1 Monday, 9 June 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone. Mr. Registrar, would you
6 please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
8 everyone in the courtroom. This is IT-06-90-T, the Prosecutor versus
9 Ante Gotovina et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar. Is the Prosecution ready
11 to call its next witness?
12 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, Your Honour, the Prosecution calls
13 Mr. Jovan Vujinovic.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Gustafson. I do understand no
15 applications for protective measures.
16 MS. GUSTAFSON: That's correct, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 [The witness entered court]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Vujinovic. I'm speaking.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic, before you give evidence in this
22 court you are required to make a solemn declaration that you will speak
23 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
24 May I invite you to stand and make that solemn declaration.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly swear that I will speak
1 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
2 WITNESS: JOVAN VUJINOVIC
3 [Witness answered through interpreter]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Vujinovic. Please be seated.
5 Mr. Vujinovic, you will be first examined by Ms. Gustafson.
6 Ms. Gustafson is sitting to your right. There she is.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can see her.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson, please proceed.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 Examination by Ms. Gustafson:
11 Q. Good morning, witness. Could you please state your full name for
12 the record, please.
13 A. Jovan Vujinovic, my father's name, late Jovan from Oton.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: If the witness could be provided with hard copies
15 of his statements in B/C/S and if he could be shown 65 ter 4920, please.
16 A. I've read it already. It doesn't really matter. Go ahead.
17 Q. Mr. Vujinovic, on the screen in front of you and in the first
18 hard copy statement you have there, do you recognise this as a statement
19 you made and signed on the 20th of January, 1999?
20 A. I do.
21 Q. Now, on page 2 of that statement, in the middle of page 2, you
22 described how you were taken by soldiers to a building near the Oton
23 railway stop on the morning of the 18th of August, 1995, and I'd like to
24 read a passage from your statement to you and give you an opportunity to
25 correct it.
1 In your statement you said, "When these soldiers were leaving
2 they took me with them. The soldiers took me to their HQ, i.e., field
3 HQ. The HQ was in a building at a railway stop known as railway stop
4 Oton. There, I saw a number of officers, a telex machine, a mobile phone
5 in one person's hand and many other soldiers. I also saw a number of
6 military vehicles bearing HV number plates."
7 I'd like to ask you, did you consider this building to be the
8 soldier's HQ or the field HQ at the time?
9 A. I haven't understood your question.
10 Q. You explained in your statement that you were taken to an HQ at a
11 building near the railway stop in Oton. Is that correct? Did you
12 consider that to be the HQ at the time or did you consider it to be
13 something else?
14 A. It was not an HQ. It was when all the villagers escaped, it was
15 clearing up really, they were collecting cattle from houses. So it
16 wasn't really any kind of centre for soldiers, but they used it as
17 accommodations to sleep over at night, so it wasn't really any sort of
18 command. I just referred to it as a command but it wasn't really a
20 Q. Thank you. And with that correction, do you consider this
21 statement that you made in 1999 to be true and accurate to the best of
22 your knowledge?
23 A. Well, what I've just said now, that is the truth.
24 Q. And with that correction, is the statement that you made in 1999,
25 the one that's on the screen in front of you, is it true and accurate to
1 the best of your knowledge?
2 A. Yes, it is. Yes, that's how it was. This was -- I won't say
3 looting, but they were just clearing up the villages. Everything was
4 deserted. The Serbs and the paramilitary, everything was cleansed and
5 they just took stuff, what -- that's it.
6 Q. Thank you, sir. If I could ask --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic, I think it would be easier if you
8 look to Ms. Gustafson who is standing over there because she's putting
9 the questions to you.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know. I know that.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and it facilitates your communication. Please
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Q. And does this statement that you made in 1999 that's on the
15 screen, does it accurately reflect what you said at the time?
16 A. Yes, it does. That's how it was. Briefly.
17 Q. And if I asked you in court today the same questions that you
18 were asked when you made that statement, would you give the Court the
19 same answers?
20 A. Well, maybe I would have some corrections. I don't know. It
21 depends. This is it, but it depends on what you're going to ask me.
22 Q. Mr. Vujinovic, did you read this statement over in the last
23 couple of days, a few days ago?
24 A. Yes, I did.
25 Q. And apart from the correction that we just went over, if I asked
1 you the same questions today in court, would you give the same answers
2 that are in your statement?
3 A. I certainly would. Except for the error, what I said before,
4 that it was a command. It wasn't really a command nor was this active
5 troops. This was just clearing up of houses and looting, but there was
6 no killing or -- nor was this an army. It was just clearing up, taking
7 cattle away. Looting, let's call it that.
8 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could the witness be shown 65 ter number 4921,
10 Q. Mr. Vujinovic, do you recognise this statement as one that you
11 made and signed on the 12th of October, 2004?
12 A. I cannot really see this without my glasses, but go ahead, put
13 the question.
14 Q. Do you have your glasses with you?
15 A. Just ask the question.
16 JUDGE ORIE: The question is whether this is the statement you
17 gave and whether you recognise it. So you can't answer that question
18 apparently without your glasses. Do you have glasses with you?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I already read all of this before
20 and everything was correct there. You didn't add anything to it.
21 JUDGE ORIE: But my last question was whether you have your
22 glasses with you.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I don't. There is nothing to
24 read. I've read this already, yesterday and the day before yesterday and
25 even before when they came to my house to Croatia, I also read it then.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At least you think it's the same, isn't it,
2 and most likely it will be the same but we would like you to look at
3 that. Could you tell us where your glasses are?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] At home.
5 JUDGE ORIE: No glasses here in The Hague?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, there is no need, but okay,
7 if you insist, I'll read.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: Perhaps the witness could read and recognise the
10 hard copy that he has.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Usher, could you --
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Why don't you read and I will
13 answer your question. If you have it, just read it. You read it out to
14 me and then I will reply whether it's correct or not.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic -- Mr. Vujinovic, what we are trying
16 to do is to avoid that we have to go through all of this again. So if
17 you look at the statement and if you recognise it as yours, then we can
18 move on more quickly. Could you -- we are now talking about the -- this
19 statement now, the second one was --
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: 65 ter number 4921.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: Dated the 12th of October.
23 JUDGE ORIE: 12th of October.
24 Mr. Usher, have you verified that the 12th of October statement
25 is in the hands of the witness.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yeah, yeah, I can see it.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That's your statement, Mr. Vujinovic?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, whose would it be? There is
4 no one else but me.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please -- okay, Mr. Misetic.
6 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I just wanted to make one correction
7 which I think for purposes of accuracy of the record, his name is
8 misspelled on the statement. So it should be with that correction,
9 that's what the statement is.
10 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: That's true, this is the issue of the name. I
12 understood that the witness doesn't bear the same name as most of his
13 family members due to a mistake in registration when he was born. Now --
14 MR. MISETIC: I believe this morning he actually said Vujinovic
15 was his name.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Let's then verify that.
17 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, it is corrected explicitly in the
18 third statement so if it's tendered into evidence, I believe that would
19 serve --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps with the third statement, you specifically
21 ask for this point. Yes.
22 So the second one, Mr. Vujinovic, same questions. If these
23 matters would be raised again, if questions would be put to you, would
24 you give the same answers as -- I don't know whether there's any
25 correction to be made, Ms. Gustafson.
1 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, there's a similar reference to the
2 HQ but I consider that to be corrected.
3 JUDGE ORIE: To be covered. Is that understood? Yes. I see
4 Defence counsel understand the previous correction as well.
5 If we would put the same questions as you answered in that
6 statement, would you give the same answers, Mr. Vujinovic? We are now
7 talking about the second statement. Yes?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as my name is concerned,
9 it's not really my name, it's my last name. There is just an "I"
10 missing. In some places it says Vujnovic and in others it says
11 Vujinovic. And the registration was -- said Vujinovic. On the other
12 hand, everyone, all my family members are Vujnovic without the "I" and
13 lately we've tried to correct it. But as far as that is concerned, there
14 is no problem. It's the same name, there is just an error that was made
15 at registration.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Now I come back to my question. You've just been
17 shown a document of which you said who else his statement could it be.
18 If the same questions would be put to you, would you give the same
20 THE WITNESS: [No interpretation]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Ms. Gustafson, with the third and
23 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour. 65 ter number 4922 is
24 the third statement and if the usher could provide the witness with his
25 2007 statement.
1 Q. Do you recognise that, Mr. Vujinovic, as a statement that you
2 made and signed on the 4th of April, 2007?
3 A. Whatever it says in there, it's correct. If you have additional
4 questions, go ahead.
5 Q. I'd just like to make sure that you --
6 MR. CAYLEY: I'm sorry to interrupt, Your Honour, excuse me.
7 It's just previously, Mr. President, when you asked the question, there
8 was no interpretation of his answer. When you asked whether or not if
9 you were asked the same questions again you would -- it just says no
10 interpretation, it doesn't say yes or no.
11 JUDGE ORIE: To be quite honest, I heard the witness clearly say
12 "da" which means yes for me but I haven't checked whether it's on the
13 transcript. If everyone has heard the same, then I take it that we can
14 agree that he said "da." Yes. Please proceed. Thank you, Mr. Cayley.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON:
16 Q. Mr. Vujinovic, I would just like you to recognise -- to look at
17 that statement and make sure that you recognise it as yours. Do you
18 recognise it? Is that your statement?
19 A. Yes, it is my statement.
20 Q. And is it and true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
21 A. To the best of my knowledge, it should be because how could I
22 tell you about anything unless -- except on the basis of what I saw? I
23 remained all alone in the village, no one touched me. And on the 24th of
24 9th, I was in Knin. My house was set on fire and there were fires
25 everywhere. It's not really the fault of the Croatian army, they did not
1 kill, but there were fools on all sides. There were idiots on all sides
2 and my mother was killed also on the 17th, but it's not the Croatian
3 army. These were the people who looted, these idiots. They told me, you
4 know, you should go away, there are idiots everywhere but I didn't want
5 to leave. And no one ever touched me.
6 On the 24th of September, I continued working until the 1st of
7 August, 1995, I worked for the railway and then on the 24th September
8 also in 1995, I came to the office to look for some papers and -- all
10 Q. I would just like to ask you to focus as much as you can on the
11 precise question that I ask you and answer just that question.
12 A. Go ahead.
13 Q. This 2007 statement that you have in front of you, if I asked you
14 the same questions that you were asked when you gave that statement,
15 would you give the Court the same answers?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Thank you, sir. I'd like to tender those three statements into
18 evidence, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter number 04920 becomes Exhibit
21 number P412.
22 JUDGE ORIE: That's the 1999 statement. P412 is admitted into
24 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter number 04921, that's the 2004 statement,
25 becomes Exhibit P413.
1 JUDGE ORIE: P413 is admitted into evidence.
2 THE REGISTRAR: And 65 ter number 04922, that's the 2007
3 statement, becomes Exhibit number P414.
4 JUDGE ORIE: P414 is admitted into evidence.
5 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 Q. Mr. Vujinovic, the Court has your statements and they now have
7 all the information that's in your statements. So I'm just going to ask
8 you a few details about things that aren't in your statements and I'd
9 like to ask you again to focus as much as you can on the specific
10 question that I ask and direct your answer to that specific question.
11 A. Please go on.
12 Q. You explained in your statement that about 200 people lived in
13 Oton Polje before Operation Storm. What was their ethnicity?
14 A. They were all Serbs. There were no Croats. But during the war,
15 no one was wounded or killed in my village, no one was killed.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Vujinovic, try to focus precisely on the
17 question. The question was not whether people were killed but just what
18 the ethnicity of the inhabitants was. So try to -- and if Ms. Gustafson
19 wants to know more, she'll certainly ask you.
20 Please proceed.
21 MS. GUSTAFSON:
22 Q. How far was your house from the building next to the Oton railway
23 station where the soldiers were?
24 A. About 356 metres and I know because I measured the hose because I
25 took water from a water fountain there.
1 Q. Now, I'd like to ask you one or two questions about
2 Stevo Vujnovic from Oton Polje whose death you talk about in your
3 statements. And I'd just like to start with some personal details about
4 Stevo Vujnovic. Was he born in Oton or was he born elsewhere?
5 A. In Oton.
6 Q. And what was his father's name?
7 A. Ivan.
8 Q. And did he have a brother who lived in Zagreb?
9 A. Yes, in Zagreb
10 dead, only the brother Momcilo is alive. Everyone else is dead.
11 Q. What was the name of the brother who lived in Zagreb?
12 A. His name was Djuro, also Vujnovic.
13 Q. And in August 1995, was Stevo Vujnovic a soldier or was he a
15 A. He was a civilian. He wasn't in any army.
16 Q. And you've explained at paragraph 3 of your 2004 statement how
17 you found Stevo Vujnovic's body in the yard of his house and that seven
18 or eight days later, you took some policemen that were in the area to the
19 place -- to his house where his body was still lying in the same spot.
20 On that day, when you showed the policemen the location of
21 Stevo Vujnovic's body, did those policemen ask you any questions about
22 how Stevo Vujnovic had died?
23 A. They didn't ask me that question because that's 1.5 to 2
24 kilometres away from my house, so nothing was said about how he was
25 killed. I heard that later. I went to see. I saw him dead in front of
1 the house. I reported that to the police. And then after that, that
2 organisation, the Red Cross or something, they took him and wrapped him
3 up and took him away. I mean that's the whole philosophy of what
5 Q. And in your 2007 statement at paragraph 5, you explained how
6 everyone in your hamlet except for yourself and two people who were
7 infirm left Oton Polje on the 21st of August, 1995, with the assistance
8 of a Ukrainian monitor named Pero and I'd like to ask you if you had any
9 conversations with Pero when he came to your hamlet?
10 A. Pero Ukrajnici [phoen] is not correct. I spoke with him, he came
11 to see me a couple of times, drank wine and Schnapps. I said to him,
12 Pero, you drink like a Russian, do you know that expression? Because
13 when they left on the 5th, the last group left on the 5th and then it was
14 the 21st of May and he was touring the villages and then after that, he
15 went to the barracks in Knin.
16 Q. In your answer, you just said the 21st of May. Is that -- do you
17 mean the 21st of August?
18 A. The 21st of August. Yes, yes, it's a mistake.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, I'd like to you to think back to the
20 conversations you had with Pero. Did you tell Pero what had happened to
21 your mother?
22 A. Yes, yes, he was there. He came to visit me a couple of times.
23 They lived in Knin and then they would come to the villages and they
24 would drop by to my place for a drink, the soldiers were also dropping
25 by. They would eat and drink. Nobody touched me. Nobody did anything
1 to me but then on that day when there was looting and things, there was
3 Q. Did you ever report what had happened to your mother to the
4 Croatian police?
5 A. There was nothing to report. The people were going around. What
6 could I do? I reported it only when I read in something -- I still have
7 that at home, when they were asking for reparation, then I contacted a
8 lawyer in Split
9 when it was time when the case came up, they just declared that my mother
10 was killed. That was all.
11 Q. Did anyone from the Croatian police or the Croatian military ever
12 take a statement from you or ask you any questions about what had
13 happened to your mother?
14 A. I don't -- nobody asked me any questions. Well, yes, actually
15 the police came and the people from The Hague, they came, they took
16 photographs, and they told me not to touch anything around the place
17 where she was killed. And it's still the same there behind the house
18 some 80 metres away. It's not disturbed.
19 Q. You said the police came and the people from The Hague, they
20 came. And I'd like you to clarify that answer. Investigators from
21 The Hague
22 come and speak to you?
23 A. I didn't report it to the police.
24 Q. Is there a hamlet called Oton Brdo near Oton Polje?
25 A. Yes, that's also a village. It's a hamlet, Brdo, Bender and
1 Oton Polje. There is Oton Polje, Oton Brdo and Oton Bender. It's all
2 just one village and these are its hamlets. That's the -- what their
3 names are.
4 Q. Thank you. And Oton Brdo and Oton Bender, are those also Serb
6 A. Yes, Oton Brdo was a hamlet of two or three Croat houses. There
7 were two or three Croat houses there, but they also left with the Serb
9 Q. And approximately how many people lived in Oton Brdo before
10 Operation Storm?
11 A. Well, I really couldn't say that. Brdo Oton and Bender are
12 smaller hamlets than Oton Brdo.
13 THE INTERPRETER: Polje, interpreter's correction.
14 Q. Thank you. And how many people stayed behind in Oton Brdo after
15 Operation Storm?
16 A. I was there with the commission from the Knin municipality when
17 they were taking down the numbers. In Plavno, there was 131;
18 Oton Bender, there were 14 left; Oton Brdo, 33. Oton Polje where I was,
19 there was just me and a grandmother. She was sick and this international
20 community was giving her food. In Padjine, there was 16. In this
21 village, there was 26. In Raducici, 27. I went when they were taking
22 down these numbers with a lawyer from the Knin municipality and there was
23 also two lawyers from Split
24 Q. Thank you, sir. And, again, could you try and focus as much as
25 you can on the specific question that I ask you.
1 Do you know two individuals named Branko Sudar and Ilija Sudar
2 from Oton Brdo?
3 A. Yes, yes, we know each other. I don't know when they were killed
5 Q. Did they stay behind after Operation Storm?
6 A. I think that they did. Actually, I don't know if they did or
7 didn't. I don't know. All I know is that they were killed. I didn't
8 see it but I heard it and I knew this.
9 Q. When did you hear that? Approximately?
10 A. I heard it later, a month later, 15 days later. I'm not sure.
11 Q. When would that have been? You say a month later, 15 days later,
12 what month and year was it when you heard about their deaths?
13 A. Maybe -- well, it was after Storm but I have no idea when. All I
14 heard was that they were killed and then I established that they actually
16 Q. Do you know what happened to their bodies?
17 A. One of them was buried at the cemetery. As for the other one, I
18 have no idea. I don't know -- well this is in the neighbouring villages,
19 Brdo and Bender but I don't know exactly about that, but all I do know is
20 they were killed; or, rather, I heard this. I didn't see it myself.
21 Q. Do you know how old they were at the time?
22 A. Pasic and Sudar, Branko, Branko was 36 years old but I don't know
23 about the other one. I think the other one was younger. Sudar, Ilija or
24 whatever his name was, Ilija, he was older.
25 Q. Do you know a woman named Djuka Zunic from Oton Brdo?
1 A. No, I didn't know her, she was an elderly woman. I don't know if
2 somebody threw her into a well or if she drowned herself. I don't know.
3 Nobody ever determined what happened.
4 Q. You said, "I don't know if somebody threw her into a well or if
5 she drowned herself." Was her body found in a well?
6 A. Yes. Yes. So that's how they saw that she drowned.
7 Q. And approximately when was this?
8 A. I really couldn't tell you. Well, it was during that period. I
9 don't know that myself. I just heard it. I didn't see it myself.
10 Q. You said "during that period," could you be more specific, a
11 month and a year?
12 A. 1995. As for the month, I don't know if it was August or
13 September. I have no idea.
14 Q. And do you know a man named Nikola Pasic from Oton Bender?
15 A. Yes, he was a blacksmith. I knew him, he worked for the
16 railways. That's all I know about him.
17 Q. Did you hear of anything happening to him after Operation Storm?
18 A. I heard that he was killed. I didn't see it myself, but I heard
20 Q. And was this also something you heard in -- around August or
22 A. Yes.
23 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you very much, Mr. Vujinovic. Those are my
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Gustafson.
1 Usually, a summary is read. I don't know whether you for any
2 specific purpose refrained from doing it.
3 MS. GUSTAFSON: I apologise, Your Honour, it was just an
4 omission. I could read it now if that would suit the Court.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic, because the public doesn't know what
6 is in your statement, apart from what you told us in addition to these
7 statements, Ms. Gustafson will now read a summary. You don't have to
8 respond. It's not questions, it's just that everyone knows what was in
9 your statement.
10 Just listen carefully. After she's read it, you will be examined
11 by counsel for the Defence.
12 Ms. Gustafson.
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour. Thank you for the
15 Jovan Vujinovic lived in the hamlet of Oton Polje in Ervenik
16 municipality at the time of Operation Storm. Prior to Operation Storm,
17 approximately 200 people lived in 60 households in this hamlet. Most of
18 those people left the hamlet between 4th and 5th of August, 1995,
19 including everyone in the witness's family except himself and his elderly
21 Most of the approximately 17 persons who remained were elderly.
22 On 5th August, 1995
23 looting. The looting continued for several weeks.
24 On 18 August 1995
25 several hours. When he returned home, his house had been destroyed by
1 fire and he discovered his dead mother approximately 80 metres from his
2 house with three bullet holes in her face. Eleven houses in the hamlet
3 were destroyed by fire that day.
4 On 21 or 22nd August, 1995, the witness found the dead body of
5 another villager, Stevo Vujnovic lying dead in front of his house in a
6 pool of blood. Seven or eight days later, his body was still there and
7 the witness took some policemen who were in the area to the location of
8 the body. The policemen did not take the body away that day.
9 On the 21st of August, 1995, all remaining persons in Oton Polje
10 except for the witness and two others, both of whom were infirm, left
11 Oton Polje with the assistance of international monitors. The witness
12 heard that they were taken to the UN barracks in Knin and later
13 transported to Serbia
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic, you will now be cross-examined by
15 Mr. Misetic who is counsel for Mr. Gotovina.
16 Mr. Misetic, and I'm also addressing other counsel, as far as the
17 level of abstract thinking versus facts is concerned, I expect from all
18 of you to stay on the safe side.
19 MR. MISETIC: Will do, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:
23 Q. Good morning, Mr. Vujinovic.
24 A. Good morning.
25 Q. I'd like to start by asking you some questions about the first
1 day of Operation Storm which is 4 August 1995. You mention it in your
2 statement and you said that your family left around 1300 hours on the
3 4th. Do you recall that in your statement?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. You also say in your statement that they left because there were
6 RSK officials, some wearing military uniform that told the people to
7 leave because the Ustasha forces were coming. Do you recall that in your
9 A. Yes, that's what they said.
10 Q. You said in your statement that these RSK officials that were
11 wearing military uniform began to distribute fuel for the purposes of
12 leaving. Do you recall that?
13 A. Yes, I do. What do I know? That organisation that was there was
14 distributing this to uniforms and civilians. I don't know exactly how it
15 was. In any case, they were distributing it and there were threats that
16 they needed to leave. Actually nobody was driving them out, they all
17 left voluntarily, all of them. Nobody was driving anyone away.
18 Q. When you say "they left voluntarily" who are you referring to?
19 A. All the civilians who left. In my opinion, they all left
20 voluntarily. I was among them. Nobody was driving me away or telling me
21 to go. I guess they were just listening to those organisations that were
22 there, the Chetnik ones and what do I know? That's why they left.
23 Nobody was driving anyone out.
24 Q. These RSK officials, some of whom were wearing military uniform,
25 did you recognise them?
1 A. We all know each other or knew each other.
2 Q. These officials, were they people from your local area?
3 A. Most of them, yes.
4 Q. Your village was not shelled on the 4th of August, was it?
5 A. No, not at all. Nobody was killed in the war and nobody was
6 wounded. There was no war there. There were no -- there was no combat
7 in that area.
8 Q. Going forward now, talking about the village by Ukrainian Pero,
9 you say in your statement that Ukrainian Pero encouraged the remaining
10 villagers to leave but you decided you were going to stay and in your
11 2007 statement at page 5, you say you felt safe because Croatian police
12 you knew -- because Croatian police whom you knew from before
13 Operation Storm --
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'm sorry, Your Honour, I just -- the reference
15 to Ukrainian Pero encouraged remaining villagers to leave. I'm not sure
16 where that is in the witness' statements.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, I take it that you are able to help
18 Ms. Gustafson out.
19 MR. MISETIC: Yes, just a moment.
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, I read about the assistance but ...
22 MR. MISETIC: Yes, just one moment, Your Honour. It's actually
23 in his supplemental information sheet, Your Honour. What we received
24 from the Prosecution says: "Pero asked the witness to leave the village
25 with the other villagers who left but the witness didn't want to."
1 JUDGE ORIE: What do you consider to be the supplemental
2 information sheet. Have we received a copy?
3 MR. MISETIC: I don't think it's in evidence, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we should -- then it's -- of course you
5 can ask questions about, no problem, but --
6 MR. MISETIC: Then it's leading but it's leading on the basis of
7 what the Prosecution gave me.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Leading, as such, in cross-examination appears not
9 to be a very bad thing to do. The only thing is that if you refer to a
10 statement, the Chamber of course will try to find in the statement and
11 finds no basis for your questions, so --
12 MR. MISETIC: I apologise, Your Honour, it's actually in his
13 supplemental sheet.
14 Q. In your discussions with the Office of the Prosecutor in the past
15 few days, you told the Prosecutor that Pero asked you to leave the
16 village with the other villagers but that you decided to stay. And in
17 your 2007 --
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. And in your 2007 statement, at page 5 -- sorry, at paragraph 5,
20 you say, "I did not fear remaining in the village. Croatian police who I
21 knew from before Operation Storm would often drink at my house and so I
22 felt safe."
23 Is that accurate that you felt safe because of the presence of
24 these Croatian policemen?
25 A. The Croatian army would come to my place every day, they would
1 come to drink. The police did stop by as well. Nobody touched me.
2 After Storm, they looked for me. They gave me an apartment. Then I
3 retired. Nobody touched me. The soldiers, the police would sit at my
4 place, the international community people also did. They would come to
5 my place as if it was the military command. I was by myself. I was the
6 only one left in the village. We would sit there, we would chat, we
7 would drink.
8 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
9 Your Honour, I'd like to call up -- this is basically to admit
10 this into evidence. It is a 65 ter exhibit of the Prosecution. 65 ter
11 4132, it's an incident report by CIVPOL.
12 JUDGE ORIE: You want to tender that from the bar table as
13 relevant in the context of the testimony of this witness.
14 MR. MISETIC: Yes, I actually am going to ask him to comment on
15 it a bit. It was on the -- I thought the Prosecution was going to admit
16 it but if they won't, I'll tender it.
17 MS. GUSTAFSON: I believe it's already Exhibit P234, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then could we have P234 on the screen.
19 MR. MISETIC:
20 Q. Now, do you recall if Pero's name was really Petro or did you
21 just call him Pero?
22 A. He introduced himself to me as Pero Ukrajinac [phoen]. He spoke
23 six foreign languages and said that he had been in the foreign legion.
24 He spoke Croatian perfectly so everyone understood him. But anyway, he
25 told me that he spoke six foreign languages but he spoke Croatian just as
1 I do.
2 Q. Okay. Pero wrote a report on the 24th of August. The person I'm
3 assuming to be Pero. And in the report, he says that according to his
4 information, Stevo Vujnovic was found by people from the village dead
5 along with his mother Marija Vujnovic in their house approximately on
6 12/8/95. Do you recall if maybe these people were found on the 12th and
7 not seven or eight days after your mother was killed?
8 A. They were found -- well, actually, an old lady was passing by
9 there and she saw Stevo Vujnovic dead. Later when I went to check, I
10 also saw him. He was lying on his stomach. His mother, she was sick,
11 she was lying in bed. Nobody went inside that house. Nobody went there.
12 Nobody looked after her. And even though we sort of looked out for her,
13 there was a stink so nobody went into the house. And when her son
14 Momcilo came back from Serbia
15 her in bed and that she was dead. But nobody went in so I really
16 couldn't say if this was like that or not.
17 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
18 Your Honour, Mr. Registrar, I'd like to call up and tender into
19 evidence the autopsy report for Stevo Vujnovic, 1D29-0009.
20 I'm sorry, it could be 1D29-0003. I apologise.
21 Your Honour, one moment just to make sure we have the right ...
22 Can we turn to the next page? And to the next page? There it
24 Your Honour, I will tender it from the bar table. I have to get
25 the ID number to match with the decedent.
1 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, it's our opinion that this is the
2 autopsy report of Stevo Vujnovic and there is no objection.
3 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, counsel.
4 If could go back to page 1, please. Under cause of death, the
5 cause of death is unascertained.
6 Your Honour, I would ask that this exhibit be marked and I tender
7 it into evidence as the autopsy report for Stevo Vujnovic.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: No objection, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit D383.
12 JUDGE ORIE: D383 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 Mr. Registrar, if I could have 1D29-0027.
15 Q. Mr. Vujinovic, I'm going to show you a map of the locality where
16 you are from. You were -- you used to work on the railway so I assume
17 you're familiar somewhat with maps from the area and if I'm wrong, please
18 correct me. Is my assumption correct?
19 A. I don't know what you mean.
20 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, can we turn to page 2 of this
21 exhibit. And the B/C/S version of this, Mr. Registrar, is 1D29-0024,
22 just so the witness can see the markings.
23 Q. Witness, you can see -- let me -- do you see Knin on the bottom
25 A. I see Oton.
1 Q. And then that line goes straight down to Knin, do you see that?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Now, Oton is up in the upper left-hand corner; correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. In the middle of the page is what I have marked in a red circle
6 Padjine, do you see that?
7 A. Yes, I see it.
8 Q. Is that where, prior to Operation Storm, there was a military
9 barracks of the ARSK?
10 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter is not sure whether the witness
11 said yes or no.
12 A. So in Padjene and in Stara Straza. There was in Padjene and in
13 Stara Straza there were barracks, military barracks.
14 MR. MISETIC:
15 Q. And those were the two red circles, the one on the right being
16 the Stara Straza barracks?
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, if you say yes, is it because you read
18 it, Stara Straza or is it because you recognise on the map the location
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm looking at it and I can
21 see it. And I know it, I also know it personally and I can also tell
22 from the map.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
24 MR. MISETIC: And if we can go to the next page, Mr. Registrar.
25 Q. This is now a close-up of your hamlet.
1 A. Yes, the Oton Polje or Oton field. That's it.
2 Q. And if you see on the right towards the middle, there is a circle
3 which I have marked as the railway stop that you refer to in your
4 statement. Is that the location of the railway stop; do you recall?
5 A. Yes, that is the railway stop. It's still a railway stop today
6 as before. That's exactly where it is.
7 Q. And to the left of that, where there is a big circle, is that the
8 general area of where your property is located in Oton?
9 A. To the left where my name is?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. Is that what you mean? Yes. Yes, it's right there.
12 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I ask would ask that this
13 be marked and I tender this into evidence as well.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: No objection, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
17 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D384, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE ORIE: D384 is admitted into evidence.
19 MR. MISETIC:
20 Q. The -- during Operation Storm itself, did you see any Serb
21 soldiers taking up any positions at the location known as Debelo Brdo on
22 about the 5th of August?
23 A. I can't remember. I don't remember.
24 Q. In your 1999 statement, Witness, you say: "Between the 5th of
25 August, 1995, and 18 August 1995, there were no tragic incidents in our
1 hamlet, just looting." No houses in your hamlet were set on fire --
2 A. Nothing more.
3 Q. -- no houses were set on fire between 5 August and 18 August in
4 your hamlet, were they?
5 A. Approximately those dates, but maybe it was before as well. I
6 think there were 13 or 17 in total. I'm not exactly sure.
7 Q. And in one of your statements, you say that there were 60
8 households in your hamlet. Would 60 households mean there were 60
9 houses? Do you know actually how many actual houses there were in the
11 A. About 50. 50, 60, I'm not sure. Up to 50 households.
12 Q. Okay. Now, when you found your mother, you buried her
13 immediately; is that correct?
14 A. I found her on the 17th at night. She was dead, and we buried
15 her on the 21st of August. She had already begun to smell.
16 Q. Okay. You did not report to these Croatian -- you reported the
17 death of -- you said on questions by Ms. Gustafson, you reported the
18 death of Stevo Vujnovic to the police but you didn't report the death of
19 your mother to the police; is that accurate?
20 A. That's correct. We didn't even know that my mother was dead. We
21 just reported his death, Stevo. We did not report my mother's death.
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. Because we didn't see it. We didn't enter. There was no one who
24 could enter and see.
25 MS. GUSTAFSON: I wonder if that last answer could be clarified.
1 I think there might be confusion as to whose mother ...
2 THE COURT: Last three answers, preferably. Not reporting -- the
3 witness is not aware of his mother having died is, of course, leaves --
4 he is certainly became aware at a certain moment, Mr. Misetic.
5 MR. MISETIC:
6 Q. After you buried your mother, you still did not report your
7 mother's death to the Croatian police officers; is that correct?
8 A. I don't really remember because we reported to the police, they
9 were writing down the houses that had been set on fire, and how would you
10 report it? I mean there was no one to report it to. This was the
11 Zadar-Knin municipality district. They only came to Knin up to 1400
12 hours. After 1400 hours, they went back. So there was no one to report
13 to. I only reported when I asked for compensation or reparations and
14 that's when I reported her and that's when she was proclaimed dead. Up
15 until that moment, she was alive.
16 MR. MISETIC: Okay. Mr. Registrar, to follow on this answer, if
17 we could have 1D29-0018.
18 Q. Do you recall, Witness, being present for an on-site
19 investigation by the Croatian police at the grave site of your mother on
20 or about the 17th of April, 2007?
21 A. Yes, the police came on several occasions and they said they
22 couldn't do anything about it.
23 Q. Do you recall an investigator of the Croatian police named
24 Robert Badzim [phoen]?
25 A. I don't.
1 Q. Do you recall giving information to an investigator of the
2 Croatian police concerning the death of your mother in 2007?
3 A. They came on several occasions. I don't recall exactly the date
4 when this happened, but they came and people asked me about it.
5 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I'd ask that the --
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] There's nothing that I can comment.
7 MR. MISETIC: I'd ask that the exhibit on the screen be marked
8 and I tender it into evidence.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
10 MS. GUSTAFSON: No objection.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D385, Your Honours.
13 JUDGE ORIE: D385 is admitted into evidence.
14 Mr. Vujinovic, could I ask you, you said the police came at
15 several occasions. Could you tell us when, for the first time, they
16 came, approximately?
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't remember. I can't recall
19 JUDGE ORIE: Was it all last year or was it in any ...
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was in the same year. Everyone
21 knew that she had been killed. The police knew. The military knew. So
22 they came to write it down. I don't know if this was an active soldier
23 or not. They all wore uniforms. The police knew about it. The military
24 knew about it. How would you tell? How could you tell? I mean this was
25 organised then.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand you well that you said they came for
2 the first time during the summer that it had happened?
3 MR. MISETIC: No, that's not what he testified, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic. I read the transcript. It was in the
5 same year, everyone knew, the police knew, so I'm seeking clarification
6 of that.
7 MR. MISETIC: I just want to make sure that we -- that the
8 witness doesn't get confused. I believe earlier he testified that they
9 started to come after he filed a claim for compensation.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I do understand. I nevertheless prefer to be
11 able to put my questions.
12 You said "Everyone knew, knew that she had been killed." What
13 are you talking about? Are you talking about last year? Are you talking
14 about the summer when it happened? Any years in between when they came
15 for the first time?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This happened the same year, the
17 same month.
18 JUDGE ORIE: The same month of what?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It didn't -- this wasn't just about
20 me. In 1995, the military and the police, they kept coming to my place.
21 They knew that she was killed. She was killed like an animal and that's
22 what they were commenting on.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And you told them about it and it was part of
24 your --
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They knew about it but they can't
1 be -- it couldn't be their fault, I mean, if some idiot killed her.
2 Maybe, maybe someone, the Chetniks killed some of their family members so
3 it was really hard to tell. Nobody knew who killed her or why she was
5 JUDGE ORIE: But it was part of your conversation when the
6 military and the police came to your place, is that in the summer when it
7 happened? Is that what you are telling us?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, every day, the police and the
9 military came to my place. There was barely a day when they didn't come,
10 so this was like that from 1995 onwards. And different organisations
11 came and aid from Switzerland
12 would come to me. So then I had to go and see the neighbours and show
13 them where someone had remained or so -- there was also from Holland
14 from Switzerland
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic, what I'm interested in at this moment
16 and I want you to listen very carefully to my question. In the summer
17 that your mother died, did you already, in that summer when, as you told
18 us, the police came to your house, did you already discuss and talk about
19 the death of your mother with the police that came to see you?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I did.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
22 MR. MIKULICIC: I'm sorry, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. MIKULICIC: I was following the translation of the witness'
25 answers and I believe in page 29 --
1 JUDGE ORIE: I have no problem if you point at a line where you
2 think there is a mistake of a translation. I, however, would not like
3 you to tell us what the witness said because that could be, I'm not
4 saying that it is, but it could be very suggestive and translations can
5 always be verified on the basis of the original material. So if you say
6 that there is any problem, please point at the line and the -- the page
7 and the line.
8 MR. MIKULICIC: I was not intending to say what the witness said,
9 Your Honour. I was just pointing the line and it was a -- page 29 and
10 line 7. The answer of the witness to the question of Mr. Misetic, what
11 was happened when the police came on the site of the death of his mother.
12 So the answer was, upon my best recollection and knowing the
13 Croatian language, wrongly translated. So maybe the witness could
14 clarify this by another question on the topic.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just see.
16 MR. MIKULICIC: The witness said, Yes, the police came on several
17 occasions and they said they couldn't do anything about it. That was not
18 what the witness said.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic, there is some doubt as to your answer
20 to the following question: "Do you recall, Witness, being present for an
21 on-site investigation by the Croatian police at the grave site of your
22 mother on or about the 17th of April, 2007?"
23 What was your answer to that question? Do you remember that?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The police came and I suppose on
25 the basis of what they received from The Hague, your officials, they
1 called me from Sibenik and this organisation from The Hague came. I
2 wasn't at home. But they had already come on several occasions earlier.
3 They all came and they said that I shouldn't touch anything where she was
4 buried. They said "Don't touch anything." So I didn't. She lay in her
5 own soil, the Croatian soil.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that answer. Thank you for --
7 it's just a matter of procedure, Mr. Mikulicic, that I'm very precise
8 because it often happens that someone then says what the witness is
9 supposed to have said and that's a procedure I'd like to avoid to the
10 extent possible but you --
11 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, I wouldn't do that, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
13 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, based on Your Honour's last question,
14 I'd like to pose a question. We will upload the witness' supplemental
15 information sheet into e-court, Your Honour.
16 Q. Let me just ask you, Mr. Vujinovic, you spoke to the Office of
17 the Prosecutor a few days ago; do you recall that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And do you recall being asked to read over and sign another
20 correction to your prior witness -- correction and clarification of your
21 earlier witness statements. Do you recall signing another document?
22 A. These last couple of days?
23 Q. Yes.
24 A. Yes, I do recall, of course I do.
25 Q. And I'm going to read back a portion of a document that has your
1 signature on it. It says, "The witness stated that he never reported his
2 mother's death to the Croatian police. At some point, the Croatian
3 authorities came around and made a list of people who stayed in the
4 villages and the witness told them what happened to his mother. Much
5 later, a few years, he also reported his mother's death to the Croatian
6 authorities in Knin."
7 Do you recall telling that to the Prosecutor's office within the
8 last few days?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, when it's loaded into e-court, we will
11 load it into e-court but the witness' supplemental information sheet of 4
12 June 2008, we would ask for a number and we tender it into evidence.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, the -- a portion of that has just
15 been put to the witness and he's agreed to it. I don't see the basis for
16 tendering the entire supplemental into evidence.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I don't see any difference until now because the
18 witness said that he never reported it so that is in his evidence at this
19 moment now, that people came around and made lists is also what he
20 testified today -- whether that is -- and the witness told them what
21 happened to his mother. I understood the testimony of the witness as
22 kind of an informal conversations during that period of time when people
23 came to see him perhaps not in official capacity but apparently
24 frequented his house.
25 MR. MISETIC: I don't see why the additional clarification
1 wouldn't be admitted into evidence.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from there are no major -- there is no
3 objection to it, Ms. Gustafson?
4 MS. GUSTAFSON: No, Your Honour, it's just that, I mean, the
5 portion that has been put to him has been put to him. There's no --
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. That's then --
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: -- nothing to be added by tendering the entire
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit D386.
11 JUDGE ORIE: D386 is admitted into evidence.
12 MR. MISETIC: Yes, if I could have one moment, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 [Defence counsel confer]
15 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Vujinovic, thank you for coming to testify. I
16 have no further questions.
17 Thank you, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: For the Cermak Defence.
19 MR. CAYLEY: No questions. Thank you, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic?
21 MR. MIKULICIC: No questions, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson, any need to put further questions to
23 the witness.
24 MS. GUSTAFSON: No, Your Honour.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's it?
2 JUDGE ORIE: I was just about to say that, Mr. Vujinovic but you
3 were, as it happened, a couple of times today, you skillfully took over.
4 Mr. Vujinovic, it's right, this concludes your testimony in this
5 Court. I would like to thank you very much for coming a long way to
6 The Hague
7 and put to you by the Bench.
8 I wish you a safe trip home again.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much, Your Honour.
10 Am I done?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Okay. Let me go and light a
13 cigarette. All right. Let's light a cigarette.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Vujinovic, smoking is allowed only outside.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] May you stay in good health.
16 [The witness withdrew]
17 JUDGE ORIE: I suggest that we take an early break. Is the
18 Prosecution ready to call the next witness after the break? Mr. Waespi.
19 MR. WAESPI: Yes, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll have a break and we'll resume at five
21 minutes to 11.00.
22 --- Recess taken at 10.25 a.m.
23 --- On resuming at 11.00 a.m.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, are you ready to call your next witness?
25 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Good morning, Mr. President. Good morning,
1 Your Honours. The Prosecution calls Mr. Peter Marti.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, I was informed that the knowledge of the
3 English language by Mr. Marti is good but not perfect. Now, he will not
4 be the only one in this courtroom.
5 [The witness entered court]
6 JUDGE ORIE: If there's any problem, we'll try to assist the
7 witness in his own language to the extent this would not hurt the
9 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour, and I did discuss this with
10 Mr. Waespi and given the fact that he probably understands best what the
11 witness is trying to convey during the cross -- certainly during the
12 course of our question, I invited Mr. Waespi to please chime in for any
13 clarification he thinks is necessary.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 Good morning, Mr. Marti. Before you give evidence in this court,
16 the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you to make a solemn
17 declaration that you speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
19 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
20 whole truth and nothing but the truth.
21 WITNESS: PETER MARTI
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Marti.
23 You will give your testimony in the English language. If there's
24 any moment where you have difficulties either in understanding or in
25 expressing yourself in that language, please ask for assistance. I must
1 admit that my Schweitzer-Deutsch is not as it should be, perhaps, but
2 Mr. Waespi is also a native Swiss-German or German-Swiss-speaking person.
3 I understand the language quite well. This is not an invitation to
4 continue in your own language because the interpreters would be lost but
5 if there is any specific matter where you are trying to find a word or
6 something like that and if you are not able to do it, then perhaps say
7 that one word in your own language and then we'll see how we can proceed.
8 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
10 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 Examination by Mr. Waespi:
12 Q. Mr. Marti, can you please state your name, your full name for the
13 record, please?
14 A. My full name is Peter Marti.
15 Q. And do you recall giving three statements to the ICTY, one dated
16 13th February, 1996
17 one dated 13th and 14th December, 2007?
18 A. Yes, I do.
19 MR. WAESPI: Your Honours, with your permission, I would like to
20 provide the witness with copies of these three statements.
21 JUDGE ORIE: With the assistance of the usher, please do so.
22 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, to be clear, the first statement of
23 February 1996 has the 65 ter number 5176. The transcript of a taped
24 interview originally in German dated 29th June, 1997, has the 65 ter
25 number 5177. And the third one dated 13 and 14 December 2007, has the 65
1 ter number 5178.
2 Q. Now, Mr. Marti, did you have a chance to review those three
3 statements before coming to court today?
4 A. Yes, I did. We did it the last days we went through all that
5 documents and we added some small corrections.
6 Q. Thank you. Let me refer you to one of these corrections and
7 this, Your Honours, relates to the taped interview. This is ter number
8 5177. On page 9, in the English version, lines 32 to 34. In B/C/S, it's
9 on page 9, line 17.
10 I'll read what it says in the English transcript. "So for
11 example on 8 August when we drove through Kistanje, we saw how the town,
12 how the streets were burning and next to it, we saw men in Croatian
13 uniforms standing there ..." and it continues.
14 Mr. Marti, can you let the Court know whether the August 8th is
15 the correct date of that incident or is it a different date in August?
16 A. No, this date is not correct. It was actually the 11th of August
17 when we -- that same day, we came back from Sibenik and we went to
18 patrol. So that was a mistake, it was the 11th, not the 8th.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti. There will be more clarifications rather
20 than corrections throughout this morning but with this correction, can
21 you tell the Court whether the information contained in these statements
22 is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
23 A. Yes, I can.
24 Q. And do these three statements accurately reflect of what you had
25 said when you were interviewed at those three occasions?
1 A. Yes, they do.
2 Q. And if asked the same questions here in court today, would your
3 answers be the same as recorded in these three statements?
4 A. Yes, they would.
5 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if these three statements could be
6 admitted, please.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, the first is 65 ter number 05176,
9 this is the statement of 1996. This becomes Exhibit P415.
10 JUDGE ORIE: P415 is admitted into evidence because there were no
11 objections as I saw from the submissions, the written submissions by the
13 Mr. Registrar, the second one.
14 THE REGISTRAR: The second statement 65 ter number 05177. This
15 is the statement of 1997. And becomes Exhibit number P416.
16 JUDGE ORIE: The same is true, as far as I'm aware, for P416 and,
17 therefore, P416 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed,
18 Mr. Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: And the third statement, Your Honour, is 65 ter
20 number 5178. This is the statement of 2007 and becomes Exhibit number
22 JUDGE ORIE: Since from the written submissions it appears that
23 there are no objections against admission, P417 is admitted into
25 Mr. Waespi.
1 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President, I would like to read a
2 brief summary of the witness' evidence as contained in these three
4 Peter Marti was a UN military observer in Team Podkonje within UN
5 Sector South from 19 June 1995
6 Team Podkonje from 6 September to 7 October 1995. From 8 October to
7 27 November, 1995
8 activities also stationed in Knin.
9 Prior to Operation Storm, Mr. Marti observed shelling around
10 Cetina and conducted crater analyses at a number of occasions. On 4th
11 and 5th August, he observed the shelling of Knin, first from his house in
12 Podkonje and then from the UN headquarters compound.
13 After Operation Storm, Mr. Marti visited many areas throughout
14 Sector South as part of regular UN-UNMO patrols. He witnessed houses and
15 villages burning in the presence of Croatian soldiers. Mr. Marti met
16 with Croatian authorities to discuss issues such as establishing
18 Mr. Marti also became a member of Human Rights Action Teams that
19 reported on incidents of looting, destruction, and killings that occurred
20 subsequent to Operation Storm. Mr. Marti's observations and conclusions
21 are contained in various UNMO reports as well as in his personal diary.
22 This concludes the summary, Mr. President.
23 Q. Mr. Marti, talking about your diary. Do you have your diary with
24 you today?
25 A. Yes, I have. It's this diary.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti.
2 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, Your Honours, we have disclosed the
3 original of the diary to the Defence which is in German and the
4 translation of some relevant parts have been -- has been made into
5 English and also disclosed to the Defence but I will not be seeking to
6 tender the diary. But the witness might refer to that source, perhaps
7 with your leave, Mr. President, throughout this examination.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Marti, whenever you want to rely upon your
9 written notes in your diary, please always indicate that you are doing
10 so. I can't see what is on your desk, both Defence counsel and counsel
11 for the Prosecution usually see what you're doing but I would like to
12 know when you are talking from memory and when you are answering
13 questions on the basis of your diary.
14 THE WITNESS: Yes.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
16 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 Q. Mr. Marti, I would like to highlight a few areas that are
18 contained in your statements. First, I'd like to direct your attention
19 to your 2007 statement which is now P417. That's the third statement.
20 In paragraph 24, that's at page 4 in the English version and page 5 in
21 the B/C/S version, you discuss a crater analysis performed by yourself
22 and another UNMO on 9 July 1995
23 four elderly women. Do you recall that incident, Mr. Marti?
24 A. Yes, I do.
25 Q. Can you please explain briefly, because it's already contained in
1 your statement, what you saw at that time and which conclusions, if any,
2 you made in relation to the shelling?
3 A. When we were asked to go to this crater analysis in this village
4 Vukovici, which is near to Cetina, we realised that the shellings were
5 not as it was usually on a field, it -- the shellings were in a village.
6 That means a house was hit by a grenade and the house, mainly the kitchen
7 was destroyed. And I remember very well the four elderly women who were
8 complaining about this incident and the detail I still remember that when
9 the grenade came into the house, the watch on the wall stopped.
10 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti. I'll ask you a few more questions but if
11 P211 could be brought up, which is a map of the Cetina area and I'd like
12 you to mark, if you can, the location of Vukovici.
13 While that's being done, can I ask you, looking back, do you
14 remember whether you saw any military activity or military target in that
15 village on that day?
16 A. No. In that village, we didn't see any military target or
17 military troops or whatever could have been a target to be shelled by a
19 MR. WAESPI: I apologise, Mr. President. I think we have a
20 better map. This is 65 ter 4938.
21 Q. And while that's been done, Mr. Marti, who was doing the shelling
22 on that day? Were you able to figure that out?
23 A. No, we couldn't figure out who has done the shelling, we just
24 could figure out where the shelling did come from.
25 Q. And where did it came from?
1 A. It came from direction south-east, south south-east.
2 Q. Can you point on this map which is now displayed on the screen
3 where the village of Vukovici
4 A. The village is here. And this is Cetina. And the shellings came
5 from this direction so ...
6 Q. Can you mark it?
7 A. [Marks]
8 Q. Yes. Very well. And the shells were fired from south-east?
9 A. Yes. Because it was an unusual -- if I may add something, it was
10 an unusual crater analysis because that was a case where the shell was in
11 a wall. So when you see the house, you can be very clearly where the
12 shell has come from. It was even much more easier to deal with this
13 crater analysis than when the crater was somewhere in an open field.
14 Q. Now, do you know the name of that mountain range where you say
15 the shells were fired from?
16 A. You mean the name of the mountains? That was the
17 Dinara Mountains
18 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you, you marked the direction from where
19 the shell came. Now, earlier, your testimony was that it was south
20 south-east. What you marked on the map was -- seems to be east
22 THE WITNESS: Okay.
23 JUDGE ORIE: If we are talking in terms of the clock, it seems to
24 be closer to 4.00 than to 5.00 which makes it not, for me at least, south
25 south-east but east south-east. I'm just trying to clarify.
1 THE WITNESS: It was rather to -- if you take the picture of the
2 clock it was rather from the direction to 4.00.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Which is east -- closer to east south-east, so
4 closer to east than to south and from south-east.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Q. And do you know who occupied, at that time, in summer 1995, the
8 Dinara mountains?
9 A. No, I didn't know. Of course we heard some rumours but I have
10 never seen somebody there so I cannot tell who actually was there.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti.
12 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if that could be tendered into
14 MR. KEHOE: No objections.
15 JUDGE ORIE: No objection. Mr. Registrar.
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P418, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P418 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
18 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Q. I would like to go back to your 2007 statement which is P417 at
20 paragraph 110. This is page 17 in the English version and page 19 in
21 B/C/S. Let me briefly quote from your statement. "Concerning the issue
22 of military operations, the military part, one has to say that prior to
23 Operation Storm that the sporadic shelling around the area of Cetina to
24 prevent farmers from harvesting had nothing to do with military activity,
25 there were no military targets. The only purpose of the shelling was to
1 intimidate the people and to prompt them to leave the area which they
3 Now, Mr. Marti, what was the basis for your knowledge about what
4 happened around these harvests, what you call "prevent farmers from
6 A. If I can explain like this: I mean I also have some military
7 experience because I was commander of a mortar company so I know a little
8 bit basics of how to proceed with artillery shooting. But this artillery
9 shooting was not according to any so-called traditional standards. I
10 mean when you just have one shell somewhere and then for a while nothing
11 happens then another grenade impacts somewhere, nothing happen anymore.
12 Maybe it's finished for the whole day. And then maybe the next day,
13 mainly in the evening, the shelling started again but very impromptu, you
14 cannot say where it is. It was not -- we didn't see any -- we couldn't
15 imagine that there was any real military target to be hit by an artillery
16 grenade so for us, it was the -- and as we saw what actually happened was
17 that the people get afraid and you know when you have children and you
18 cannot -- no more be sure if the children are still safe and your family
19 are safe, you start to first to remove the children, the family, and
20 finally you leave yourself, the place.
21 Also with discussion with the commander in Vrlika, he also told
22 us, the UN must finish this shelling, otherwise we, the Serbian army, we
23 also continue to shell Dubrovnik
24 Q. Let me ask you when you say, "The UN must finish this shelling,"
25 what do you mean by that?
1 A. I mean I had two or three meetings with Commander Popovic in
2 Vrlika and the main problem was for him, I mean for the population, that
3 the farmers were no more able to cut the corn, to do the harvest because
4 they were afraid to go with a big cutting machine on the field during the
5 day because they could never know if there would a grenade come. And I
6 mean a machine to do the harvest is, in my opinion, not a military
8 Q. This Commander Popovic you met, from which army was he?
9 A. He was the commander of the Krajina Serb army in that region.
10 Q. And my last question on this issue: Did the UN conduct patrols
11 in order to protect the farmers?
12 A. Yes, we established a so-called harvest protection patrol. We
13 divided this job with CIVPOL, that means half of the day UNMO patrol went
14 into the Cetina area, just drive middle in the field, let the car
15 standing in the field, put the flag on, and we were just hoping that if
16 there is any artillery observer on the other side, he would see our UN
17 car and hopefully he would not let any guns fired on us. And then the
18 other half of the day, CIVPOL did the same.
19 Q. Let me turn back to the forces who did the shelling, the farmers,
20 and Mr. Popovic complained about. Are you able to say who was the
21 originator of this shelling that troubled the farmers?
22 A. I mean when we did that crater analysis, what you can say very
23 accurately was where, from which direction came the shelling, what
24 calibre it was, but we never could state it really who had done it
25 because we didn't have access to the other side. We could not go and --
1 to have a look there which Howitzer or whatever was on the other side.
2 That was always -- also in our reports, we just noted the shelling comes
3 from this and this direction. It had happened by this and this time, it
4 had hit this and this field or whatever. But we were not able to make a
5 statement who did it. I mean, because we didn't have access on the other
6 side to find out where the places of the guns and howitzer on the other
7 side were.
8 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti.
9 If 65 ter 5189 could be retrieved. Now, in your 2007 statement,
10 P417 now, at paragraph 28. This is page 5 in both English and B/C/S, you
11 describe another incident of shelling that you experienced on the 30th of
13 There has, in fact, Your Honours, been evidence led on this event
14 in this courtroom already.
15 Paragraph 28 mentions that you were on the way to conduct a
16 crater analysis near Strmica when you came under fire from five to six
18 Mr. Marti, do you recall this incident when you came under fire?
19 A. Yes, I recall it very well because this was, I think, that the
20 incident or the -- where I was most afraid in my whole year as a
21 UN Military Observer because we were also called and it was like the
22 other incidents and it was a Sunday too, we were called to make early
23 Sunday morning crater analysis near Strmica. First we picked up the
24 Serbian liaison officer in Knin and we drive towards Strmica and then
25 we -- near Strmica, we parked the car and the liaison officer tried to
1 get in contact with the Serb commander or whatever was there because
2 there up in Strmica was also a checkpoint.
3 When the man was away from us, all of a sudden the shelling
4 started again and very close to us. I mean it was so close that I feel
5 the impacts, the -- it was the air was shaking in my stomach, my whole
6 body was shaking so we turned the car quick to go to a shelter near a
7 stable. And I remember very well when I was turning the car, the
8 interpreter told me we have to wait for the Serbian liaison officer
9 because he was running towards us and we drive a small distance to the
10 stable and beside the stable, we tried to have some protection, some
11 shelter. By that time, there were about five to six impacts on the field
12 nearby and it was -- by that time, I remember very well I was really
13 afraid because I didn't know if the shelling comes closer, if it will
14 finish or if there is -- if there was an artillery observer somewhere, if
15 he would have seen us or if it was just an impromptu shelling near
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti.
18 Now, on your screen, you see a cut-out of an aerial of that
19 Strmica area which we discussed during proofing. Now, can you indicate,
20 using a pen Mr. Usher is providing you with, where you stopped the car
21 and the liaison officer left it in order to make, as you say, contact
22 with that Serbian checkpoint.
23 A. It must have been somewhere here.
24 Q. Can you mark it with A, please.
25 A. [Marks]
1 Q. And second, the location where you thought at that time that the
2 Serbian checkpoint was located.
3 A. I think that the contact was somewhere here. But as I remember
4 the checkpoint must be more up. I mean he didn't make a contact directly
5 on the checkpoint. The checkpoint was -- I cannot actually remember very
6 well if it was somewhere here. I remember there were two streets coming
7 together but I cannot say from this map that these are exactly these two
9 Q. Very well. So the circle to the top, the smallest one will be C.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Make it a question mark in view of the witness'
11 answer, he doesn't know whether it was there. If you put a question mark
12 next to the small circle then ...
13 THE WITNESS: [Marks]
14 MR. WAESPI:
15 Q. Yes. And that delineates where you think might have been the
17 A. Checkpoint, yeah.
18 Q. And lastly, if you can, mark the location of where you thought at
19 the time that the shells were landing?
20 A. [Marks]
21 Q. And if you could mark it with letter D, please.
22 A. B or C?
23 Q. D, Daniel.
24 MR. WAESPI: If that could receive a number, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P419, Your Honours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: May I take it that P419 meets no objections? Then
3 P419 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
4 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 If D224 could be brought up, please. That's an excerpt, in fact,
6 of Mr. Marti's diary that has been produced by the Defence with another
8 Q. While that's being done, let me ask you this, Mr. Marti: In the
9 Cetina valley, did you see any signs of any weapons system that belonged
10 to the Krajina Serb army?
11 A. No, I didn't see.
12 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti.
13 I'm only interested in the note at the bottom, Sunday, 30th July,
14 1995. And I read the portion in the middle line 5, "We picked up the LO
15 at the North Dalmatian Corps, but then there was artillery shelling from
16 Strmica on the western hillside about 1 kilometre away."
17 Now, is that a correct English translation of your diary?
18 A. No, this translation is not correct. When I read in my diary and
19 if I may open the diary?
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you may open the diary and I take it it's
21 written in German. You would like to read in your own language, then,
22 isn't it?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes, to be very exactly.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, that will remain untranslated because we
25 have no German-English translation. Nevertheless, it appears to be
1 important to have it on the record. I do not know would to what extent
2 the transcribing causes problems if the witness would speak German. If
3 it cannot be transcribed, then at least it is on the audio record of this
4 hearing and I think now sufficiently explained when there is a small gap.
5 Please read slowly just the lines where you think that there is a
6 translation error.
7 THE WITNESS: I just read this sentence: "Beim Nord Dalmatien
8 Korps LO aufgeladen, dann aber kurz vor Strmica Arty-shelling am
9 Westhang, circa 1 Kilometer.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Could you read it again so that I have it.
11 THE WITNESS: "Beim Nord Dalmatien Korps LO aufgeladen, dann aber
12 kurz vor Strmica Arty-shelling am Westhang, circa 1 Kilometer. That
13 means it was not near Strmica, but in -- before we reached Strmica.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. So from Strmica is not correct.
15 THE WITNESS: It's not correct. It's before we reached Strmica.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And you read in German "before"?
17 THE WITNESS: Vor.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Vor. Yes.
19 Does this need any further clarification from my knowledge of the
20 German language, "vor" means before you arrive somewhere or not "from."
21 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
22 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. That concludes this part
23 of examination in chief about those events that occurred prior to
24 Operation Storm.
25 If we could bring up 65 ter --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, before we -- of course it's nice if a
2 witness reading the original and knowing how it's translated corrects
3 what appears to be a translation error but would it not be the best way
4 to replace the translation by a better one in e-court so that we -- if
5 you would have done that, then -- and just have given notice of a
6 correction then we do not have to bother the witness with it and we do
7 not have to spend court time on it.
8 MR. WAESPI: Certainly we'll do that, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
10 MR. WAESPI:
11 Q. Mr. Marti, I'm going to show you a series of six maps. In fact,
12 I will only show you the first of these six maps and while that's being
13 done, because it takes some time to upload it, can I ask you: Were you
14 visited by investigators from the OTP who asked you to mark maps? The
15 65 ter number again is 4442.
16 A. I was visited during my stay in Zagreb. By that time, I was
17 still a UN Military Observer and I was posted by that time in Zagreb
18 That means not actually posted but we were waiting what would happen with
19 the UN mission in Eastern Slavonia, so during that time I was in Zagreb
20 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti.
21 Mr. Registrar, if you could zoom in at the bottom of this map.
23 Now, Mr. Marti, do you see some initials at the bottom of this
25 A. Yes, that's correct. That is my signature.
1 Q. If we move up, please, we can see yellow markings over village
2 names. Can you tell the Court, Mr. Marti, who made these markings and
3 what do they mean?
4 A. It was me who has made this marking during this interview with
5 the people from the court and as far as I remember, I marked all the
6 places where UN patrols have been gone through, have noticed something or
7 have found some people.
8 Q. And what time frame are we talking about that these UN patrols
9 were operating?
10 A. That time frame was after operation until November 1995.
11 Q. And we know from your statement that you were a member and later
12 a team leader of Team Podkonje. Did your team and you yourself
13 participate in these patrols yourself?
14 A. Yes, we did.
15 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, there are five more maps from other
16 areas covering Sector South which have been marked by the witness. I
17 don't think there is a need to go through them. With your leave, I would
18 like to tender them into evidence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could I hear from the Defence teams whether
20 there's -- it appears that it's mainly identifying the maps and the
21 markings, whether you are satisfied with this first map and take it as
22 for a fact that the other maps are marked by this witness as well or
23 would you like to ...
24 MR. KEHOE: I mean I have no objection to a map such as this if
25 it's just marking this as opposed to some -- if there's going to be some
1 type of development from these other maps, then I think that they warrant
2 a discussion that the Chamber may want to hear. If it's merely just a
3 perfunctory marking of a document such as --
4 JUDGE ORIE: The marking stands for something that is this is the
5 villages where they went and where they have observed something during
6 this period of time. I mean that's where we stand now, not any further
7 details. Of course if we would go into further details, then of course
8 we could check on this map whether that village was marked for having
9 been visited and something we notice there.
10 MR. KEHOE: I suppose then if, in that sense, Judge, that the
11 relevance of the other five maps escapes me if we are ...
12 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it says something, that's at least how I
13 understand you, Mr. Waespi, that the area was visited with -- how do you
14 say -- that the coverage of places visited was rather high and
15 observations must have been rather frequent if you have so many markings
16 on the map. Is that what you are seeking to establish?
17 MR. WAESPI: That's correct, Mr. President. There is also a
18 slight difference, as the witness will address later, between what the
19 UNMOs did and what other international organisations did.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So, therefore, also to identify UNMO as --
21 the UNMOs as the ones who visited these villages and these -- that's what
22 it's for. If there's any objection -- Mr. Cayley not. Mr. Mikulicic, I
23 do not see you have any objections. Mr. Kehoe the same.
24 Then could you give the 65 ter numbers, all five, the first one,
25 of course, we've got already. The next four ones so that Mr. Registrar
1 can assign numbers to them.
2 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
3 JUDGE ORIE: I do understand that the whole series of maps are
4 unloaded under one number so therefore if Mr. Registrar now assigns a
5 number, he assigns it to a series of maps marked out of court by the
7 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. 65 ter 04442 becomes
8 Exhibit number P420.
9 JUDGE ORIE: P420 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
10 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 If we could see 65 ter 5187 which is a list of dead bodies.
12 Q. While that's being done, Mr. Marti, do you recall the list that
13 you see now on your screen?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. And please tell the Court what this list is?
16 A. This list with the date of 29th of November shows the dead bodies
17 UN organisation has found in and around Knin in the former Sector South
18 and -- but this list was not done by me, myself, but by the UN political
19 affairs and what is on this list, you can see it on the right side, the
20 list is not completed. There is another row with a row of the witnesses
21 but this row is cut off due to security reasons.
22 So when I got this list from Judy Jacobs, she told me I cannot
23 hand it out this list to you because there are too -- the remarks of the
24 witnesses are too sensitive. We have to be very careful that nobody --
25 that this list remains secret so I can only give you the list with the
1 names, et cetera, where we have found the people, whom we have found, but
2 not the list with the last row, so the last row of this list is cut off.
3 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, this new proposed exhibit is a part
4 of already existing Exhibit P177 but it's a more legible copy at the
5 right side. So with your leave, we would then, again, ask to replace
6 that part of P177 which is pages P14 to P24. It is an identical copy
7 although this copy obviously is a copy this witness received and not
8 Mr. Anttila who was the tendering witness of P177.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Now, do I understand that it is 10 pages of P177
10 which contains this same list so therefore, we would not replace P177,
11 but we would replace only a portion of that.
12 Now, to what technical problems that will lead -- first of all,
13 any objection against replacing part of P177 by a better, legible copy or
14 by admission of this list?
15 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. The objection -- I don't normally
16 object to these. The objection to this is that it is in fact different,
17 I do believe, Judge. But more importantly, it's impossible for the
18 Defence to get behind this document with the matters that have been taken
19 off. I mean knowing the -- where this came from and where this
20 information was compiled by that portion that has been taken off lends a
21 tremendous amount of relevance to this document and certainly to the
23 Now, the document that I think Mr. Waespi is talking about came
24 in with Mr. Ermolaev, I believe, as -- Mr. Anttila, I believe, but this
25 is a completely different document and before any admission of this
1 document comes in, the Defence should be entitled to see the entire
3 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. WAESPI: What we see here, I think it's 11 pages, is
6 according to my assessment, identical to those 11 pages that form part of
7 P177. The only difference -- there are two difference. One difference
8 is it's better legible and the second difference are the circumstances
9 under which Mr. Marti received this copy. And the Defence is certainly
10 allowed to explore more into the circumstances what might be missing.
11 Mr. Marti already explained about the circumstances. And that's as far
12 as I can take it.
13 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, if one looks at P177, the document that
14 came in, this document is dramatically different from that document.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I tend to agree with you because it's a three- or
16 four-column document only. The structure seems to be quite different.
17 Now, apart from whether the Chamber would follow you in not
18 admitting it, the document is quite different, Mr. Waespi, would you
19 agree? If I look at -- if I look at the 10th page out of 24 on P177,
20 first of all, it's a bit difficult to understand because the 9th page
21 looks similar so I do not know exactly why it's only pages 10 to 14.
22 The structure of the lists is quite different, isn't it?
23 MR. WAESPI: Yes, Mr. President. If that's the case, what the
24 witness now discusses, which is ter 5187, that's a list the witness
25 received at the date he hasn't told us yet from Ms. Jacobs from human
1 affairs of the United Nations.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Let's keep matters simple.
3 [Trial Chamber confers]
4 JUDGE ORIE: Let's forget about replacing the list. Let's talk
5 then about admission because that apparently is the remaining issue then.
6 MR. KEHOE: If I may, one additional item which brings to mind
7 the actual document that came in through Mr. Anttila. And when this
8 document came in and it was handed over to the Defence, no one ever told
9 us that the document was cut off and that there was yet another portion
10 to this document that hadn't been provided.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Well, apart from that, Mr. Kehoe, of course that's a
12 document dated the 4th of October, isn't it, and I don't know whether it
13 was part of another document, parts cut off or whether it was another way
14 of presenting the same data. I'm -- but let's not at this moment --
15 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- let's not revisit the document which is in
17 evidence but let's focus on admissibility of the present document where
18 apparently two columns have been taken off.
19 Could we first ask you, Mr. Marti, when you received this list
20 which is now on your screen, were the two columns cut off already?
21 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. I received this document in
22 November in Knin when I was in the -- sorry, in Zagreb when I was in the
23 UN HQ and I got this document from Judy Jacobs who was working with the
24 UN in political affairs or whatever, I don't remember exactly. And she
25 handed over this list to me and told me there are sensitive information
1 on the original of this list. I cannot give you this -- the whole
2 document due to reason of security.
3 By that time, she also mentioned that her computer was stolen in
4 inside the UN headquarters in Zagreb
5 evening, she always took the actual document, because this was an ongoing
6 document, every evening, she took a copy on a disk --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, at the time it was still disks.
8 THE WITNESS: -- home in her handbag, so it was okay. She got a
9 new computer and continued her work.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Waespi.
11 Yes. I don't know -- you objected against admission. I'd like
12 to give an opportunity to Mr. Waespi to respond to that after we have
13 gained some additional information from the witness.
14 Mr. Kehoe, do you want to further elaborate on your objection?
15 MR. KEHOE: The first objection, obviously the document is not
16 complete. The second objection is Mr. Marti can't even vouch for the
17 accuracy of this document because it comes from Ms. Jacobs in political
18 affairs. And it's very, very -- going at it further with regard to the
19 sensitive information, it has to have -- bear some relevance on the
20 content or it wouldn't have been deleted out. That merits some
21 discussion. If the OTP has the whole document, I don't know if they do,
22 Your Honour, it bears scrutiny at this point to look at the whole
23 document and see where we can go from here.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, have you checked whether you have the
25 whole document, that means including the cut-off -- I don't know whether
1 they were electronically cut off or whether they were factually cut off.
2 I see the witness making a gesture which appears to be scissors rather
3 than electronically cutting it off.
4 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, we were presented with this document,
5 the physically cut-off document I think on Saturday for the first time by
6 this witness. We saw the similarity to P177 and we thought it was
7 important and indeed relevant that the witness told you about when he
8 received the list, from whom he received the list, and whether there is
9 additional information we might have witnesses from the UN, I think
10 Mr. Al-Alfi is on our witness list who can shed further light on to this
11 document. We don't have the cut-off part and the witness, Mr. President,
12 Your Honours, I think is good enough to testify that he received this
13 list from whom he received. He explained what was done with it and with
14 all due respect, I think we have instances where documents were tendered
15 with much, much less link to the tendering witness than in this case.
16 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. KEHOE: The document that the witness got was a document with
19 sensitive information which I understand or the sensitive information has
20 been deleted. Now, whoever put this document together and it was not
21 Mr. Marti, must have concluded that the information that was cut off bore
22 some relevance to the items that are set forth in this document.
23 Now, when this or some version of this was presented by
24 Mr. Anttila, and I don't fault the Office of the Prosecutor in any
25 fashion about this, and I don't think that they were informed of this,
1 but apparently, the document or the version of this document that was
2 presented by Mr. Anttila likewise had information that was cut off.
3 At this point, Your Honour, this document, given it has just been
4 told to the Defence that there was other information in here, puts us in
5 a difficult position to scrutinise this document and the source of these
6 allegations without the rest of this sensitive information because the
7 document that is Prosecutor is offering is simply not a complete document
8 and analogizing it to any other document one cannot just cut off that
9 portion of the document simply to put it into evidence when one doesn't
10 know what is actually being excised.
11 JUDGE ORIE: To say cut off a part of the document to put it into
12 evidence ...
13 MR. KEHOE: I don't infer anything negative from that and my
14 apologies, I don't infer that and I have and I trust Mr. Waespi's word
15 that he received this document in this fashion and I apologise if
16 anything came along in that fashion. It wasn't meant that.
17 What -- I'm just talking about is scrutinising this document as a
18 whole and whether or not this document is -- certainly not a complete
19 document, whether or not the Defence is, before such a document comes
20 into evidence, should be permitted to scrutinise the whole because quite
21 clearly, whatever has been excised off by Ms. Jacobs or whomever bore
22 some significant relevance to the rest of this document.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we first ask another a question to the
25 Mr. Marti, you explained to us that the list is not complete.
1 There is, as you first said, another row. I later got the impression
2 that there are actually two columns missing but I don't know whether you
4 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I don't know how many columns exactly
5 were still on the paper, but if you can see from the size of the version
6 which is cut off and you took the whole page of -- the whole size of a
7 page then you can see it must be one or maybe also two rows.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Or it has been a two-page wide document which
9 of course -- so but that's all conclusions. You say something is missing
10 on the right.
11 Now, you also told us that, "She told me that she could not hand
12 it out to you because there are two remarks of the witnesses are too
13 sensitive ..." Now, how did you -- I don't know if you have a
14 recollection on how exactly she explained this to you. What kind of
15 sensitivity she explained was contained in it?
16 THE WITNESS: She told me on the last row there are some remarks
17 or names or something of who has witness -- who has been witness of these
18 killed people, I mean who have seen what was going on when this
19 180-something dead bodies have been killed or who have found it first, et
21 Because on the one row, you only see source of information, that
22 is anonymous. For example, on number 4 it's just written "villagers"
23 have found the people but not the name of the villagers.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, the sensitive nature of the information,
25 did you understand it, that's at least how I now understand your words,
1 was to -- not reveal the identity of the persons who had reported this or
2 was there any other type of sensitivity involved in the cut-off parts?
3 THE WITNESS: I think it was only not to involve the -- persons
4 in it who has made a statement towards the UN.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Thank you for that answer.
6 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Judge, the -- with regard to identity, I
7 mean if we just look at the source of information on the item that
8 Mr. Marti said, the villagers, it says names are on file. So that would
9 indicate that there is yet another file with the names of those
10 individuals as opposed to the names of those individuals set forth in
11 this document.
12 But even if that were the case and it's just the names of the
13 villagers, I think, Your Honour, based on some of the evidence that we
14 have seen, that bears some scrutiny too. Because when these allegations
15 which are very serious are set forth, who was making these allegations is
16 equally serious because we have had in this court at least one witness
17 who gave statements to the Office of the Prosecutor saying that he
18 observed certain bodies at certain locations at the pertinent times, the
19 first week in August of 1995 and then came into this courtroom and said
20 that he did not see those bodies.
21 So taking Mr. Marti from what he was saying, if that's, in fact,
22 the case, that is equally important in order to flesh out some of these
23 allegations that are in these documents -- in this document.
24 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, we can certainly make inquiries into
25 whether the list exists in the UN system. We will contact Ms. Jacobs and
1 can report back. But for the time being, I maintain my proposition to
2 have this exhibit tendered as a document that Mr. Marti received directly
3 from Ms. Jacobs and he explained the circumstances. It depends on the
4 weight given to this document, if there are columns missing but it should
5 certainly in our submission be admitted as an exhibit.
6 MR. KEHOE: I do believe, Judge, and on the totality of matters,
7 that this is a document that Mr. Marti didn't prepare, has no knowledge
8 on the accuracy of this document because he didn't prepare it, it was
9 simply given to him and it wasn't given to him in a complete form. And
10 while he may have some inkling as to what is missing or not, the fact is
11 that he doesn't know how much is missing. And I understand the weight to
12 be given to a document but under the circumstances of offering a document
13 that's not a complete document through a witness that didn't prepare it
14 and doesn't know anything about the accuracy of it, I think we are beyond
15 the admissibility point and I don't think there is any foundation for
16 this document to come in.
17 [Trial Chamber confers]
18 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber will take the break to decide on
19 admissibility. I don't know, Mr. Waespi, whether you would have any
20 further questions in relation to this document because then of course we
21 might consider to take an early break but if you have no questions on the
22 document, it will now be marked for identification. The Chamber will
23 decide on admission of this document.
24 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit P421 marked
2 for identification.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
4 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. If we could move to
5 probably a less controversial document, 65 ter number 2023. This is a
6 document dated 10th of September, 1995. If we can briefly go to the last
7 page of this short document.
8 Q. We see here, Mr. Marti, that your name appears and if we can go
9 to the front page again. Mr. Marti, do you recognise this document?
10 A. Yes, I do.
11 Q. And can you please explain to the Court what it is?
12 A. It was a report done on the 10th of September, 1995, when I
13 was -- just a few days after I have been appointed as team leader of
14 Team Podkonje and we register some people we have found who are still --
15 who were still living in the area and I also described that the problems
16 we had, we faced because it was almost impossible as a team leader
17 with -- in the best case, three teams cover all the area and try to find
18 out who is still living there.
19 Q. I would like you to refer to one specific part of the document
20 and it's in both English and B/C/S on the first page. The heading "Two
21 problems: One, humanitarian aid is not usual task for UNMOs ..." and so
22 on. And the last sentence in this paragraph in English on page 2 says,
23 and I quote, "What are the other international organisations really doing
24 on the ground more than driving along the main asphalt roads?"
25 Can you explain what you meant when you wrote that?
1 A. During that time, there were different organisations busy in Knin
2 like UNHCR, like the European Commission Mission also some other -- even
3 some NGOs also Red Cross. But we realised that along the main roads, the
4 remaining people were visited sometimes several times by the different
5 organisations but in the small hamlets up in the mountains, nobody was
6 there, even we didn't know exactly who was still living there. And the
7 UNMOs were the only one who were able to proceed in these villages and
8 hamlets because of the fact that we had four-wheel driven cars and we had
9 also all the accurate maps and the knowledge about the region so UNMOs
10 were the only one who were able to travel in all the small places but the
11 task was almost impossible to fulfill because we were only a few. I mean
12 I had about 8, 9 people in my team and when somebody was on the normal
13 leave, I was able to let conduct two patrols, in the best case, three.
14 So the task to get an overview of what was going on in the region was
15 almost impossible.
16 Q. And concluding this document, can you briefly tell the Court
17 the -- whether the people you visited, the villagers appreciated your
19 A. Yes, they appreciated it very much because in many cases, we were
20 the only one who were in contact with them. I remember a case in Mrkic,
21 that is near Otric, we found up in the mountains, we found an old couple
22 and they didn't realise that there has been a war down in the valley. So
23 they just tell us that they had no electricity anymore, but that was all.
24 So we were the first ones who gave them the information that there has
25 been a war. Or in another case, I remember very well in a small hamlet
1 in Plavno valley a woman told me, "You are like the sun," when we were
2 coming. And it was very emotional situations because they hug us and
3 they even kissed us and they were -- you can see that what was missing
4 was not in the first case food or -- but contact and information what was
5 going on.
6 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti. And I think you referenced to the sun and
7 "sunce" in Croatian is mentioned on page 2 of the English document under
8 3, comment.
9 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if this document could be admitted
10 into evidence.
11 MR. KEHOE: No objection.
12 JUDGE ORIE: No objections. I see no objections from any of the
13 Defence teams.
14 Mr. Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P422, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: P422 is admitted into evidence.
17 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. If we could move to the
18 next document and already existing Exhibit P68 at page 17, second
19 paragraph from the bottom in English and it's on page 14, B/C/S, third
20 paragraph from the bottom.
21 Q. This reference, Mr. Marti, is to a visit of your team to several
22 villages including Biskupija on the 26th of August, 1995. Do you
23 remember this patrol, Mr. Marti?
24 A. Yes, I do remember very well because that very day was my
1 Q. If we look what's written down on that paragraph, it says that
2 and I quote, from the third line, "... and observed that most of the
3 houses were looted, many were burned down. The few villagers are scared
4 of the presence of HV soldiers."
5 Now, can you describe to the Court the appearance of these HV
7 A. They were partly dressed with --
8 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, are we talking about this particular
9 instance or are we talking about generally? Because I don't think that
10 the witness says that the HV soldiers were there on this occasion.
11 MR. WAESPI: Yes, we'll talk about these --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Could you take care that you clarify whether you're
13 talking general or whether on these specific incidents.
14 Mr. Marti, you might have catched up already some of the problems
15 when you are -- describe the appearance of HV soldiers, whether you are
16 describing any HV soldiers you may have seen at that occasion, if there
17 were any, or whether you are describing HV soldiers in more general
18 terms. I mean not specifically for this occasion.
19 MR. WAESPI:
20 Q. Mr. Marti, what I'm interested in is whether you recall the
21 presence of these HV soldiers on your birthday in 1995 in any of those
23 A. I think on the way back when we were on patrol in the evening
24 near Ocestovo, we were stopped by four -- I will call it soldier because
25 they have military guns and they have still part of military uniform. So
1 for me, this were type of soldiers. And we were first -- I remember
2 because my Kenyan colleague was the driver. I was the patrol leader.
3 And it was near Ocestovo in a small forest. We were stopped by these
4 four young men and first I thought: Should we try to just to drive
5 through because we had an armoured car. But then I decide, okay, I am
6 not a driver and I cannot tell the Kenyan colleague to speed up so we
7 better stop. But when you have an armoured car, you cannot open the
8 windows so to talk with people, with these guys, I had to open my door
9 and I was quite nervous because I didn't know what would happen so I just
10 used my few words which I knew by that time in Croatian and tried to
11 explain the man who I am, what I am doing so I showed him the map and
12 told him with my fingers, I want to go from here to here and then they
13 just let us pass.
14 MR. WAESPI: Mr. Registrar, if we could get 65 ter 5192, please.
15 And, Your Honours, this is a newspaper excerpt we received from the
16 witness on Saturday and which we disclosed to the Defence. It's four
17 pages, I believe, and I'm interested in two photos the witness explained
18 to us during the proofing session.
19 Q. Let me ask you first, Witness Marti, when did you recognise this
21 A. On the 10th of August, just shortly after the Operation Oluja,
22 our sector commander Lieutenant-Colonel Steinar Hjertnes gave us a day
23 free. That means he told us, my team had the chance to go to the UN team
24 in Sibenik to have at least a fresh shower after so many days and just to
25 relax and come back the next day. And due to my former profession, I was
1 very much interested in newspapers so that very day in Sibenik, I -- even
2 if I couldn't understand the words but I tried to buy as much as
3 newspaper from that very day and among these newspapers were both these
5 Q. And does the photo or the soldiers, one of the soldiers depicted
6 on this photo remind you of soldiers you have seen during the patrol
8 A. Yes, it does, especially the soldier here in front because for my
9 understanding by that time of how an army should be at least look like,
10 that was something which was not used so I called them in my private
11 diary pirate soldiers. For me they look rather than pirates than members
12 of a military unit.
13 Q. Where did you see these pirate soldiers, as you call them in your
15 A. They looked very similar to what I have mentioned before near
16 Ocestovo on the 26th of August.
17 Q. If we could go to the next page or I guess the third page or do
18 we only have this photo uploaded? The next page, please. Yes. Thank
19 you, Mr. Registrar.
20 Is there another photo here that reminds you of pirate soldiers?
21 A. Yes, this photo on the top which -- a man who is handing --
22 making -- who is receiving fire from the soldier with the helmet.
23 MR. WAESPI: Thank you.
24 Mr. President, if this exhibit could be tendered into evidence?
25 I'm, in fact, only interested in the two photos the witness described and
1 not in any text there might be.
2 MR. KEHOE: No objection.
3 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, Your Honour, I would like to say something.
4 Does the admitting of these photographs includes and likewise the text
5 below them because I think the text below them is very significant.
6 MR. WAESPI: I have no objection.
7 MR. MIKULICIC: So I have no objections as to introduce as
8 evidence those photographs but I would like that also the text would be
9 admitted as in evidence.
10 MR. WAESPI: Obviously the witness doesn't read or at least not
11 sufficiently to understand what he bought on, I think, the 10th of
12 August, but I have absolutely no problem to have the whole thing
14 JUDGE ORIE: You know what the text is under there, Mr. Waespi?
15 MR. WAESPI: Yes, I've seen the line, it says Kijevo, it says
16 Knin and it has a few lines of explanations.
17 MR. MIKULICIC: I'm especially referring to the first photograph.
18 JUDGE ORIE: The first photograph.
19 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes. The text below it.
20 JUDGE ORIE: The text below it.
21 MR. MIKULICIC: The text below it.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it appears that Mr. Waespi has no objection so
23 therefore -- but you have not uploaded any translations?
24 MR. WAESPI: No, that's the main reason why I only tendered the
1 JUDGE ORIE: Apart from that, and that of course also makes the
2 importance of this evidence very relative is that is what we see on this
3 picture resembles more or less the type of military people that you've
4 seen at that date. So it's a rather, I would say, a rather impressionist
5 piece of evidence.
6 Now, if we add text to that, I have got no idea what the text is,
7 whether it is favourable or unfavourable to either of the parties. Then
8 of course we get a photograph of which we do not know when it was taken,
9 where it was taken, we also all are aware that the media have not always
10 for the full 100 per cent been neutral on reporting on war situations.
11 If you would keep all of this in mind that you would still be happy to
12 have the text admitted then ...
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber has no reason not to admit the photos,
15 at least the two photographs with text but with a clear signal that what
16 weight to be given to this text, it could be about being a guitar on the
17 one and an accordion on the other picture, we've got no idea but let's
18 look at it, take care that it will be uploaded with translation.
19 May I take it that we leave it to just the text related to these
20 two photographs because otherwise we really are too far away.
21 MR. MIKULICIC: That is correct, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit P423.
24 JUDGE ORIE: P423 is admitted into evidence. The Prosecution is
25 instructed to provide translation of the photograph on the front page and
1 the photograph on the third page including an accordion.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Q. I would like to go to another document --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Are you moving to another subject as well?
6 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps we rather first have the break. Apart
8 from having a break, Mr. Waespi, I think the witness was scheduled for
9 two and a half hours. I think you've until now -- we had a bit of a
10 procedural incident but approximately five-quarters of an hour. Are you
11 confident that you will manage before we adjourn for the day?
12 MR. WAESPI: Yes, I think another hour I anticipate.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Then we quickly go for the break. Resume at quarter
14 to 1.00. Precisely, you've got one hour left.
15 --- Recess taken at 12.23 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 12.47 p.m.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The document marked for identification P421, that is
18 the list is admitted into evidence. At the same time, Mr. Waespi, you
19 offered that the Prosecution would further inquire into the -- to whether
20 there was a complete version of this list already available and also to
21 further investigate whether the source that provided the witness --
22 provided the list to this witness, whether that person could provide us
23 with a complete list. You are invited to report on that within -- how
24 much time do you think it would take you?
25 MR. WAESPI: I think that's going to be communication with
1 New York
2 JUDGE ORIE: Two weeks. You are instructed to report within two
3 weeks what the results of your further inquiries are.
4 Of course the Chamber has considered the objections against
5 admission and the Chamber will in giving weight to the document, the
6 Chamber will certainly have in the back of its mind the objections made.
7 You may proceed.
8 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
9 If Prosecution Exhibit P176 could be brought up, please.
10 Q. Mr. Marti, I understand from your witness statement that your
11 Team Podkonje was involved in assessing the damage caused by
12 Operation Storm and in the aftermath to the houses in the area; is that
14 A. That is correct, yes.
15 Q. Now, let me show you a document and if we can go to page 2. You
16 are also familiar, I take it, with Mr. Anttila.
17 A. Yes, I am familiar with this document too, yes.
18 Q. And what does this document show?
19 A. It gives an overview about the damages in the different villages
20 of the region of Krajina.
21 Q. Now, let's turn to page 7 of this document in both versions, and
22 I think it's just -- if it could be enlarged a bit, the English part.
23 We see, Mr. Marti, that the bottom half of the document lists
24 Team Podkonje with some activity and as you see from the document, there
25 are other columns with data that's filled in. And in relation to the
1 heading "number of buildings," we see that there is a lack of data for
2 Team Podkonje.
3 Now, do you have an explanation why Team Podkonje didn't report
4 as completely as perhaps other teams on number of buildings in certain
5 villages and towns?
6 A. Yes, I have an explanation because our main focus was not on the
7 destroyed or partly destroyed buildings. Our main focus was on the
8 people who were still living in the area. So we rather tried to find
9 people who were still there than to count all the houses or partly
10 damaged houses. I mean we just tried to establish a kind of system to
11 get an overview about the whole situation in the region of Krajina and
12 some teams put their attendance more on the buildings, how were the
13 buildings and my teams, we were always -- our main focus was on the
15 Q. Let's turn to the last page of this document which shows the
16 summing up of these figures and if it can be made slightly more bigger
17 still, you can see that between the number of buildings reported, above
18 20.000, and the number of buildings damaged or partially damaged, there
19 is perhaps a ratio of two-thirds of the buildings at least partially
21 Now, you have been there in that region, you were on numerous
22 patrols, you were patrol leader. Can you tell the Court whether that
23 ratio, as we see it here in Mr. Anttila's study, is an accurate one?
24 Does it coincide with your own assessment?
25 MR. KEHOE: I object, Judge, there's no foundation for that. The
1 foundation has got to come from the actual numbers and you just can't
2 add -- you add numbers to the numerator and not to the denominator and it
3 skews the percentages.
4 MR. WAESPI: I'm less interested in the exact percentage. I
5 would just like the witness to tell the Court whether according to his
6 personal knowledge, his capacity as a member, as a team leader, roughly
7 that picture displayed in this survey coincides with what he has
9 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I quite simply object.
10 JUDGE ORIE: If you just ask the witness whether he could give us
11 a general impression of the percentage of buildings that was partially or
12 totally damaged, then you don't give him the clue of the answer which, of
13 course, is leading in some way.
14 Could you give us your impression about the percentage of houses
15 that do remain not undamaged so that were either partly or totally
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour, I can at least try because it
18 was -- there were some villages which were more or less completely
19 destroyed but some other mainly small hamlets up in the mountains which
20 have not been touched by the war. But overall average is about 60 per
21 cent of the buildings were partly or completely destroyed and even we
22 made a difference because in the region, of course, you also found
23 buildings who have been destroyed or partly destroyed much earlier, that
24 means before Operation Oluja.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
1 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 If we can move on to the next exhibit, potential exhibit, this is
3 ter number 620. For everybody's understanding, this is a note for the
4 record dated 15 -- in fact, 16 September, 1995, although the actual
5 report that starts on page 2 is a note dated 15 September 1995. If we
6 can go to page two in both versions, please.
7 Q. Mr. Marti, do you recognise this document and what it's about?
8 A. Yes, I recognise this document and it covers the case where we --
9 UN organised a transport for the people who have been left in the area
10 but who wanted to be transported towards Serbia to their relatives or
11 whatever. Because whenever we found people before, we also asked them,
12 What are your problems, do you want to stay here or do you want to leave
13 and whenever they tried -- they wanted to leave, there was something like
14 a collection point organised in the school of Knin
15 people to go there and at that very day, there was a -- in my opinion, a
16 very fast way was a transport organised from Knin to Belgrade
17 Q. I see on line 3 of the first paragraph, Plavno. A sentence and I
18 quote, "They had been threatened by the army and their houses looted;
19 some had been damaged."
20 Do you remember this instance of threats by the army and looted
22 A. What I remember is that the people we found there had complained
23 that they are no more sure that nobody helps them, nobody protects them.
24 They are afraid. They just want to be -- to live in safe conditions
1 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. Marti. If that could be admitted as
2 an exhibit, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No objections. Mr. Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P424, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: P424 is admitted into evidence.
6 Mr. Waespi, when you used this inventory of buildings, et cetera,
7 did you check whether, because it looks very much like a - how do you
8 call it - a spreadsheet where you usually say at the bottom, some this,
9 some that. Now we often see that either the total number of buildings is
10 not filled in but sometimes the damage to buildings is there in numbers.
11 Sometimes it's the other way around that we have the total number of
12 buildings but not even not zeros for partially damaged or totally
14 Now, if I, at the bottom end, say some column so and so, then you
15 get the distortion, have you verified, has someone verified how these
16 numbers at the very end, what they actually do sum up? Because then you
17 get different data.
18 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, we'll certainly look into that. I
19 think at least four witnesses have been testified as to this document. I
20 think there are even four different versions of this document.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
22 MR. WAESPI: With Mr. Ermolaev, Mr. Anttila, Mr. Munkelien and
23 now with this witness and I agree that there might be enough information
24 now to assess the reliability and the ...
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm not that impressed that comments are there
1 by other witnesses on the matter where the witnesses might not have been
2 fully aware of the way in which the spreadsheet was handled. But I'm
3 just drawing your attention to it because you are now specifically
4 focused on the last line which summarizes, but I would like to know what
5 exactly it summarizes.
6 MR. KEHOE: Just briefly with regard to this document and the
7 content of P176, the only witness that said anything about the content of
8 that document was Mr. Anttila. To the extent that Mr. Ermolaev said he
9 was received the document but he was the only one that had any degree of
10 discussion about it because he was one of the preparers.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I was only drawing the attention that if you look at
12 the sums, you should know exactly what is summed. Otherwise, it might
13 distort the picture.
14 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Judge, that goes to -- because the sums
15 include damage prior to Storm and, of course, it is --
16 JUDGE ORIE: That's another aspect. But I'm -- I am aware of
17 that. Nevertheless, it even goes further than that alone. Yes, because
18 that is more or less specifically identified not in their numbers but at
19 least in the comments whereas this might just slip in without anyone
21 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
22 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
23 If potential exhibit 65 ter number 2038 could be pulled up.
24 Q. Now, Mr. Marti, in your witness statement of 2007 which is now
25 P417, at paragraph 12, you discuss that you have met once a person called
1 Milan Marcetic and you said that you were informed that he had been
2 killed at a later stage. Can you please look at this document and more
3 importantly at the second page of this document which is an incident
4 report by CIVPOL dated the 12th October, 1995.
5 Now, do you see a reference to the death of Milan Marcetic?
6 A. Yes. Yes, I see. I can see it, yes.
7 Q. Now, in your diary, do you have a reference, if you recall, to
8 the fact that Mr. Marcetic was reported killed? Do you remember that?
9 A. Yes, I have a reference in my diary because I got to know some
10 days later that he has been killed and I mean he was somebody who I have
11 seen alive and I -- even when I met him, I was wondering because he is a
12 man who was still there and normally, the Serb men, they had to run away
13 or they run away. But he was still alive and I ask him, Why you are
14 here? Why you are alive? Why you were never harmed by anybody or so?
15 And then he told me he has never been in the Yugoslavian army because he
16 is -- his eyes are not good enough and you could see it from his glasses,
17 they were really thick glasses so he was unable to do military service.
18 And even he showed me a paper but of course I couldn't read it because it
19 was all in Cyrillic letters but he told me that this is paper that proves
20 that he has never been in the army. He showed that paper to the soldiers
21 when they arrived and that was the reason why they left him in peace.
22 Then when some days after, when I got to know that he was killed,
23 then I was very disappointed because I saw all -- what we are trying to
24 protect the people there actually it was not a guarantee that the people
25 were protected. I mean in our opinion, it was -- the minimum we could
1 do, we said, okay, at least we make a list of all the people who are
2 still there so that might be a kind of protection and everybody knows we
3 have registered the people. They cannot just disappear after. But still
4 that was not any type of protection as the case of Milan Marcetic showed.
5 Q. Thank you for this answer. Mr. Marti, in paragraph 12 of your
6 witness statement, P417, you mention the death of another person. Do you
7 remember who that second person was?
8 A. I have to go to my diary to find out the name.
9 MR. WAESPI: Yes, with Mr. President's leave.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please try to find the name.
11 THE WITNESS: What is the date?
12 MR. WAESPI:
13 Q. The 8th of October although there might be a --
14 A. Yes, in my diary I wrote in my diary that I get to know Milan
15 Marcetic and Dusan Suica have been killed.
16 Q. Now, Mr. Marti. Now, on the screen in front of you, you have
17 already recognised the name of Mr. Marcetic. Do you see also the name of
18 the second person?
19 A. Yeah, I think -- yes, it must be on the second-last paragraph,
21 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. Marti.
22 Mr. President, if that document could be admitted into evidence.
23 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
24 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour, I do. First objection, of course,
25 is this is outside of time frame that Your Honour limited for the
1 indictment. I do believe Your Honour gave an order on that score
2 limiting the time frame to be addressed by the Prosecution's case.
3 The second issue on this is that this is not within an area of
4 responsibility with regard to my client. It's not within the
5 Split Military District. Because I do believe from the top front page of
6 this document, we're talking about the village that's in the Gracac area.
7 Frankly, I mean with regard to the probative value of it, it's a
8 statement that was taken by UN CIVPOL that, with all due respect to
9 Mr. Marti, he doesn't know anything about.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Do the other Defence teams share the objections?
11 Yes, I see yes from the Cermak team. Mr. Mikulicic.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: No objections, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, although your microphone was not switched on, I
14 do understand that the Markac Defence has no objections, that the Cermak
15 Defence --
16 MR. MIKULICIC: I share the objections with Mr. Kehoe. I have no
17 objections of my own, that's what I meant.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then I misunderstood you. So all three Defence
19 teams object against submission.
20 Mr. Waespi.
21 MR. WAESPI: I think the death occurred, according to paragraph
22 12 of P417 on the 29th, on or about the 29th of September, 1995, which is
23 within the indictment period as I understand. In relation to the
24 location, I have to verify that but it's certainly in the former
25 Sector South area as defined by the UN, otherwise the witness wouldn't
1 talk about. Thirdly, on its face, this document clearly appears to be
2 authentic and the witness can be cross-examined about that.
3 MR. KEHOE: Frankly, Judge, I can't cross-examine him about the
4 document because, with all due respect, Mr. Marti doesn't know anything
5 about this particular document. The fact is that this area is not within
6 my client's area of responsibility and I think that that's just a fact
7 that is well-known to the Prosecution as well. To set out yet with
8 another homicide in an area that is not his responsibility is prejudicial
9 and we object.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and I haven't heard you about the time limit.
11 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I will go back and take a look at this.
12 I know that the time limit, I was looking at the front page here which
13 notes that this report is dated October 7th, 1995. Getting behind this
14 document, certainly if it's something that's in and around that time
15 frame, it's outside the -- it's outside the time frame of this
16 investigation. If we look at the third page of this document, with the
17 HRAT activities, that's in fact noted on the 9th of October. I would say
18 that both of these note -- it does note the 29th of September but at this
19 point, if -- certainly I can't ask Mr. Marti about the underlying facts
20 on the score because he doesn't know anything about it. So if we could
21 take an additional look at exactly when this information was transmitted,
22 I think it may be outside the time-frame at which at first blush it looks
23 like it might be of the matters covered by this indictment. So, if we
24 could cover this just as an MFI at this point then do further research, I
25 will consult with my colleague on the time-frame and see whether it goes
1 into that appropriate time-frame as delineated by the Chamber.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would you please MFI the document.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit P425, marked
4 for identification.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Waespi, you are invited to see to what
6 extent an agreement can be reached with Mr. Kehoe. The Trial Chamber
7 will take care that by the beginning of tomorrow morning's session that
8 you -- that the Defence is aware whether it's admitted, yes or no.
9 Please proceed.
10 Of course at the beginning we'll tell you unless we receive other
12 MR. KEHOE: Yes, sir.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
14 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Q. Let's turn to the shelling of Knin.
16 Mr. Marti, in all three of your witness statements you gave
17 observations about the shelling of Knin on the 4th and 5th August and
18 we'll come to that in a second.
19 Now, where were you when Knin was shelled on the 4th and 5th of
21 A. On the 4th of August, 1995, I was in Podkonje the whole day. And
22 on the 5th of August, I was in UN camp, UN headquarter in Knin itself.
23 Q. Let me direct you to your witness statement of December 2007,
24 that's P417 at paragraph 110. That's on page 17 in the English and page
25 19 in B/C/S.
1 We -- I already quoted from this paragraph in relation to the
2 Cetina shelling. Let me continue at around line 6. And I quote, "The
3 same is to be said for the shelling of Knin which is clearly a violation
4 of laws and customs of war. It is forbidden to shell a civilian town, of
5 course one could assume that there might have been military personnel in
6 the town, but there was no real military target. The only thing which
7 might have been there was a camp close to the UN camp, a place where
8 there were a few tanks and a repair depot were located but it was so
9 close to the UN camp that its targeting would have been useless. The
10 shelling, in fact, took place without a goal. It was carried out rather
11 randomly. It was carried out above all to intimidate the people and to
12 force them out which eventually happened. And they also fired at the
13 refugees, one could see that later on the road, one could see craters,
14 artillery craters on the road, and on the road there are no military
15 targets only if there are tanks on the street, however tanks, destroyed
16 tanks were hardly to be seen, one could see many civilian vehicles."
17 And I might add that this is an excerpt from your taped statement
18 which you gave in 1997, originally in German. Now, can you comment on
19 what you said here? What was the basis for your assessment which I just
20 read out?
21 A. The basis of this quote I made in 1997 was my experience as far
22 as I have been in Knin and around Knin, I never saw a big military target
23 which could have been or should have been taken under fire by artillery.
24 I mean when you take a target under fire by artillery, it must be a
25 couple of tanks or a couple of vehicles or -- it must be a bigger target,
1 not only one building or so.
2 So when the attack on Knin started on the 4th of August, we were
3 rather surprised because we didn't know what's going on and it was also
4 not traditional artillery shelling, it was one shot then after a time
5 another one and you could see -- I mean we couldn't see directly from
6 Podkonje to Knin, but because there was a small hill in between but what
7 we could see, we could see that smoke rose up from different places but
8 even by that time there was -- the people were not yet in panic. I mean,
9 we lived together with the people in this small village, Podkonje, we
10 didn't know what is going on, just during the day the shelling of Knin
11 continued but not with a clear aim.
12 Later on when we were allowed to go and -- to leave the camp, the
13 UN camp in Knin, we realised on the street, mainly on the street towards
14 Otric that there have been artillery shelling on the street, into the
15 street and we saw civilian vehicles hit, destroyed. We saw items from
16 population left like clothes, furniture all along the street. That means
17 they -- there have been civilian shelled by artillery.
18 Q. Did you discuss among the UNMOs the comment you just made?
19 A. Yes, we discussed this case several times among UNMOs but after
20 the operation was over, our main focus was as I have mentioned already,
21 just to see what happens with the people which were not able to flee,
22 which were not able to run away. Are they protected? Or what happened
23 to them? And that was our main point to find out if after the operation,
24 is there a security provide for the people or is there now, if one -- one
25 government has been pushed out, if there is now a new control on the
1 ground and we didn't see much or we didn't see that there was done much
2 for the security of the people left.
3 Q. We'll come to that in a moment, the control aspect of it.
4 Let me show you 65 ter number 5188. Did you see houses burning,
5 Mr. Marti, in the aftermath of Operation Storm?
6 A. Yes, on different places.
7 Q. Looking at this photo, can you tell us what it depicts?
8 A. It is a burning stable which I saw together with my Swedish
9 colleague, Mr. Bertil Svendsen when we were on patrol.
10 Q. Can you tell the Court when you took this photo?
11 A. Yes, but I have again to stick to my diary.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please consult your diary.
13 MR. WAESPI:
14 Q. And the Court is also interested in the location of this burning
16 A. Yes, I have found it. It was on the 4th of October.
17 Q. And the location?
18 A. It's called -- the name is called Ivosevci.
19 Q. Ivosevci.
20 A. Ivosevci, yeah.
21 Q. And do you know where it is in relation to Kistanje?
22 A. It's on the way to -- it's north, a few kilometres north of
24 Q. Did you see houses, Mr. Marti, that were apparently safe from
25 being burned because they were marked as Croatian houses?
1 A. No, I didn't see such houses. I can only remember that in our
2 neighbourhood in Knin when we got a new location, the neighbour woman,
3 she -- one day she painted on her house "kuca Hrvatska" or similar like
4 this, that means that this is a Croatian house.
5 Q. And what was the effect of the marking of the house as a Croatian
6 house, if you know?
7 A. I think the main effect was to mark the house was also a kind of
8 self-protection but I don't know if it works all the time. I mean I can
9 see in our -- in -- what I can say in our neighbourhood, it works because
10 this woman, she was not -- the house was not -- didn't get destroyed.
11 Q. Just to make it clear, why would she, if you know, mark her house
12 as a Croatian house?
13 A. I actually, the neighbouring woman, she was a Croatian woman.
14 Q. And the purpose of her doing that is what?
15 A. Just to show the looters that they shouldn't loot or destroy this
16 house also.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Marti.
18 Let me address in the remaining minutes the aspect of control or
19 measures. In your taped witness statement which is now P416, if that
20 could be pulled up, please.
21 But before we do that, Mr. President, if we could have an exhibit
22 number for this photo, please.
23 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
24 MR. KEHOE: No objections.
25 JUDGE ORIE: No objections. Mr. Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P426, Your Honours.
2 JUDGE ORIE: P426 is admitted into evidence. Please proceed.
3 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. P416, page 13, English
4 version, and page 12 in B/C/S. In the English version it's line 28,
5 towards the bottom. Let me quote. "The question whether the looting
6 could have been prevented, I must actually answer with yes. It would
7 indeed have been possible for the Croatian authorities which after all
8 claimed that this area belonged to them, that is, was their territory and
9 who made us sometimes feel that it would have been indeed possible for
10 them to establish more order. It would not have been impossible to set
11 up at the main crossings, at the main intersections police checkpoints
12 and it would also have been necessary to make a deterrent example with
13 adequate reports in the media to prevent these lootings," and it goes on
14 to the next page, "and the threatening of the old people or at least
15 largely reduce them but as already mentioned, nothing happened. Almost
16 nothing happened."
17 Now, can you elaborate a bit, Mr. Marti. Why do you say the
18 Croatian authorities could have done more?
19 A. As I have mentioned already, to do our job was something like
20 almost an impossible thing. I mean we tried to protect somehow the
21 remaining people but with our few patrols just noticed the name of the
22 people that was actually not done with it. And we were always wondering
23 why the Croatian authorities, whoever, police, or army or whoever, but I
24 mean they have overtaken Krajina so now they also were responsible for
25 the security there, why they didn't do more to provide security.
1 For example, when you saw the looting in Plavno valley, this is a
2 valley surrounded by mountains and there is only one or two streets
3 leading into this valley, one checkpoint there would have reached to stop
4 the looting in Plavno valley. One checkpoint maybe on the street
5 crossing in Kistanje would have at least reduced the looting. One
6 checkpoint in Vrlika, et cetera, only with a few means, you could have
7 established something like a little bit of order.
8 Of course when we -- we also tried to -- what we could do against
9 the looters? I mean when we were on the spot with our UN vehicle, they
10 just disappear or sometimes even we get into discussion with them. Once
11 I ask a looter what he is doing here and he told me I'm just looking for
12 a motor saw. So I mean looting was something like shopping without
14 Or in other cases, we start to discuss many times also in German
15 because many of them have been in Germany
16 then they also told us, oh, where UN have been, 1991 when we have been
17 pushed out from Krajina. I mean on one side, I understood that there was
18 also revenge behind -- to come back in they told us, oh, that was my
19 house several years ago so I'm just back now.
20 But what I said with this statement was that if there was an
21 authority, and there was an authority who pretend to be responsible for
22 Krajina now, because they had a big - how you say - a big party on 26th
23 of August when Tudjman came by train through Knin to Split, that was also
24 on my birthday by the way, so I mean when you have overrun a region, then
25 you are responsible. You are responsible for security. But I mean where
1 has this brigade gone who has attacked Knin and Krajina before?
2 As I remember on a map in a newspaper, there were about five
3 brigades who have been attacked Krajina. So what they did afterwards?
4 Why they didn't provide more security there? It would have been not so
5 difficult just to establish different checkpoints. Then at least when
6 the people realise that there is a control, they would have changed
7 hopefully their behaviour.
8 Just one detail.
9 One of our -- we thought we could do something so we started to
10 notice the number plate of the cars who came and looted the villages and
11 we gave them to the Croatian authorities. But a few days after, what
12 happened, the cars just came without number plates. So at least that
13 shows that somebody has realised that somebody is making a very small
14 kind of control so they realised that we were controlling something but
15 that was not enough. And I remember we discussed this also with Croatian
16 authorities and then for only a few days, there was a checkpoint near --
17 where the street comes out from Plavno valley and we thought, okay, at
18 least now we have achieved something, a small stone for security. But a
19 few days afterwards, this checkpoint was not manned again, it was empty.
20 What can we do?
21 Q. In your witness statement I quoted a moment ago, you talk about
22 the necessity of a deterrent example with adequate reports in the media.
23 Can you explain what you meant by that?
24 A. I'm quite sure if the Croatian officials would have stated
25 officially that it is not allowed to loot and that the looters are
1 punished and even maybe if they would have made an example public, okay,
2 we have catch this and this person with looting things, now he has to
3 give it back or whatever, that most probably would have helped a little
4 bit but there was -- there was nothing against it and I mean it was
5 funny, you could see the -- a kind of looting procedures. The first
6 wave, what they took, the remaining cars, TV, washing machines, you could
7 see it -- what they have put on their cars. And after a while, you saw
8 them coming with furniture, with wood, and finally, they took everything.
9 So you saw houses that the doors, the wood frame of the doors, the
10 windows, everything was completely looted.
11 I realised it very well when I was in my former accommodation in
12 Podkonje. Finally, there was only the naked wall, even the carpet who
13 was fixed on the wall was looted. So the house was completely empty but
14 not at once, it was like different waves coming and -- coming over the
16 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. Marti, for that.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask you one clarifying question.
18 You said at the Plavno valley they once had a checkpoint which
19 was removed after a couple of days. Did you observe when that checkpoint
20 was there, were you able to observe any change in the intensity of
21 looting or did it remain the same or were you not able to observe?
22 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, by that time, actually I was not every
23 day in that Plavno valley but I got the message from the other patrol now
24 they have established a checkpoint but a few days after, when I was
25 there, the checkpoint have disappeared.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you have no personal observation of what the
2 possible effects would have been.
3 THE WITNESS: No.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. WAESPI:
6 Q. Mr. Marti, were you ever asked or interviewed or questioned by
7 the Croatian authorities, military or civilian, in relation to what you
8 saw and observed and reported during your mission in the Krajina?
9 A. No, I was never asked. I mean the only contact I had with
10 Croatian authorities was together with a team of Husein Al-Alfi and it
11 was always that we went to the Croatian authorities but nobody of them
12 came across towards us.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. Marti.
14 Mr. President, that concludes my examination.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Waespi. We are ten minutes off from
16 the time where we have to adjourn. At the same time, we often get in
17 difficulties later during the week. Is there any -- who will be the
18 first one to cross-examine?
19 MR. KEHOE: I will be the first up, Judge.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I think we should just use this ten minutes so I
21 hope you can find some suitable --
22 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Marti, you will now be cross-examined by
24 Mr. Kehoe who is counsel for Mr. Gotovina. But only for ten minutes.
25 MR. KEHOE: May I proceed, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
3 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Marti. Mr. Marti, I'd like to ask you a few
4 questions not only based on what Mr. Waespi asked you but some other
5 matters that were in your witness statements. So, I know you have them
6 before you and if we can just take the time to go through that.
7 Let me ask you a specific question that plays into some of the
8 testimony that you talked about in some of the areas and your impression
9 with regard to the military.
10 On page 2 of your 1997 statement and that's P416, if you go to
11 page 2 of that. If we go to line 12. Now, do you see line 12 there,
12 Mr. Marti? It notes that, "To me, the Serbian forces gave the impression
13 of being very poorly equipped."
14 Now, if I can show you P401, page 10. This is a presentation
15 that was received into evidence and was done by General Forand. And if I
16 can address your attention to that second paragraph -- I'm sorry, this
17 is -- I'm sorry. I believe it is the next page. That's it. The third
18 paragraph down beginning with "The army of the Republic of Serbian
19 Krajina ." Do you see that, Mr. Marti, on the screen?
20 A. Yes, I see it on the screen.
21 Q. And it notes that "The army of Republic of Serbian Krajina
22 the ARSK, were better known to us as we dealt with them on a daily basis.
23 Nonetheless, we only had a superficial appreciation of their strengths
24 and weaknesses, as they also restricted our movements. And following the
25 1 May attack of Sector West, they had withdrawn all of their equipment
1 from weapons storage areas therefore inhibiting our accounting and
2 verification of their assets."
3 Now, it is a fact, sir, that when you as an UNMO attempted to
4 verify ARSK weaponry, there was a restriction of movement put on you by
5 the ARSK, wasn't there?
6 A. I can only answer what I have seen and, for example, on the
7 very -- on my very beginning in Krajina, I think it was on the 4th of
8 July or -- I have to stick to my diary, we visit one of these storage
9 facilities between Knin and Drnis and by that time, the facility was
11 Q. So --
12 A. So we were not restricted to go but I mean there was no reason to
13 restrict us because it was empty.
14 Q. So the -- if I understand you correctly, the army of the Republic
15 Serb Krajina allowed you to go to see this storage facility and it was
17 A. We went there even without to ask them. We just checked it and
18 it was empty and I think that was on the 4th of July. But that was only
19 storage place I visited myself.
20 Q. General Forand says that "The ARSK had withdrawn all their
21 equipment from the weapons storage area." Do you know, Mr. Marti, what
22 the ARSK did with that weaponry?
23 A. No, I don't know it. I don't even know where or wherever or
24 whatever they have withdrawn because I have not seen.
25 Q. Now, you noted for us that you went to this weapons storage
1 facility and it was empty. Now, did you have occasion to go to -- let me
2 preface the question with this: Are you familiar with the village or
3 town of Golubic between Knin and Strmica?
4 A. Yes, I am.
5 Q. Now, I think you told us in your 1997 statement on page 13, lines
6 1 through 6, it would be at the top of the page, that the church in
7 Golubic, and this was the Orthodox church?
8 A. I don't remember.
9 Q. Well, in any event, the church in Golubic had camouflage netting
10 over it?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Is that right?
13 A. Yes, and there was always a rumour that in this church, there
14 have been hidden some anti-aircraft guns.
15 Q. So --
16 A. But I have never been in this church before Operation Oluja.
17 Q. Were you told this by other UNMOs that there was an anti-aircraft
18 weapon in this church?
19 A. No, the other UNMOs told me.
20 Q. I apologise. The other UNMOs told you that there was an
21 anti-aircraft weapon?
22 A. It might be there.
23 Q. It might be there.
24 A. But I have not been there. I didn't see it by my eyes.
25 Q. Now you also note on line 5 and 6 of your statement and I am
1 talking about the P416 that the -- that you "later we assumed that it
2 could have been a Serbian ammunitions dump." Do you see that, sir?
3 A. I didn't see it myself, it was just rumours among the other
5 Q. But you and other UNMOs made an assumption that it was a Serbian
6 ammunition dump? I'm pointing you to lines 5 to 6.
7 A. Yes but as it is written, it was an assumption.
8 Q. I understand. Were you familiar with the ARSK using other
9 religious facilities to store ammunition and weapons?
10 A. No, not in the region where we were patrolling before the
11 Operation Oluja.
12 Q. And how about after Oluja, did you find out the ARSK had used
13 religious facilities to store weapons and ammunition?
14 A. No, I didn't.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, there is a suggestion in these questions
16 that they did use religious facilities to store ammunition whereas I
17 understood the testimony of the witness to be that there were rumours.
18 There is a difference.
19 MR. KEHOE: I understand, Judge. There is in fact a video of
20 that particular issue.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Fine, if we see that and if we -- but let's not try
22 to --
23 MR. KEHOE: I understand.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I am now looking at the clock as well. So it
25 gives you quite a number of hours to think about the matter.
1 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Marti, we'll adjourn for the day and since these
3 courtrooms are used in the afternoon by other Chambers, you have to wait
4 until tomorrow. I'd like you instruct you that you should not speak
5 about your testimony, whether that is testimony that you already gave
6 today or testimony still to be given in the days to come.
7 We adjourn until tomorrow morning, the 10th of June, 9.00 in the
8 morning in Courtroom II again.
9 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.
10 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 10th of June,
11 2008, at 9.00 a.m.