1 Thursday, 13 February 2003
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 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 Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness into the courtroom.
11 Mr. Ierace -- Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Good morning, to begin with,
13 to everybody. I merely wanted to say that General Galic tells me that on
14 his monitor the date of the hearing is incorrect, and on my monitor I
15 simply have no dates. I don't know whether this is important and how
16 important it is, but I merely wished to tell you about it.
17 JUDGE ORIE: It says the 13th of February on my screen.
18 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It's not this date. The day
19 of the hearing.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Is it day 196 or -- it's not quite clear to me.
21 Perhaps, General Galic, you could tell us what you see and what is
22 not correct.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning. I don't know whether
24 it is important, as Mr. Piletta-Zanin, my lawyer, has said. But it says
25 here the date -- it is the 169th day of the trial, and according to my
1 record yesterday it was 193rd or 194th day. So obviously something has
2 gone wrong here. My apologies if something is wrong, but I don't think I
3 am, because I keep record.
4 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Microphone not activated]
5 THE INTERPRETER: The counsel's microphone is switched off.
6 JUDGE ORIE: [Interpretation] Mr. Piletta-Zanin, it is easier for
7 interpreters when you switch on your microphone.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] My apologies.
9 JUDGE ORIE: When I look at my list of transcripts, I see on the
10 12th of February day 195 and today 196. Therefore, it -- and it now
11 says --
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 169.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] 169. One-six-nine, I'm sorry.
15 JUDGE ORIE: It should be 196. Yes. Of course. Thank you,
16 General Galic, so that at least avoids that under the same name different
17 transcripts will be stored on your computers.
18 [The witness entered court]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Ms. Guskova.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
21 JUDGE ORIE: We had some difficulties with our computers.
22 I apologise, but as a consequence of my manipulations I
23 closed -- yes, I think it's functioning again. Yes.
24 Ms. Guskova, Judge Nieto-Navia has one or more questions for you.
25 WITNESS: ELENA GUSKOVA [Resumed]
1 [Witness answered through interpreter]
2 Questioned by the Court:
3 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Do you recall that -- are you hearing? Is it okay?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Do you receive translation? No, of course -- yes.
6 Is the -- because what I would expect, as a matter of fact, a Russian
7 interpreter to sit next to you. But --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Sorry. I will be listening to the
9 Serbian interpretation.
10 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, may I just ask where -- I know
12 that we have three interpreters' booths in this courtroom. And usually if
13 there is translation in a fourth language, the interpreter is sitting next
14 to the witness in the seat. The chair is there. Is there Russian
15 translation effective at this moment?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was about to ask you for the
17 permission to listen to the Serbian interpretation and to answer in
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would the interpreters in B/C/S, would they be
20 able to translate into English and into French if the witness speaks
21 Russian? I see that --
22 THE INTERPRETER: Yes. Yes. Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it then, Ms. Guskova, that you are
24 mastering of the -- as we call it the Bosnian/Serbian/Croatian language is
25 sufficient to understand it and -- yes.
1 We'll then proceed, you listen to the B/C/S and you answer in
3 Please proceed.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have only one request: I -- may I
5 remind you that yesterday you promised to give me the floor for a
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. If you -- after we've put questions to
8 you, you will get your few words. Yes.
9 Please -- please listen to the question of Judge Nieto-Navia.
10 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Do you recall that yesterday we saw the
11 numbers of the 1991 census? Do you recall the ethnic groups shown in that
13 THE WITNESS: [No audible response]
14 THE INTERPRETER: The witness is nodding.
15 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: You're nodding. That means --
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Yes?
18 Do you recall the names of those groups?
19 A. Ethnic groups. I do, yes.
20 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Could you please tell me. Tell me the names.
21 A. Muslims, Serbs, and Croats.
22 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: And Yugoslavs?
23 A. Yes, there were also Yugoslavs. I'm referring to the three main
25 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: My question was the following: We know who
1 are the Serbs, who are the Croats, and who are the Muslims. Do you know
2 who are the Yugoslavs?
3 A. I do.
4 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Yes. Tell me.
5 A. After 1945, the Yugoslav society set out to create a new type of
6 ethnicity, to be called Yugoslav. Just as the Soviet Union was of many
7 different ethnic groups, ethnic communities, was doing the same. Once
8 upon a time we were also on the way to create the Soviet people. The idea
9 of a unification of South Slavic peoples was -- found its reflection in
10 the new name for people who wanted to give proof -- to give manifestation
11 of their internationalism. And therefore, in every republic at the time
12 of population censuses, everybody could, rather than his natural
13 ethnicity, his ethnicity by birth, also declare that he was a Yugoslav.
14 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: The Yugoslavs -- the Yugoslav group was it
15 composed then by Muslims, Serbs, and Croats?
16 A. Yes, you are quite right.
17 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Thank you, Mr. President. No further
19 JUDGE ORIE: Judge El Mahdi has one or more questions for you.
20 JUDGE EL MAHDI: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 [Interpretation] Madam, I have to tell you that I read your report
22 with great interest, and it therefore prompted me to start to seek for a
23 large number of -- for further information. Therefore, I will ask you
24 some questions which would mostly be meant to clarify certain points. I
25 do not know whether you have the English translation before you of your
1 report, which is titled "The position of Serbs." In English, it is on
2 page 16. It comes after the subtitle "Arming of Muslims." Right?
3 Therefore, the "The position of Serbs," towards the end of the
4 last paragraph -- or rather, the one before the last, and I will quote it
5 to you in English. [In English] "Representatives of the Serb population
6 of Bosnia and Herzegovina addressed the Minister of Defence of Serbia,
7 Mr. Simovic, with a request for help. Since all the military institutes
8 were located in the territory where Muslims were a majority population,
9 Minister of Defence proposed to Serbs, 'to plan actions for a forcible
10 seizure of materiel and technical equipment from the warehouses,' to start
11 training of fighters within the system of Territorial Defence, et cetera,
12 and but in general to rely on their own forces."
13 [Interpretation] Now, I'd like you to tell me why was this so and
14 why did he turn to the Ministry of Defence of Serbia. That is one
16 Secondly, do you know how did it happen and how did they lay their
17 hands on the weapons from the military depots? Was it the Minister of
18 Defence requisitioned those weapons from the depots? Were they under the
19 control -- were these weapons under the control of the JNA? That is, I'd
20 like you to tell us briefly a little bit more about this. Thank you.
21 A. You have chosen a very interesting subject. One could really
22 belabour the point at great length because it sheds much better light on
23 the creation of forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina towards the end of 1991
24 and in the beginning of 1992.
25 My first comment: Why did they turn to the Minister of Defence of
1 Serbia? Because the Minister of Defence of Yugoslavia refused to talk
2 with the Serbs from Bosnia and Herzegovina, to address that subject. And
3 the Ministry of Defence of Serbia had just been -- had barely been
4 established, had just been set up in 1991. And apart from the Minister of
5 Defence and his cabinet, that ministry had no resources whatsoever, and
6 they could not help any forces in other republics, of course apart from
7 the moral support. And therefore, when they turned to the Ministry of
8 Defence of Serbia, it offered a possibility to consult, to seek advice as
9 to what to do if it's turned out that there was a shortage of needed
10 weapons in case of the possible -- of the possible need for such weapons.
11 And here I'd like to draw your attention to two dates. The Armed Forces
12 of the republic of the Muslim side started their preparations in spring
13 1991, and the Serbs turned to the Ministry of Defence of Serbia only as
14 late as autumn 1991, at the time when they could already sense the danger.
15 And it is important that -- to say that the armed units did not have any
16 such weapons. And therefore, the response of the Ministry of Defence
17 tells us and proves to us that the preparations to set up armed units was
18 still at the stage of consideration and search for possible solutions.
19 And the minister was quite right that all -- that basically all of the
20 military assets, all of the depots and plants, were in the Muslim
21 territory, and that is why he suggested to share those weapons. And I'm
22 aware of facts that that is what was done. That is, the Muslim side and
23 the Serb side. And it depended on who headed a particular military
24 formation or a depot or what particular ranks were close to those depots.
25 If Muslims -- whether it was Muslims or Croats and Serbs, it depended on
1 that, how the Serbs were then distributed in two or three sets, because at
2 that time the Yugoslav People's Army had not yet disintegrated. That was
3 only beginning. That is, that was the time when the officers started
4 leaving following ethnic criteria, that is, depending on whether they were
5 Muslims, Croats, or Serbs.
6 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Right. So if I may, I'd like
7 also to ask you: You said "representatives of the Serbs." Could you give
8 us some names, the names of persons who were representatives?
9 A. Do you mean in the army?
10 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Well, yes -- no. What I mean is
11 that in your report you say "representatives of the Serb population
12 addressed the Ministry of Defence." Who was that? Who were those
13 representatives? What -- whom did you mean by "Serb representatives"?
14 A. As the Army of Republika Srpska did not exist yet, as no -- as no
15 institution had come into being to reflect the Serbs, that was why those
16 who represented Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina went. But I cannot give you
17 the names, unfortunately, right now because I would need to have a look at
18 the book, the book from which I took this information. And the book is
19 practically a diary of the secretary of the Minister of Defence, Simovic.
20 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] -- If I understand you correctly,
21 you accepted this version as an accurate version. You accept this
22 version. You go along with this version, don't you?
23 A. Which one?
24 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] What you have put on paper. If I
25 understand you correctly, you say -- you say you learnt about this fact
1 from a diary. But do you then side along with this version? Did you
2 verify it? Did you -- were you able to check whether it was true, whether
3 that version was accurate? Right. You also say the minister advised them
4 to act, and I quote, [In English] "to plan actions for a forcible
5 seizure." [Interpretation] By force. Do you, therefore, also agree that
6 what was said was what was later on carried out in practice?
7 A. These are two different things, what the minister said and what
8 all the three parties did later on when the Yugoslav People's Army fell
9 apart. And how they acted? Well, they acted different. At times those
10 were seizures by force, and there were also tricks, and there were also
11 voluntary transfers.
12 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you. I'd now
13 like to broach another subject, if I may. I'm now referring to the
14 heading [In English] "Serbs were making concessions". [Interpretation] It
15 is page 26 in the English text, the third paragraph. Are you following
16 me, madam? Very well. Then I quote. [In English] "Serb air force was
17 completely blocked." [Interpretation] The paragraph which begins with the
18 words [In English] "It was a question of the ban on military flights."
19 A. Is it where it begins with Dobrica Cosic and Franjo Tudjman?
20 "Serbs were making concessions." Is that it?
21 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] I'm sorry. French booth, I don't
23 Madam, it is a paragraph which begins with the words "it was a
24 question of the ban," the third paragraph, on the page with the heading
25 "Serbs were making concessions."
1 A. I can't find it. Is it after the heading of Vance Owen --
2 Vance-Owen plan?
3 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
4 A. That is the previous one.
5 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Which previous -- "Serbs were
6 making concessions." It is under this heading.
7 A. Yes, right. But I can't find the paragraph. So could you tell me
8 what is the preceding paragraph or the one after it.
9 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] It is under that particular
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could I just try to assist. In the paragraph
12 starting with "Serbs were making concessions." I think it's the third
13 linear -- starting with, "It was a question of the ban on military
15 JUDGE EL MAHDI: Yes.
16 JUDGE ORIE: It's approximately -- in the English version between
17 line 10 and 15.
18 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] It's more or less in the middle
19 of the page, halfway down the page.
20 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: It's after the footnote 164. After the
21 footnote 164.
22 A. Just to assist me a little bit, can you please specify. "Serbs
23 were making concessions." This action starts with the words
24 "Dobrica Cosic and --"
25 JUDGE ORIE: And then we have the second paragraph.
1 A. [No audible response]
2 JUDGE ORIE: "The co-chairman of the international conference
3 understood..." And then we have the third paragraph, which reads: "It
4 was a question of the ban on military flights in the air space of Bosnia."
5 And I think you're talking about the third --
6 JUDGE EL MAHDI: The third paragraph.
7 JUDGE ORIE: The third paragraph, consisting in English of three
9 A. Unfortunately I cannot find this paragraph. Maybe I will just try
10 and answer your question.
11 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] I'll quote to you in English.
12 [In English] "Ban on military flights in the air space of Bosnia and
13 Herzegovina. In this way Serb air force was completely blocked. In case
14 of failure of the question would be raised in lifting the embargo on the
15 supply," et cetera. [Interpretation] Do you remember this?
16 A. [No interpretation]
17 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] So my question is, first of all:
18 When you say "the Serb air force," you're referring to the air force of
19 the Republic of Serbia or are you referring to something else? Is this
20 the air force of the Republic of Serbia that was part of the new
21 federation, the Yugoslav Federation, together with Montenegro?
22 A. Well, the Security Council resolutions banned any flights over
24 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. But not the air force.
25 When you mention the air force, it's the military air force of the
1 Republic of Serbia. And you say that you are aware of what Serbia did,
2 that it was not to control the air space of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Have
3 I understood this correctly?
4 A. May I have a look at the English text, please.
5 Yes. The Serb forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina were completely
7 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. But the air force, the
8 prohibition -- you said here that military flights -- were you referring
9 to the air force of the Republic of Serbia that was part of the old
10 Yugoslav Federation, or did you mean that the forces present in
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina had an air force at their disposal as well?
12 A. Well, I believe I should have a look at the data, whether the
13 Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina had any aircraft at their disposal. I believe
14 they did have some aircraft. That is why I would say that here. We're
15 talking about the aircraft of the Republika Srpska. I have some data in
16 the computer, and I have the data on who had how much weaponry. And if
17 you're interested in precise data, I could quote you the exact number of
18 aircraft and which party had how many of those. I believe that here we're
19 talking about Republika Srpska.
20 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] But I wanted to make sure that
21 you wanted to say that this was a prohibition of flights with regard to
22 aircraft that belonged to Republika Srpska.
23 A. [No audible response]
24 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. You are nodding. Yes.
25 Well, thank you.
1 So my last question is then -- I think I'm going to read this out.
2 It's under the title "The essence of the conflict." It's page 11 and 12
3 in the English version, and it's the first four lines at the end of the
4 first paragraph. I'll quote you in English: [In English] "He warned at
5 the dangers of war." [Interpretation] If I've understood this correctly,
6 you are referring to Mr. Karadzic.
7 A. Let us find this section. You're speaking about the assessment of
8 the character of war.
9 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. But I would like to hear
10 your interpretation. You say that Mr. Karadzic warns of the dangers of
11 war. In your opinion, is this a threat? What context was this said? I'll
12 finish the sentence. [In English] "if the leaders of Muslims and Croats
13 should decide for a unilateral secession." [Interpretation] Did this
14 express the desire not to accept anything and to go as far as war?
15 A. Excuse me. I would like to first find this passage. I would like
16 the interpreters to help me in which section would I find this paragraph.
17 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] This title is called "The essence
18 of the conflict in Bosnia." It's the first paragraph. It's at the very
19 end, the last four lines, which start with the words [In English] "He
20 warned of the dangers of war."
21 A. Mm-hm..
22 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes. My question is simply --
23 A. It starts with the 24th of January in the version I have. I've
24 found it.
25 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] It says "Quoted in a television
1 programme of the 2nd of November, 1991," where Mr. Karadzic said something
2 to the effect of -- something like [In English] "He warned of the dangers
3 of war." [Interpretation] In your opinion, was this a warning?
4 A. [No interpretation]
5 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] He said that there would be war
6 if there was no compliance. There were no means of negotiating. If the
7 other side opted for independence, opted for secession from Yugoslavia, he
8 said that in that case war would ensue. Is that how you understood this
10 A. Excuse me for this delay. Since I failed to find this paragraph
11 right on the spot. Here I have in mind that in November 1991 all the
12 parties were ready to discuss together the issues of the threats for their
13 republic. And after the events in Croatia, in Slovenia, the warnings of
14 the threats of war or the dangers of war should have stopped the secession
15 of Bosnia and Herzegovina from SFRY. This is how I would understand this
16 statement by Karadzic.
17 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] With the leave of Mr. President.
18 You mentioned the two encirclements that Owen mentioned. [In English]
19 "The first one was placed by Serbs shelling the city from artillery
20 armament and sniper rifles and by placing a circle around the city. The
21 second blockade was made by the army of the Bosnian government."
22 [Interpretation] You remember this paragraph, don't you? In your opinion,
23 is this information reliable? It's about history. When this is expressed
24 as an academic in this domain, to what extent would you take these
25 statements as truthful statements? Or would you have doubts about such
1 statements? Do you as an academic, when Owen says or writes, would you
2 say that his writings, his statements are a reliable source when carrying
3 out scientific research? And in particular when he says -- I have to be
4 quite clear. [In English] "The first one was placed --" [Interpretation]
5 I'm quoting you. [In English] "The first one was placed by Serbs shelling
6 the city with artillery, armament and sniper rifles and placing a circle
7 around the city." [Interpretation] Do you accept these statements?
8 A. Well, I shall answer both your questions, the first and the second
10 Quoting Mr. Owen -- I was quoting Mr. Owen because I believe that
11 if we don't have a historic distance from the events which we witnessed,
12 then for us it is extremely important to consider all the diaries, memoir
13 writings and especially for the crisis in the territory of the former
14 Yugoslavia the appearance of such memoirs were extremely important from
15 David Owen, Carl Bildt, MacKenzie, General Rose. That is why quoting from
16 them would be quite justified from the academic point of view.
17 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Yes, madam, I apologise, but my
18 question is very simple. I'm asking you as an academic, as an expert.
19 When you refer to Mr. Owen in your opinion, this is a reliable source, a
20 reliable reference. That's all I'm asking.
21 A. Well, I absolutely agree with the issue about the double blockade.
22 But with regard to formulation on this subject, I wouldn't concur.
23 JUDGE EL MAHDI: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
24 [In English] Thank you, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. I've got a few question for you as well.
1 But if you would first allow me.
2 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
3 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to ask you a few questions. The first one
4 is that in your report you write that those who reported as being
5 Yugoslavs, you said these were mainly Serbs and children of mixed
6 marriages. What is the source of this knowledge? You just answered to a
7 question of Judge Nieto-Navia that they could have been of all ethnic
8 origins, but in your report you described that the majority were Serbs or
9 children from mixed marriages. Could you tell me what -- on the basis of
10 what you have drawn that conclusion.
11 A. Well, in order to see it precisely, I could have a look at the
12 footnote in the text. But I would like to tell you that in statistics
13 there is a special methodology for determining such cases.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 A. Whenever it is possible to compare the numbers of the previous,
16 the subsequent censuses, then it becomes clear which numbers went up,
17 which numbers went down, and which numbers stayed the same. This fact is
18 not put to doubts in scientific literature that Muslims also ascribed
19 themselves both from among Serbs, Croats, and would tell you that the
20 numbers themselves were for the -- were testifying towards the Serbs, and
21 we can also spread them out across the regions. Unfortunately, the census
22 of 1991 was not considered as an official one. The last official census
23 was the census of 1981. That is why the numbers, the exact numbers, could
24 be determined only later.
25 But talking about the historical aspect, as you have asked me,
1 well, I can tell you that history as demonstrating to us --
2 JUDGE ORIE: No. As a matter of fact, I just asked you what was
3 the source on which you have drawn this conclusion. You said you could
4 look it up in the footnote. One of the reasons why I asked the question
5 to you is because there is no footnote as far as I can see that would have
6 enabled us to follow the sources. It's the --
7 A. Which number are you talking about?
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We are talking about the -- the first chapter
9 reads "Causes of the Yugoslav crisis," and in the first subtitle is,
10 "Causes of war in Bosnia-Herzegovina." And then it is the first -- the
11 sixth paragraph starting with "Bosnia and Herzegovina was a centre
12 republic of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia with a mixed
13 population." And at the very end of this paragraph, you say that "5 and a
14 half per cent decided at a given time to declare themselves as being
15 Yugoslav and the majority among them was Serb or children from mixed
17 A. Yes, I see. I would like to refer you to footnote 117 and 91.
18 The book which I'm referring to in footnote 91 is a book published by the
19 Institute for Ethnology of the Russian Academy of Sciences where the
20 issues of statistics were elaborated on in great detail.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And as far as statistics are concerned, if you
22 tell us that it is by comparison to an earlier census that you could draw
23 these conclusions, would a number of 5 and a half per cent where during
24 ten years a huge number of new citizens would be part of the census? I
25 mean, the population changes considerably over ten years. Would that
1 allow for a conclusion such as you write it down? Is it your conclusion
2 on the basis of this literature, or is this the conclusion of those that
3 have written the articles or the books you just mentioned?
4 A. Yes, undoubtedly. I was not involved myself in statistics
5 matters, but I used the data of those experts who were working in that
7 JUDGE ORIE: Were you using the data or were you using the
8 conclusions of those experts? Is it on the basis of their data that
9 you've drawn your own conclusions or is it on the data that you've
10 reflected those conclusions? Because what makes me this question to you
11 is because you were very precise referring to pages very often but there's
12 no footnote and no reference to whatever page in this specific paragraph.
13 A. Perhaps it is an error, but it can be easily corrected. I simply
14 know what book it is. And in response to your question, I can say that I
15 used both the data and the conclusions which the scientists included and
16 presented in that book.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that answer.
18 You have drawn our attention to an intensive construction of new
19 mosques. You compared the number of mosques and the newly constructed
20 mosques. Could you tell us what exactly is the relevance of those data.
21 A. This information speaks about the atmosphere above all in the
22 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina until -- up to 1990s. No specialist
23 and none of the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina believed that
24 Bosnia-Herzegovina could precisely be the place where
25 inter-ethnic -- where the inter-ethnic strife or struggle, would start.
1 And I suppose I was not a good specialist, because in the late 1980s I was
2 saying that it could perhaps begin in Croatia, and I didn't believe that
3 it would start in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But again, my question was -- and you partly
5 answered it. You said it demonstrates the atmosphere. What atmosphere?
6 You could interpret this in -- I would say in many different ways. I
7 mean, you could interpret it as being that people became more -- Muslim
8 people became more religious than they were before or that they -- well, a
9 lot of possible interpretations of this fact. And I would like you to
10 tell me what exactly you had in mind when you put this figure into your
11 report as a relevant one for the conflict.
12 A. Let's have a look. Where did I write that down?
13 JUDGE ORIE: I haven't got the exact source. But you gave
14 numbers. You said new mosques were constructed, and you compared with the
15 number of the existing mosques. Yes?
16 A. I did, yes. Yes. I've found it. Well, the purpose of it was to
17 show the relations in the SFRY, that is, the central authorities and their
18 attitude towards ethnic aspirations in other republics, and the attitudes
19 in the republic itself and respect for the faith -- for the religions of
20 all the three peoples which inhabited that republic.
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's still not quite clear to me. You say the
22 purpose of it was to show the relations in the SFRY, that is, the central
23 authorities and their attitude towards ethnic aspirations in other
24 republics. That's not clear to me, as a matter of fact. Could you
25 be -- could you explain it for me. Did you want to express, for example,
1 that constructing 700 mosques would find no opposition whatsoever, and
2 therefore it indicated how the -- how liberal the government was towards
3 religion, or what -- what exactly do you mean by the words you -- in your
5 A. I meant tolerance. I meant the tolerant climate which reigned in
6 Bosnia and Herzegovina.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Was the same tolerance effective in respect of other
9 A. Yes. But I have to say that after 1945, the majority of the
10 population of the SFRY, both under the Communist rule, were atheist by and
11 large, and in the Orthodox church -- and the Orthodox church and the
12 Muslims were not particularly happy to hear that you were a communist and
13 you went to -- you attended service in the church, and therefore, since
14 everybody had one political party and a large part of the population were
15 members of that one party, religion was not a topical subject in that
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. I'd like to ask you a few questions about
18 your comments on the Markale incident. And I'm referring to the incident
19 you describe at -- in your report in great detail, that is, the 5th of
20 February, 1994. You said that the attention was drawn -- the attention of
21 the public was drawn to some facts, one of them being that 80 per cent of
22 the wounds inflicted by explosion were on the lower extremities of the
23 bodies. What is the source for this fact?
24 A. The source is my conversation with Colonel Demurenko, who at a
25 later stage assessed Markale II.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So it is on the basis of Mr. Demurenko that you
2 accept or at least that you did write down in your report that 80 per cent
3 of the wounds inflicted were of the lower extremities of the bodies. Was
4 Mr. Demurenko present at the market when the incident took place?
5 A. No. Demurenko was not present at the time of the first incident
6 in Markale in 1994. He was present only at the time of Markale II.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What would be the source of his information as
8 to the injuries for 80 per cent inflicted on the lower parts of the body?
9 A. I think you will be in a position to ask Colonel Demurenko about
10 it. But from what I could gather, he juxtaposed the incidents in 1995 and
11 1994, because he was interested in the subject and it is quite possible
12 that he had some supplementary information. I have the recording of my
13 conversation with him. And if I remember, it was enclosed with my expert
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I don't doubt that Mr. Demurenko told you. But
16 I was just wondering what the actual source of this information was.
17 Could I -- you also mention that there were testimonies that a
18 little while before the explosion bodies of just deceased persons were
19 brought to the marketplace. What are these testimonies? Are they
20 published, or did you gather this also from your conversation with
21 Mr. Demurenko?
22 A. In my footnotes I make reference to the file which was compiled by
23 the Ministry of Information of Serbia, and it is entitled "Pijaca Markale
24 file, Markale market file."
25 JUDGE ORIE: I have not looked that up. I hope you'll understand
1 that the Chamber has not been able to verify all the sources you used, and
2 that's the reason I'm asking you. Are names mentioned in this file or the
3 names of the witnesses who testified and where, under what circumstances
4 they testified?
5 A. You know, I think that we have this document in our centre. And
6 if you don't have it here, we can send it to you, the document I mean.
7 But I couldn't really tell you off the cuff. I don't remember.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then my next question is about -- you have -- I
9 read part of your report where it says, "According to the recollections of
10 Lord Owen in Zagreb, one of the UNPROFOR officers, a ballistic expert by
11 specialisation, was studying the possible trajectories of the shells and
12 concluded that the firing point was located along the positions of the
13 Muslim army." And then you go on literally quoting the publication of
14 Lord Owen.
15 The first sentence, which is not a literal quote, do you have the
16 original text of what you are paraphrasing here? I'll tell you why I'm
17 asking: Because it says that "The firing point was located along the
18 positions of the Muslim army." That suggests that an exact firing point
19 was not located. And therefore, I'm quite interested to know what exactly
20 were the conclusions according to Lord Owen. Do you have the literal part
21 of this book, especially on this subject?
22 A. I was asked by our people to copy all the quotations that I
23 intended to use here. And as likely as not one can find it photocopied in
24 the footnotes, I gather, and we can look it up. This is not in the Serb
25 version of my text -- I mean the footnotes. But -- but being a scientist,
1 being a researcher, I can tell you that I didn't put things in inverted
2 commas, only when I would use -- I would quote only a word or two from
3 some text. That is why I didn't put inverted commas. But this sentence
4 was taken from David Owen's book.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The reason why I'm asking you is that although
6 this Chamber has seen reports, ballistic reports on the incident, it is
7 not my recollection that it was any of these reports that would say that
8 the firing point was located along the positions of the Muslim army.
9 Therefore, I'm just wondering whether there would be a report unknown to
10 this Chamber that would contain such a conclusion. But you say you
11 haven't got the book with you. Perhaps we could check in the original of
12 the book. The problem is the book was on loan in the library, so I can't
13 do it right away.
14 Then my next question would be -- and I'm specifically interested
15 to know whether there are any reports unknown to this Chamber. You refer
16 to -- and you are quoting Mr. Akashi in an interview -- "the existence of
17 a secret report was never --"
18 A. I can answer that.
19 JUDGE ORIE: And you said -- well, you don't know yet what my
20 question is about that secret report. And you say, "And that many
21 journalists disposed with the copies of its text." Did you ever see the
22 text of this report? Because I'm very much interested to know whether
23 it's in the report unknown to us or whether this is a report which is
24 known to this Chamber. Did you ever see the text of that report?
25 A. Well, I didn't have it in my hands, and I didn't want to quote
1 journalists. However, the atmosphere that I observed in Zagreb at the
2 time when possible versions of the Markale case were being discussed and
3 what Yasushi Akashi had to say about it tells me that such a document is
4 in existence, and I believe that the Tribunal should have that document.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we have the document. But if you have
6 not seen the text, it's difficult for us to compare the documents we have
7 available and those documents which you say that they were in the hands of
8 journalists. My --
9 A. No, I'm not saying -- I'm not saying that the journalists had it.
10 They were trying to quote him. But Yasushi Akashi spoke about its
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. But at least there's no possibility for
13 us to verify if we haven't got the text of the report you are referring to
14 in the words of Mr. Akashi. Then --
15 A. I think it is very good that we agreed that there was a document
16 which was missing in the Tribunal, and I believe it will be -- you will be
17 able to locate it.
18 JUDGE ORIE: I don't think that we agreed on anything at all. The
19 only thing I said is that in order to establish whether the report you're
20 referring to is a report which is not available to the Tribunal is to
21 compare the two documents. And since we've only the documents available
22 to us and not the potential missing document, we did not agree on
23 anything. It has still to be established.
24 Then you told us about the report of the Secretary-General of the
25 19th of May, 1992, which came on the desk of the members of the Security
1 Council only after a resolution had been adopted. You were confronted
2 with the text of it and some questions were put to you as far as the
3 preparation of this report is concerned. And did I understand your
4 testimony correctly where it -- that the final version of that report was
5 not available when the members of the Security Council were voting on the
6 resolution but that a draft report was available, because you mentioned an
7 earlier draft?
8 A. No, I don't think you understood me correctly.
9 JUDGE ORIE: When confronted with a certain line and asked whether
10 this would not indicate that the report was not prepared before the
11 resolution was adopted, you told us that this might be a version different
12 from a draft. I took that to be a previous version. But please explain
13 what you then meant.
14 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, if I may interrupt. I beg your
15 pardon. The date of the report is 30th May 1992, not 19th May.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I think I said 1992. But at least I mentioned -- at
17 least I meant to say the 30th of May. But yes, could you please explain
18 then what you meant while talking about a draft or an earlier version of
19 that report.
20 A. It was yesterday when we started talking about the document of the
21 30th of May, 1992. It was then that I asked you to allow me to speak out,
22 because I wanted to look at the computer which I have here with me and I
23 wanted to look up the Russian version of the Secretary-General's report.
24 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
25 A. And I -- and in relation to what I had already looked up at home,
1 and I even printed out the seventeenth item of the report and have it with
2 me, because it will prove to us fully today that I was absolutely right
3 when I said that this report had been prepared for the session of the
4 Security Council but had not found its way to the desk. But the text of
5 this item 17 is very important for us now, and it reads like this:
6 "Today's resolution of the Security Council to impose sanctions on
7 Yugoslavia creates a new situation. It is not clear yet what will be the
8 effect of this on issues considered in this report."
9 So the word "today" or "today's" tells us that the report was to
10 have been put on the desks of the members of the Security Council of the
11 30th of May, yet it appeared -- it emerged only a few days later.
12 JUDGE ORIE: The last part of your answer you say it "have been
13 put on the desks on the 30th of May and it emerged only a few days later."
14 How exactly did you establish that it appeared a few days later? I
15 mean --
16 A. No. This fact is common knowledge.
17 Now, yesterday I explained that on the 30th this report was not on
18 the desks, that the voting took place -- that they voted without having
19 discussed before that the report of the Secretary-General. All this
20 information we received in the parliament of the Russian federation in
21 early June, at the time when this issue was on the agenda.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I've got no difficulties to accept that if the
23 report refers to something that happened on that same day that it could
24 not be -- have been written prior to that day. Nevertheless, I still do
25 not understand what supports -- what is the basis for your assumption that
1 it was -- it emerged only a couple of days later. You say that is common
2 knowledge. Is that the basis of this fact you establish?
3 A. If you need corroboration of what I'm saying, that this report was
4 not on the desks at the time of the vote on sanctions against Yugoslavia,
5 then I suppose one has to look at the protocols, at the records of the
6 Security Council. I came by this information from the documents that were
7 available in our parliament and the statement made by our representative
8 in the Security Council.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. I nevertheless would like to take you
10 back to your testimony of yesterday. One of your answers was, "Based on
11 the fact that the report itself appeared later, it is quite possible that
12 it was written up later on. When we analysed this at our parliament
13 session, this paragraph was missing. It wasn't there. We had it in a
14 different draft."
15 I have some problems in reconciling your answer of today where you
16 quoted in Russian exactly the same paragraph as read out yesterday to you.
17 Yesterday you said that you had not the same paragraph in the report you
18 studied, and today you confirm to me that it was exactly this paragraph 17
19 that is of such importance.
20 A. Well, I'm not saying that it is irrelevant or non-important.
21 Simply yesterday I could not derive from English why this paragraph did
22 not lead me to think about this and to raise this issue in those days, in
23 1992. That is why I could not simply reconstruct this in my memory. I
24 simply needed to have a look at the document.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 A. This was just a presupposition which I was speaking about. I
2 checked the document, and today we dotted all the I's.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you. I have some more questions for you,
4 but I'd prefer first to have a break. But it will not take much time
5 after the break.
6 We'll adjourn until 11.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 10.29 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 11.09 a.m.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Usher, could you please.
10 Professor Guskova, I have the following question for you: In your
11 report you write about the suspicions in respect of the explosion in a
12 bread queue on Vase Miskina Street. Do you know what happened? I mean,
13 apart from it seems you suggest that the BiH forces or at least not the
14 Serb forces were responsible for that explosion, and you give some reasons
15 for suspicion. Do you have any knowledge on what actually happened? I
16 mean, apart from -- I do understand your doubts, but could you bring us
17 any further?
18 A. No, I do not have any additional information at my disposal with
19 regard to what happened in Vase Miskina Street.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then my next question again goes to your
21 reflection of what Lord Owen writes in his book. You say that a ballistic
22 expert was studying the possible trajectories of the shells and concluded
23 that the firing point was located along the positions of the Muslim army.
24 Did he -- how firm was his conclusion and on what was it based, according
25 to Lord Owen?
1 A. Well, I believe that this question should be referred to
2 Lord Owen.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No. You are writing -- you're reflecting the book of
4 Lord Owen, so therefore I think it would be perfectly right to put the
5 question to you, since you paraphrased the book of Lord Owen. Does
6 Lord Owen give any specification as to whether this was a probability or
7 whether this was a firm conclusion or whether this was a possibility
8 or -- and on what was it based?
9 A. Lord Owen writes specifically that according to his recollections,
10 in Zagreb there was a ballistics expert who expressed his opinions with
11 regard to Markale I and he mentions him, although does not name him.
12 However, I believe that here another thing is rather important.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But could you please concentrate on my question
14 and answer my question. I'm not asking you whether Lord Owen refers to a
15 ballistic expert. I'll be glad to accept that. But what does Lord Owen
16 exactly write about the conclusion of this expert?
17 A. As far as I understand, he takes him as a fact for information.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm not asking whether he takes him -- no,
19 please listen to my question. In what terms he describes the -- what you
20 present as a conclusion and on the basis of what?
21 A. Well, I'm sorry to say that I do not quite get your question.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you say that Lord Owen writes that a ballistic
23 expert was studying the possible trajectories of the shells and - and now
24 comes the most relevant part - and concluded that the firing point was
25 located along the positions of the Muslim army. Would that mean that
1 Lord Owen presents this conclusion as that the shell was fired from a
2 position along the positions of the Muslim army?
3 A. Yes.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Didn't Lord Owen write that this expert thought it
5 more probable that the shell was fired from within a distance of 2.000
6 metres rather than from a distance between 2 and 3 thousand metres?
7 A. No. Since further on he describes why this information was kept
8 secret from everybody else, from all the other peacekeeping forces.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I'm just asking you about what according to
10 Lord Owen's book the conclusion of the expert was. And I asked you
11 whether it is not true that the expert expressed himself in probabilities
12 where he thought under 2.000 metres was more probable than between 2 and 3
13 thousand metres distance.
14 A. Well, I would answer negatively to your question.
15 JUDGE ORIE: So it was a conclusion that the shell was fired from
16 along the positions of the Muslim army.
17 A. I am convinced of this.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. My next question would be -- yes. My last
19 question to you is: You have explained at several -- in several parts of
20 your report that the Serbs would not opposed -- be opposed against being
21 in a federation -- a Bosnian-Herzegovinian federation if they would have
22 their own specific entity that would allow them later to seek to join with
23 the Republic of Serbia and that the Muslims were very much opposed to this
24 and they wanted to be independent. I've been wondering whether my
25 understanding would be correct that if the Bosnian Serbs would remain
1 within a federation with the Muslims and the Croats, that they would be a
2 approximately 30 to 35 per cent minority of the population, although
3 holding approximately 50 per cent of the land, and would therefore be in
4 an unfavourable position, whereas if they would join with the Republic of
5 Serbia that they would have a stronger position on the territory. Is that
6 a correct understanding of why the other parties were very much in favour
7 of an independent Bosnia-Herzegovina, whereas the Bosnian Serbs would
8 rather not be cut off from other Serbs outside Bosnia-Herzegovina?
9 A. You have a correct understanding of this matter.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you very much then for your -- for your
12 Is there any need to put further questions to the witness? Yes.
13 Perhaps we now can first give the -- give you the opportunity to say what
14 you wanted to say. But there might be some additional questions by
15 the -- by the parties after that.
16 Yes, please proceed. Tell us what you wanted to tell us.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Excuse me. I had a question to you.
18 Yesterday for quite a while we were discussing one document which
19 interprets the session of skupstina or element of Republika Srpska of the
20 12th of May. And we did not talk about the document itself, the document
21 of skupstina. I deem that the Tribunal does not have this document at its
22 disposal and would like to say that in Moscow, in our centre we have this
23 document and we could provide it to the Tribunal.
24 JUDGE ORIE: As far as -- you mean the strategic objectives, the
25 six ones in the original document? Is that -- yes.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think we have that available in the Tribunal.
3 So that -- as far as I remember, it was also one of the annexes to one of
4 the expert reports.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE ORIE: So we have it available. It's already in evidence.
7 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm sorry you had to remain in uncertainty for
9 such a long time, but --
10 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
11 Further examination by Mr. Piletta-Zanin:
12 Q. [Interpretation] Good day, madam. You spoke to us about this
13 residual section in the census, the section that one refers to as
14 Yugoslavs. Many questions were put to you about this. My question is as
15 follows: Within the three category that is we are interested in - the
16 Croats, the Muslims, and the Serbs - was there one category which in terms
17 of nature and history was more inclined to declare themselves as being
18 Yugoslavs for intrinsic reasons? I am not talking about figures at the
19 moment. I'm talking about internal characteristics.
20 A. This is exactly what I wanted to explain when I was asked about
21 the notion of Yugoslavs. The whole crisis itself in the territory of the
22 former Yugoslavia, starting from 1991, demonstrates that from all the
23 peoples populating the former Yugoslavia only Serbs were attempting to
24 maintain the Federation. All the others were striving to exit the
25 Federation and create states of their own. That is why sociological
1 surveys and studies confirm our line of thinking that the idea of
2 Yugoslavism to a greater extent was present among the Serbian and
3 Montenegrin population and a little bit, to a lower extent, among the
4 Montenegrin people, I would say --
5 THE INTERPRETER: Macedonian people. Correction by interpreter.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Thank you, witness. And the formulation Muslim Yugoslav at the
8 time, would there have been an antagonism? Would there have been a
9 contradiction between these two terms in the way that Croat and Yugoslav,
10 these two term, could be contradictory? Have you understood my question?
11 A. Yes, I understood the question in general. However, I would like
12 to state that among the Muslims there were also Yugoslavs, those who would
13 register themselves as Yugoslavs. This has to deal with their origins
14 which they remembered as Serbian or Croatian. However, this number was
15 very low as compared to the Serbs.
16 Q. Thank you. Witness, in response to one of the questions put to
17 you, by Judge El Mahdi, I think, you said that the census on
18 1991 - nine-one - wasn't sufficiently official or wasn't sufficiently
19 credible, I think. I can't remember what you said exactly, but I think
20 that that was the idea. What did you mean with regard that this subject
21 and in comparison to the other two censuses that we are aware of, 1971 and
23 A. The matter is that the census of 1991, the results of that census
24 should have appeared a little bit later after they were drawn and at that
25 very moment the fire of the conflicts escalated in the territory of the
1 former Yugoslavia. That is why any official data confirmed by signature
2 at the level of the state is not available. However, we could see that
3 published in many magazines, but at the same time it is considered that
4 there might have been some adjustments made in other republics pursuant to
5 the altering situation. That is why the United Nations organisation, in
6 its consideration of inter-ethnical issues, would always refer to the
7 census of 1991 -- 1981.
8 Q. Thank you. When you say this, can you be more specific and can
9 you tell us about the scientific reliability of the document of 1991,
10 which was elaborated in December 1993.
11 A. Which document are you referring to? I didn't quite get that.
12 Q. I'm referring to the same document, the census of 1991. And we
13 know that it was elaborated in December 1993. My question concerns the
14 scientific reliability, the reliability of this document if one is to base
15 scientific research on it.
16 A. All the documents of the census which emerged during the periods
17 starting from 1991 and further on should be seriously scrutinised and
18 checked from the scientific point of view. Since I know from our own
19 experience on the example of Croatia and the Republic of Srpska Krajina
20 and Zagreb, lists would be published on the statistical data about the
21 population, which were totally different and did not match, in that very
22 period from 1991 to 1995.
23 Q. Thank you. When you say that there were discrepancies, can you
24 tell us whether this was accidental, there were certain shortcomings in
25 certain documents, errors, or was this organised in a voluntary manner, et
2 A. Yes. I am absolutely convinced that the alteration of data was
3 taking place in accordance with the political situation.
4 Q. Thank you. Professor, I would now like to move on to the issue of
5 the double blockade. Judge El Mahdi asked you a certain number of
6 questions about this double blockade, and he wanted to know whether you
7 agreed with what Mr. Owen had declared. I'd like you to focus on my
8 question with regard to what Lord Owen said. What do you know about the
9 statement according to which sniper fire or the shelling of civilians was
10 allegedly organised by the Serbian forces? What do you know about this?
11 A. Are you asking about the origins or causes for this, or are you
12 asking what Lord Owen thought about this?
13 Q. No. I am asking you a question to an extent that you answered in
14 affirmative terms the question put to you by Judge El Mahdi. I want to
15 know what you personally know about an alleged campaign of shelling and of
16 sniper fire which was directed against civilians by the Serbian forces.
17 This is my question. If you don't know anything about it, just tell us.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I object. This doesn't arise
19 from the questions put by Judge El Mahdi. In fact, the question was with
20 regard -- as to whether the witness accepted the statement of Lord Owen,
21 the statement attributable to him where he claims -- speaks about the two
23 [Trial Chamber confers]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from whether it arises from -- I think
25 the -- having consulted also with Judge El Mahdi, that the witness has
12 Blank pages inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts. Pages 19542 to 19554.
1 answered the questions as to what her own knowledge is and what was the
2 source of what she wrote about in her report. Therefore, the objection is
4 Please proceed, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. I'll move on to
6 another subject.
7 Q. It concerns the well-known secret report in which the conclusions
8 of this report -- in which conclusions were reached, and you mentioned
9 about it with regard to Mr. Owen. And I'm referring to the Markale
10 incident. You were questioned by Judge Orie earlier on about what Lord
11 Owen wrote in his book with regard to the origin of fire, if there was
12 such an origin, in the case of this incident. My question is as follows:
13 Was there and can you be specific about this if it is the case -- were
14 there any other elements that would have enabled you to support this
15 conclusion that was reached in the report or to support the different
16 conclusions -- or to support different conclusions than we spoke about
17 earlier on? I'm talking about the substance, not about the form of what
18 Mr. Owen said.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Before the witness could answer this question, should
20 it not be first be established what according to Lord Owen the conclusions
21 of the report were?
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Gladly. Gladly,
23 Mr. President.
24 Q. You were asked -- you asked what Mr. Owen said, according to this
25 witness, with regard to the origin of fire. To be more precise, this is
1 the issue that concerns -- the issue of alongside the mines [as
2 interpreted]. Contrary to other factors, for example, 2 or 3 thousand
3 metres. What I want to know is whether this witness was aware of any
4 other elements that might support the first deduction that you summarised
5 in your report. Could you answer that question.
6 A. I would like to draw the attention of the report to the
7 Secretary-General of the United Nations organisation of the 15th of
8 November, 1999. I have it in my computer, and I could show it to you if
9 you don't have it at your disposal. In paragraph 119, it is stipulated
10 that the first studies of the United Nations organisation of the crater of
11 the explosion demonstrated that the bomb had been launched from the
12 Bosnian side from the combat lines or possibly detonated on the spot.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] For the transcript,
15 Mr. President, in line 37 I was talking "alongside lines," not "mines".
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That was clear.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you. I just wanted to
18 make it clear.
19 Q. My last question: You were asked about a high number or the
20 increasing number of mosques at a certain period of time. My question is
21 as follows: Could one establish certain parallism [as interpreted]
22 between this, say, religious activity, that is, the increase in the number
23 of houses of worship and the political situation, according to your
24 experience? On the Muslim side, obviously.
25 A. I'm sorry, but I didn't really understand your question.
1 Q. I will rephrase it and cut it shorter. Could one draw a parallel
2 between what I call the religious activism and the political attitude of
3 the Muslims during that period of time? Could one draw some conclusions
4 that there -- that these two were developing in parallel?
5 A. Yes, one could do that.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Just to understand your question better. Do you
7 refer to the construction of a high number of mosques? Is that what you
8 call religious activism, Mr. Piletta-Zanin? Just to clarify the issue.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, I have said that quite
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You said that. But is -- you were referring to
12 the construction of mosques.
13 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, quite so, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's clear.
15 And I take it that you understood the question in that sense?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Any further questions from the ...?
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No. I need to consult. I
20 need to consult.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Very well.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 [Defence counsel and accused confer]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Just one more question, but it
1 will be Mrs. Pilipovic who will ask it, because it will be shorter then.
2 MS. PILIPOVIC: Your Honour, with your leave, a clarification, a
3 question for Mrs. Guskova. She said that she was quoting Lord Owen with
4 regard to the blockade, so my question is whether Madam Professor could
5 tell us if she knows what a blockade is.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Can I answer that?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As I understand the question, it is
9 an extension of a question that I was already asked before, whether I went
10 along with Mr. Owen's definition or phrasing. I think that that is not an
11 accurate phrasing. There was no full complete external blockade that is a
12 circle around Sarajevo. In one of the reports of the
13 Secretary-General - and it is the same report that I mentioned a while
14 ago - in item 2, in 176, the Secretary-General, as early as 1990, says
15 that there was a road used for army transports across Igman and Bjelasnica
16 and which led directly into the heart of the city. Moreover, there was a
17 tunnel under the airport, and everybody knows about that. There were also
18 humanitarian relief convoys. And all this tells us that -- testifies that
19 the term "blockade" is rather -- should be understood in rather
20 conditional terms.
21 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Is there any need for further questions?
23 Ms. Mahindaratne.
24 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: May the witness be shown the 1991 census.
2 Perhaps my copy can be shown to her.
3 JUDGE ORIE: When we talk again about the 1991 census,
4 Ms. Mahindaratne, may I remind you that the issue has been raised by you
5 in order to ask questions about a certain part of the report, whereas the
6 witness has testified that when she was talking about a majority of Serbs
7 that this was only the territory controlled by the Bosnian Serb army, not
8 necessarily the full territory of these municipalities, and that it was
9 the situation at 1993 or the second part of 1992. And I don't know
10 whether the parties do agree on the fact that at least some movement of
11 population has taken place at the beginning of the conflict. So I'm not
12 disallowing you to go into the 1991 census again, but please keep in mind
13 the testimony of the witness on how she used these figures concerning the
14 population, in what areas exactly.
15 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President. I just need to verify with
16 regard to her position that this is not an official census and the fact
17 that it's not the final statistics. I just merely needed to get that fact
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps I have taken too much of the time,
20 but ...
21 Further cross-examination by Ms. Mahindaratne:
22 Q. Madam, would you please read out the name of the body - it is on
23 the cover page of the census - the body which has published this census.
24 A. The results of this census -- of this census were published by the
25 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the State Republic Statistics
1 Administration. But this information came out in 1993.
2 JUDGE ORIE: May I just interrupt you. Would you mind to have the
3 document on the ELMO and read it from there so that we also can see it.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
5 Q. Perhaps in the interest of time, madam, I will -- would you agree
6 with me that the body that has published in document is the state office
7 for statistics of Bosnia and Herzegovina? That's what the -- what it
8 reads on the top of the page.
9 A. No, I don't agree with you because the 1991 census took place
10 whilst SFRY was still in one piece. And I've already explained the
11 situation in this regard.
12 Q. Would you please read the name of the body which is printed on the
13 top of the first page, the cover page. That's all I'm asking you to do,
14 madam. Just read from the cover page the name of the body which has
15 published this census. It is at the top of the page.
16 A. I can repeat: I've already read it. The Republic of Bosnia and
17 Herzegovina State Statistics administration of the Republic of Bosnia and
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
20 THE INTERPRETER: We are sorry. There were several speakers
21 speaking at the same time.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I don't mind this. But to
23 make the witness to read and reread and then reread once again the witness
24 one and the same thing, I don't think this is particularly productive.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's not a -- such disastrous that it would
1 need an intervention. There seems to be some -- some misunderstanding.
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President. I will go on to my
3 next question.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
6 Q. Would you please turn to the next page, madam, page 2. Can you
7 read out what it says there. Does it indicate that it is the final
8 statistics? Is the word "final statistics" or "final data" mentioned
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Do you see a seal there and a signature?
12 A. Yes, I do.
13 Q. Who has signed that document, the position of the person who has
15 A. Hasan Zoljic.
16 Q. And what was his position?
17 A. Well, presumably the director of the statistics administration or
19 Q. Do you recognise that seal on the document?
20 A. Yes, of course I do.
21 Q. So would you agree that it is an official document giving out
22 final statistics?
23 A. I disagree with that statement. Why? Because the 1991 census
24 took place whilst the Federation still existed, and all the official data
25 were verified by the central statistics administration in Belgrade, which
1 was the state institution of the Federation as a whole. And since, all
2 the data after that, were also published at the republican level at the
3 time when the political situation was not stable, leads me to believe that
4 this data, these figures, are the figures of the republics, rather than
5 the figures provided by the Federation or arrived at by federal bodies as
6 had been -- as was to be the case in the census of 1991.
7 Q. Very well. I'll move on.
8 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Sorry, Ms. Mahindaratne. As we are talking
9 about the statement that we have on the ELMO and we don't have the
10 translation, could you ask the witness or the interpreters to translate
11 the statement.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Your Honour.
13 Q. Madam, could you read out the statement on page 2 in full.
14 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you to do it slowly because we know that
15 while reading, speed goes up usually.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Page 2: "Foreword, preface. This
17 is one in a series of bulletins published by the state statistics
18 administration of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina relative to the
19 census of the population, household, residential units, and farms in 1991.
20 The bulletin encompasses the final results, the final data on the
21 ethnicity of the population per settlement." And then "Sarajevo, December
22 1993, director Hasan Zoljic."
23 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
24 Q. Thank you, madam. In reference to a question about the Markale
25 incident --
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, this is not directly related to
2 a question from the Bench but following from a response given by the
3 witness to a question from the Defence.
4 JUDGE ORIE: You may formulate the question. We'll then decide
5 whether the witness can answer the question.
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Q. You referred to a report of the Secretary-General of 15th of
8 November, 1999 where you claim the report refers to the Markale shell
9 being fired from the, to use your own words, "the BH side." My question
10 to you is: Did I understand you well? Is that date correct, 15th
11 November 1999?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. What is this report? Do you know the number of the report?
14 Generally the Secretary-General's report bears a particular number. Could
15 you give out the number of that report.
16 A. May I switch on my computer, and then I'll -- and I'll give you
17 the exact number. It deals with the response to resolution 53/35.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may consult your computer if you stored your
19 data in that.
20 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Here it is. The number of the
23 document, A54/549. If you want me to, I can show you the document.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I see that you have a laptop showing the
25 document. I see that you have a copy. What --
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is an official UN document.
2 [Trial Chamber confers]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I wonder whether we could peruse
5 this document. Perhaps --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we could do another thing. If we would
7 have an early break, we perhaps could have it printed and then it's
8 available in printed form that comes from our library or from the laptop
9 of Professor Guskova.
10 Yes. Ms. Pilipovic, we might even have a CD-ROM copy.
11 Yes. So the number is available now to the Prosecution.
12 Did you have any further questions?
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
16 Q. Could you read the relevant portion of that report where it states
17 that the explosion, and to use your word, that it had either originated
18 from the Bosnian side or it was due to an impact on the spot? And that is
19 as I recall the words used by you. Could you read that particular portion
20 which due to you assert your position.
21 A. What I read out to you was the quotation.
22 Q. Yes. In fact you referred to the paragraph -- you say paragraph
23 119. It is --
24 A. 119, yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If -- if we want to pay attention to the
1 specific text of this document, should it then not be printed out during
2 the break and that we -- because that's an easier way of dealing with it.
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Would you have any other questions on any other
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes. Just one more, Mr. President. I'll move
7 on and then come back.
8 JUDGE ORIE: If you would move to that and then perhaps we'll have
9 an early break and then look at the document.
10 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
11 Q. Madam, you stated that those who claim to be Yugoslavian were
12 mostly of Serbian origin. Isn't it the case that the Yugoslav census were
13 all based on self-declaration and not on an analysis of ancestry,
14 religion, or name? Isn't that the case?
15 A. Yes, it is.
16 Q. And you referred to surveys -- you referred to sociological and
17 ideological surveys which confirmed this fact. Could you refer to such a
18 survey conducted by a particular body that you --
19 JUDGE ORIE: May I just ask you. It's not my recollection that
20 the witness referred to ideological surveys but, rather, statistical --
21 statistical analysis. Or am I wrong?
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I've written out those two words,
23 Mr. President, and perhaps --
24 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We object to this question. I
2 will explain briefly why. I think that the witness has told us why the
3 distribution of the statistics. I think that the witness explained it
4 quite clearly. I do not remember exactly. But I do not remember any
5 mention of any ideological movements.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Prosecution is now asking for specification
7 of the sources the witness relied upon when testifying that it was
8 mainly -- I think you said mainly Serbs or children of mixed marriages.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I will rephrase my question.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You're now specifically asking for the source of this
11 research on which you base your -- yes, you may answer that question.
12 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: Mr. President, just a minute, please.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 JUDGE NIETO-NAVIA: On page 33, 1 it says "sociological surveys
15 and studies."
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, not ideological.
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I beg your pardon if I'm --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, we all understand that you didn't rely on
19 ideological research. Please answer the question whether you have any
20 specific research sources for your conclusion.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It is my footnote 91, and it is a
22 book of a leading expert on ethnic issues in the Balkan peninsula called
23 "Ethnic aspects of the present Balkan crisis." We now already have a book
24 out, and it was a research done for the purpose of the doctoral thesis,
25 doctoral dissertation.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Any further questions, Ms. Mahindaratne?
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: One more, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
5 Q. Are you aware of the methodology employed by the -- the author of
6 this book you referred to, from which you've derived this information
7 which has assisted that person to arrive at a conclusion that most of the
8 Yugoslavs were of Serbian origin? What is the methodology used by that
10 A. What I can tell you is that there is such a methodology, and it
11 has to do with mathematical statistics, with mathematical statistics. In
12 that branch of science there are certain formula which then allow one to
13 draw certain conclusions about the future or, rather, which allow to make
14 forecasts about future populations. But I never mastered that methodology
15 because I never studied statistics.
16 Q. So is it your position that you are not aware of this formula that
17 would assist one to arrive at a conclusion that most of the -- most of
18 those who declare themselves to be Yugoslavian are in fact of Serbian
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I object.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I object. The witness is a
23 historian and shouldn't be asked whether she's aware of the formula used
24 by sociologists or other scientists.
25 JUDGE ORIE: The witness testified that she relied on the data but
1 also on the conclusions, which I understand to be that you are aware of
2 the data, that you are aware of the conclusions drawn by statistical
3 experts but you did not do the job again.
4 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
5 JUDGE ORIE: If that is the testimony, I think the question is --
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I have one last question, Mr. President, and
7 then I will come back to the earlier topic after the break.
8 Q. Does the source you refer to -- does the source you refer to
9 contain the statistics to assist one to rely on such a conclusion or the
11 A. Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you.
13 Questioned by the Court:
14 JUDGE ORIE: Before we have a bit of an earlier break, I would
15 like to put one or two more questions to you. The book of Dr. Owen you
16 referred to, do you know whether there are several versions of that book
17 or is there one version? And did you read an English version?
18 A. I read this book in the Serbo-Croatian language.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You quoted in the footnote -- you quoted the
20 title of this book in English, but you read it in Serbo-Croatian, I do
22 A. [No audible response]
23 THE INTERPRETER: The witness nods.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please say aloud that you agree,
25 because it's difficult for the translators to interpret nodding.
1 On the relevant part of the --
2 A. Excuse me. May I ask you which footnote number are you referring
4 JUDGE ORIE: I am now referring to footnote 695. But I would
5 first like to draw your attention to the relevant part of your report that
6 is about the book of Lord Owen in the paragraph on Markale. Have you
7 found it?
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Could I have the page number,
10 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... 54.
11 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Where it reads, "According to the --"
13 A. The book was referred to in the Serbo-Croatian language.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just have a look. It's footnote 695. It says
15 "Owen, D, 'Balkans Odyssey,' English translation".
16 A. I believe that the footnotes were translated for you into English.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 A. That's my presupposition.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 A. The book was read by me in Serbo-Croatian or Bosnian as well.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You refer on page 54 to page 291. It says 695,
22 page 291. However, in footnote 695, you refer to page 410.
23 A. No. This is the total number of pages in the book. I give the
24 full, bibliographical description of the source.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course I do not know -- are you now
1 referring to the English translation having 410 pages or the version you
2 have read to contain 410 pages?
3 A. 410 pages can be found in the book which I read in B/C/S.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm asking you this because -- but that might
5 be a coincidence that in an English version of this book which contains
6 far more than 410 pages it is exactly at page 410 that we find the first
7 mentioning of the Markale incident. But you say that must be a
9 A. No. 410, this is the total number of pages.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Would you be able to provide the Chamber the version
11 of this book you have read so that we can verify some questions, because
12 my next question would be that in the English version of the book it
13 reads, as far as the conclusion of the ballistic expert is concerned, "A
14 senior ballistic expert in Zagreb has studied a map of likely trajectory
15 patterns produced by UN investigators in Sarajevo and believed the angle
16 at which the mortar had hit the roof of the market stall indicated that
17 the firing point was more likely to be 1100 to 2.000 metres from the
18 impact than 2.000 to 3.000 metres and that this would tend to indicate
19 that the mortar had been fired from a Bosnian army position." Could I ask
20 you whether you understand this part I just read as an expression of
21 probabilities rather than of firm conclusions.
22 A. Yes, I absolutely understood everything what you just read.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Now, how do we have to understand your testimony
24 where you earlier said that it was not a matter of probabilities that Lord
25 Owen describes as the conclusion of his ballistic expert, whereas you now
1 say this text I just read to you seems to refer to probabilities rather
2 than to firm conclusions? Have you read a version of the book which is
3 badly translated, or did you make a mistake, or how do I have to -- how
4 does this Chamber have to understand this? Should we further investigate
5 the difference in the versions of the book of Lord Owen, or would you
6 reconsider your testimony as to what Lord Owen has written?
7 A. In our joint collaborations, we started with saying that this was
8 not a quote.
9 JUDGE ORIE: No.
10 A. That is why during the comparison of versions it's quite
11 possible -- let us compare the two versions of the book and come to some
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would you be willing to provide your version,
14 the version of the book you used, to the Chamber?
15 A. Unfortunately, I do not have a copy with me here.
16 JUDGE ORIE: You have a copy with you?
17 A. No.
18 JUDGE ORIE: No. Well, the trial is not over today, as you might
19 be aware of. Would there be a possibility to provide it? Otherwise,
20 we'll try to find a way to get a copy. But if you provide it, we'll be
21 certain that this is the copy you used. That's the reason why I'm asking
22 you. It avoids whatever confusion. And of course you'll get it back.
23 A. Yes. But in which manner can I obtain it now from Moscow? I have
24 to go back to Moscow tomorrow for sure.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But perhaps you could send it or have it
1 delivered by -- by courier or -- there might be ways of getting the book
2 to The Hague, although you are in Moscow.
3 A. Do you have a copy in the Serbo-Croatian language?
4 JUDGE ORIE: We'll have to investigate that. But if we could not
5 find such a copy, would you be willing to, even if it would be
6 temporarily, provide the copy you have used?
7 A. I'm not afraid that I will never get my copy back. The question
8 is that I will not have enough time to provide it to you today.
9 JUDGE ORIE: No. No. I don't expect you to do it today.
10 That's -- I understand that that's impossible. But at a later time.
11 Well, let's say within a week or ten days. It's just for -- it's just
12 for --
13 A. Yes. If I have ten days, then of course this would be possible.
14 Tomorrow I have to go back to Moscow. I can come back, if you like, some
15 other day.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it's not -- I'm not saying that it's necessary
17 to come back and testify about it, but the Chamber might be interested in
18 comparing the versions in order to better understand the testimony you've
19 given. Yes?
20 Then we also could check some of the other quotes you made, and
21 perhaps I'll read them to you so see whether you have any comment. You
22 did quote, "More than anything else, they were afraid that this
23 information would become known to Russians or Serbs." That's what your
24 report quotes as the book of Lord Owen. Whereas, in my version I read,
25 "The trouble with that --" and that is preventing a press leak -- "the
1 trouble with that response was that among the UN in Sarajevo, the
2 information was more widely known and there was every chance that it would
3 reach the Russians as well as the Bosnian Serbs," which is not -- at least
4 not literally the same. Would you have any comment on the text I just
5 read to you and the text you used?
6 A. I do not see any contradictions in your statements and mine.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I'm not saying that there is a major contradiction,
8 although there are differences. But I'm wondering whether using a quote,
9 that's where one usually would expect a literal quotation of the text, and
10 this text is at least longer and not exactly the same.
11 A. I suggest to reserve this issue for the time when this book
12 reaches you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then my final question is that you did not
14 quote the part on page 410 where Lord Owen writes that -- "However,
15 UNPROFOR military experts after analysing the explosion crater had not so
16 far been able to determine with certainty exactly where the mortar had
17 been launched from." That's what my text says, and you did not make
18 reference to that, as far as I remember.
19 A. Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Why did you pay specific attention to those
21 parts of the book where you find that UN sources would consider the point
22 of firing to be on the Serbian -- to be on the BiH side, and why did you
23 not pay attention to other passages in the book where one could at least
24 find a different opinion that it was uncertain where it came from?
25 A. My task was - and I believe that I managed to achieve it - to
1 bring about doubts with regard to the correctness of the decision and
2 conclusion which was predominant with regard to the fact that this crime
3 had been committed by the Serbs, the military ones. My goal was to find
4 at least some mention of this event which would be different from the
5 official version, and quite obviously that as a next stage it would be
6 necessary to attempt to find that document which is mentioned by
7 Mr. Yasushi Akashi and which is also mentioned in other sources as well by
8 other authors. In particular, I have in mind the official version and the
9 mentions of the unofficial version which also exist. I believe that only
10 this could somehow influence the objectiveness of the Court.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand you well that you considered it
12 to be your task to -- well, to say to counterbalance the official
13 information and to present material that would contradict that official
14 version. Is that a correct understanding?
15 A. You understood me quite well.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, we've located the UN
19 Secretary-General's report.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And after the break we could have sufficient
22 copies to pass around.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In order to speed up, since this is an official
24 document, we could have copies already so that we can use our break as
25 efficiently as possible.
1 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you're standing -- oh, you're just waiting
2 until I announce the next break?
3 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] No, Mr. President. Not yet.
4 But if you haven't finished your new series of questions would mean that
5 we would have one or two questions to put to these -- to this witness.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You may put these questions to the witness now. And
7 then after the break the only thing we'll deal with is the UN
8 report -- no, perhaps we'll first have a break, because it might be too
9 long for the translators. I always get a bit confused when exactly to
10 have a break.
11 We'll adjourn and --
12 Yes, Mr. Ierace.
13 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, just in relation to those photocopies.
14 I expect they'll be brought down in five minutes. Perhaps we can give
15 copies to Madam Registrar to be taken to your chambers.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If that could be done, and if the Defence would
17 then also have these documents.
18 We'll adjourn until five minutes to 1.00.
19 --- Recess taken at 12.31 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 12.55 p.m.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness be brought into the courtroom.
22 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, please proceed. There is a copy of
24 the relevant part of the document available.
25 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President. I think we have
1 distributed copies around.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Perhaps a copy could be handed over to the
5 Further cross-examination by Ms. Mahindaratne:
6 Q. Madam, this is the relevant portion of the report that you were
7 referring to when you spoke of the UN Secretary-General reporting on the
8 Markale incident, that is, document A54/549 dated 15th November 1999. You
9 identified the copy you've just been shown as the same source you were
10 referring to?
11 A. Well, maybe yes. Quite possibly. But I have a Russian version of
12 the text.
13 Q. Would you please read paragraph 119. You don't have to read the
14 whole paragraph. The relevant portion is about the sixth line from the
15 bottom of the page. It starts with, "The UNPROFOR commander."
16 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please read it in Russian so that we can
17 check right away whether the Russian version is the same as the English.
18 And could you please read slowly the line beginning with, "The UNPROFOR
19 commander however." Yes?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I think that the version would be
21 the same because this is an official UN translation. "The UNPROFOR
22 commander told them that the investigation carried out by the United
23 Nations organisation of the bomb crater at the market indicated that the
24 bomb had been launched from the Bosnian side of the battle lines or
25 possibly detonated on the site. In fact, the subsequent analysis
1 overruled that conclusion. However, his suggestion was apparently
2 effective since after some additional pressure from the side of the
3 UNPROFOR commander the Bosnians also agreed to the cease-fire conditions,
4 which as they believed were unfavourable for them."
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I just ask you. There was, I noticed, one
6 difference in language. The translation said "told them that the United
7 Nations investigation," whereas I read "the first United Nations
8 investigation." Does the Russian version also speak of the first United
9 Nations investigation?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The first investigation of the
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Q. Well, madam, the reference is to a statement -- the UNPROFOR
15 command is not referring to an investigation carried out, the first
16 investigation, but he has told them -- the words are -- I will repeat to
17 you, "The UNPROFOR commander, however, told them that the first United
18 Nations investigation of the bomb crater in the marketplace indicated that
19 the bomb had been fired from the Bosnian side of the battle lines or
20 perhaps detonated in situ." However, in your evidence, you referred to
21 the Secretary-General of the United Nations organisation reporting that
22 the studies -- of the United Nations organisation of the crater of the
23 explosion --
24 THE INTERPRETER: Will the counsel please speak into the
25 microphone. The interpreters could not follow.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, if you would please --
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I beg your pardon, Mr. President.
3 Q. Your testimony was that the Secretary-General of the United
4 Nations spoke of an investigation whereby it has been found that the bomb
5 had been launched from the Bosnian side or it had been detonated on the
6 spot. However, the reference here in this report is to a statement made
7 by the UNPROFOR commander to the two parties. Do you agree that there is
8 a difference in your testimony and what is in this report?
9 A. Well, here it is referred to the UN Secretary-General's report in
10 which, and then I quote.
11 Q. Now, why is it that you in referring to this particular portion in
12 the report, why did you omit to mention the continuation, the second
13 sentence which goes on to say "in fact, subsequent analysis contradict
14 this finding," that portion? Why is it that you selected only the first
15 part which speaks of the first investigation and not the subsequent one?
16 What was the reason?
17 A. Well, I wanted to ask you to have a look at this document
18 yourself, and I would presume that you had not seen the document before.
19 And I just wanted to draw your attention to this so that you get
20 interested in this, because we are all familiar with the official version
21 and it would be rather hard to expect to see in an official UN document
22 any failure to mention the official version or any overruling of the
23 official version. For us it is important to know that this is another
24 proof for the existence of that possible document which we spoke about
1 Q. Madam, in this paragraph there is a reference to footnote 11, that
2 is, in relation to the paragraph -- or the first -- in relation to the
3 sentence with regard to the first investigation. Do you know what this
4 footnote 11 refers to, what the source is? Do you have that source
5 material in your computer?
6 A. I will have a look. Maybe, yes.
7 All right. I've found it.
8 Q. Could you please state what the source material is.
9 A. Here there is reference to the book by Michael Rose.
10 Q. Have you read the book written by General Michael Rose, that is,
11 this particular source material?
12 A. Unfortunately although I do have a copy of that book, I did not
13 have a chance to read the full volume of the book. I only read portions
14 thereof or interviews about it.
15 Q. Did you refer to the particular portion -- portion which is
16 referred to in this footnote 11 in order to verify the source reference or
17 perhaps what is stated -- what was in fact stated by Michael Rose?
18 A. I have that book, but it's not in English.
19 Q. Yes. Well, my question to you is: Did you read -- did you refer
20 to the particular portion in this book which was the basis for this
21 statement in this report? Have you read it? I'm not asking about the
22 whole book but the relevant portion.
23 A. No, I did not read that.
24 Q. Did you read any portion of that book in relation to Sir Michael
25 Rose making --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, I think you made your point.
2 Please proceed.
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
4 Q. Do you know -- I presume you probably would have --
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I withdraw that, Mr. President. I withdraw
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Any further questions?
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: If I can have just one moment, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President. No further questions.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Before giving you an opportunity, I thought that you
14 asked to verify whether the document on the laptop computer was the same
15 as the UN. Of course I am not in a position to say yes, but I would not
16 oppose against checking that.
17 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] It's not necessary any more.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Because the document has been
20 perfectly read out.
21 Further re-examination by Mr. Piletta-Zanin:
22 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, I have a few questions. The first one
23 is methodological. You wrote your report in Russian, if I have understood
24 you correctly. Yes or no?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Which language did you write it in?
2 A. In B/C/S.
3 Q. Thank you. And in order to be quite clear, when you quote - but
4 the question not that important now, so I can withdraw it. Thank you.
5 My second question is as follows: After one of your answers when
6 you said what your task was, what your objective was, Judge Orie asked you
7 to inform us what you were talking about. It was a matter of balancing
8 two points of view. My question is as follows: Is the primary objective
9 of a researcher an attempt to establish objectivity?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Is that what you did in the course of your work?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I have no further questions.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then I have a very final question for you.
16 Questioned by the Court:
17 JUDGE ORIE: You said that you were successful in counterbalancing
18 the official version of what has been said and you told us so in response
19 to a question why you did emphasise certain aspects of the events and did
20 not make any mention of other aspects of the events. Now, could you
21 reconcile your last answer to the question of Defence counsel with the
22 earlier answer given as to that you were successful in counterbalancing.
23 A. My task was to assist the Court to -- or to draw the attention to
24 the fact that there are several ways to explain the events. And if I may,
25 I would like to draw a parallel to Markale II. If Colonel Demurenko in
1 due time, at his own initiative or the initiative of an officer of the
2 Russian Battalion, had not conducted his own investigation of the events,
3 then there would be also the official version that this had happened from
4 the Serbian side. This did not happen in Markale I, but obviously there
5 is a document which could shake us up with regard to the official
6 position. That is why I deem my work as successful, due to the fact that
7 I have managed to alert you to the possibility that a parallel version
8 could exist. I am profoundly convinced that it is within the competence
9 of the Tribunal and the Tribunal is capable of tracing and finding that
10 document which is mentioned both by Mr. Akashi and David Rose [as
11 interpreted] and David Owen as well.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no further questions for you, this
15 concludes your evidence in this --
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, if I could just have a moment.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: We do have the book referred to by General
20 Michael Rose. So perhaps --
21 JUDGE ORIE: The English version on the B/C/S version?
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: The English version, Mr. President. Perhaps --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Since the witness -- I take it that --
24 Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we should have
1 spoken about this earlier on. We can't go back to these matters all the
2 time. I think it's a little late now.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No, it's not -- I don't think that Ms. Mahindaratne
4 wants to put any questions to her but just wants to offer to the Chamber
5 the possibility of checking what versions of this book exists.
6 It comes from the library?
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President. It's Mr. Ierace's personal
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's the 1995 English version of the book?
10 MS. MAHINDARATNE: 1999 -- no, Mr. President. The page references
11 are different, Mr. President. This is the 1998 edition, Mr. President.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The parties are invited to check in the
13 published versions of this book whether it needs any further attention.
14 As far as I'm aware of, the English version was first published in 1995
15 and then the B/C/S version was published in 1996, but we don't have to pay
16 specific attention to it now.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, would the Prosecution be
19 permitted to read out the relevant passages to the witness in order to
20 bring it into the correct context?
21 JUDGE ORIE: Is it -- is it -- are these versions -- is it
22 different from what I read to the witness?
23 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, this is the book by General
24 Michael Rose.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Oh, Michael Rose. I'm totally confused, as a matter
1 of fact. Yes. You are talk about footnote 11 in the UN report.
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I have to apologise that I was not aware of -- of
5 Mr. Piletta-Zanin, you would oppose I think --
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Objection.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, for what reasons?
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. Mr. President, either
9 we'll reopen the debate all the time. But if the debate is over, it's
10 over. We can't look for a book and then say if I'd have been aware of
11 this, I'd have done something else. Either we should proceed immediately,
12 put these questions immediately, or we shouldn't proceed at all like this.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I think, as a matter of fact, this source came up
14 during the examination and it's just a matter of verification so that it
15 will be clear.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE ORIE: In order to clarify the issue, Ms. Mahindaratne,
18 it's -- my recollection is not clear whether we have heard the literal
19 text of footnote 11. Not yet, I think. So if the witness has the
20 document with her, the UN document A54/549. If you would please read for
21 us aloud footnote 11, and then I will allow you to confront the witness
22 with the relevant part of the book.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Can you hear me?
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Defence counsel is opposed to
3 this. Apart from matters of methodology, though we -- we object for the
4 simple reason that this witness said that she hadn't read this book. So
5 why read it out to her again if she said she hadn't read it? What can we
6 adduce from this since she said she hadn't read it?
7 JUDGE ORIE: Since the -- since the witness has referred to this
8 UN document, that having been -- having partly read the book, that her
9 comments could be asked when we know exactly the content of footnote 11
10 and if we know the content of the source in a book.
11 So would you please, Professor Guskova, would you please read
12 footnote 11 of the UN report literally, and then Ms. Mahindaratne will
13 quote a part of the book of Michael Rose. Yes? Please proceed.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This footnote does not have the
15 quote. It is only a footnote with reference to the page.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please again -- is that a full copy
17 of --
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President. The full copy of the
19 report is here.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Could we just have a look at it.
21 In front of me is what seems to be the full text of the document
22 of which we have been presented a part. And I'll read -- I'll give it to
23 the Defence after I've read it.
24 Footnote 11 refers to pages 48 to 49 of a book which is mentioned
25 in footnote 8, which is "Michael Rose, 'Fighting for peace,'" published in
1 London 1998. The Defence is --
2 Would you then please read, Ms. Mahindaratne, what you think to be
4 THE INTERPRETER: Could it be put on the ELMO, please.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Usher, could you please.
6 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The Defence counsel was a bit
9 surprised by the production of documents which weren't complete. Could we
10 have a copy of the page that we're going to read out. That would be a
11 minimum required by courtesy.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I have the book here, Mr. President. I'm not
13 in a position to take a photocopy at this very moment. But I could
14 certainly have the copies provided to the Defence later on.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But then of course that would mean that the
16 witness has to be -- remain available, and she intends to travel back.
17 What we'll do -- you are travelling back tomorrow? I'm not going
18 to change that, but ...
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I must go because we have elections
20 in the academy of sciences and I have to be there.
21 JUDGE ORIE: As I have said, I'm not going to change that.
22 But -- so you're not -- you're not leaving at 2.00 this afternoon.
23 What we'll do is we'll -- Ms. Mahindaratne may read the relevant
24 pages of the book. If there -- the book should then be provided to the
25 Defence so that it can look at the whole context, and we would ask the
1 witness that if needed, if so requested by the Defence, but then
2 exclusively on the context of the part read, she could be re-called this
3 afternoon. So we have to create one way or the other a line of
5 Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.
6 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
9 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] The only thing I would like to
10 do -- it's a logical question -- is that we are provided with the date
11 when the book that is going to be read from was published.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you please confirm that it's the same
13 year as I just mentioned, Ms. Mahindaratne, or ...
14 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, it's a subsequent edition. It's
15 the 1998 edition.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I mentioned the same one, 1998.
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: 1998, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Could you try to read it from the ELMO, if it will be
19 enlarged. Then at least everyone can see it on the ELMO.
20 MS. MAHINDARATNE: For the record, Mr. President, since the year
21 of publication is different from the original --
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I --
24 JUDGE ORIE: It is suggested to me that perhaps it's better to
25 have very quickly made these two copies -- these two pages copied.
1 So if the usher could copy the two pages and prepare, I would
2 say --
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: The page references are different,
4 Mr. President, because since this is a 1998 edition, the --
5 [Prosecution counsel confer]
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Different --
7 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, two problems:
8 Because the references in the text that you have here, it refers to 1998.
9 So if it's not the same thing, then we'll have to be -- then this could
10 result in confusion.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It is not impossible that in 1998 some
12 subsequent versions were published.
13 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, if I could respond, simply because I'm
14 perhaps more familiar with the contents of the book.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. IERACE: I don't know whether the edition referred to in the
17 UN report is a hard cover. I know this is a soft cover. Chapter 2,
18 according to the contents, deals with the bombing of the marketplace.
19 That commences at page 61.
20 On my reading of the book there are two relevant passages.
21 An alternative course if you're uncomfortable with using this book
22 is that if we come back at 3.00 we may be able to locate the same edition,
23 the same version which is referred to in the report.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE ORIE: We'd prefer that then to be done.
1 Then I have to ask you, unfortunately, to come back at --
2 At what time do we start, Madam Registrar, this afternoon? At
4 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
5 JUDGE ORIE: We'd have to ask you, although I really apologise for
6 the -- to come back at 3.00 again.
7 Is there any other question to be put to this --
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
10 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I can't foresee
11 the future. It all depends on the answers and the extent of the questions
12 that the Prosecution will put to the witness.
13 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ...
14 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] But with this reservation, no.
15 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... Of course
16 that goes without saying, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
17 Professor Guskova, you would like to say something.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It seems to me that this discussion
19 is not particularly fruitful because I referred to the communication, or
20 rather, the report of the Secretary-General. And whatever we quote now
21 from Michael Rose's book, it will -- it can again give rise to questions
22 addressed to Secretary-General, rather than to me.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand. But you're an expert. You
24 might have knowledge of what is in the sources of the UN report. And what
25 the parties are doing at this moment is to verify the sources you have
1 used. And although it's clear that you exclusively used the UN document,
2 that the underlying source mentioned in footnote 11 might shed a new light
3 on the issue on which you might have any comments. We do not know yet.
4 It has not been yet read to us, though that's the use of this exercise.
5 And I'm fully aware that you did not use yourself the underlying source.
6 We'll then adjourn until 3.00. Same courtroom.
7 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.31 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 3.01 p.m.
9 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber was informed that there are good reasons
10 to finish this court hearing after this witness.
11 And General Galic, I'm glad that at least you indicate when you
12 feel that we should stop, that you feel free to do so.
13 Therefore, I would like to ask Mr. Usher to escort the witness
14 into the courtroom.
15 Mr. Ierace.
16 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, might I just take advantage of the
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 MR. IERACE: To put on the record that in relation to the Defence
20 expert report on the shelling, there are references to three maps, at
21 pages 24, 61, and 61 again. We've only been served with one map. We'd be
22 grateful for the other two. Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that the Defence has noted the
24 request and will adequately respond.
25 Madam --
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Unfortunately I have not been able to find the
4 original edition, the first edition that was published in 1998. The
5 edition we have is the second edition, which has been in fact published in
6 1999. I made a mistake earlier on when I said 1998. And by a different
7 publisher. And therefore the page references could be different to what
8 has been referred in the report of the Secretary-General. I wonder,
9 Mr. President, if whether you would still permit the Prosecution to put
10 that ...
11 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber then would not like -- let's not forget
12 what the issue is about. It is a source used by the Secretary-General in
13 his report, a source on which this expert witness has not specifically
14 relied. Therefore, to further explore the matter with all the risks of
15 confusion as to what the source exactly is is not something the Chamber
16 would allow you to do.
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I take it that you have no further
20 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No further questions.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I -- Madam Guskova, this was a shorter
22 continuation of your examination than you would have expected and I would
23 have expected, and it is -- I also have to apologise to you,
24 General Galic, that you had to wait for over one hour, especially when you
25 didn't feel that well and as a matter of fact, for just these two minutes
1 in court. I'm not happy that it was necessary.
2 Madam Guskova, this then concludes your testimony in court. I
3 would like to thank you for answering for a long period of time a lot of
4 questions both from the parties and the Bench. And I hope tomorrow you
5 have a safe flight home again.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Ierace.
8 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, before we adjourn, I wonder where
9 leaves us in terms of witnesses for next week, whether the first witness
10 will be Dr. Kuljic or having regard to Mr. Gray's arrival, he will not be.
11 [The witness withdrew]
12 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Pilipovic, could you tell us who will be the
14 MS. PILIPOVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I cannot tell you
15 right now. I have been informed that Mr. Kuljic was scheduled for Monday.
16 He is here. I don't know whether he can stay until Monday, but we had
17 Professor Dunjic scheduled for Monday, and your assistant told us that
18 they were planning to leave Dr. Kuljic for Monday and that Mr. Gray would
19 be first after him. I don't even know whether Mr. -- Professor Dunjic,
20 who was scheduled for Monday, can come for that day or whether
21 Mr. Kuljic can stay until -- until Monday. I have to check all that and
22 then I will inform the Court and my learned colleagues, my learned
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you could please do that. I take it that
25 this would be -- well, perhaps since Mr. Gray did not arrive yet, that you
1 might have some uncertainties. But could you do -- make a proposal how to
2 proceed this afternoon when possible, because then everyone will be in a
3 position to adequately prepare for next Monday.
4 MR. IERACE: Mr. President, finally the matter of exhibits in
5 relation to the last witness. Do you want to tender those now or --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we could do that right away now. But I
7 wonder -- I wanted to --
8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Before dealing with these documents, first of all
10 the --
11 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin, is there ...?
12 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Two
13 things. The first one is simply -- the first one, I am expecting a sign
14 from the library. We know that Mr. Galic does not always feel well. It
15 surprises us that we are waiting for a book to find out whether a page is
16 this or that, whereas I believe that a simple call to the library would
17 have allowed us to know whether this book was here or not. And we
18 wouldn't have lost all this time.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
20 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] I have to say --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin, I can tell you that during the
22 lunch break efforts have been made to retrieve the book not only from our
23 library, where it was not available, but perhaps from other libraries, and
24 I even have seen some people on bicycles for that reason. So it's not
25 that easy, and I think I dealt with the matter when I said to General
1 Galic that I deplored that this was necessary and that the Chamber would
2 have wished that it would have taken a different course. That's enough
3 for that matter.
4 Is there anything else you'd like to ...?
5 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Very well. The second thing,
6 and it again has to do with the following: We noticed that again there
7 are new documents which were tendered in their truncated version and that
8 they were not quite identical with the document which was included in the
9 paper by expert Donia. We would, therefore, like to see page 2 and
10 quickly as well, so that we can finally deal with this document. And we'd
11 like to see it in its -- in its complete form, and we'd like to thank the
12 Prosecution if they can give us -- give it to us. We'd also like to know
13 what happened to page 2 of the new document or what is it? The same page
14 2 as the page 2 of the document which one can find in the transcript of
15 Mr. Donia. If it's not the same page, then what page 2 is it?
16 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous interpretation continues] ... To that.
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Mahindaratne.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I think the page was provided on a previous
20 date, and it is the same document which is in footnote 89 of
21 Dr. Robert Donia's report. It has already been tendered in evidence.
22 It's now in evidence in court.
23 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes. But my learned friend,
24 are you quite positive? Because if we compare the two documents,
25 Mr. President - and that is why I'm raising this matter - that I see that
1 the origin of the two documents is not identical. That is, the document
2 which was produced under P3413 has a stamp which is a stamp of an
3 institute in Sarajevo, which, however, does not appear on the other
4 document and which was belatedly disclosed.
5 However, in the second document -- also, in the second document
6 there are some underlined passages which are not in the earlier document,
7 so therefore we simply wanted to know whether these two documents are
8 identical or not. Perhaps we should like to hear from the Prosecution
9 what can they do in order to establish whether these two documents are one
10 and the same or not.
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: May I respond, Mr. President?
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Certainly the fact that there are two different
14 ERN numbers show that they are from two different sources. But they are
15 identical. Perhaps if the Defence wishes, if both documents are compared,
16 the Defence would be satisfied that there is no difference between these
17 two documents. The fact that there are two ERN numbers shows that they're
18 not from the same source, but they are the same document.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could I just have a look at the annex to the
20 report of Dr. Donia.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Footnote number 83, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I knew that, Ms. Mahindaratne, since I
23 indicated that it was footnote 83.
24 What we see is that the document -- the incomplete document that
25 was presented to the witness -- expert witness Guskova was a document with
1 a -- with two stamps on it: One stamp of the command of the 1st Partisan
2 Brigade and an additional stamp of Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina
3 Institute for Research of Crimes against Humanity and International Law in
4 Sarajevo. That looks very much as if it has been stored for -- at least
5 that's what the stamp says -- for research reasons; whereas, the other
6 document that has been admitted into evidence as an annex - that's annex
7 83 to the report of Dr. Donia - has the same or at least at first eye
8 stamp that looks entirely similar, both in the stamp part and in the
9 written part. In the stamp it looks entirely similar to the other one but
10 on which we do not see a stamp of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina
11 Institute for Research of Crimes.
12 Since the document is in its complete version, at least in a
13 version with page 2 in it, has been admitted into evidence, I wonder
14 whether the Prosecution still wants to tender the new version of the
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If the Prosecution does not tender the new
18 document, the Defence, of course, has seen this document now. And if
19 there's any reason to comment on either the translation or whatever which
20 would cast a different light on the document originally tendered and
21 admitted into evidence through the expert witness, Mr. Donia, we'd like to
22 receive a short written submission to what extent this would need further
24 Yes, Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
25 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Yes, Mr. President. Very
1 briefly. I believe that at the time this document which had to do with
2 Dr. Donia's expert opinion and which was tendered in evidence, I believe
3 there was a certain discussion, now speaking from memory, and I think that
4 the Defence at that time indicated it would like to get annexes to this
5 document in the original because the signature seems pretty illegible and
6 things were not -- and the question -- the issue of the signature was
7 moot. Now, I do not know whether your Chamber took note of this issue
8 which was raised then. I'm seizing this opportunity to check that, but
9 I'm quite sure that this matter was raised and it was in particular in
10 relation to this document. In that case, of course we still stand by
11 the -- by our comment which we made at the time.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I take it that a decision finally resulted in
13 the admission into evidence of this report. If there's any reason to
14 reconsider that, then the Chamber will be glad to receive any written
15 submissions in that respect.
16 This newly -- P3413, the incomplete version, is not tendered.
17 Therefore, it is returned to the Prosecution.
18 Then we have a document which is United Nations General Assembly
19 document A/54/549. Does the Prosecution tender this document?
20 [Prosecution counsel confer]
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, the Prosecution wishes to tender
22 the Secretary-General's report which was brought forth during the last few
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MS. MAHINDARATNE: That is, the cover page of the report, the
1 report bearing number 53/35, paragraph 119 that -- that is, page 31 going
2 on to page 32, and footnotes 8 to 12.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We have -- did the Chamber receive footnotes?
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, it's in the -- the report itself
5 which was handed over earlier on.
6 JUDGE ORIE: I think I got three pages of that report. Isn't it?
7 Oh, the full -- yes, it has been given to us at a certain moment where I
8 read the text of footnote 11 in conjunction with footnote 8. I then gave
9 it to the Prosecution. No copies have been presented -- to the -- I gave
10 it to the Defence. I think it was then either returned or is it still in
11 the hands of the Defence?
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: It wasn't returned to the Prosecution,
13 Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Piletta-Zanin.
15 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] Mr. President, I believe that
16 we understand that this document was tendered as an annex to the expert
17 opinion of the witness, who has just finished her testimony, and I do not
18 see why we need to have this document in the file twice. No, no I
19 withdraw it. No. No. It was a misunderstanding on my part. My
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then where is the full copy of the report?
22 MR. PILETTA-ZANIN: [Interpretation] We had something else,
23 Mr. President.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No, I think that's the one. Yes.
25 So now, is it -- do you want to tender the entire document?
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Or the footnotes? Could you then prepare for the
3 relevant parts to be copied. I think we do not need, unless there's a
4 specific reason to have the full document tendered because it is a public
5 document after all. So the context could be reviewed by the parties, even
6 without formal tendering the other pages of this report. So if you would
7 then provide at -- in due course the front page. I see page 31, 32, and
8 the -- I think you need two pages for the footnotes.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Because the footnote 11 is on a different page from
11 footnote 8.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President.
13 JUDGE ORIE: And the both together provide the source.
14 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Footnote 8 onwards --
15 JUDGE ORIE: 11 then starts with "ibidem," which means same source
16 and the source is found in footnote 8.
17 MS. MAHINDARATNE: As well as footnote 12, Mr. President. I will
18 provide those two pages.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you do that, we'll then -- if properly
20 produced, we'll then admit them into evidence.
21 Is there any other issues? We'll not sit tomorrow because for --
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We have discussed paragraph 17 of a report of
24 the, if I remember well, the 30th of May, 1992, report of the
25 Secretary-General with the number S/24049. Does the Prosecution tender
1 that document?
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No. It's also a public document, so it always could
4 be reviewed by the parties.
5 Then, Madam Registrar, I think there are no other documents that
6 could be admitted.
7 Therefore, we'll adjourn until next Monday in the -- we'll be in
8 Courtroom I at quarter past 2.00 in the afternoon.
9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
10 at 3.24 p.m., to be reconvened on Monday,
11 the 17th day of February, 2003, at 2.15 p.m.