1 Monday, 8 September 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.18 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. This is case
9 number IT-06-90-T, The Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
11 Ms. Gustafson, I think I don't have to ask you whether you are
12 ready to call your next witness because I assume that in front of us is
13 Ms. Malm. Yes.
14 Good afternoon, Ms. Malm. Before you give evidence in this
15 Court, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you to make a solemn
16 declaration, that you will speak the truth, the whole truth and nothing
17 but the truth.
18 The text will now be handed out to you by Madam Usher. May I
19 invite to you stand and to make that solemn declaration.
20 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
21 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Malm. Please be seated.
23 English is not your -- the language you usual speak at home. If
24 there's ever any problem, either in understanding or in expressing
25 yourself in that language, please let me know.
1 THE WITNESS: I will.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
3 Mr. Gustafson, you may proceed.
4 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
5 WITNESS: LAILA MALM
6 Examination by Ms. Gustafson:
7 Q. Good afternoon.
8 A. Good afternoon.
9 Q. Could you please state your full name for the record.
10 A. Laila Malm.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could the witness please be shown 65 ter number
12 5365, please.
13 Q. Ms. Malm, do you recognise this statement as one that you made on
14 the 29th and 30th of July and on which you made some corrections on the
15 4th of September of 2008?
16 A. Yes, I do.
17 Q. And is this statement true and correct to the best of your
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. Does it accurately reflect what you said at the time it was
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And if I asked you in court today the same questions you were
24 asked when you gave that statement, would you give the Court the same
1 A. Yes.
2 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'd like to tender that statement into evidence,
3 Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: From the written submissions I see that there are no
5 objections. Madam Registrar, that would be number ...
6 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit number P774, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: P774 is admitted into evidence.
8 Which does not automatically mean that all the attachments are
9 admitted. Ms. Gustafson, you may have noticed that there are out of, I
10 think, 34 exhibits that the Gotovina Defence and I think it was the
11 Markac Defence opposed against number 1, number 30, and number 31.
12 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, Your Honour and I spoke with the Defence
13 briefly before the testimony and I have agreed that I won't tender
14 numbers 30 and 31. I believe there's -- still an objection to number 1,
15 which I intend to deal with during the witness's testimony perhaps
16 objections could be dealt with then.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then I think we could invite
18 Madam Registrar to prepare a list assigning numbers to all the
19 uncontested documents which we find in the -- in the 92 ter motion.
20 Apart from admission into evidence also I understood that adding
21 the documents to the 65 ter list would be -- that the attitude would be
22 the same as to admission.
23 Madam Registrar, do you have the list and the ...
24 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
25 JUDGE ORIE: In close cooperation with the case manager of the
1 Prosecution, Madam Registrar will prepare a list assigning exhibit
2 numbers to the uncontested exhibits.
3 Mr. Kehoe.
4 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Judge, and I maybe correct this with -- I
5 got the actual exhibit list that the Prosecution is going to involve
6 itself with that was given to us, and my question is and this -- there's
7 some source of confusion is -- are the exhibits because there is a
8 significant overlap. Are the exhibits that are in the exhibit list as
9 provided by the Prosecution the same as the exhibit list that are
10 attached to the -- 92 ter statement that was given by the Prosecution.
11 Because to that end, I believe in the 92 ter statement there was an
12 exhibit of a homicide that was well -- was outside the area of the Split
13 military district.
14 So I'm a bit confused on which sheet counsel is moving from, the
15 65 ter list that was provided to us, or the list in the 92 ter statement
16 and if there is an overlap or if they are different.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
18 MS. GUSTAFSON: As far as I am aware, Your Honour, they're the
19 same. They're meant to be the same. Perhaps I could discuss this with
20 colleague at the break. If there's a particular exhibit he is concerned
21 about, I'm not entirely sure what the concern is.
22 MR. KEHOE: I can clarify it right now.
23 And it is the issue coming up involving a report on 9/21/1995
24 the hamlet Bolte/Kadzane [phoen] and it deals with a --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, I have two lists at this moment, the one
1 is the one which is part of or attached to the 92 ter list that contains
2 31 documents; and then I have another one, apparently another list which
3 gives more information and which is part of the hand-corrected statement
4 of the witness.
5 Could you -- if that's the one you're referring to, could you
6 please give me the page number and the exhibit number, so that I'm -- I
7 know what I'm talking about. Or what are you talking about.
8 MR. KEHOE: I am talking about a document that is referred to
9 which was initially part of the documentation supplied by counsel, if I
10 may, that had the number on the top 00548120.
11 JUDGE ORIE: That -- where does it appear on one of the lists.
12 MR. KEHOE: That's the source of confusion, Your Honour. It came
13 in with this bundle of documents from the particular witness, and I am
14 having a difficult time, you know, assessing it, and I -- in the spirit
15 of caution, I wanted to bring it to the attention of the Chamber because
16 I am a bit confused about these multiple lists and whether or not this
17 event is part of the submission of the Prosecution, in light of the fact
18 that it's outside the scope of the -- it's outside the geographical area
19 of the Split
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, I have not been able until now to
21 identify what document we are talking about, on whatever list. Guide me
22 to a list and to a number or to a page and then ...
23 MR. KEHOE: If I might have one moment with my colleague.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 [Defence counsel confer]
1 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, as -- I'm sorry.
2 As part of P774, there is a witness statement and if we go to
3 page 17 of 21, in the middle of the page there is a reference to an
4 UN CIVPOL report that is SO5-95/117.
5 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, if I might --
6 JUDGE ORIE: [Microphone not activated] ... that you're referring
7 to 177 instead of 117.
8 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, 177, excuse me.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Okay, I have found it.
10 Ms. Gustafson.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, that report does not form part of
12 the 92 ter submission and I'm not tendering that report.
13 JUDGE ORIE: So it is mentioned by the witness but you're not
14 going to rely on that.
15 MR. KEHOE: I -- with all due respect, Judges, the bit of
16 confusion is the list that is attendant to P744. There's a list that is
17 attendant to the 92 ter submission and there's an exhibit list, and my
18 confusion resulted from exactly what we were proceeding on, because, as
19 you see, they don't necessarily coincide.
20 JUDGE ORIE: But I now do understand that this document -- that
21 the Prosecution will not rely on that, therefore, it's -- it will not be
22 in evidence.
23 MR. KEHOE: It's a moot point.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And then to what extent the witness statement is
25 still comprehensible without the document, we'll see that.
1 Ms. Gustafson, please proceed.
2 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour. At this point I'd like
3 to read a short summary of the witness's 92 ter statement.
4 Please proceed.
5 JUDGE ORIE: And you've explained to the witness the purpose of
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 MS. GUSTAFSON: Laila Malm was an UNCIVPOL monitor who was
10 stationed in Knin between the 26th of August and the 2nd of
11 September 1995, and then stationed in Sukosan between 2nd of
12 September and December 1995. While she was station in Sukosan, Ms. Malm
13 was primarily responsible for patrolling in the Gracac area. She went on
14 daily CIVPOL patrols and received information about crimes such as
15 murder, looting, burning, and mistreatment that were reported to her by
16 people who remained in the villages in the Knin and Gracac areas.
17 She personally witnessed a group of soldiers looting in Ivosevci
18 village near Kistanje on the 30th of August, 1995. Ms. Malm and her
19 colleagues recorded information they received about crimes in CIVPOL
20 incident reports and reported these incidents to the Croatian civilian
22 And that completes the summary.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Gustafson.
24 I take it that when closely cooperating with the registrar that
25 you will also pay attention to those documents that are already admitted
1 into evidence, such as on the list we find P251, P252, and P261, which
2 are not necessarily all yet, but those are discovered already as being
3 into evidence.
4 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
6 MS. GUSTAFSON:
7 Q. Ms. Malm, I'd like to ask you a little bit about your patrolling
8 patterns. You have explained in your statement about your general
9 pattern, how you went on patrols, daily patrols, generally with your
10 colleague Mr. Martins. What was the purpose of your patrols, what were
11 your tasks as CIVPOL monitors?
12 A. The task was to monitor human rights violation.
13 Q. So when you went to a village, what would you do?
14 A. We would leave the car, we would check the houses, if there was
15 anybody there. If we found houses burned, then we would report it. If
16 we found people, of course, we would ask them for the ID card, if they
17 had ID card. Otherwise, we asked them to give name and date of birth.
18 And if they had been violated in some way, we would made a report.
19 Q. What was the purpose of collecting the names and dates of birth
20 of the people in the villages?
21 A. That was to keep track where does people live or not. And we
22 also delivered food. We went very often to Knin to the Red Cross so then
23 we went back to these people we met, to give them some food.
24 Q. And you've explained in your statement that you wrote your
25 reports the same day that you received the report of the incident. Did
1 you write those reports from memory or were you taking notes when you
2 spoke with people?
3 A. We were taking notes. Of course we had interpreter with us all
4 the time, and we were taking notes and we usually came back quite late in
5 the evenings, but then we went to the station and we wrote a report for
6 each incident.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could the witness please be shown 65 ter number
10 Q. This is a map that you used at the time and you've talked about
11 it at paragraph 13 of your statement.
12 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could we zoom in on the lower right-hand quarter
13 of the document, of the map.
14 Q. Now, in your statement you explained that you marked the villages
15 that you visited on this map. The yellow and red or pink highlight marks
16 on this map, are those your markings?
17 A. Yes, it is.
18 Q. Are those the markings of the villages you visited?
19 A. Yes, it is.
20 Q. And is there any difference between the red markings or the
21 yellow markings, or no?
22 A. I believe that one colour is where we found people and another
23 colour is where we didn't find them.
24 Q. Do you remember now which colour is which?
25 A. Not when I see it like this. If I can see the name of the
1 village, I will probably remember.
2 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could we zoom in on the part where most of the
3 markings are in the middle.
4 Q. Are you able to see that, or would you like it blown up more?
5 A. I think it's okay.
6 I think it is the red where we found the people. I remember
8 Q. And when you went to a village, did -- what did you do to
9 determine whether it was empty or whether there was still people living
11 A. Well, if we found people, then of course we know that there were
13 Q. And if a village appeared empty, did you take steps to determine
14 if there were actually people?
15 A. I believe -- I think that we marked it with yellow, we didn't
16 find any people.
17 Q. And what I'm asking is if you drove to a village and didn't see
18 people in the streets, would you get out of the -- of your vehicle and
19 look around or would you just move on?
20 A. We even went into the houses, to check. Maybe not every house
21 but a lot of houses and actually we found people. In one village we
22 found a blind woman sitting on a -- on a bed, asking us not to kill her.
23 That woman we -- we made a report and we gave it to the Red Cross, so
24 they went to pick her up.
25 Another man we found in the bed. He couldn't move from his bed
1 also, so we went to the Red Cross in Zadar and after some discussion that
2 man was also taken to, I believe, hospital, or I actually think he went
3 to his brother.
4 Q. Thank you.
5 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'd like to tender that map into evidence.
6 JUDGE ORIE: No objection.
7 Madam Registrar, that would be number.
8 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit number P775, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: P775 is admitted into evidence.
10 Please proceed.
11 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you. If we could now -- if the witness
12 could be shown 65 ter number 5368.
13 Q. This document is one of the lists of people that you made, people
14 in the Gracac area that you describe at paragraph 14 of your statement.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And on the first page you see the letters WJ. Do you remember
17 what that refers to?
18 A. This is -- I believe it's grids. Grid number.
19 MS. GUSTAFSON: And could we move to page 2 of this document.
20 Q. You've just described how you went to the villages and recorded
21 people's names and dates of birth. Are these -- is this created from
22 your patrols and the information you recorded about who was left in the
23 villages, their names and their dates of birth?
24 A. Yes, it is.
25 Q. And how often did you update this list and the other similar
2 A. It was updated every evening. It was Luis who kept this list, so
3 it was updated every evening by him.
4 Q. So every day you would record the names of the people that you
5 met that day?
6 A. Yes.
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: And could the witness please be shown 65 ter
8 number 5367.
9 Q. Is this a similar list dealing with villages in the WK grid
11 A. Yes, it is.
12 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'd like to tender these two lists into evidence,
13 Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: One exhibit number or under two different numbers.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: They can be under one exhibit number.
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour. It's not really an objection, just
17 a clarification. What is the date on these two documents? There is no
18 date on the document itself.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson, could you clarify perhaps with the
21 MS. GUSTAFSON:
22 Q. You heard the objection. Could you clarify what dates these
23 lists refer to?
24 A. Yes. We started to make these lists, as far as I remember,
25 almost immediately when we started on patrols and of course we were using
1 these lists until the end of the mission.
2 Q. You said almost immediately when you began your patrols. Is that
3 when you began patrolling in the Gracac area?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Just so we're clear, it is the end of August of
6 1995; correct?
7 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I think the witness did not arrive any earlier, at
11 least what's what I take from her statement.
12 Madam Registrar, I do understand that it's is preferred by the
13 Registry to have the documents separate under two numbers. Could you
14 identify the documents and then assign a number to it.
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 5368 will become
16 Exhibit number P776; and 65 ter 5367 will become Exhibit number P777.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P776 and P777 are admitted into evidence.
18 Please proceed.
19 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you. Now if the witness could be shown 65
20 ter number 5374.
21 Q. The document you're about to see is a memo that you and your
22 colleague forwarded to the Office of the Prosecution in December of 1995,
23 and it's described in your witness statement as well.
24 Do you remember why you wrote this and sent it to the ICTY with
25 your colleague?
1 A. Yes. We were very frustrated at this time because we felt that
2 all these people didn't receive any help. They were intimidated. Their
3 property was stolen. They were even murdered and nothing was happening
4 so that's why we wrote this.
5 Q. By "all of these people" do you mean people in the Gracac area?
6 A. Yes.
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could we move to page 2 of this document, please.
8 If we could zoom in on the paragraph -- the last paragraph on this page.
9 Q. And I'd like you to look at that last paragraph where it says:
10 "CIVPOL has no cooperation from policija in Gracac. We have requested
11 information from all cases in the weekly meetings for follow-ups but no
12 answers." And a little further down it says: "In one case we have
13 received information from policija that they have arrested one woman for
14 theft of cattles. This information is not confirmed. In all other 56
15 cases concerning murder, rape, assault, theft, intimidation, robbery,
16 looting, arson, and missing persons, CIVPOL received no information from
17 Gracac policija."
18 Now, this paragraph refers to requesting information from all
19 cases. Was it your practice to report all the incidents you recorded to
20 the Gracac policija?
21 A. Me and Luis Martins, we went there a few time to talk to them.
22 Normally it was the team leader, Lennart Widen, who had meetings and
23 brought it up.
24 Q. And between your reports that you made with Luis Martins and team
25 leader's reports, was it your understanding that the Gracac policija was
1 aware of the incidents that you recorded in your reports?
2 A. Absolutely.
3 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'd like to tender this memo, Your Honour, and I
4 believe that counsel may have an objection to part of it.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
6 MR. KEHOE: Yes, my objection when we came up with this was that
7 I wasn't sure all this information was in the time-frame of the actual
8 indictment or the charges, that is, from the end of September backward.
9 And my question when we initially objected to this was: Were these
10 issues that had taken place after the end of September of 1995?
11 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, just for the Court's information,
12 we also join in the objection for anything beyond the scope of the
13 indictment. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, I could ask the witness about the
16 time-period. I would point out that on page 4, 5, and 6, there are
17 follow-up CIVPOL incident reports referring to earlier reports, many of
18 which are in the indictment period, not all, but many them are. Some of
19 them have exhibit numbers.
20 MR. KEHOE: Well, to that end, the ones that are discussing
21 matters that are not within the indictment period I do believe it is
22 incumbent upon the Prosecution to remove those from the statement.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, just as an example, the very first
24 paragraph on the first page talks about incident in Vojnica and Glina and
25 that has nothing to do with Sector South. So that is just an example.
1 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, I believe the Chamber is able to
2 determine which parts of this are relevant and which aren't, and my
3 submission is that much of it is relevant to the time-period and the
4 location of the indictment.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
6 MR. KEHOE: I mean, with all due respect, Judge, I don't believe
7 that -- and while I have the highest respect for the Chamber's ability to
8 cipher through stuff, when we ultimately come to the end of this I would
9 suspect that the Chamber wants some guidance when they're looking at a
10 document as to what is pertinent and what's not.
11 And to that end, if matters here are outside the scope, then
12 albeit not specifically date-identified but known to the Prosecution to
13 be outside the scope of the indictment, it is incumbent upon the
14 Prosecution to remove them.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, the other point along with that is
16 that, you know, they have the burden of proof in this case and if they're
17 going to start adding things that aren't part of the indictment and
18 aren't part of Sector South and we have to weed those things out and
19 point those things out, I think that's tremendously unfair to the
21 JUDGE ORIE: It would have no probative value for the charges
22 would it.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: It would not, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No.
25 Now, the issue apparently is whether, as Ms. Gustafson tells us,
1 that we should not redact the document and that it will be clear to the
2 Chamber what is relevant and where there is probative value in this -- in
3 these -- in this exhibit, and -- or whether it should be redacted so as
4 to keep away from the Chamber those irrelevant portions.
5 The Chamber will consider the matter and we'll take our time to
6 carefully look at it.
7 Please proceed.
8 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. And in your statement at paragraph 19, you describe reporting
10 incidents to the Gracac policija. You say you mainly reported them to
11 Ante Pogorolic, the chief of informations of the Gracac police, and
12 sometimes also to the duty officer.
13 When you reported these incidents to the Gracac police, did you
14 go to the police station to report them?
15 A. Yes, we did.
16 Q. I'd like it ask you about the Gracac police station. Do you
17 recall the building, recall going there?
18 A. No, I don't recall it.
19 Q. Do you remember seeing police in the area and patrol cars in the
21 A. In the town of Gracac
22 Q. In the town or in the wider area.
23 A. I have seen it on check-points, I have seen it -- yes. On, on
24 the fields also. I remember Mala Popina, I think I have other reports
25 also where I have seen them.
1 Q. So in addition to Mr. Pogorolic and the duty officer at the
2 police station you also saw other members of the police in the area?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, at paragraph 21 of your statement, you said: "Based on my
5 observations, I don't think the Gracac policija put in sufficient effort
6 to stop the criminals. We were able to visit all people in the villages
7 and collect information on crimes but the crimes kept happening. I think
8 the police could have done more to prevent crime from happening by, for
9 example, stopping cars without licence plates and patrolling the villages
10 more frequently."
11 Based on what you observed in the area on your patrols and in
12 your interactions with the police, who was patrolling the villages more
13 frequently, you and Luis Martins or the Gracac police?
14 A. We were there more frequently.
15 Q. And based on what you observed in the area, do you think the
16 police could have patrolled as frequently as you were patrolling?
17 A. Yes, I think so.
18 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could the witness please be shown 65 ter number
20 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue, the document on which the
21 Chamber still will have to deliberate on admission has not been MFI'd
22 yet. So that's the previous document.
23 Madam Registrar, could you give us the number.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 5374 will become
25 Exhibit P778, marked for identification.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. It will keep that
2 status for the time being.
3 MS. GUSTAFSON: If the text in the middle box of this statement
4 could be blown up so the witness can read it.
5 Q. Now, this is the incident of looting in Ivosevci that you
6 described in your statement from the 30th of August.
7 The report -- in the report you stated that many men dressed in
8 military uniform were looting household goods from houses.
9 And I'd just like you to describe to the Chamber more
10 specifically what you saw the soldiers doing.
11 A. What I can remember now is that we were travelling in our UN car.
12 This village was on the right side of the road, and as I write in the
13 report, we see all these people looting, carrying -- I don't remember
14 exactly what it was now, if it was TVs or whatsoever, but they were
15 carrying things into at least one truck. That's what I remember today.
16 Q. And the report says: "We spoke to one them and they stated that
17 they were protecting the civilians."
18 Do you remember that comment?
19 A. Yeah, I remember that, because what is what we usually did so I
20 cannot exactly recall this incident but that's what we did. We asked
21 people usually not what they were doing but if they saw people around or
22 -- yeah. We were just a little bit of fishing what they were doing and
23 to observe them so ... what I wrote here, that is what happened.
24 Q. Based on what you were seeing happening, did it appear to you
25 that the soldiers were doing something to protect the civilians in that
2 A. No.
3 Q. And at the bottom of the report it says: "Policija will be
5 Did you personally inform policija about this incident?
6 A. I don't remember.
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could that report be given a number, please,
8 Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
10 MR. KEHOE: No objections.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P779.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P779 is admitted into evidence.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: Now I'd like to move to another report, which is
15 65 ter number 5377.
16 Q. The report that is about to come up on your screen relates to the
17 Gracac cemetery. It's a report from the 11th of September.
18 MS. GUSTAFSON: And if the text could be expanded for the
19 witness, please.
20 THE WITNESS: Can I just add to the other report before that
21 is -- the soldiers were screaming -- one of them were screaming that they
22 would come after us.
23 MS. GUSTAFSON:
24 Q. I think you mentioned that in your statement as well.
25 A. Okay.
1 Q. In your statement, when you describe this report about the Gracac
2 cemetery, you said that the graves were visible from the main road and
3 that's why you noticed them.
4 Do you remember what it was about the graves or the graveyard
5 that caused you to enter the graveyard?
6 A. I think it was the pile of sand and -- yeah, the crosses. That's
7 what we saw from the road.
8 Q. And you describe in the report and in your statement about a
9 policija post there, and you stated in the report that it was 24-hour
10 post. Do you remember now how you knew that it was a 24-hour post?
11 A. No, I don't remember. Probably he told us this, this guy. But I
12 don't remember. Because we usually left the area around 4.00.
13 Q. And based on your knowledge of the area and your patrols and
14 experience as a police officer, did you understand why the police were
15 guarding or had a post at the cemetery?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Did you see any other policija posts like this set up in the
18 area, or was this the only one?
19 A. This was the only one, except the check-points at the crossings.
20 Q. Were there any permanent check-points at the crossings during the
21 time that you were there?
22 A. I don't remember today if they were permanent.
23 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could this report be given a number, please,
24 Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections.
1 MR. KEHOE: No objections, Judge.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P780.
4 JUDGE ORIE: P780 is admitted into evidence.
5 Please proceed.
6 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could the witness be shown Exhibit P261, please.
7 Q. The report that is about to come up on your screen is -- relates
8 to an incident from the 13th of September in Brgud. And if we could move
9 to page two of this document.
10 In your statement at page 14, you explained that you remembered
11 this incident and that you had given Prosecution colour photos of the
12 bodies. I'd just like you to familiarize yourself with this report and
13 then I'd like to show the witness 65 ter number 5372.
14 A. Yes, I remember it.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could we bring up 65 ter 5372.
16 Q. Are these the photos of that incident?
17 A. Yes, it is.
18 Q. And the report that we just looked at states that you found the
19 bodies outside house number 78.
20 MS. GUSTAFSON: Could we go back to the previous picture, please.
21 Q. Do you remember where house number 78 is, in relation to this
22 photo? Is it in the picture; is it to one side; it behind the person?
23 A. I don't remember.
24 Q. And in your statement, you explained that you looked around after
25 you found the bodies but you didn't see anything. Do you remember if you
1 went into any of the surrounding houses?
2 A. I don't remember.
3 Q. Thank you.
4 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'd like to get a number for these photos,
6 MR. KEHOE: No objections, Judge.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P781.
9 JUDGE ORIE: P781 is admitted into evidence.
10 MS. GUSTAFSON: Thank you. Now, I'd like the witness to be shown
11 65 ter number 2041, and if it could be shown in such a way that is not
12 visible to the public. And if we could move to page 2.
13 Q. I'm going to ask you one or two questions about this report, and
14 if could you answer without referring to the names of the victims that
15 would be helpful.
16 Do you remember this incident?
17 A. Yes, I remember it.
18 Q. Right about the middle of this report it explains that the victim
19 informed the police in Gracac.
20 Do you remember if you spoke to the victim about any steps that
21 the police had taken, or any investigation that it -- was taking place?
22 A. No, I don't remember if we discussed that. I remember that we
23 met a policija patrol there once, and we made more reports from these
24 people there. They had visitors quite often, not -- not by the police,
25 but by people who stole things from them, and I think she was beaten up
1 also -- or other people. So we went to Mala Popina quite often.
2 Q. And in general, if a -- if you recorded an incident and a victim
3 or witness told that you they had reported that incident to the police,
4 did you still follow up with the police about the incident or did -- or
6 A. We followed it up, yes.
7 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'd like tender this report, Your Honour, and I'd
8 like to tender it under seal to protect the privacy of the victims if
10 MR. KEHOE: No objection, Judge.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit number P782.
13 JUDGE ORIE: P782 is admitted into evidence. I have forgotten to
14 add to that, under seal.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON:
16 Q. Thank you, Ms. Malm.
17 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour, have I no further questions.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Gustafson.
19 Who will be first to cross-examine Ms. Malm?
20 Yes. Ms. Malm, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Kehoe.
21 Mr. Kehoe is counsel for Mr. Gotovina.
22 THE WITNESS: Okay.
23 MR. KEHOE: If I could just have one moment, Your Honour, to get
24 set up.
25 Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
1 Q. Good afternoon, Ms. Malm.
2 A. Good afternoon.
3 Q. I'm -- I'd like to ask you a few questions about what was just
4 discussed on your direct examination and some of your reports, both your
5 statement and your UN CIVPOL report. So if I jump around a little bit,
6 bear with me, and if you don't understand any question that I ask you,
7 please stop me.
8 A. Okay.
9 Q. Ms. Malm, first, when you were -- at the early part of August in
10 your statement, you note that you were in Sector North, and I believe the
11 town is Topusko, is that right?
12 A. That's right.
13 Q. And you were there during Operation Storm. Is that right?
14 A. Yes, that's right.
15 Q. The 4th and 5th? And if I can go to your 1997 statement,
16 1D49-0004. This is a copy of your 1997 statement. That's the first
18 MR. KEHOE: If we could go to the second page, five
19 paragraphs down.
20 Q. Now, before I ask you about this, Ms. Malm, the area that you
21 were in was controlled by the ARSK on the 4th of -- up to the 4th and 5th
22 of August of 1995, was it not?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. And you note in this report, in that paragraph, again, one, two,
25 three, four, five, about halfway down, in talking about the ARSK:
1 "Operation Storm started early in the morning of 04 August 1995
2 area was not shelled or bombarded. There was no military activity of the
3 army of the RSK. Before Operation Storm, there was several battalions in
4 the territory of Sector North but they did not resist Croats. They just
5 withdrew from the territory the day after the operation had started. It
6 seemed to me that they received such an order from the government, not to
7 fight, to surrender weapons to UNPROFOR and flee to Bosnia."
8 Just waiting for the translation to catch up with us.
9 So the -- according to your statement, Ms. Malm, the ARSK
10 withdrew and went to Bosnia
11 1995. Is that correct?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. And it seemed to you, did it not, that they received an order to
14 do that or got some indication to do that.
15 A. That is it what we were told by the interpreters, the Serbian
17 Q. Did those -- did those Serbian interpreters inform you that their
18 ARSK communications with their headquarters in Knin had broken down?
19 A. No. I was told that the government in Knin had left earlier,
20 before Operation Storm. That's what the -- the interpreters told me.
21 Q. So if I can just reformulate what you said. You were told that
22 the government in Knin had left, so then all the soldiers left as well.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. So would it be fair to say that when the people in charge of the
25 RSK departed in Knin, the soldiers that were in Sector North chose to
1 leave once they learned of that fact?
2 A. Most probably. And, of course, we saw RSK soldiers leaving with
3 tanks. Because I think I was out on the street around 6th, 7th of August
4 so they were still in the area going with the -- with the refugee convoy.
5 Q. So as late as the 6th or 7th of August, the ARSK military
6 personnel, in conjunction with the convoys, were moving towards Bosnia
7 A. Yeah. I remember I saw at least one tank with the -- with the
9 Q. Now, Ms. Malm, when you are talking about the events in
10 Sector North and Sector South, you were aware that as of the 6th of
11 August of 1995 that the constitutional authority of the Republic of
13 Are you aware of that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You also mentioned your basic area of expertise was in the civil
16 arena with the civilian police. Is that accurate?
17 A. Absolutely.
18 Q. And that accounts, I take it, for your statement in paragraph 23
19 of P774, that -- do you have that? I don't want to get too quickly ahead
20 of you. Paragraph 23 of 774.
21 "In general, I don't know anything about the relationship
22 between the Croatian police and the military."
23 A. Sorry, I didn't follow.
24 Q. I'm sorry. I am just trying to reference to you a point and then
25 go to a next point.
1 In your statement, P774, at paragraph 23 --
2 MR. KEHOE: If we could bring that up on the screen. That will
3 be page 7 of that document. In the middle of that paragraph --
4 Q. You see where it writes: "In general, I don't know ..."
5 Do you see that Ms. Malm?
6 A. Yes. That's true.
7 Q. So, in general, you don't know anything about the relationship
8 between the Croatian police and the military because you were basically
9 involved with the civilian police?
10 A. That's right.
11 Q. So when, for instance, P265 --
12 MR. KEHOE: If we could put that up on the screen.
13 THE WITNESS: Sir, I also want to make clear, this report is
14 signed by me but Luis Martins was beside me when this Russian
15 investigator from ICTY was interviewing me. So it is also his words in
16 this report.
17 Q. I'm sorry, ma`am, just if I can correct it with the assistance of
18 the Prosecution.
19 The point that I just read to you on P744 is your statement of
20 the 29th and the 30th of July of 2008. This is not the statement that
21 counsel put in of December of 1995 where you signed it with Luis Martins.
22 So just to be clear, and if there is ever any question in your mind which
23 report we're talking about, just take your time and we can address them
24 point by point, okay?
25 A. All right.
1 Q. So when we turn to this report, P265, and in this, which was
2 mentioned in your evidence -- your 65 ter evidence, it notes that when
3 you got to Otric junction, "we were stopped by a Croatian military and
4 civilian police at their check-point."
5 So this is a check-point manned by the MPs and the civilian
6 police together.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And you note: "They informed us that we were not allowed to
9 proceed our patrol without special permission from Knin military
10 authorities. They stated it is a military zone."
11 Now, on the -- this statement which is the 20th of September,
12 1995, was the HV operating in that area on the 20th of September, 1995
13 A. I don't remember if I saw them that day.
14 Q. Well, okay. So you don't know, as you sit here, one way or the
15 other whether or not --
16 A. No, of course, if they were at this check-point, of course, yes,
17 since I wrote the report.
18 Q. So other than the people at the check-point, do you know if there
19 was military operations going on in that area?
20 A. Outside the check-point, I don't remember that.
21 Q. Now, I would like to just touch on briefly some of the matters
22 that you addressed concerning some of the issues that you discussed with
23 residents of villages, if I may. And you talk about in some of your
24 reports soldiers, individuals wearing military clothing, people telling
25 you that people were walking around with military clothing on. Do you
1 recall generally those conversations? We'll go into them a little more
2 specifically. Do you remember those?
3 A. Well, I remember that quite often we were told when we made the
4 report that it was soldiers in uniforms.
5 Q. Okay. Now, at that time, did you know if those soldiers were
6 demobilised troops?
7 A. What is demobilised troops?
8 Q. Were you aware -- let me back up.
9 Were you aware that approximately the 9th of August, the HV
10 demobilised 70.000 troops, approximately, and that is, took them out of
11 service of the army of the Republic of Croatia
12 A. No, I was not.
13 Q. Were you aware that many people walking around in Sector South
14 and Sector North wearing camouflage clothing were no longer part of the
16 A. I don't remember if I saw people in -- civilians in camouflage.
17 I don't remember.
18 Q. Well, if a civilian was in camouflage clothing, would you know
19 that person was in fact a civilian and not a soldier?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Now, so there is some -- well, let us address a particular point
22 and maybe we can develop this idea of who these folks are. And if I may
23 go to your report that was just put in evidence by counsel on Ivosevci,
24 4168, and I believe that is P779.
25 MR. KEHOE: If we could bring that up on the screen. If we can
1 just blow that up just a little bit more. Okay.
2 Q. Now, we -- this is a document that was just put in evidence. And
3 it notes that you observed many men dressed in military uniforms. And
4 that means camouflage, doesn't it?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. And they were looting household goods from houses. They were
7 travelling in one truck, plate number ZD 2353 AB and one red car, plate
8 number ZD 34 U.
9 Now, looking at that, Ms. Malm, you know that those licence
10 plates are for vehicles that emanate from Zadar, don't they?
11 A. Yes, that's correct.
12 Q. And, likewise, you know that vehicles that belonged to the
13 Republic of Croatia
14 letters HV, don't they?
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. So these individuals that were in this particular -- these two
17 vehicles were in vehicles that were not part of the Republic of
19 were they?
20 A. I don't know. I just report what I saw.
21 Q. I understand, ma`am. But you just told us that licence plates
22 for military vehicles belonging to the army of the Republic of Croatia
23 have HV in them and these have plates that are from the city of Zadar
24 And don't those plates normally or aren't those plates normally on
25 civilian vehicles belonging to civilians and not the military?
1 A. I believe so.
2 Q. Now, let us turn your attention to 65 ter 5380. I don't know if
3 that has been, in fact, put into evidence yet or if we have a number for
5 MR. KEHOE: I don't believe we have a number for that yet, Judge.
6 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
8 MR. KEHOE: Shall I just deal with the 65 ter number and then
9 clean it up later on.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course the issue is that Madam Registrar
11 prepared now a list for the exhibit numbers so we have to check whether
12 the document you're referring to now appears on that list.
13 MS. GUSTAFSON: It does, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: It does, Your Honour.
15 Then it will receive a number anyhow. Madam Registrar is kind
16 enough to single it out from her list so that we immediately deal with
17 this one. That would be, Madam Registrar ...
18 THE REGISTRAR: That would be Exhibit number P793, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that you want to tender this soon,
20 Mr. Kehoe.
21 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I think this was part of the series of
22 documents that were being presented by the Prosecution.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So then ...
24 MR. KEHOE: I was just dealing with it on cross because it was a
25 part of that list.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then since there are no objections, this one
2 certainly will be admitted in evidence.
3 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: So we have now on our screen P793.
5 Please proceed.
6 MR. KEHOE:
7 Q. Ms. Malm, just take a look at this report which is of the 20th of
8 September. The gentleman that was in this informed you - and this is the
9 third paragraph down - that: "On the 15th of September around 1530,
10 three armed men between 35 years of age were in this hamlet and all of
11 them used military uniforms. They parked two cars 200 metres from his
12 house. One yellow colour, the other blue. Those cars with, I'm not
13 sure, triller and without number plates."
14 Now you use the term "used military uniforms." What you meant by
15 that, ma'am, was -- or what this individual was telling you was that
16 individuals were dressed in camouflage, but the implication is that they
17 were not real soldiers. Isn't that right?
18 A. This report is written by Luis Martins, but -- yes, he probably
19 means camouflage uniform. That's what I believe.
20 Q. But the further implication that in using military uniforms is
21 that the people that came, these men that came were not active-duty real
22 soldiers. Isn't that right?
23 A. I don't know.
24 Q. Well, let us probe yet further in this. We look down again and
25 there are two vehicles, one yellow and the other blue, without number
2 Now, you know based on being in that area for sometime that those
3 vehicles did not belong to the army of the Republic of Croatia
4 had no plates with HV on them. Isn't that correct?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. So when you got this information, ma`am, did you conclude, based
7 on what this gentleman told you, that these three armed men who came to
8 this village were not HV soldiers?
9 A. Well, I'm not even sure if the villager know if it was from the
10 army or, as you say, if it is civilians then -- I don't know.
11 Q. Okay. Likewise, if we could just touch on the end of this. I
12 mean, you noted that you were doing quite a bit of -- you said -- during
13 your direct examination you were doing more patrolling of villages than
14 the civilian police. At least in this report the last sentence reflects
15 that: "They also informed us that they -- now they started to see more
16 often the policija from Gracac in the area on patrol."
17 Do you see that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. So at least by this point, would you agree, Ms. Malm, that the
20 Gracac police department was getting up to speed and was starting to get
21 more active in patrolling?
22 A. Well, according to this Dragan Milanovic in Palanka village, it
23 looks like, yes.
24 Q. Now let us turn to 65 ter 5379, if I may. I don't know if we
25 have a number for that yet.
1 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, that is another one that we don't have a
2 number but it is part of the list of documents that was set forth by the
4 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps, Madam Registrar could help us out.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P792.
6 MR. KEHOE: Thank you.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Which, since you use it and since there are no
8 objections, will be admitted into evidence as part of the list.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. KEHOE:
11 Q. Now, if we look at this, this is a report that is the 9th of
12 September -- excuse me, the 16th of September.
13 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
14 MR. KEHOE:
15 Q. If can you just take a quick look at that.
16 Now, this reflects that on the 7th of August, I guess about the
17 time that you still saw ARSK military personnel moving through
18 Sector North, this reflects that a woman told you that: "In the
19 afternoon of the 7th, 30 Croatian soldiers came to the village. They
20 drank coffee with the inhabitants and then left."
21 Did she tell that you these Croatian soldiers treated her well
22 and just had coffee and moved on?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And she told you that two soldiers came back. Do you see that
25 next sentence?
1 A. Yes, yes.
2 Q. And took her TV set.
3 Now, since the TV set wasn't taken when the 30 soldiers were
4 there, when you were writing this report, Ms. Malm, did this information
5 indicate to you that these two soldiers were operating on their own?
6 A. Well, they came back alone.
7 Q. Well, let me take you -- let me take this. 30 soldiers are in
8 there and they're drinking coffee, I take it, exchanging pleasantries
9 with this woman on the 7th of August and they move on. They don't take
10 any TV set, they don't do anything. Thereafter, two come back and take a
11 TV set. Based on being a law enforcement officer, Ms. Malm, did that
12 information indicate to you that these two soldiers were operating on
13 their own and it wasn't some part of concerted military activity?
14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
15 MS. GUSTAFSON: I think he is asking the witness to speculate.
16 She wasn't there.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Well --
18 MR. KEHOE: I --
19 JUDGE ORIE: You're asking for conclusions. This witness has
20 several times tried, Mr. Kehoe, to -- although in questions you were
21 asking for conclusions to take you back to facts, which is right to do.
22 Doesn't make much sense to ask these kind of conclusions. I mean, if any
23 conclusions are to be drawn from that, why would we ask the witness
24 whether the other 28 were looking in another 14 houses for televisions,
25 what it would mean that they were coming back alone.
1 The witness rightly said, What I saw is the two coming back
2 alone. We do not know. You could ask the witness whether she knew where
3 the other 28 were, whether they were still together, whether they were
4 split up in groups of two, what they were doing, but it doesn't make
5 much --it doesn't assist the Chamber very much if you, more or less, push
6 the witness into the conclusions you consider the most probably ones.
7 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Judge, the witness can draw the conclusions
8 that she has, but if I just may analogize those questions to the
9 questions asked by Ms. Gustafson, for instance, did you believe based on
10 operating in the area whether or not the Gracac police department could
11 have patrolled these areas more than they had --
12 JUDGE ORIE: If you would have objected to that, apart from that
13 it is part of the statement already to which did you not object, I would
14 have listened to you, I would have dealt with it, and what is true for
15 you, of course is similarly true for Ms. Gustafson without any doubt.
16 MR. KEHOE: I will do -- Your Honour, I will be guided
17 accordingly in the future and will be more vigilant in those objections.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
19 MR. KEHOE:
20 Q. Ma`am, as you continue on this statement it notes that: "These
21 two were dressed in military uniforms from the National Guard." When you
22 were writing that, did you understand that the National Guard -- what did
23 you understand the National Guard to mean? Was that the home guard
25 A. National Guard, they are there to protect the civilians.
1 Q. What element of the HV was the National Guard? Were they home
2 guard units?
3 A. I don't know.
4 Q. So when you wrote down here "National Guard," is that information
5 that you received from this individual in the village?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And you don't have any knowledge with regard to military
8 formations above and beyond what these individuals are telling you. Is
9 that right?
10 A. Can you repeat the question, please.
11 Q. Well, the information concerning National Guard, you don't have
12 any information or knowledge about HV military formations and you're just
13 writing down there what these individuals are telling you?
14 A. Correct.
15 Q. Let us go to another point, which is 65 ter 5381.
16 MR. KEHOE: And if I can just get the actual number, being -- it
17 would be P794.
18 Q. Now, this report reflects in the bottom paragraph of this
19 document as of the 22nd of September, 1995: "Many armed civilians are
20 around to steal and intimidate who lives alone and without any chance to
21 defend themselves."
22 Do you see that, Ms. Malm?
23 A. Yes, I see it.
24 Q. And, again, were you getting consistent information that there
25 were armed civilians that were not in camouflage, that were not -- have
1 any trappings of military wear that were committing crimes in the area?
2 A. I don't remember hearing that. This is Luis Martins who wrote
3 this report.
4 Q. Well, it says that -- at the top of this page that you were
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. Do you recall being told this, that armed civilians are around?
8 A. No. I believe that he made a mistake in the writing there.
9 Because I don't remember that I heard that the civilians were armed. The
10 few people we met in Gracac I don't think they had any weapons at all.
11 Q. Ma`am, during the course of your witness statement, you verified
12 that these were accurate reports. Are you now telling the Chamber that
13 this report by Mr. Martins or whomever wrote this report was inaccurate?
14 A. No, but I cannot remember civilians are around. I don't
16 Q. So right now you're just saying that you don't remember this
17 event? Or this comment.
18 A. Let me think about it for a few minutes. Can I read the whole
19 report first.
20 Q. Absolutely, ma'am, absolutely. And let me say, Ms. Malm, at any
21 time we're moving through these reports and you need more time to read
22 one of the reports, please just advise me accordingly and we will take
23 the time and I believe --
24 A. Thank you.
25 Q. -- the Trial Chamber would permit that.
1 A. Yeah. No, I don't remember this report.
2 Q. Okay. As you sit here, do you have any reason to question the
3 accuracy of this statement being given to at least one UN CIVPOL
4 member --
5 A. No, maybe I was too quick to answer then. Probably.
6 Q. You're going to have to just -- go into that a little bit more
7 deeply. I was about to ask you: As you sit here, you don't have reason
8 to question the accuracy of the statement be given to at least one CIVPOL
9 member. Is that right?
10 A. Yeah. And it could be right, because I think I even myself
11 remember to seeing one man in civilian clothes running from a house when
12 I was about to enter the house, and he was carrying like a hunting rifle,
13 so he ran away from me. And I think he was in civilian clothes.
14 Q. Okay. Let us move to 65 ter 924, which is P796.
15 Now, this is an event of -- that was with you and Mr. Martins.
16 And in this particular event, we have another particular crime and we
17 have an individual that's in a white Volkswagen with no registration
18 plate. Do you see that? It's in the --
19 A. Yeah, I see it.
20 Q. Okay. And after the soldiers left, the police did, in fact,
21 respond to this village, didn't they? Look at the fourth paragraph down.
22 A. Okay, yes.
23 Q. Now, again with this white vehicle with no registration plate
24 based on your knowledge as an investigator, that, likewise, is not a
25 vehicle of the army of the Republic of Croatia
1 A. No, it is not.
2 Q. Let us turn to the last paragraph of this. It says:
3 "Mr. Cvjetkovic informed us there is a lot of people dressed in military
4 uniforms in the area."
5 Now is that what he told you, ma'am, that people were dressed in
6 military clothing, as opposed to describing them as soldiers and active
7 duty soldiers that people were dressed in military uniforms? Is that
8 what he said?
9 A. That's probably what he said.
10 Q. Let us move on to 65 ter -- and I want you to keep in mind the
11 white Volkswagen that is in the document that we just addressed. And if
12 I could move to 65 ter 5382, which is P797.
13 This is again a report several days thereafter talking about a --
14 at least people coming with two civilian cars, one red and one white,
15 without registration plates.
16 Now, did you ever, when you were down there, make the connection
17 between those two white cars that were operating in this same area in
18 these civilian vehicles? Did you make that connection at all?
19 A. No, we didn't. And it looks simple when we see it like this, but
20 with all these incidents that happens it was not that easy to connect
21 different reports to each other. Because in the evening we could come
22 back with five, maybe ten reports.
23 Q. So when you came back with these reports, there was no attempt to
24 synthesize the information so you would all try to understand exactly
25 what was transpiring? For instance, whether or not these people that
1 were operating in this white vehicle were civilians, operating without
2 plates or if they were operating in a vehicle with army of Republic of
4 A. No. We just collected the information and informed the policija
5 and the Knin HQ.
6 Q. Okay. Now, we talked a little bit about -- about Croatian
7 soldiers. I mean, we talked previously about the Croatian soldiers
8 drinking coffee with the woman in the village.
9 There were other incidents when soldiers attempted to help
10 individuals in the -- civilians in these villages, did they not?
11 A. I remember one couple. The soldiers came there to have barbecue
12 once in a while.
13 Q. And did they assist the people in the village or did they --
14 A. I don't remember if they assisted them. I just remember that
15 about the barbecue.
16 Q. I mean, let us turn to 65 ter 5383 and that 5383 would be P795.
17 Is that right?
18 [Defence counsel confer]
19 MR. KEHOE: Oh, I'm sorry, P788.
20 If I may, just correct that. 5378, which is 791.
21 JUDGE ORIE: That's correct.
22 MR. KEHOE: P791; I apologise. P791. If we could put that on
23 the screen.
24 Q. I'm just going to show you a couple of reports, the first one
25 being P791.
1 This is an incident where an individual was -- they attempted to
2 take his vehicle. Do you recall this, ma`am, and the soldiers tried to
3 get it back. That's in the last paragraph, the second-to-last paragraph.
4 And let me show you another document which is 65 ter 5383, which
5 is P788.
6 MR. KEHOE: If we can turn to that.
7 Q. The second paragraph refers to an intimidation here and the
8 intimidation stopped because one of the soldiers told the other soldier
9 to stop.
10 Now, did those events -- I mean, those events transpire where
11 there was intercession by one soldier -- by, I guess, another soldier who
12 was trying to prevent these people being abused. Did that happen? Were
13 you told about events like that during the course of your deployment?
14 A. Absolutely. I have it on report here, and it actually happened
15 to me once also. I think you have the report also. A soldier who was
16 trying to steal my glasses and one of the other soldiers told him to give
17 it back, so, of course, it happened.
18 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I don't know if it's the time for the
19 break or if you want me to continue.
20 JUDGE ORIE: It is. I don't know how much time you would still
21 need, Mr. Kehoe.
22 If you have to look at your papers then certainly more than is
23 still available.
24 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could you, nevertheless, give us an indication after
1 the break.
2 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: We'll now have a break and will resume at a quarter
4 past 4.00.
5 --- Recess taken at 3.49 p.m.
6 --- On resuming at 4.21 p.m.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, could you give us the estimate I asked
8 for before the break.
9 MR. KEHOE: At the most an hour, Judge.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
11 MR. KEHOE:
12 Q. Ms. Malm, just if we could just talk about the reports that you
13 put into evidence generally. When you were seeing people looting after
14 Operation Storm, be they Domobrani or people in camouflage or civilians,
15 did you know that these people on many instances had their property
16 looted between 1991 and 1995 when the Serbs expelled the Croats?
17 Did you know that?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. So you knew at that point that many of these people were exacting
20 revenge for what happened to them.
21 A. I'm not sure if I thought about it at that time. But as you ask
22 me now, of course, I know that something had been going on before also.
23 Q. Now, you mentioned in direct examination about the Gracac police
24 department and, if I can just speak generically about it, that they
25 didn't do much to stop crime and you didn't find answers on the progress
1 of your investigations.
2 I mean, first off, you didn't report everything that you observed
3 to the Gracac police department, did you?
4 A. Not immediately. Sometimes it was the team leader, Lennart
5 Widen, who brought it up with, I believe, the chief of policija.
6 Q. The fact is you didn't report every incident or possible crime
7 that you observed, did you?
8 A. Not in person, no. But I reported it to the team leader, to the
10 Q. Well, let`s look at, on P774, paragraph 10.
11 By the way, as we're bringing that up, just following up on the
12 question that I asked you about people looting because they had been
13 victims of looting between 1991 and 1995, did any of these people who
14 were doing the looting tell you that they needed to take some of these
15 items from some of these houses in order to live? Did any of them ever
16 tell you that?
17 A. No. I cannot remember that I even spoke to them.
18 Q. So you didn't engage them in conversation as to why they're --
19 A. Not -- no, because they were quite aggressive, as far as I
20 remember it. One person even threw a stone at us and, as I told you, I
21 saw one guy running away with a rifle, so we did not try to stop them or
22 speak to them about these crimes.
23 Q. So let me --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, may I ask you one clarification.
25 MR. KEHOE: Yes, sir.
1 JUDGE ORIE: You were talking about when you saw people looting
2 and were you aware that these people were -- I take it that you're
3 talking about categories rather than as person A, B, C, D.
4 MR. KEHOE: Categories.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes.
6 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Otherwise we would have to establish the --
8 MR. KEHOE: Yes, categories.
9 JUDGE ORIE: -- basis for this.
10 Yes, please proceed.
11 MR. KEHOE:
12 Q. So if I can round this out, you never went and talked to these
13 people and say, Why are you taking products from an individual house and
14 putting it in yours.
15 A. No. Not as far as I remember.
16 Q. If can I go back to my question before about incidents, in
17 paragraph 10 you talked about the incident where some individual
18 threatened you, and in the last sentence of that paragraph, you said:
19 "We did not report every incident such as this one."
20 A. No. I don't think we reported incidents that happened to
21 ourselves, actually. I think we -- we just reported when it happened to
22 the civilians.
23 Q. So if a crime took place concerning an UN CIVPOL member that
24 would not be reported to the Croatian police?
25 A. Not when it came to myself. I don't think I did it, as far as I
2 Q. But that was your decision, that wasn't UN policy, I trust?
3 A. I don't think so. I think I was at that time more concerned
4 about the civilians in the area than myself.
5 Q. By the way, ma`am, your reports to the Gracac police department,
6 they were oral reports. Is that right?
7 A. I believe so. I remember one incident we went to the duty
8 officer, so that's oral.
9 Q. Paragraph 19 of the same document that is on the screen.
10 A. Pardon? Paragraph --
11 Q. 19. You'll see it.
12 A. Uh-huh, uh-huh.
13 Q. In the middle of the page, four lines down in paragraph 19: "Our
14 reports were verbal."
15 Do you see that?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Paragraph 19.
18 A. 19, yes.
19 Q. Four lines down.
20 A. Uh-huh, yes. Mm-hm.
21 Q. In your home jurisdiction in Sweden, are your police reports when
22 you convey information to another police department, is that verbal or in
24 A. I suppose it depends what it is concerning. But in this case if
25 we went there, we didn't even have the report ready. So we had to go and
1 inform them this is what happened maybe two hours ago. This is the
2 information we received.
3 Q. Ms. Malm, in your home jurisdiction if you routinely provide --
4 if you provide information from one police department to another, do you
5 routinely do that verbally or in writing?
6 A. Well, I don't do it myself; it is higher chiefs. If I receive a
7 report from a -- or an incident from a civilian, of course, I will write
8 it down.
9 Q. Ma`am, let me continue on here.
10 You said that they didn't do enough to stop crime. When it came
11 to getting around check-points, you could easily get around check-points,
12 couldn't you?
13 A. Easily, I don't know. I don't remember.
14 Q. Did you get around check-points --
15 A. I remember once that we were being stopped. That's what I
17 Q. Did you get around a check-point?
18 A. Well, I don't think they allow us at that time.
19 Q. I want you to turn your attention to paragraph 23 of the same
20 time document. The middle of the page. Paragraph 23. Middle of the
22 When you talk about not knowing any of the -- about the
23 relationship between Croatian police and the military. This is talking
24 about getting stopped at the check-point in Otric. "We drove through the
25 fields to get around a check-point the same day we were stopped."
1 A. Yeah.
2 Q. So in fact, you and Mr. -- I believe you were with Mr. Martins at
3 this time, got around this check-point quite easily, didn't you?
4 A. Depends how you see it.
5 Q. Well, you tell me --
6 A. We went through the fields, yes. So we went there. But still we
7 were being stopped.
8 Q. After you got stopped, you and Mr. Martins --
9 A. Yeah, but we took another way, another road.
10 Q. Excuse me. After you got stopped, you and Mr. Martins got around
11 this check-point by driving through fields.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And if civilians who were engaged in some type of improper
14 conduct wanted to get around that check-point, they could have done the
15 same thing that you and Mr. Martins did. Correct?
16 A. Probably.
17 Q. In fact, when you were going through this area you were dealing
18 with a lot of rumours about crimes as well as particular criminal events,
19 weren't you?
20 A. What do you mean by rumours?
21 Q. Let me turn your attention to paragraph 5. I'll give you an
22 example. If we can go to the bottom of page 2 of 22 on the same
23 document, paragraph 5. If you read that bottom part of the page. "I
24 usually went on patrols with Luis Martins and one interpreter. We
25 patrolled daily, seven days a week. Our general practice when we
1 patrolled was to stop in the villages that we visited and look around.
2 For example, we would look inside wells because we heard that people were
3 sometimes put in wells. We never found any bodies in wells."
4 Now the bodies being thrown in wells was a rumour that was
5 rampant in the area, wasn't it?
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. And you found no evidence during your patrols to support that?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. Now, with regard to the actual investigations by the Gracac
10 police department, again, you noted that they could have done more to
11 patrol and that you weren't getting the information that you needed. But
12 let me -- before I ask you questions in that regard, I would like to show
13 you a document, 65 ter 2091. And this is an UN CIVPOL Sector South
15 And if you can take a look at this, report, I believe you
16 referred to this in one of your statements, and if we can go ten pages
18 Now, we were talking about the ability or you were on direct
19 examination talking about the ability of the Gracac police department to
20 do more. And let us look at the second paragraph at the top of that
21 page, where it notes: "Regularly joint patrols with CRO POL
22 police, have tried to be established. Some of these have been cancelled
23 because CRO
24 Now, were you aware of that fact when you were down there that
25 the Croatian police, the civilian police, did not have enough police
2 A. Not as I remember today.
3 Q. Let us go to the first page of this document, at the bottom of
4 the page. Talking about patrols and cooperation.
5 "In this level, it seem that the cooperation is good. However,
6 many joint patrols have been cancelled due to lack of police officers and
8 Now, were you aware of both of those shortages on behalf of the
9 Croatian police when you were in Sector South and Sector North, or
10 especially Gracac, that is, the paucity or lack of police officers and
12 A. Not what I remember today.
13 Q. You also mentioned to us that -- and it says in your report that
14 you weren't getting information back on investigations. Do you recall
15 that generally?
16 A. Yes, I remember my report also about that issue.
17 Q. And if we can -- you actually discuss it for just reference
18 points, Your Honours, in paragraph 19 of P -- of P774.
19 Let us look at some documents, and if I can first bring up P425.
20 Now, as we're bringing this document up, ma`am, were you aware
21 that crime was being investigated in the Gracac area, not by the police
22 station in Gracac but by the arm of the civilian police in Zadar? Were
23 you aware of that?
24 A. Not as I remember today. I remember about a judge mentioned in
25 reports coming to the area. But not today.
1 Q. Let us turn -- this is P425, if we can go to the next page.
2 This is a -- a situation where you came with others, as you can
3 see, you're at the top, your name is at the top. And about midway it
4 notes that with regard to the first homicide of Milan Marcetic that one
5 commissioner and one judge from Zadar came to this place and then with
6 their order the police took the body to Zadar.
7 Now, from that, ma`am, did you inquire whether or not this was
8 being investigated in Zadar.
9 A. I didn't understand the question.
10 Q. When you were writing this report and you were getting this
11 information about a commissioner and a judge coming to the village to
12 investigate, did you inquire whether this crime was being investigated in
13 Zadar as opposed to in the Gracac police department?
14 A. I don't remember that.
15 Q. And, likewise, with the next homicide at the bottom of the page,
16 you likewise received the same information on the second death that,
17 again, a commissioner and a judge came from Zadar to examine the scene
18 and to examine -- and to take the body, didn't they?
19 A. Yes. Looks like it.
20 Q. Would you agree with me that when you made this statement as to
21 whether or not something is being investigated certainly to your
22 satisfaction, it is important to know who exactly is doing the
24 A. Yes. But the incidents were brought up to the Gracac police and
25 if I remember it from other reports, I think they have mentioned that it
1 should be investigated by Zadar. I think so. But still, why didn't we
2 receive any answers?
3 Q. Well, ma`am, when you received the information that this was
4 being investigated from -- in Zadar, did you make inquiries of the
5 criminal investigation unit in Zadar as to what was happening with this
7 A. I don't remember the exact procedure how it was done. Of course
8 we asked for an answer but how it was done, I don't remember.
9 Q. Well, let us turn to the next page which documents in the same --
10 in this same exhibit which documents yet further investigation, were you
11 aware that individuals were -- from the village were brought down to
12 Zadar in an attempt to identify any -- or a potential perpetrator of this
13 crime. Were you aware of that?
14 A. I don't remember this, no. I --
15 Q. Now, were you aware of any incident when you were in the Gracac
16 area or in the Obrovac area, where the police department solved -- a
17 Croatian police department entity solved a crime based on information
18 that CIVPOL this provided?
19 A. Not as I remember today.
20 Q. Let us go back to the report that we had up previously; that
21 would be 65 ter 2091.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, I don't find that on the list of the
23 Prosecution. You neither tendered it.
24 MR. KEHOE: I will tender it, Your Honour.
25 JUDGE ORIE: You will tender it.
1 MR. KEHOE: I will tender this. At this time I will tender
2 65 ter 2091.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections.
4 MS. GUSTAFSON: No, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, 65 ter P2091 would be...
6 THE REGISTRAR: Would be Exhibit D740, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE ORIE: D740 is admitted into evidence.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. KEHOE: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 If we could go to ten pages in on that document. And about
11 midway down, notes on the meeting of 24/10/1995 in Benkovac: "24/10/1995
12 in Benkovac, chief policija Mr. Nica, K-n-e-z, Knez, informed that
13 because of the information given to CRO POL by UN CIVPOL about the number
14 of the plates of a car seen in Gosici village, they had solved a murder
15 case ..."
16 Now, did you know about that, ma`am?
17 A. I don't remember it today.
18 Q. Would it be accurate to say, as you sit here, you have no idea of
19 investigations that were being conducted by the Ministry of the Interior
20 of the Republic of Croatia
21 that accurate?
22 A. Well, I assume so, unless the chief of investigation in Gracac
23 didn't inform us. I don't know why he would not inform us at the same
25 Q. My question to you is, ma`am, do you know what the Republic of
3 A. No. Not as far as I remember today.
4 Q. Now, let me cover a couple of points, if I may.
5 And if we could just bring back up 65 ter -- excuse me, P780.
6 This is a document that was discussed by counsel during your
7 direct examination. And it notes that this is the situation where the
8 police were protecting the graveyard. Is that right?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Were these graves -- were these bodies being buried in conformity
11 with humanitarian law; do you know?
12 MS. GUSTAFSON: Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: Before that question is asked, perhaps a
15 foundation could be established as to the witness's knowledge of
16 humanitarian law and burial of bodies.
17 MR. KEHOE: Just asking if she knows if they were buried in
18 accordance with humanitarian law.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Is that in answer to Ms. Gustafson's --
20 MR. KEHOE: Well --
21 JUDGE ORIE: -- objection? She says it needs --
22 MR. KEHOE: I don't believe it needs a -- I think the question
23 is --
24 JUDGE ORIE: You consider it for every witness just to have
25 knowledge of humanitarian law in such a way that you could answer this
1 question? Doesn't need expertise there?
2 MR. KEHOE: Well, to a degree of a person being in the area that
3 is involved in that. The knowledge of whether or not bodies are being
4 buried in conformity with humanitarian law is not a quantum leap as to
5 whether or not she knows, but I'll make the -- I will lay the foundation.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I guess, if she's -- it has been
7 represented she is testifying and reporting observations of violations of
8 humanitarian law so I suppose the foundation question was answered in her
9 direct examination.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, if I'm expected to report on the
11 health situation of a population, I'm not yet a medical doctor.
12 Nevertheless, I can describe certain observations I make. You offered
13 kindly enough, Mr. Kehoe, to lay a foundation. Please do so.
14 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
15 Q. Do you know how bodies are supposed to be buried in conformity
16 with humanitarian law?
17 A. No, I'm not.
18 Q. When you looked at the Gracac cemetery and you saw these bodies,
19 do you have any idea where these bodies came from?
20 A. No.
21 Q. There was a 24-hour guard protecting this area, wasn't there?
22 A. Not from the beginning but at the end, yes.
23 Q. Let's go -- as of your report on the 11th of September of 1995,
24 there 's a 24-hour a-day-guard of that cemetery, right?
25 A. At this time, yes.
1 Q. This is taking place when, you have testified, that looting and
2 other crimes are taking place in the area by people coming back into the
3 area. Isn't it?
4 A. Can you repeat, please.
5 Q. This 24-hour guard at the Gracac cemetery is guarding this
6 graveyard at a time when your reports reflect that people are telling you
7 that a variety of crimes are takes place. Isn't that right? Happening
8 at the same time.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Given that situation, Ms. Malm, is -- don`t you believe it is
11 eminently reasonable for the Croatian police department to take the wise
12 course and protect bodies, especially Serb bodies, which may be in this
13 cemetery? Don't you think that is perfectly reasonable for them to do?
14 A. I didn't question this -- this check-point, if that's what you
16 Q. My question is, in an area that you, from your reports attest,
17 people are telling you many different crimes are taking place, is it not
18 eminently reasonable for the Croatian police department to put a 24-hour
19 guard on a Serb cemetery to protect those bodies? Isn't that reasonable?
20 A. I cannot answer that question.
21 MR. KEHOE: One moment, Your Honour.
22 [Defence counsel confer]
23 MR. KEHOE:
24 Q. Let me turn your attention to one last area and you, in your
25 reports, have told us or you have admitted into evidence some reports on
1 some killing incidents.
2 Now, all of the information you received about people either
3 dying or being killed in the area, let me clarify, that you never
4 witnessed any killing. Isn't that right?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. And the information that you have in your reports was told to you
7 by other individuals.
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. And once you received this information, UN CIVPOL did not conduct
10 an investigation on its own, did they?
11 A. No.
12 Q. And you -- the information you received you passed on to the
13 Croatian civilian police.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. You didn't pass it on to the Croatian military structure, did
17 A. No.
18 Q. Now, when you write these reports, you are not attesting to the
19 accuracy of the information that is given to you, you are just writing
20 down what people are telling you. Isn't that right?
21 A. That is correct. But if I would feel that something is wrong
22 with the person and something is not correct, I would mention it, because
23 that is what I do in Sweden
24 Q. But, ma'am, as you said before, you did no independent
25 investigation after this information was given to you?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Now let us talk about a few items that have been received in
3 evidence. Let's go to P795, if we may, first.
4 Now, this is an incident in Zrmanja, 25 September 1995,
5 concerning the bodies being decomposed with identification very
7 You don't know anything about how this individual died, do you?
8 The circumstances under which he died, or they died, excuse me?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Let us turn to P251. This is a report concerning an individual
11 by the name of Gojko Komazec found at the side of the road. You
12 identified three bullets to the stomach. You likewise have no knowledge
13 concerning the circumstances of this individual's death either, do you?
14 A. No.
15 MR. KEHOE: P252.
16 Q. This is information you received in -- again in Zrmanja on the
17 6th of September, 1995, concerning two Serbian men shot by Croatian
18 soldiers "during some of the first days of the attack."
19 I ask you the same question: You have no idea concerning the
20 circumstances of the death of these two men either, do you?
21 A. No. Not more than I was told.
22 Q. So you don't know, for instance, whether or not they were
23 combatants at the time they died, do you?
24 A. No. I only know what's in the report.
25 Q. Let us turn to P789.
1 This is a report of 9 -- excuse me, of 6 September 1995, in the
2 village of Palanka and it notes that a Serb -- it's in the second
3 paragraph, the individual Brkic, Dusan, was shot by Croatian soldiers.
4 Brkic was dressed in military uniform. By the time of the murder he had
5 no weapons.
6 Now, you use the term "murder" there. Do you know anything of
7 the circumstances of the death of Mr. Dusan Brkic?
8 A. No, not more than is in the report.
9 Q. But nevertheless, you use the term "murder." Do you see that?
10 A. Yeah.
11 Q. Now why did you use the term "murder"?
12 A. Probably that's why she told us.
13 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, if we could bring up 65 ter 251. This
14 is it the report of -- autopsy reports of Dr. Baccard, a Prosecution
15 expert. And if we could go to page 116, and it's -- the number at the
16 top, the date stamp number is 3455583. 55583, please.
17 My colleague says try page 33. No. 3455583. 55583, I'm sorry,
18 if I said ...
19 [Defence counsel confer]
20 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Your Honour, this is the autopsy of
21 Dusan Brkic, the number is GO7/0025. We identify it as Dusan Brkic, so
22 it is in the report but it's also in a filing, the most recent
23 clarification schedule of the Prosecution.
24 If I may proceed, Judge, I can just read it as opposed to just
25 going to the document. We're going to see the document down the line, I
1 would think.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
3 MR. KEHOE: I'm informed it's 65 ter 471. Page 116. Thank you
4 very much.
5 Q. The individual that is discussed at the bottom of this page, if
6 we can just blow up the bottom.
7 The Prosecution expert, Ms. Malm, in the bottom of the page
8 dealing with Mr. Brkic notes that: "I agree with the conclusion of
9 Dr. Blazanovic's report. The clothing examination showed several large
10 defects on the front side and the left sleeve of the shirt with edges
11 were burnt. This aspect being consistent with the hypothesis of
13 That is reaffirmed by Dr. Baccard subsequently. Now, when you
14 received this information and this person said you were murder -- that
15 this person told that you this individual was murdered, did they mention
16 to you that he been hit by some type of explosion?
17 A. No. Only what was in that report.
18 Q. Let's go back to that P789 just briefly.
19 Now, looking at this report, Ms. Malm, where once again Mr. Brkic
20 was in a military uniform and the Prosecution's expert maintains that the
21 hypothesis of death is consistent with explosion. Does that indicate to
22 you as a law enforcement officer that this individual was not murdered
23 but died in combat?
24 A. I just wrote what I was told from these villagers.
25 Q. And you don't know anything else other than just what you wrote?
1 A. No. If I had been told something about explosions, I would have
2 written it in the report.
3 Q. I understand.
4 MR. KEHOE: May I have one moment, Your Honour.
5 [Defence counsel confer]
6 MR. KEHOE:
7 Q. Thank you, Ms. Malm.
8 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, have I no further questions at this
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.
11 MR. KAY: I have no questions on behalf of Mr. Cermak,
12 Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kay.
14 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I do have some questions. I'd just
16 like to get set up for a moment.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 MR. KUZMANOVIC: All set, Your Honour. Thank you.
19 Cross-examination by Mr. Kuzmanovic:
20 Q. Good afternoon.
21 A. Good afternoon.
22 Q. Could you please tell me, with respect to your reporting, what
23 kind of training did you have before you came an UN CIVPOL officer in
25 A. It was a week in Stockholm
1 the training.
2 Q. What did you have specifically as far as your training is
3 concerned? Did you learn about the area, did you learn about the people?
4 What -- if you could be more specific.
5 A. I think we were told about the history about the former
7 not aware of the situation we would end up in. So I would say that we
8 were not really prepared or trained for what happened.
9 Q. Okay. And you said that training lasted for how long?
10 A. A week.
11 Q. And that was in Sweden
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And then did you first come to Zagreb then?
14 A. Yes. We arrived in Zagreb
15 Q. Was there any training in Zagreb at all?
16 A. Not as far as I remember.
17 Q. Okay. Did you meet at all with any Croatian counterparts in
19 A. No.
20 Q. So it's fair to state that as far as you know, before you started
21 your position as an UN CIVPOL officer in Croatia, you had no knowledge of
22 what the structure of the Croatian police was?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. And I guess it is similarly true that no one gave you any
25 instruction as to what the general background and scope of Croatian
1 criminal law was?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. When you were in -- your first posting after Zagreb was where?
4 Sector North, you said?
5 A. Yes, Sector North. Immediately I was, as far as I remember, I
6 was in Slunj.
7 MR. KUZMANOVIC: P774, if that could be called up, please. I'm
8 not sure if the witness has that, Ms. Gustafson. If she's got it in
9 front of her, might make it a little bit easier.
10 MS. GUSTAFSON: She doesn't, but I have a copy of it. If she can
11 be given her statement.
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC:
13 Q. Ms. Malm, I have asked for the exhibit to be called up on the
14 screen, but I wanted you to have a copy of it to make it easier for you
15 to follow.
16 If you could take a look at paragraph 8, please.
17 The second sentence of paragraph 8 says that, and I'm referring
18 to the -- when you were in Knin, that you: "Never personally observed
19 Croatian soldiers putting houses on fire, but people in the villages and
20 hamlets often told us that Croatian soldiers looted and burnt houses. I
21 made reports about the quantity of houses burnt when I visited villages.
22 Two of these reports are referenced in the table of CIVPOL reports
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Now, I'd like to refer to 65 ter 4765, please,
25 if we could put that up.
1 And while we're waiting for it come up --
2 Q. Ms. Malm, when you say in your statement the quantity of houses
3 you're talking about numbers?
4 A. Pardon?
5 Q. When you say quantity of houses burnt when you visited villages,
6 you were talking about numbers of houses?
7 A. Quantity. We estimated the percentage. That's how we did it.
8 We didn't exactly count one, two, three.
9 Q. So when we have up on our screen now, 65 ter 4765, this is
10 villages and --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, in order to make it possible for
12 those who will later look at the transcript, that is provisionally
13 assigned number P784.
14 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC:
17 Q. P774, which is now on the screen right now, provisionally
18 assigned, is entitled villages and hamlets visited 28/8/1995. Is that
19 your signature on the bottom right there?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And that signature is dated 1997?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, here you have various villages listed that you visited on
24 that particular date and obviously there is no numbers that you put on
25 those estimates. Correct?
1 A. No. It says all houses burned, for example, for Kistanje.
2 Q. And for example, in Bratiskovici, it says: "Most houses intact,
3 just a few burned." Correct?
4 A. Yes, correct.
5 Q. And then you have further down: "20 per cent burned in Djakici,
7 A. Mm-hm.
8 Q. You haven't given us any estimate of what that means in terms of
9 quantifiable numbers. Correct?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. So when you use the term "quantity" in your statement, P774, you
12 don't actually give us a specific number?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Now, when you made reports to the civilian police in Gracac, was
15 that basically the place where you reported anything that you saw that
16 appeared to you to be a crime?
17 A. Yes. As far as I remember, it was the only place I went to.
18 Q. Were you aware of what the territorial boundaries and divisions
19 were of the Croatian police districts immediately after Operation Storm?
20 A. No, I don't think so.
21 Q. It's quite possible, is it not that you reported things to the
22 Gracac police station that were not within their district or jurisdiction
23 to investigate. Correct?
24 A. That's possible.
25 Q. Do you -- in your statement and we'll go to P774 again, please.
1 Paragraph 23, and I'll wait for it to get on the screen so the Chamber
2 can follow.
3 Paragraph 23, you were talking about check-points. And in the
4 second sentence it says: "In general, I don't know anything about the
5 relationship between the Croatian police and the military."
6 I guess following those lines, you could not tell us whether the
7 civilian police had any jurisdiction over men in military uniforms, can
9 A. No.
10 Q. And could you tell us whether the military police were the only
11 ones who had jurisdiction to deal with alleged crimes committed by
12 persons in military uniforms?
13 A. No.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, you're referring to men in military
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: And from your last question, not from the one before
18 that, you suggest that military police had jurisdiction with alleged
19 crimes committed by persons in military uniforms.
20 Now, I do understand from a lot of cross-examination that the
21 last thing you could conclude from the fact that someone is in a military
22 uniform is that he is -- that he is a military man.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Certainly, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: So therefore, could you explain to me what is the
25 basis that military police has jurisdiction over civilians dressed in
1 military uniforms.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Actually, that's not the question that I asked,
3 whether there were civilians in military uniform.
4 JUDGE ORIE: No, I do understand. But you put as part of the
5 question that military police had jurisdiction over those who were in
6 military uniforms.
7 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I guess it was a foundation -- it was really a
8 foundation question, Your Honour. I was asking her whether she knew
9 whether or not the military police had jurisdiction over people in
10 military uniforms, and if that's not how it's in the transcript, then I
11 asked the question very poorly. So I can re-ask the question if that is
13 JUDGE ORIE: You asked whether the military police were the only
14 one who had jurisdiction to deal with alleged crimes committed by
15 personnel in military uniforms.
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Right. And that was really a foundation
17 question as to whether she knew that existed or not. So I'm not
18 representing it as a fact, I'm asking her whether she knows.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It is a rather complex question apparently.
20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I guess I can try to split it and make it little
21 more simple, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
23 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you.
24 Q. Ms. Malm, do you know what role, if any, the military police had
25 immediately after Operation Storm?
1 A. No.
2 Q. So do you know what their jurisdiction was?
3 A. No.
4 Q. The same thing with the civilian police. Do you know what role
5 they had after Operation Storm?
6 A. Civilian police, I suppose, is there to protect lives and
8 Q. Do you know what jurisdiction they had, immediately after
9 Operation Storm?
10 A. No.
11 Q. And it's fair to state that you did not learn from anyone what
12 their structure was. Correct?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. Now you had said that you reported your observations to the
15 Croatian police in Gracac and you were a bit critical that the Croatian
16 police chief or the Croatian police in Gracac did not report back to you.
17 It's true, is it not, that under the UN CIVPOL mandate, an
18 agreement with Croatian, the Croatian police had no obligation to report
19 anything to you after you gave them information. Correct?
20 A. I don't remember it.
21 Q. Do you know -- can you point me to any document, any agreement
22 that you're aware of that states the Croatian police had any obligation
23 after you gave them information to report back to you?
24 A. No, I cannot remember that.
25 Q. Nonetheless, even though did you report violations to the
1 Croatian police, you stated that you didn't report everything. Correct?
2 A. No. Correct.
3 Q. Your primary obligation was to report crimes to the local police
4 after you observed them, as an UN CIVPOL member?
5 A. I don't remember exactly what was the rules today. But we found
6 it proper to inform the police since they were ones who should
7 investigate it. So if we found something seriously happened, then we
8 went there. If the time was okay.
9 Q. And is it fair to state that because on many or most occasions
10 they didn't report back to you, you assume that they did nothing about
11 investigating those reports you gave to them?
12 A. I think it was because of -- of the meetings where I told that I
13 couldn't show any results and also because we saw that the crime was
14 still going on. On the fields.
15 Q. Other crime. But not the crime that you necessarily would have
16 reported in the first instance. Correct?
17 A. No. I mean other crimes.
18 Q. So I guess it's fair to say that with respect to the things that
19 you did report to the civilian police, you don't know one way or the
20 other what investigation was done, whether anyone was charged or
21 convicted with any crimes that you reported to them. Is that fair?
22 A. As far as I remember, we were not informed about any results.
23 Q. Okay.
24 A. Mm-hm.
25 Q. Did you happen to go into the areas of Sveti Rok or Lovinac
1 during your patrols in and around Gracac, if you can remember?
2 A. Lovinac and?
3 Q. Sveti Rok.
4 A. Lovinac sounds familiar but I'm not sure. I have to refer to
5 reports in that case.
6 Q. Well, there aren't any reports in your materials regarding
7 Lovinac or Sveti Rok as those were areas that were primarily before 1991
8 occupied by Croats and had been destroyed, and I was just wondering if
9 you had any opportunity to go in those areas.
10 A. I don't remember. Then we have to look at the map.
11 Q. Okay. In your statement, P774, paragraph 20, you talk in the
12 lower -- the third-last line discussing the report which is entitled,
13 Team Obrovac assessment of cooperation with CRO POL from October 1995
14 until today. It says: "The report states that cooperation between the
15 Croatian police and UN CIVPOL was 'good' during the period. I don't
16 think it should be characterized as 'good' because we never received any
17 information from them."
18 And, again, I'm going to back to the discussion I had with you
19 regarding receiving information from the Croatian civilian police.
20 Simply because you did not receive any information does not mean that
21 anything -- that nothing was done to investigate crimes by the Croatian
22 civilian police. Is that fair?
23 A. The way you put it, could be.
24 Q. Now, the report was written by whom?
25 A. Which report?
1 Q. The report that's referred to in paragraph 20, the Team Obrovac
2 assessment. Was that a joint report which had input from all CIVPOL
3 officers or was that one person that wrote the report?
4 A. Can I see it?
5 Q. Sure.
6 MR. KUZMANOVIC: It's D740.
7 Q. On the cover page of the document it appears to be written by a
8 name -- person named Per Roed. Is that familiar to you?
9 A. No, I don't remember that guy.
10 Q. Do you remember when this report came out?
11 A. No.
12 Q. When was the --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Gustafson.
14 MS. GUSTAFSON: I'm sorry to interrupt, Your Honour. I just
15 think that the specific report Counsel is referring to is page 10 of this
16 larger document --
17 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Okay. All right. Thank you.
18 MS. GUSTAFSON: -- and it might help.
19 JUDGE ORIE: These are separate reports in one bundle.
20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you. We'll go to page 10 of this
22 Thanks, Counsel.
23 Q. It is simply entitled, Team Obrovac Assessment. And I guess
24 before I ask you any specific questions about the report, you said you
25 had read the Team Obrovac assessment dated 19 November. When did you
1 read it?
2 A. This one, I think, I read in the Prosecutor's office. I think.
3 Q. When -- when in the Prosecutor's office?
4 A. Six weeks ago.
5 Q. So that is the first time that you saw this particular report?
6 A. As far as I remember, it is 13 years ago all this happened.
7 Q. Sure. I understand that and I don't begrudge you that at all.
8 You -- do you recall yourself having any input into the items
9 that are filled in in this report?
10 A. No, I was not involved in this report, because I reported to the
11 team leader, Lennart Widen, and he informed the Knin HQ.
12 Q. Okay. So if anyone, it's your recollection that Mr. Widen would
13 have been the one who would have contributed to this report?
14 A. Yes.
15 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I don't have any other questions.
16 Thank you.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kuzmanovic.
18 Ms. Gustafson any further questions for the witness.
19 MS. GUSTAFSON: About two minutes, Your Honour, if I may.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 Re-examination by Ms. Gustafson:
22 Q. You were just asked a few questions about cooperation with the
23 Gracac policija and one of the things you were asked was whether it was
24 possible that you reported crimes that were not within the jurisdiction
25 of the Gracac policija.
1 I'd like to ask you this: Do you remember ever being given the
2 answer from the police that the incident you were reporting was not
3 within their jurisdiction?
4 A. No, I don't.
5 Q. Are you familiar with the division of the territory into
6 municipalities, the Gracac municipality versus the Knin municipality? If
7 you're not --
8 A. I don't remember.
9 Q. In general, were you reporting incidents to the Gracac policija
10 that occurred in the Gracac area or were you reporting incidents that
11 occurred outside the Gracac area?
12 A. In the Gracac area, as far as I remember.
13 Q. And you were also asked about whether you -- whether the Croatian
14 police had any obligation to report back to you. In your meetings with
15 the Gracac policija, did they ever refuse to give you answers on the
16 basis that they had no -- that there were not required to report to
17 UN CIVPOL?
18 A. I don't remember.
19 Q. And one last question. Back to an earlier question you were
20 asked by Mr. Kehoe about armed people in civilian clothes and you say --
21 you said in answer: "I remember seeing one man in civilian clothes
22 running from a house and he was carrying a hunting rifle."
23 Is that the only armed person in civilian clothes you remember
24 seeing during your time there, or do you remember others?
25 A. That's the only one I can remember today. This clear picture.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 MS. GUSTAFSON: Those are my questions.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Ms. Gustafson.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Malm, I have a few questions for you.
6 Questioned by the Court:
7 JUDGE ORIE: The first one is a follow-up question to a question
8 that was put to you by Mr. Kehoe.
9 He asked you: "You never went and talked to these people and
10 say, Why are you taking" I think it reads, the transcript is not very
11 clear, "product from an individual house and putting it in yours." And
12 then your answer, although appears not quite clearly, was: "No, not as
13 far as I can remember."
14 The question was related to what you described as looting.
15 Did you ever see, apart from seeing goods taken out of houses
16 that such goods were then taken into private houses, after that?
17 A. No. Not as far as I remember today.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. My next question would be about those
19 who were guarding the graveyard where you told us, and it is also in a
20 report. In the report, it reads: "When we had been in the yard for a
21 few minutes, a policija officer showed up. He informed us that no one is
22 allowed to enter the graveyard without permission from policija."
23 Did you have any conversation with this policija officer who said
24 that you were not allowed in the graveyard?
25 A. I remember we stopped and we spoke to him, but I don't remember
1 exactly how the conversation went.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Do you remember whether you explained to him what
3 your role and your position was?
4 A. I don't remember that.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please tell me if you do not remember, but did it
6 come to your mind that what the police officer was doing, which is not
7 allowing you to come to the graveyard, that that was done for the purpose
8 of not allowing you to commit any crime, such as looting?
9 A. No. I don't understand why he was there.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Apparently, he was there - at least that's how I
11 understand your testimony - to keep persons off, and that is also what I
12 read from the report --
13 A. That's correct.
14 JUDGE ORIE: -- keep people off from entering the graveyard. Did
15 you gain, at the time, any impression as why he was keeping people off
16 from entering the graveyard?
17 A. No.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
19 Any questions triggered by the questions by the Bench.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour, just briefly.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Kehoe.
22 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe
23 Q. With regard to the -- Ms. Malm, just a few brief questions with
24 regard to the goods that were taken. Do you have any idea where those
25 people were taking those goods?
1 A. No idea.
2 Q. Now, this graveyard situation, and the guard that was there, was
3 it a fact that this -- this policeman that was there was preventing
4 anybody from going in there without authorisation? Isn't that what he
5 told you?
6 A. I don't remember what he told me but I remember from the report
7 that he told us that not even the Serbs are allowed.
8 Q. So from the report that you got, nobody was allowed into the
9 graveyard without authorisation.
10 A. That's the impression I have now.
11 MR. KEHOE: If I might have just a minute.
12 [Defence counsel confer]
13 MR. KEHOE:
14 Q. One last question on this. One last question on this, ma'am.
15 As a police officer, if you receive an order not to allow people
16 to come into an area, you as a police officer aren't going to allow
17 anybody in with without authorisation, are you?
18 A. Correct.
19 MR. KEHOE: I have nothing further, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.
21 Ms. Malm, this concludes your evidence. I'd like to thank you
22 very much for coming a long way to The Hague and for having answered
23 questions put to you, both by the parties and by the Bench, and I wish
24 you a safe trip home again.
25 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please escort Ms. Malm out of
2 the courtroom.
3 [The witness stands down]
4 JUDGE ORIE: The parties, meanwhile, have received a list from
5 Madam Registrar, in which we find eight documents already admitted into
6 evidence, one still MFI
7 Are there any objections against the other items appearing on
8 this list, some of them already put to the witness, that is, on this
9 list, numbers ten up to and including 24.
10 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I don't believe so. We've been through
11 these documents and schedules several times but there has been a degree
12 of confusion, at least for me, because there have been three different
13 lists. If I could just -- at the next break just go through these
14 particular documents and I can have an answer for you at that juncture if
15 that is satisfactory.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we will do that. We'll give you an opportunity
17 to -- and I take it that other Defence counsel then will also go through
18 the list.
19 Ms. Gustafson, I don't know whether you are still with us after
20 the break, where we expect the next witness to be called. Will you be in
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: I can make myself available, Your Honour, if that
23 is helpful.
24 JUDGE ORIE: If there are no objections, the Chamber will decide
25 on admission of these documents. Perhaps if there are any objections, if
1 you would be stand by so as to be in a position to respond to that.
2 Perhaps there could already by an informal communication between
3 Defence counsel and Ms. Gustafson, how alert she should be on any
5 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I'll just tell counsel, whoever's here.
6 I don't anticipate them to be any problem, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: It is a very practical problem. If there's any
8 objection, I take it that not just any of Ms. Gustafson's colleagues
9 could respond to that, and since I would like to keep the MFI list as
10 short as possible, if there's any objection I would expect you to inform
11 Ms. Gustafson during the break.
12 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
13 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I said, as a matter of fact, in relation to
15 P792 and P793, that I would expect them to be admitted into evidence
16 since they were used by the first Defence team. I, however, did not
17 formally admit them into evidence. At least I'm not quite sure about
18 this. We'll deal with the list after the break.
19 We will have a break.
20 Ms. Gustafson, I do understand that the next witness to be called
21 is available?
22 MS. GUSTAFSON: Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll have a break, and we will resume at five
24 minutes to 6.00.
25 --- Recess taken at 5.33 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 6.00 p.m.
2 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber would like to first deal with the
4 We had already P774 up till and including 777, in evidence. P778
5 was marked for identification. The Prosecution is invited to -- to
6 redact P778, preferably then agree with the Defence whether the way of
7 redacting meets the concerns expressed. Of course, if there's still
8 disagreement then, of course, the Chamber will decide.
9 P779 up to and including P782 were admitted into evidence
11 Madam Registrar, could you please deal with the next nine
12 documents provisionally -- where provisionally exhibit numbers were
14 Mr. Kehoe.
15 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. I just discussed it with
16 Ms. Gustafson, from P783 to P797 there are no objections.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Then we need to everything with full accuracy on the
19 Madam Registrar, if would you read the 65 ter numbers and the
20 numbers provisionally assigned to these documents.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, exhibit numbers have been assigned
22 as follows:
23 65 ter 5369, Exhibit number P783. 65 ter 4765, Exhibit number
24 P784. 65 ter 5375, Exhibit number P785. 65 ter 2560, Exhibit number
25 P786. 65 ter 2565, Exhibit number P787. 65 ter 5383, Exhibit number
1 P788. 65 ter 3188, Exhibit number P789. 65 ter 5376, Exhibit number
2 P790. 65 ter 5378, P781.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that you misspoke and that you wanted to
4 make it P791, the last one.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, I stand corrected.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then P792 and P793, as has been checked during
7 the break by Madam Registrar, are already admitted into evidence.
8 We'll then continue, Madam Registrar, with number 21 on the list.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the final four documents are 65 ter
10 5381, that would be Exhibit number P794. 65 ter 1823, Exhibit number
11 P795. 65 ter 924, Exhibit number P796. And, finally, 65 ter 5382,
12 Exhibit number P797.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. P783 up to and
14 including P791 are admitted into evidence. The next two numbers, 792 and
15 793 were already admitted. P794 up to and including P797 are admitted
16 into evidence.
17 The Chamber would like to hear from the parties on P778 later
18 this week. I think that would not be -- would be sufficient time.
19 Mr. Waespi, are you ready to call your next witness.
20 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Good evening, Mr. President, Your Honours.
21 The Prosecution calls Mr. Liborius.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 [The witness entered court]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Good evening, Mr. Liborius. Before you give
25 evidence in this Court, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you
1 to make a solemn declaration that you will speak the truth, the whole
2 truth and nothing but the truth.
3 The next is now handed out to you by Madam Usher. May I invite
4 to you make that solemn declaration.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
6 I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the whole truth,
7 and nothing but the truth.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
9 Mr. Liborius, you are not a native English-speaking person. If
10 you have ever any problem in either understanding the questions put to
11 you in this language or in the -- in answering those questions in this
12 language, please inform me immediately.
13 Mr. Waespi.
14 THE WITNESS: I will do so.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
16 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 WITNESS: SOREN LIBORIUS
18 Examination by Mr. Waespi:
19 Q. Good evening, Mr. Liborius.
20 A. Good evening.
21 Q. Can you please make a pause after my question, and it is usually
22 best to follow the cursor on your screen. As soon as it has stopped
23 moving, it is safe for you to answer.
24 Can you please state your full name for the record.
25 A. My name is Soren Liborius.
1 Q. Do you recall giving five witness statements to the Office of the
2 Prosecutor, the first dated 2nd November, 1995; this is 65 ter 5409. The
3 second on 21st August, 1997; 65 ter 5410. The third on the 11th and 12th
4 October 2005; which is 65 ter 5411. The fourth on 19 and 20 May, and 19
5 and 20 June 2008; this is 65 ter 5412. And the last and final, dated 6th
6 September 2008; this is 65 ter 5439.
7 Do you recall having given these five statements to the Office of
8 the Prosecutor?
9 A. Yes, I do.
10 MR. WAESPI: Your Honours, with the assistance of the usher, I
11 would like to give these five statements, hard copies to the witness.
12 Q. Did you have a chance to review all five of those statements
13 prior to coming to court today?
14 A. I did review them. However, the statement dated 5 and 6
15 September 2008 does not carry my signature.
16 Q. Yes. Perhaps if 65 ter 5439 could be pulled up on the screen.
17 Because I did print, I think, the version that's been disclosed over the
19 And if we can look at the first page, and perhaps you discover
20 your signature.
21 A. There's no page currently available.
22 Q. Yes. I believe we have to wait a little bit.
23 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I do have a signed copy right now of
24 the witness statement. If that could be given to the witness.
25 JUDGE ORIE: There's no problem, as far as I'm concerned.
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 MR. WAESPI:
3 Q. Now, I take it that the fifth statement will be uploaded shortly
4 in e-court.
5 Now, for the time being, in reviewing these statements,
6 Mr. Liborius, can you tell the Court whether they accurately reflect what
7 you told the investigators at the time those statements were taken?
8 A. Yes, they do.
9 Q. And can you tell the Court whether all five statements taken
10 together are true and accurate to the best of your knowledge.
11 A. To the best of my knowledge, yes.
12 Q. And if you were questioned today about the matters contained in
13 these statements, would your answers be the same?
14 A. Yes.
15 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. At this time I'd like to
16 move the five statements into evidence.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 Mr. Misetic.
19 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I know we made a filing, however, I do
20 wish to reserve my position until the end of the cross-examination, of
21 the position on the Gotovina Defence on the statements we believe, after
22 reviewing everything, that there may be a Rule 91 issue, and I, as a
23 result, don't want to take a position that may be inconsistent with a
24 Rule 91 request at a later point.
25 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, for the Court's information, we
1 join in that.
2 MR. KAY: Also, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 Mr. Waespi.
5 MR. WAESPI: I'm -- although I have been informed at the break
6 that there might be a reservation by the Defence on this point, it is
7 kind of unusual at this point but I have no problem to defer the
8 admission of those statements until the end of cross-examination.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, we need a practical basis to work on. Of
10 course, the Chamber will have to know what is and what is not in
12 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour --
13 JUDGE ORIE: I think for practical purposes we could start
14 working on the basis of as if these statements were admitted, but the
15 reservation is there by all three Defence teams.
16 MR. MISETIC: I agree with that, Your Honour. The reason I took
17 the position is in light of the attestation and if there is an subsequent
18 issue, and I have a good faith basis at this point to believe there may
19 be a question, I'm reserving my position on it, but I agree
20 wholeheartedly with your position, Your Honour. We should just proceed
21 as if they had been admitted.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Although it is all still a mystery, of course, to
23 us, but we have to live with that. That's our position.
24 Mr. Waespi, there is an -- I would say especially in the present
25 circumstances, usually the statements are shown on the screen, the
1 witness then confirms that he has signed them and that these are the
2 statements he has given and has reviewed. You've not done that.
3 Nevertheless, of course, the Chamber would like to know exactly to what
4 the witness gave his attestation. So, therefore, I prefer that the
5 copies given to the witness be shown to the Chamber so that we can see to
6 what he actually attested.
7 MR. WAESPI: Certainly, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps with the assistance of the usher. And then,
9 of course, at a later stage, I would like that have the signed copy of
10 the last statement on the screen as well or be given a hard copy.
11 [Prosecution counsel confer]
12 JUDGE ORIE: I see the last one is already there in hard copy.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, I don't know whether have you any other
15 copies. I'd like to put these in the hands of the Madam Registrar, hard
16 copies, in front of the witness when he attested to these statements.
17 If have you any spare copies left for the witness, I don't know
18 whether you have.
19 MR. WAESPI: I only have my copies but perhaps we can ...
20 JUDGE ORIE: We find ourselves in a little bit of an unusual
21 situation, in which -- of course, the Chamber wants to proceed with the
22 necessary caution.
23 MR. WAESPI: Yes. I believe if I'm showing the witness excerpts
24 from his witness statements and there will be very few, certainly in the
25 first hour, we can put it on to the screen or I can read it out.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
2 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
3 I would like to read out ...
4 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
5 JUDGE ORIE: It also can be put on the ELMO, if need be.
6 [Prosecution counsel confer]
7 JUDGE ORIE: And I take it that on the basis of the 65 ter
8 numbers, Madam Registrar could always put them on the screen. Apart,
9 perhaps, from the last one.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 The 92 ter summary has kind of a different connotation at this
13 point in time, but I think it might still be valuable for the public
14 listening to make this two-minute information.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please do so. I do understand that more than
16 usual time will be spent on the examination-in-chief with this witness.
17 So if you have a short summary that would be good to give a context.
19 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, as I have no papers in front of me, I
20 would like to have a piece of paper where I can note down or am I suppose
21 to receive the papers later?
22 JUDGE ORIE: What papers? You mean your own statement?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes, or any other paper that I will relate to.
24 Otherwise, I will have to take notes while we proceed.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me see, there always is a possibility for
1 you to have the statements. Often only one line will be read. Let's
2 proceed and we'll see. If you feel the need to look at your statements,
3 then we'll find a copy somewhere, or most likely we'll put it on the
5 THE WITNESS: That's fine. I'll just take some notes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President --
8 JUDGE ORIE: It is fine for you to take any notes if you think it
9 would assist you. However, you are not supposed to use any other
10 documents. So start with a clean paper and then whatever you write down
11 to focus your attention on, that's fine. But no other papers.
12 THE WITNESS: Exactly. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
14 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 The witness was an operations officer and later monitor and team
16 leader of the European Commission Monitoring Mission, ECMM, teams based
17 in the Knin area from 28 July 1995
18 During Operation Storm, on 4th and 5th August 1995, he witnessed
19 the shelling of Knin and observed the firing of multiple rocket systems.
20 Witness Liborius personally observed crime incidents within the Krajina
21 during the weeks following the shelling. They include looting, burning
22 of houses, farms and property, as well as destruction of livestock by HV
23 troops and special police.
24 The witness talked to soldiers who explained to him why they were
25 looting. The incidents are reported in various documentation and reports
1 prepared by the witness. The witness, in his capacity as an ECMM
2 official met with two of the accused, Ante Gotovina and Ivan Cermak on a
3 number of occasions between August and October 1995 and raised with both
4 the human rights violations ECMM observed.
5 That's the brief, I guess, undisputed - or perhaps even
6 disputed - summary of Witness 127.
7 Q. Mr. Liborius, we just heard from this brief introduction that you
8 were part of ECMM in August 1995 in the Krajina.
9 Can you tell us what the job, the purpose of ECMM was in the
10 Krajina at that time?
11 A. The purpose of the ECMM was to operating under a mandate signed
12 by the six presidents early on during the war to monitor and report on
13 political, military, human rights, economic and other relevant matters,
14 observing and reporting through a structure of teams, coordination
15 centres, regional centres, up to the headquarters of ECMM.
16 Q. And how many teams were operational in the Krajina?
17 A. In the RSK, the so-called Republika Srpska Krajina, there was a
18 regional centre, RC Knin, abbreviated, it had a number of teams. It had
19 a number of coordination centres under which it had teams, and in the
20 Krajina area between, if we include Sector North and Sector South, in the
21 total we would have between six, seven, up until nine teams, depending
22 on -- on the situation and the organisational structure.
23 The organisation was adopted to the -- to the changing situation
24 on the ground throughout the war.
25 Q. What was your role within the ECMM structure you have just
2 A. Initially, when I was assigned to the RC Knin, the
3 Regional Centre in Knin, I was designated as an operation officer, and I
4 also served as a team leader. Later on, I had various positions in the
5 ECMM organisation, including in the Regional Centre in Zagreb, and later
6 on, in the headquarters, ECMM.
7 Q. We already heard a summary from me, but can you tell the Court
8 when exactly you arrived in the Krajina and when you left the Krajina.
9 A. I arrived in the late July in 1995 and I left Krajina in late
10 November, 27, 28.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius. Now very, very briefly, did the
12 structure and the mandate of ECMM change with the fall of the RSK around
13 4th and 5th August 1995
14 A. The mandate stayed unchanged. It was a very broad mandate. But,
15 of course, the structure was, over the weeks to follow and the month,
16 adjusted. Some of the teams were given new areas of responsibility.
17 Some team structures were added. It was a dynamic process, until the
18 fall of -- or the autumn, well into autumn of 1995 where the RC Knin, the
19 Regional Centre in Knin, was merged in the RC Zagreb structure.
20 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if we could have 65 ter 5430. This
21 is a well known photo of Knin.
22 Q. Now, Mr. Liborius, where were you --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Perhaps -- one second, please.
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber would like just to inquire with the
1 parties, especially with the Defence teams, you have referred to Rule 91
2 and you have made a reservation as far as admission of evidence is
3 concerned. As I said before, it is, of course, not known to the Chamber
4 what causes you to refer to Rule 91.
5 That also means that the Chamber could not act proprio motu under
6 Rule 91(A).
7 Nevertheless, if the Defence teams who have not made an
8 application under Rule 91(A) consider that this would be appropriate to
9 do, then, of course, the Chamber would have to perhaps hear a bit more in
10 private session for the reasons so that we'll give, if need be, the --
11 that we could deal with a warning as provided for in Rule 91(A).
12 It's a situation which does not often appear but the Chamber
13 wants to see whether any consequences already at this moment in
14 procedural terms should be attached to the reservation earlier expressed
15 by all three Defence teams.
16 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I understand from that short
17 conversation with Mr. Misetic during the break that --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Let's be very careful not to discuss the substance
19 of any matter in the presence of the witness.
20 MR. WAESPI: Yes, that's why I wanted to --
21 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether you --
22 MR. WAESPI: Exactly. Because obviously my examination-in-chief
23 will be different if we continue without the admission of these
24 statements, and certainly before we finish tonight I would like to know
25 if I can be given any indication of where it's going. And so without the
1 presence of the witness perhaps we can discuss the specificity of the
2 Defence`s reference to this rule.
3 MR. MISETIC: I would be happy to do it, Your Honour. I also
4 think it would be wise to do it outside the presence of the witness at
5 the moment.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Liborius, I would like to ask you to leave
7 the courtroom briefly so that we can deal with a procedural issue.
8 [The witness withdrew]
9 JUDGE ORIE: Is it a matter that can be discussed in public,
10 because it --
11 MR. MISETIC: My preference would be in private session,
12 Your Honour, only on the basis that obviously outside people could, in
13 theory, pass information or --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, would you agree with that?
15 MR. WAESPI: Yes, I agree.
16 JUDGE ORIE: We turn into private session.
17 [Private session]
11 Pages 8232-8236 redacted. Private session.
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in open session.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
18 MR. WAESPI: Of course, I need to know by the end of, I think,
19 today whether the 92 ter application still stands or whether -- which
20 I'll -- prepare to elict all the evidence live from this witness.
21 JUDGE ORIE: I see the inconvenience which is there. If finally,
22 the Chamber would not admit 92 ter statements, we might be in a situation
23 that it doesn't make much sense to elicit, but let's -- let's live with
24 this uncertainty for this moment, Mr. Waespi.
25 [The witness entered court]
1 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 Q. I think we left off, Mr. Liborius --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, first of all, thank you for your
5 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI:
7 Q. We left off where we wanted to go into the morning of the 4th of
8 August, 1995, and I believe I had asked that 65 ter 5430 be retrieved.
9 That's a photo of Knin.
10 Where were you, Mr. Liborius, on the 4th of August, in the early
11 morning hours?
12 A. I was working in my accommodation.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. WAESPI: If we could blow up the upper left part where we see
15 two markings, A and B.
16 Q. Now, did you mark this photograph, Mr. Liborius?
17 A. Yes, I did. Could we tilt the photo, please?
18 Q. But tilting you mean what, to enlarge it --
19 A. To turn it around.
20 JUDGE ORIE: To have north on the top.
21 THE WITNESS: 90 degrees, please.
22 MR. WAESPI:
23 Q. Is that the way you want it?
24 A. There's --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Surprise me.
1 THE WITNESS: Yeah, that's right, yeah.
2 Yes, I did print the A and B, yeah.
3 MR. WAESPI:
4 Q. And can you let me know what A means and what B means?
5 A. B is my accommodation, where I was working in the morning hours.
6 And A is the RC Knin, the Regional Centre Knin building.
7 Q. RC meaning part of ECMM?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. You were in the accommodation in B. Now, what did you observe in
10 the early hours of the 4th of August?
11 A. I was awake and I was working, and I observed by hearing the
12 impact of heavy artillery fire, and I looked out of the window and I
13 could see heavy smoke from some of the first impacts.
14 Q. And did you observe the impacts?
15 A. Once I got out of the -- the building, I could observe impacts to
16 the south in the direction of south, down at the -- the Tvik factory.
17 And I could hear the impacts of heavy artillery in different locations.
18 Q. Was there heavy artillery nearby where you were observing the
20 A. At that time, in the early morning hours, I judged the -- the
21 closest impacts to be down south of me in and around the Tvik area, but I
22 quickly focussed on getting my personal belongings and my emergency gear
23 and rush up to the -- the Regional Centre, the RC house. And the impacts
24 were heard around in the -- in the area. That's the best description I
25 can give.
1 Q. Was there a time you conducted a crater analysis?
2 A. There was -- if I may, for the clarity, explain what I did in the
3 morning hours.
4 Once I had moved up to the Regional Centre, the RC house, we
5 established the ordinary routines of observation from the house, we
6 observed the shelling throughout the -- the morning hours, the day, and
7 the closest impact, I gather that was your previous question, was in the
8 grass fields to the south-west of the -- of the building indicated by A,
9 and I conducted in some of the subsequent days the crater analysis of
10 some of the craters I saw there.
11 Q. And do you recall how many craters you saw there?
12 A. I saw a couple of craters that were clearly visible of heavy
13 artillery impacts. Some of those I believed I had seen from the
14 operations room in the RC house. By their distinct impact, they left
15 fragmentation marks on the buildings. If you imagine just below the A,
16 there were parked cars and the facades of the house received the
17 shrapnel, the shrapnels from the artillery impacts. The closest impact
18 was about 40, 50 metres of the RC building.
19 Q. Just to clarify, you say that the closest impact of these
20 artillery shots were 40 to 50 or -- within the RC building?
21 A. To the south-west of the RC building, yes.
22 Q. In an area you had described as grass fields.
23 A. The -- the terrain just where the marking A is, there was a -- a
24 dirt and grass field at that time.
25 Q. Now, in your assessment at that time, and your knowledge, was
1 there a military target nearby where you saw these artillery impacts?
2 A. I believe that the closest military target would perhaps be
3 the -- the Knin police station, in the line of fire there. But there
4 were no, to my knowledge at least, military targets in that particular
6 Q. And how far away was the police station?
7 A. Roughly 700 metres, 800 metres or so.
8 Q. And you told us you conducted a crater analysis. What were your
9 findings in relation to source of fire, direction of fire, if you were
10 able to find something out?
11 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, if I could ask for foundation as to
12 the date, when.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
14 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
15 Q. When did you conduct the crater analysis?
16 A. It's on the screen still blinking here.
17 I conducted the crater analysis a couple of days later, when the
18 ground was still fresh, and my observations indicated that the shelling
19 had been conducted from a direction up north-west -- north-east, sorry,
20 of our location. I think I measured an angle or bearing to the firing
21 position within the 60 or so degrees, meaning up in the mountains area,
22 east of Knin.
23 Q. I believe you earlier told us that you saw a couple of impacts,
24 and me personally in English I'm never sure what couple means, does it
25 mean two or more. Can you be more specific about how many impacts you
1 saw on that grass field?
2 A. I remember that I did -- there were two good craters that I could
3 conduct crater analysis on and there were, I mean, a host of other
4 craters. You should remember that, at that time a few days after when
5 you were able to move around, there were many impacts, and I focussed on
6 some of the craters that were clearly, marked clearly. They bore the --
7 the clear imprints, so that the quality of the crater analysis would be
8 as good as possible. But there were impacts, many, many, impacts.
9 Buildings and in the dirt and -- but not all of those are, so to speak,
10 of a -- of a distinct quality so as to allow a precise crater analysis.
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
12 MR. WAESPI: If we could go to a document. This is it 65 ter
14 Q. Was part of your duties as operational officer to draw reports,
15 Mr. Liborius?
16 And before you answer and before we move into this new area --
17 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if the previous exhibit could be --
18 could be tendered.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections.
20 Aerial photograph marked by the witness.
21 MR. MISETIC: Yes, no objection, Your Honour.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number P798.
24 JUDGE ORIE: P798 is admitted into evidence.
25 Mr. Waespi, I am looking at the clock and see that we have two
1 and a half minutes left. I leave it to you whether your next subject is
2 such that we could cover it in such a short time.
3 MR. WAESPI: No, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps it would be better to adjourn for the
6 Mr. Liborius, before we adjourn, I'd like to instruct you that
7 you should not speak to anyone, whoever it is, about the testimony you
8 have already given today, or the testimony still to be given the days to
10 Then we'd like to see you back tomorrow, quarter past 2.00 in the
12 Madam Registrar, would that be in this same courtroom?
13 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
14 JUDGE ORIE: We have to check in which courtroom we'd like to see
15 you back. The parties will be informed about it. We'll check that on
16 the basis of the Court calendar.
17 We stand adjourned until tomorrow, quarter past 2.00.
18 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 6.59 p.m.
19 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 9th day of
20 September, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.