 also, Mr. President, start with the portion that my learned colleague
25 described, because it comes out in English translation as an area beneath
1 the term "Nedzarici" which doesn't concern many --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Let me give it a try. The witness started explaining
3 what is in the triangle going from -- to a red dot related to the number
5 He then told us that after the first double line, houses would
6 start going to the left approximately to where the word "Nedzarici" is
7 above the triangle. The part of the triangle just under the word
8 "Nedzarici" was described as being a field. Then further to the left
9 where the colour starts, the witness indicated that there were houses, and
10 then the last part to the left of this triangle being without colour, the
11 witness indicated that there was a field. And he then pointed at what
12 seems to be a structure left of number "75" just outside the triangle and
13 said that that was the theological faculty in Nedzarici.
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
16 Q. Witness, I have two questions that I would like to put to you.
17 They are as follows: First of all, since this -- I don't comment on that.
18 First of all, what is the distance between the point that you have
19 described as the theological faculty and the point which is indicated as
20 number "23" which is marked with number "23"? So in your opinion, what is
21 the distance between these two points, as far as you know?
22 A. I think it is about 1.300 or 1.400 metres from one point to the
24 Q. Very well. Could you indicate number "23" the red point.
25 A. [Indicates]
1 Q. The witness has complied with the request. Around this point that
2 you are pointing to, were there any enemy positions, and if yes, what can
3 you tell us about them?
4 A. Well, there was a cannon, more or less, near this point which
5 fired on Nedzarici. Fully, not just where it is inscribed.
6 Q. Thank you. Were there operators with that cannon, too?
7 A. Well, yes.
8 Q. Thank you. Was there an exchange of fire between the two sides,
9 and if so, how frequently did such exchanges occur?
10 A. What do you mean "between the two sides"?
11 Q. The Serbian side and the Muslim side.
12 A. Along all the lines?
13 Q. No, in general. Yes, and more specifically in that zone.
14 A. Very frequently; every two or three days.
15 Q. Thank you very much. Under point "23" that you have mentioned, as
16 far as you know, were there also military establishments, establishments
17 of military troops?
18 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object to leading on these sorts of
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. I will reformulate
22 Q. Under point "23" do you know what was located there at your -- at
23 the time that you were a soldier? I am referring to the zone in general.
24 A. Somewhere here, more or less. There was a water reservoir and
25 before the war broke out, the JNA had positioned itself there. And about
1 two months later, they were under fierce Muslim attack. They weren't able
2 to return to Lukavica by this road. The combat vehicles, a tank and five
3 armoured carriers remained there. They descended to our barracks in
4 Nedzarici and then they came to us in Lukavica and got around. But all
5 those weapons remained there.
6 Q. Thank you very much. As a result, that position, in whose hands
7 was that position after the attack, the position that was described as
8 being the one where there was a water reservoir?
9 A. The Muslim Army.
10 Q. Thank you very much.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] For the sake of the
12 transcript, the witness indicated the extreme point of a curving, a
13 serpentine road which finishes just under the red point which concerns
14 incident 23.
15 Q. Witness, I would now like the change the subject, to move on to
16 another subject. And very briefly, what do you know about the elevated
17 points, and I am referring to military positions of both sides. What do
18 you know about elevated points in Sarajevo or around Sarajevo? For
19 example, the Mojmilo hill, what do you know with regard to army positions?
20 Who held Mojmilo?
21 A. The entire Mojmilo hill was under the Muslim Army. That was a
22 dominant position above Nedzarici.
23 Q. Thank you very much. Who held the Zuc hill?
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, perhaps first address the
25 Prosecution. We have heard quite some testimony on who held what hills.
1 As far as my recollection goes, this testimony was mainly concurrent.
2 Does the Prosecution contest, I would say, the main lines of that
3 testimony given until now about Zuc, about Trebevic, about Mojmilo, about
4 Hum, about ...
5 MR. IERACE: Well, Mr. President, yes there was much evidence
6 about who held those positions at various times in the Prosecution case.
7 As I recollected in relation to Mojmilo, one party held it earlier.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mojmilo might be different, but especially the
9 other before we go into all the hills again. Perhaps I should not speak
10 about it at this very moment. Perhaps just to the parties that this --
11 MR. IERACE: Yes, the Defence can tell us.
12 JUDGE ORIE: If the Defence would tell what their position in this
13 respect is and see whether we can avoid, if not necessary, repetitious
14 evidence on that.
15 Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, it is one of
17 the items you could see on my list this morning, but I have to continue
18 with this witness. Thank you.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
21 Q. The same question for Zuc, do you know who held the Zuc hill?
22 A. As far as I know, the Muslim Army.
23 Q. The same question for the Hum hill.
24 A. That was in the depth of Muslim territory.
25 Q. Witness, if you know --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
3 Q. -- the same question for --
4 MR. IERACE: Would you allow me just one minute. I am unable to
5 access my transcript at the moment. It will take me a few minutes. But
6 do we have clear as to what period of time we are talking about as to when
7 these positions were held?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please tell us if the hills that you were
9 questioned about during the period of the armed conflict, that the forces
10 that were holding these hills changed, would you please then indicate. So
11 I take it if the answer is put to you that it is for the whole period, if
12 that would not be possible to answer the question in such a way, please
13 indicate so. Yes. So if there was any change during the conflict.
14 Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
16 Q. Do you know what the situation was in the area called the Seven
17 Woods area; yes or no?
18 A. I haven't heard about the Seven Woods area.
19 Q. Thank you. I am going to move on to another subject. Witness,
20 have you ever heard anything about a plan that was allegedly one of your
21 army's plans, the purpose of which was to destroy and move out from
22 Sarajevo all property or all Muslim property, all Muslim people, have you
23 heard about such a plan for massive destruction; yes or no?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Thank you very much. I would like to return to the questions of
1 symbolic objectives. In the Nedzarici area or near the Nedzarici area,
2 were there any monuments such as mosques; yes or no? Were there any sites
3 such as mosques?
4 A. Well, yes.
5 Q. Thank you. What are you referring to and where? Which location?
6 A. In the Aerodrom, the airport neighbourhood, this is near
8 Q. Thank you very much. As far as you know, this mosque, was it
9 intentionally shelled or destroyed or by your forces?
10 MR. IERACE: I object to the question, Mr. President, "was it
11 intentionally shelled or destroyed."
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I will reformulate that.
14 Q. Did you ever receive any orders, for example, an order to fire on
15 such targets; yes or no?
16 A. No.
17 Q. As a result, you didn't receive any orders to destroy these sites;
18 is that how I am to understand your testimony?
19 A. Yes, you have understood that.
20 Q. And by the way, throughout the war, do you know whether this
21 mosque was ever destroyed; yes or no?
22 A. I can't say because it can't be seen from Nedzarici.
23 Q. Thank you very much.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to have a break in approximately five
25 minutes. I take it that you will be able to finish by then.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, yes, willingly.
2 Q. Witness, at the beginning of your testimony you said that you had
3 been wounded. Can you tell us when you were wounded, how, by what, et
5 A. On both occasions it was in Nedzarici. On the 1st occasion it was
6 on the 19th of June. The second time was on the 12th of July.
7 Q. What were you wounded by?
8 A. The first time I was wounded by a bullet, and the second time it
9 was a hand-held rocket launcher when it hit me when I went to fetch the
11 Q. Thank you. Were you recognisable when you went to see -- when you
12 went to pick up the wounded? Was it possible to recognise you as someone
13 who was trying to provide the wounded with assistance?
14 MR. IERACE: I object. Again, the question is inappropriate to
15 the question to that issue. Might I respectfully suggest should be, what
16 was he wearing at the time?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I think that would be the proper way of putting
18 it. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the question -- yes.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President. I
20 apologise. But if, for example, this person was wearing a camouflage
21 uniform and a stretcher, he could have that with the Kalashnikov. But I
22 think Mr. Ierace's objection with regard to clothing is not pertinent. I
23 don't know if he had a stretcher.
24 JUDGE ORIE: I think, as a matter of fact, that the objection was
25 that you should not lead the witness in this respect and whether you would
1 not lead him by asking about what he did wear at the time or what he had
2 with him or how he moved around, that is all fine, but the issue is not
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
6 Q. Were you carrying weapons when you were wounded the second time?
7 A. No.
8 Q. Thank you. I would now like to continue -- no, I am going to
9 finish with this question.
10 Were the wounded in open territory, the wounded or the wounded, if
11 there were several of them, were they in open terrain?
12 A. I haven't understood your question. What do you mean by an open
14 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I object to the question.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
16 Q. What was the terrain like? What kind of terrain were the wounded
17 in, the wounded that you assisted?
18 A. They were in our existing positions because we always defended
19 ourselves, we never attacked. When someone was wounded, the colleagues
20 would take them to a secure place until we arrived because the medical
21 unit couldn't come. My unit went to get the wounded out.
22 Q. Was there a specific place where one received the wounded for your
23 unit or was there a specific place where one collected, where one gathered
24 the wounded; yes or no?
25 A. When the wounded would be taken away from the unit, they would be
1 taken to the medical place which was at the barracks for a certain period
2 of time, and then at the theological faculty and then they were taken to
3 the hospital after that.
4 Q. And the incident, where did this incident take place?
5 A. It was in the street that you have asked me about, the Aleja
6 Branka Bujica where the old primary school used to be. I came to get the
7 wounded, and when we were leaving, they put us in the building of the
8 student home.
9 Q. Thank you. Thank you very much. This is my very last series of
10 questions. I would like to know whether you knew about military
11 objectives, strategic objectives on the other side in the town of
12 Sarajevo, and in particular, objectives such as workshops, et cetera?
13 A. The people who would go out in the course of the war who were
14 captured or who were in the Viktor Bubanj Barracks, there was a prison
15 there, we would receive information from them. Or rather, the army, the
16 police, military police would receive information. They gave statements
17 according to which they had started producing in the engineering centre,
18 in the very centre of town, where there were workshops before the war too,
19 where they had tools of various kind, for the education of pupils. I
20 heard that they produced then in the Vaso Miskin Crni factory. And I
21 heard about the Zrak factory which they produced optical sites.
22 MR. IERACE: I want, Mr. President, the -- the evidence is in a
23 very general hearsay form, and as you have required with earlier in the
24 Defence case it should be more specific as to who said what. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. It is
2 obvious that if we want to prove that a certain firing was justified in
3 Sarajevo itself, it would be very difficult for us to find people on this
4 side who were in Sarajevo itself, and also on the other side. So the only
5 reasonable source of information is the information that military
6 personnel had at the time. And if we can't obtain this information from
7 people who lived with them, then nothing can be proven, and I don't think
8 this is justice.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I -- the information until now is rather
10 general. The witness testified on how he would have received this
11 information. That is perhaps an area that could be further then explored
12 because I do understand that it is not information he got from the other
13 warring party, but from, if I may say it, his own people who have seen
14 that at the other part.
15 So I certainly can imagine that that is something the Defence
16 would explore in further detail. If the witness has any -- for example,
17 if he could tell us from whom he got this information, that might assist.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. President, and
19 I will only have two or questions after this --
20 Q. From which person, for instance, did you receive such information?
21 Do you remember whether such-and-such a person gave you some particular
22 information, briefly, please?
23 A. I have already said that during exchanges or when Serb civilians
24 fled that had been captured in the Federation, the normal procedure was
25 for them to make a statement about what they knew. And this information
1 was passed on through military channels to higher levels of command.
2 JUDGE ORIE: We understood that, but do you know the names of any
3 of those persons who gave this information, that is the question. Yes.
4 If you would prefer to say it in closed session, then we will do so.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really don't know the name.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You don't know the name. Okay. Please proceed,
7 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
9 Q. On the other hand, Witness, the information coming from the police
10 went through the chain of command, is that right, was passed on along the
11 chain of command?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. How many people were living in Nedzarici at the time
14 that you were familiar with, that is 1992, 1993, how many civilians were
15 there, if you know?
16 A. I would say around 200, 180 to 200.
17 Q. Thank you. And my very last question now: What do you know about
18 the digging of trenches in the Nedzarici zone, trenches of the enemy, of
19 the adversary, who did this and so on?
20 A. Along the whole length of the line around Nedzarici, trenches were
21 dug, and the digging was done exclusively by Serbs who had been captured
22 and stayed behind --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Ierace.
24 MR. IERACE: For some reason I missed the earlier question to
25 places on the other side of the confrontation lines which might have been
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well, I will check.
3 MR. IERACE: I also ask that my learned colleague,
4 Madam Pilipovic, lower her voice. Not for the first time, I can hear her
5 quite clearly from here, speaking in the Serbian language, which I
6 understand to be the language of the witness. It is inappropriate.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do take it, Ms. Pilipovic, that it is because
8 you have your headphones on that you sometimes do not hear yourself, that
9 you can be --
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I do apologise.
11 But this type of observation today to Ms. Pilipovic, she cannot speak.
12 She doesn't have a voice. She is mute. That is really a bit too much. I
13 am so sorry.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that you do not agree with
15 Mr. Ierace.
16 Could you tell us exactly how you know who has dug the trenches at
17 the other side of the confrontation line?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know, because I already said at
19 the beginning of my testimony that the sources were exclusively from the
20 region of Dobrinja V, that the Muslim side would send Serbs with two
21 bottles of petrol to set fire to Serbian houses. And on one occasion --
22 JUDGE ORIE: As far as I understand, you were not at that very
23 location when people were digging trenches. You were not so close to
24 these trenches, I take it, that you could speak with these people; is that
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, but if I may finish how we
2 obtained that information. One man ran across to the middle of the
3 meadow. He threw away the bottles and he ran over to the Serbian side and
4 our soldiers --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Who was that? Who was that man?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can give you the name of that man.
7 But I don't know what the proper way is --
8 JUDGE ORIE: We will turn into closed session. We will turn into
9 closed session.
10 [Closed session]
3 [Open session]
4 JUDGE ORIE: So you say they were dug by Serbians who were
5 captured. That is how you started your answer.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. And this man, when he arrived,
7 he told us that it was always the Serbs who dug trenches. And usually as
8 they were digging, they would show three fingers to the men on position --
9 on the front lines. Sometimes I was on guard duty and I could hear them.
10 They were digging trenches and letting us know not to shoot at them. And
11 we didn't shoot. And they were approaching us.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Did they lift these three fingers, please?
14 A. As a sign of recognition that they were Serbs. I doubt that a
15 Muslim would show himself up to the waist up as digging trenches. It is
16 rather inconceivable.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you very much. No
18 further questions, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE ORIE: We will adjourn until 1.00.
20 --- Recess taken at 12.40 p.m.
21 --- On resuming at 1.04 p.m.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, is the Prosecution ready to cross-examine
23 the witness, once he has returned in this courtroom?
24 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I am ready to start, and I can
25 indicate tomorrow whether I will be ready to finish. Thank you.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness
2 into the courtroom.
3 [The witness entered court]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. DP5, you will now be cross-examined by counsel
5 for the Prosecution. Mr. Ierace, please proceed.
6 Cross-examined by Mr. Ierace:
7 Q. Sir, during the questions that were asked to you by the Defence,
8 you were shown various video clips. Do you know where those video clips
9 came from?
10 A. I think they were video clips of the Serbian radio and television.
11 Q. When did you see those video clips for the first time?
12 A. These ones, when I arrived here at the court.
13 Q. Do you mean today?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. So you had not seen that footage, that is, that video before
16 today; is that correct?
17 A. Correct. This one, I hadn't seen it before.
18 Q. Had you seen any of that video before today?
19 A. No.
20 Q. I take it that in relation to the footage of the student hostels,
21 therefore, you don't know where it was taken from, in other words, where
22 the camera was positioned when it recorded that footage --
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I object.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I object. Because the first
1 question to be put by Mr. Ierace was whether the witness had access to
2 this tape with sound and music or without it. So he should have started
3 with that question, whether he had seen the tape with the sound and the
4 music, or without the sound and music, as we viewed it, to clarify things.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace, I think the objection as such should be
6 denied, but if that would be an issue for the Defence, perhaps it could be
7 clarified right away.
8 MR. IERACE: Yes.
9 Q. When the video was played to you today, we could not hear the
10 sound track. Had you seen that video before today with a sound track?
11 A. No. I have already said, I haven't seen it at all.
12 Q. All right. Have the lawyers for the Defence, Madam Pilipovic,
13 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, or any other member of the Defence team ever shown you
14 any videotape?
15 A. No. But I saw Mr. Piletta-Zanin for the first time today. I
16 spoke to Madam Mara Pilipovic and I think his name was Voja Radovic, as
17 investigator that came to Sarajevo two or three times. On two or three
18 occasions they came to Sarajevo and we spoke for maybe a half hour.
19 Q. And when did you first meet him?
20 A. Whom do you mean? I didn't quite understand.
21 Q. Voja Radovic?
22 A. Mr. Voja Radovic and Madam Mara Pilipovic came together. I think
23 it was about eight months ago, eight or nine months ago.
24 Q. And at any stage, have you given a statement to any member of the
25 Defence team, including investigators?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Now, do you remember the part of the videotape that showed the
3 student hostels?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Have you ever been to, during the war, the school for the blind or
6 school for blind children, as it is sometimes known?
7 A. On a number of occasions. Because I said that my brother was
8 there throughout the war.
9 Q. I didn't understand your evidence to be before then, that your
10 brother was positioned at the school for blind children. Is that your
12 A. I think I did say that when I said that the tank was firing from
13 Brijesce Brdo, the whole of Nedzarici, including the Institute for the
14 Blind, a position where my brother was throughout the war.
15 Q. So you're saying that a tank from the Bosnian government army side
16 fired upon the school for the blind and your brother was in one of those
17 buildings at the time; is that your evidence?
18 A. Yes, it is. Yes.
19 Q. What position did your brother have in the Sarajevo Romanija
20 Corps, at that stage?
21 A. He was an ordinary soldier throughout the war.
22 Q. For what period of time do you understand your brother to have
23 been positioned somewhere in the complex of the school for blind -- school
24 for the blind? How many weeks or months or years?
25 A. You mean in total, how much time he spent there?
1 Q. Yes.
2 A. From about mid-May, that is when we entered the institute - until
3 then there was no one there - and up until the end of the war.
4 Q. Do you mean from mid-May 1992?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Is your brother still alive?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. I don't want his address, but do you know where he lives?
9 A. I do.
10 Q. All right. Now, during -- I withdraw that.
11 You told us you were wounded in mid-1993 and that you went
12 somewhere for treatment. After you received your treatment, did you
13 return to Nedzarici?
14 A. I didn't.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] A problem of translation. I
17 think I heard 1992, was it 1993? I wanted to make sure whether it was
18 properly translated for the witness. It is okay now.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
20 MR. IERACE:
21 Q. Where did you go after you received your treatment?
22 A. I returned to Ilidza. During my treatment, my unit, what happened
23 was that the heavy weapons had to be placed under control so that the APCs
24 went to the larger holes of Energoinvest in Ilidza. And the Ukrainian
25 soldiers was in charge and I was assigned there and stayed there until the
1 end of the war.
2 Q. So in terms of what happened in Nedzarici and your own personal
3 observations, you can assist us up until mid-1993; is that correct?
4 A. For some things I can assist you after my return from treatment
5 because I said my house was there, my brother was there, my relatives and
6 friends who were ordinary soldiers. And when I was free, with regard to
7 my obligations to my unit, though we weren't very busy because of the
8 heavy weapons were under control, so I would go to Nedzarici. And towards
9 the very end of the war, the Muslim Armies attacks were not so intensive.
10 Q. Does not mean that between mid-1993 and say September 1994 there
11 were occasions when you went to the school for the blind children?
12 A. I didn't quite understand the dates you mentioned.
13 Q. Between mid-1993 and September 1994, did you go to the complex of
14 buildings known as the school for blind children?
15 A. In the second half of 1993 until October 1994, I was treated at a
16 clinic for orthopedic traumas in Belgrade.
17 Q. You told us that after your treatment you went to Ilidza, you were
18 stationed with your armoured carriers where the Ukrainian brigade or
19 battalion were, but even so you returned to Nedzarici because your brother
20 was there and your house was there. Can you tell us, yes or no, between
21 the time you returned from your treatment until October 1994, did you go
22 to the school for the blind?
23 A. Once or twice.
24 Q. Now, having seen the video this morning of the student hostels,
25 does it appear to you that the position of the camera was probably
1 somewhere in the general area of the school for the blind?
2 A. I really don't know.
3 Q. When you went -- go on.
4 A. I apologise. The position could be from the old people's home in
5 Nedzarici, and there were no soldiers of ours there. For a time, members
6 of the French Battalion were accommodated there as observers at the
7 beginning of the war to observe any violations of the ceasefire.
8 Q. Now, just in relation to that, they left certainty by the end of
9 1992, hadn't they, the UNPROFOR soldiers from the home for old people?
10 A. No. The soldiers left the old people's home sometime in October
11 after two incidents occurred in Nedzarici. On one occasion, a French
12 soldier was wounded --
13 Q. I am not asking you for the information as to why they left. Do
14 you mean October 1992?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, whenever you visited -- on any occasion that you visited the
17 school for the blind, between September 1992 and August of 1994, did you
18 ever go into, up into a floor of any of the buildings above ground level?
19 A. No, because it was impossible. You couldn't climb up because
20 where the steps were, there was a glass partition that was broken, so you
21 would be visible from almost the whole of Vojnicko Polje.
22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the -- I understand the audio visual
23 room has the videotape ready to show for me that I indicated to them
24 during the break. Could I ask that the witness's monitor be switched
25 to -- I think computer evidence gives the best picture.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Usher, could you please assist. Computer
2 evidence or video evidence? I think video evidence gives the best but --
3 MR. IERACE: Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and I received something -- as a matter of fact,
5 on computer evidence, I see there was a totally different thing. I see it
6 is a 360 degree movie.
7 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I have noticed that the picture which
8 we get on the courtroom monitors, for whatever reason, is not as clear as
9 one gets when the video is watched directly on the monitor with the tape
10 in the monitor. And that may be critical during this cross-examination,
11 but I will persevere for the moment.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we will see how things develop and whether you
13 will be able to do.
14 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No. I just wanted to check a
16 point, but I think Mr. Ierace has already told us. I think we are talking
17 about the video we saw a moment ago. I think that's what we are talking
18 about, aren't we?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. IERACE:
21 Q. On the screen at the moment we see what you described earlier as
22 the remains of the Oslobodjenje building; is that correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. That was shelled by the Bosnian Serb Army, wasn't it?
25 A. Yes, after sniper fire. We can't see the top of this building --
1 Q. I would ask you that --
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, objection. The
3 witness was just explaining why the action took place, and I think he
4 should be allowed to finish, as was the case earlier on during our
6 MR. IERACE: Mr. President --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Are you going to ask about the reasons or not --
8 MR. IERACE: No.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Not. Nevertheless, if you could just briefly finish
10 your answer, Mr. DP5 -- no, not 5. I am making a mistake. Yes, Mr. DP5.
11 You said "after sniper fire we can't see the top of this building," and
12 then what would you like to add?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I said that on this
14 picture, we can't see the very top of the building. There was a rounded
15 part from which sniper fire was opened and we had seven or eight dead.
16 From this building, you could see the whole separation line along Lukavica
17 Street, so that they jeopardised that line too. So we had to open fire on
18 that building.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand your testimony to be that the
20 shelling of this building took place in response to sniper fire coming
21 from the top of that building?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. We targeted that building the
23 moment it was ruined. On that day, there was no fighting. There was an
24 alarm sounded throughout Nedzarici. Nobody knew what was happening. And
25 then a soldier saw one part of -- one wing of the building fall and then
1 the second part. And this is the central part that we see. There were
2 two glass parts of the building. The left part fell first, and three days
3 later the part to the right. But we were not firing at the time.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just -- one moment, please. One of your
5 earlier answers was on a question about the building: "That was shelled
6 by the Bosnian Serb army wasn't it?" You said then: "Yes, after sniper
8 How should I understand your testimony? That this destruction was
9 the consequence of shelling or ...
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not destruction. You didn't
11 understand me. Always after wounding. I said that we had eight or nine
12 killed from shots from that building. There were many more wounded. And
13 it was only after that, if a soldier is wounded or is killed, then we
14 would target the building to neutralise the fire coming from it. Do you
15 understand? We had to defend ourselves. For us, it was a military
16 target, if fire was opened from it, we couldn't just sit there and say, we
17 don't care.
18 JUDGE ORIE: What you are saying is that shelling was a response
19 of sniper fire coming from that building, is that a correct understanding?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
22 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President. Perhaps we could have the
23 image back on the screen.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. IERACE:
1 Q. Now, the weaponry that was used to shell the building, was it
3 A. On two occasions, yes. But in most cases it was hand-held rocket
5 Q. Now we are talking about fire from Bosnian Serb army positions
6 against the Oslobodjenje building. Do you understand that to be the
7 context of my question?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You told us the collapse of the building occurred in two stages.
10 As I understand it, the first stage immediately following shelling by
11 tanks, the second stage part of the building collapsed a few days later;
12 is that correct?
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, no, objection,
14 Mr. President. That was not the testimony of the witness
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps you should ask and put that to the
16 witness. And it is not quite clear to me whether it was his testimony or
17 not, but please ask him, Mr. Ierace.
18 MR. IERACE: Yes, Mr. President.
19 Q. When the building was first targeted by shells, was that in
20 particular by tanks, that is, tanks of the Bosnian Serb Army?
21 A. No. The first time it wasn't.
22 Q. What was used?
23 A. The first time they used automatic rifles, the first time.
24 Q. Yes. I am asking you about shelling, not small arms.
25 A. During the first couple of times when they opened sniper fire, our
1 people responded with infantry weapons. Later on --
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I think there
3 is a problem of translation here.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. About the answer of the witness?
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No. But actually the reply
6 given in line 24 of the previous page was already the same as the witness
7 is giving now. This "they" refers to the same side. I wish to underline
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please in your questions make sure
10 that we always know for certain what part the witness is -- what party the
11 witness is referring to. But I take it that as far as -- to listen to
12 your answer until now, that you said, "during the first couple of times
13 when they opened sniper fire," that you referred to BiH sniper fire, and
14 that your people, the Serbian people, then responded with infantry
15 weapons. And then you continued, "later on."
16 What happened later on?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's right. That's what I said
18 and I wanted to clarify this. Throughout the war what happened with this
19 building is something that happened in November 1992. There were perhaps
20 about 15 incidents, and it was always shelled. The first part of the
21 building was always shelled. On that day, we didn't fire either. There
22 were no operations. The building wasn't shelled. The first part of the
23 building collapsed, and three days later the second part of the building
24 collapsed. And when both parts had collapsed, well, there was no
25 reaction. Perhaps the material failed. I don't know how to explain it.
1 Whenever there was shelling, the Oslobodjenje building was shelled.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, --
3 JUDGE ORIE: The last part of your answer is -- Mr. Piletta-Zanin,
4 it is -- the last part of your answer is: "Whenever there was shelling,
5 the Oslobodjenje building was shelled."
6 What do you mean by that?
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] -- I apologise. Could the
10 witness take his headphones off.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I will ask him to do so, but do you understand any
12 English? Do you understand any English?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Just a little.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I saw you reading on the screen, as a matter of
15 fact. Mr. Piletta-Zanin, may I ask the witness to take his headphones
16 off, but first do not go in any detail, what would you like --
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I would like to say that
18 in the transcript something appears in the affirmative, whereas --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Would you please take your headphones off, please.
20 And Mr. Usher, could you please switch off the transcript, if that is on
21 the screen. Yes.
22 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, the Prosecution would prefer that the
23 witness leave the courtroom.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then would you please ask the witness -- could
25 you please leave the courtroom.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, I know that you have your headphones
3 on, and I know that you can't talk, but I heard you talking, as the
4 Chamber did before.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. I just
7 wanted to check about this with my colleague. What I wanted to say is
8 that perhaps there is some confusion in the translation. Because the
9 witness said "We didn't" -- he said "We didn't fire, we didn't shell." In
10 the transcript, this may have appeared elsewhere, it was possible to
11 understand what the witness said as being "we." Phonetically, there is a
12 resemblance, so this may have been the cause of confusion. I asked for
13 Ms. Pilipovic's opinion, she nodded, and I think we moved from the
14 negative to the positive in the transcript. What the witness says in the
15 English transcript -- in the English transcript it says "It was always
16 shelled --" I don't have it in front of me, but that is the passage
17 concerned. The witness had clarified this matter and I am drawing your
18 attention to this now because we will not be able to do so later on, and
19 during the break I have managed to cut off the blink with my computer.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, the lines are not correct because
21 my LiveNote is not functioning on from the beginning. I lost the first
22 two pages. But the first question put by the Prosecution on whether the
23 building was shelled, the answer, least as it appears in the transcript is
24 "yes." That, as a matter of fact, what is in my recollection as well. I
25 know now by now that "Da" means yes. Whatever the witness said later on,
1 is it the position of the Defence that the first time the witness answered
2 that question, he did not say yes after sniper fire; that the your
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, what I said is that I did
5 not hear the witness saying this in his own language, but I may have made
6 a mistake because things are going very fast and I guess I recognise the
7 fact that I made a mistake, but I did not hear what I can see in line 21,
8 page 87 -- page 97. I didn't hear "It was always shelled." And there was
9 something -- this is something I didn't hear the witness say. I didn't
10 hear the witness saying that it was always shelled. But I may have made a
11 mistake. But I wanted to draw your attention to this immediately since we
12 are relying on the English transcript. That's all. And this is at
13 page --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes, I do understand that you did not hear him
15 say that it was always shelled, but Mr. Ierace is allowed to please
16 proceed, and if the witness said that it was no shelling, at least it is
17 not the position of the Defence that his first answer, that it was shelled
18 in response of sniper fire, which was repeated I think on questions on my
19 side as well. So, Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness into the
20 courtroom again.
21 [The witness entered court]
22 JUDGE ORIE: And I take it that you will check this afternoon so
23 that we know by tomorrow whether there is any --
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It is impossible. It is
25 literally impossible, Mr. President, I have no access to the tape. I
1 won't have access to the tape for four or five days. I won't have access
2 to the Serbian tape.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you didn't ask me to assist you. I will
4 certainly assist you. If you take your time this afternoon, then you will
5 certainly get an opportunity to listen to whatever part of the tape you
6 need. Yes.
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Gladly.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 MR. IERACE:
10 Q. Sir, when did sniping start, according to your evidence, from the
11 Oslobodjenje building into Nedzarici? What month? What year?
12 A. 1992.
13 Q. What month?
14 A. At the very beginning in May or June.
15 Q. And did sniping -- do you say that sniping continued from that
16 building up until the time that the building collapsed?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. You told us that the first response by the Bosnian Serb Army was
19 to use infantry weapons. When was the building first shelled, and by that
20 I mean, by artillery or tanks or rocket launchers?
21 A. Never from mortars. It was never shelled from mortars because
22 firing from mortars would have had no effect if you are after snipers.
23 And from hand-held launchers perhaps in mid-June. And from a tank on two
24 occasions, two shells each time because there was no time -- there wasn't
25 time to take up position to fire at the Oslobodjenje building.
1 Q. All right. You said that firing from mortars would have no
2 effect. I take it the reason for that is that if the snipers are in a
3 high-rise building, you really need direct fire rather than indirect fire
4 to neutralise the sniper; is that correct?
5 A. Well, as far as I know, a mortar shell even when it falls on a
6 building, it can't completely destroy it. People remained protected
7 inside. So that would have been senseless. What was the point?
8 Q. Was the objective by the shelling, as you understood it, to
9 completely destroy the building in order to neutralise the snipers?
10 A. No. Because we always received orders from each position from
11 which they were firing on us. We were ordered to neutralise such fire as
12 efficiently as possible and by causing as little damage as possible for
13 the sake of the security of our men. And could I ask the Chamber, because
14 it is not clear, can I draw the Oslobodjenje building? It would be a lot
15 easier to understand then. Because those two parts were next to that
16 middle part and they became detached. They didn't go out from the bottom.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I do not know whether the Prosecution wants to hear
18 more details about that. So if Mr. Ierace would like to know more, then
19 he will certainly ask you to make a sketch. But if not, he may proceed.
20 MR. IERACE: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Q. You told us that hand-held launchers were used against the
22 building from mid-June, and then a tank on two occasions. When were those
23 two occasions that tank rounds were fired onto the building?
24 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I think your microphone is still on.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I have already said, it was in
2 MR. IERACE:
3 Q. And when after that, after mid-June, were tanks -- I withdraw
5 When did the building collapse, in which month or months of 1992?
6 A. As I said, it was in November.
7 Q. When was the building next fired upon with tanks or artillery or
8 multiple rocket launchers or a similar weapon to those after mid-June
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. I want to make an
12 objection, a formal objection, Mr. President. Could the witness perhaps
13 take his headphones off.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] And it is for a very simple
16 reason. The witness always mentioned one tank. He used the singular, he
17 never used the plural. In the transcript it says "tanks." It's in the
19 JUDGE ORIE: The question to you was: "When was the building next
20 fired upon with tank fire, artillery or multiple rocket launchers or
21 similar weapons to those after mid-June 1992?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said it was on two occasions,
23 because that was my unit. On two occasions in June, that's when we
24 shelled --
25 JUDGE ORIE: So the second time was also in June?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed, Mr. Ierace.
3 MR. IERACE: All right.
4 Q. Now, what weaponry did you have in your unit? Did you have -- I
5 take it you had tanks, is that correct, a tank or tanks?
6 A. We had three Armoured Personnel Carriers, which were old, and a
7 tank which we had captured from the Muslim side.
8 Q. And do I understand you to say that it was the tank in your unit
9 that fired on the building on two occasions in June?
10 A. Yes. I said in mid-June, and I said that the first attack with
11 Muslim tanks was in May or the beginning of June, something like that.
12 Q. Now, was that tank ever kept at the faculty of theology?
13 A. It was positioned, it was kept there -- I think it was there on
14 two occasions, because once it was hit and the soldier who was in the
15 tank, for the sake of his own security, he went to the site immediately
16 and he was treated. And the second time was when he was bandaged, but it
17 wasn't positioned there all the time.
18 Q. Was there a place where it was normally positioned in Nedzarici?
19 A. It was located at the end of the barracks, in the last facility,
20 30 or 40 metres from the theological faculty. But it was within the
21 barracks, within the compound, the barracks compound.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I have to
23 interrupt at this point. I apologise. Yet again, as far as the first
24 part of the answer is concerned, line 4, page 95, there is -- the opposite
25 sense appears --
1 JUDGE ORIE: I am just asking you, on page 95, I am now on line 3,
2 so I have some difficulties in finding line 4.
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I am going to
4 read what I have in front of me. I will read it out.
5 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... to leave the
6 courtroom. We are close to a quarter to 2.00. And we will adjourn anyhow
7 until tomorrow morning 9.00 in this courtroom. May I -- yes, please put
8 your headphones on.
9 We will adjourn until tomorrow, but we have to deal with one
10 procedural issue. So I ask you to leave the courtroom accompanied by the
11 usher, and not to speak with anyone, whoever it is, about your testimony
12 in this court. And we would like to see you back tomorrow morning, 9.00.
13 Yes, please. Thank you.
14 [The witness stands down]
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, what exactly is bothering you?
16 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. What bothers me is that
17 the witness said -- I think he said this, but again I am basing this on
18 memory. He used the following terms, he said the tank was never there
19 apart from on two occasions and this "never" did not appear in the
20 transcript, so we get the contrary impression. And I don't want the
21 witness's testimony to be erroneously interpreted at a later date.
22 JUDGE ORIE: I think, as a matter of fact, what I read as his
23 answer that he says that it was there twice. That is approximately the
24 same as never, but on two occasions.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President. I would
1 like to be more precise. According to the sentence, the sentence says:
2 "Le fait d'avoir'attempt' positionne ici signifie quelque chose en termes
3 de position." And this means that it had some bellicose purpose, the fact
4 that it was not positioned there. In terms of the position of the
5 battery, that could mean something else. This is why the term "never" is
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the last line of his answer, but you could check
8 that, if you are check the tape anyhow this afternoon. The last part is:
9 "But it wasn't positioned there all the time." Did he say that it was
10 never positioned there, or that it was not all the time?
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I think I heard the word
12 "never" at the beginning.
13 JUDGE ORIE: If you find this word, the transcript will have to be
14 corrected. So if you find the word, please write it down, and what word
15 you heard, and then it will be -- then that specific line we will ask this
16 to be interpreted again so that there is no misunderstanding.
17 Yes, Mr. Ierace.
18 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, I will do the precise figures
19 overnight, but I anticipate that much of the last 45 minutes of
20 cross-examination was lost because of lengthy interventions. It impacts
21 inevitably on the flow of cross-examination, and this is clearly a witness
22 of some importance, as it turns out in the latter stages. I would be
23 grateful for some guidelines before I recommence cross-examination
24 tomorrow on interventions as to what the witness said and so on, and
25 hopefully guidelines that would achieve fewer interventions of that
2 I say it respectfully, Mr. President, because, as I say, it does
3 impact on the flow of cross-examination, and if that can be avoided, then
4 I think it should. Thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President -- gladly. I
7 think that you have been able to see that my interventions which concern
8 language, let's say, are only made when it is absolutely necessary, not
9 only for the understanding of the Prosecution, but for also of the
10 understanding of the Trial Chamber because we only have the English
11 transcript. And in doing this, I am trying to help everyone in the spirit
12 of the tradition that is our tradition, in order to help justice.
13 So this is -- if this assistance is not accepted by all the
14 parties, well so much the worse. But I think it is my duty to do this and
15 to try and establish the facts as clearly as possible. Last time the
16 problem concerned the root. We have to do this. There are no other
17 possibilities, whether this is something that the Prosecution likes or
18 not. And I am surprised that one may think that I am using this for other
19 reasons. I am not shocked, but I am surprised.
20 JUDGE ORIE: We will adjourn until tomorrow morning at 9.00.
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
22 1.50 p.m., to be reconvened on Friday,
23 the 8th day of November, 2002, at 9.00 a.m.