1 Wednesday, 10 September 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.21 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 Before we continue, I'd like to briefly deal with scheduling.
12 The Chamber is aware of the positions of the parties, it being
13 that considerable time will be needed for cross-examination and that even
14 Friday in the afternoon, sitting in the afternoon, would not help you
16 The Chamber has considered this.
17 Mr. Waespi, if you would take another hour, then that would mean
18 that we would -- when we would also sit Friday in the afternoon, we would
19 have 13 hours left altogether and I'm talking about effective examination
20 time. If you'd just take the net hours, I mean, a sitting day is four
21 hours and 45 minutes, 45 minutes of break, that makes four hours, and my
22 calculations for 13 hours, I started at three and a half hours for a day
23 session, which would mean that for Wednesday, Thursday, Friday morning,
24 Friday afternoon, we'd have all together 14 hours minus one hour to be
25 taken by Mr. Waespi today. That's 13 hours.
1 The Chamber considers that it should be possible to at least give
2 it a serious try to finish the case, and therefore, suggest to the
3 Defence teams to agree on how they would -- how they would use 11 hours
4 for cross-examination. We would then still have a couple -- two hours
5 left, perhaps re-examination, perhaps some questions from the Bench.
6 Let's see, whether, in the total of 13 hours remaining after Mr. Waespi
7 has finished his examination-in-chief, whether we can achieve that.
8 The Chamber is aware, especially in the circumstances, where
9 reference was made to Rule 91 at an early stage, that the Chamber will
10 adapt the schedule, if it appears that, that would be required by the
11 fairness of the trial, which should be guaranteed by the Chamber. That
12 remains unaffected. Nevertheless, 13 hours, let's see whether we can do
14 Mr. Misetic.
15 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I understand your
16 instruction completely and I know you're aware of this but I feel the
17 need to make a record on our behalf concerning the time. We feel
18 strongly that I will certainly try to get that done within the time you
19 have allotted. However, we feel strongly given the fact that we have
20 five witness statements here, there will be approximately five to six
21 hours worth of direct testimony, there are 20 to 30 sitreps, and 100-day
22 report, that time should be given to the defendants in particular,
23 because we are not talking about one or two topic areas, if I may use an
24 expression, the kitchen sink here in this -- through this witness has
25 been thrown at us, and it will take some time to cover each topic with
1 this witness.
2 Given that, I completely understand the Trial Chamber's desire
3 and, as always, will strive to make the cross-examination as effective as
4 possible dealing with the issues. However, did I want to state that we
5 feel very strongly concerning this witness and that we be given the
6 amount of time necessary to do a proper and thorough job in the
7 cross-examination. And as I said, I'm sure that the Trial Chamber was
8 already aware of that but I wanted to make that clear on the record.
9 Thank you.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You already started speaking more quickly in order
11 to achieve that.
12 Mr. Waespi, you have until quarter past 3.00, I would say. You
13 said four and a half hours. You've taken three hours and 45 minutes.
14 This would bring you -- and if you would take five minutes more, that is
15 already part of our calculation.
16 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, I'd like to remind you that you're
18 still bound by the solemn declaration that you have given at the
19 beginning of your testimony, and I do understand that although you have
20 travel arrangements that that would be only for later on Friday. Is that
22 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. I have been corresponding with
23 the Prosecutor and arranged that my latest departure from The Hague would
24 be Friday evening. I have a prime minister's visit to attend to and I
25 simply have to leave The Hague
1 course in the interests of justice, prepared to reappear here or produce
2 material in writing or whatever.
3 JUDGE ORIE: An afternoon session goes, then, till 7.00 p.m.
4 that would be still --
5 THE WITNESS: Sorry.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Your plane leaves at what time?
7 THE WITNESS: 8.00 in the evening.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Hmm. That creates an additional problem.
9 Let's get started and see whether Mr. Waespi has a private plane
10 for you.
11 Mr. Waespi.
12 MR. WAESPI: Since the previous Prosecutor has left there is no
13 more government plane available to the Prosecutor.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I can understand that you're suffering, Mr. Waespi.
15 Mr. Misetic.
16 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I just wanted to clarify. I assume
17 that the witness meant he has been contacting through the Victim and
18 Witnesses Unit.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether the correspondence, Mr. Waespi,
20 was -- first of all, it was in writing. It was --
21 MR. WAESPI: Prior to the witness being sworn in.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 WITNESS: SOREN LIBORIUS [Resumed]
1 Examination by Mr. Waespi: [Continued]
2 MR. WAESPI: If 65 ter 5441 could be brought up, please.
3 Q. Now, Mr. Liborius, while that is being done, did you maintain a
4 notebook, a patrol notebook while you were on mission in 1995?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And what was the purpose of that notebook?
7 A. The purpose was to record observations and informations,
8 statements and the like that I observed during my monitoring activity.
9 Q. Now, please have a look at this document. Do you recognise this
11 A. Yes, I do.
12 Q. And what is it?
13 A. It is a meeting conducted on the 19th of --
14 Q. Let me ask you first. What is it -- have you prepared this
15 document, before you go into the contents?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. And when did you prepare it?
18 A. I prepared it the day before yesterday or so, yeah.
19 Q. Thank you. Let's go to page 3 of this document. And the basis
20 for this document was what, Mr. Liborius?
21 A. The basis is my patrol notebook.
22 Q. I believe we need to go to the next page. Yes.
23 Can you tell us what it says under the entry of the 23rd of
25 A. Danish or in English?
1 Q. In English.
2 A. Voting in barracks. 4 Guards Brigade, under General Gotovina,
3 arrow, Guards Brigade commander, arrow, Ministry of Defence, soldiers
4 will vote in barracks.
5 Shall I continue?
6 Q. No. Let me ask you, do you remember having met with
7 General Gotovina on or about 23rd of October?
8 A. For the preparations of the elections we had a host of meetings
9 with different authorities in that period, and in and around that time,
10 yes, a short meeting.
11 Q. And how do you remember that you had a short meeting with
12 General Gotovina?
13 A. Because it was decided that that -- the further detailed
14 discussions should be delegated to some of the aides in his staff.
15 Q. And do you remember the name of the aide in Mr. Gotovina's staff?
16 A. That was Mr. Seric.
17 Q. And do you recall his function?
18 A. It's written on the yellow Post-It note that is referred to a
19 little bit down below. Colonel Seric, Deputy Commander OZ Split, for
20 political affairs. He later introduced himself as an aide to
21 General Gotovina during that meeting that was held on the 26th of
23 Q. Thank you Mr. Liborius.
24 MR. WAESPI: If this piece could be admitted into evidence,
25 Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I see and hear of no objections.
2 Madam Registrar.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P821.
4 JUDGE ORIE: P821 is admitted into evidence.
5 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Q. Let move to the 27th of October. And I would like to have
7 65 ter 4337 brought up, please.
8 Now do you know who Colonel or General Gambotti was,
9 Mr. Liborius?
10 A. Yes, certainly. He was the designated Head of Regional Centre.
11 Q. Of what organisation?
12 A. Of the ECMM.
13 Q. Now are you familiar with this document that you see on your
14 screen now, Mr. Liborius?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And were you the drafter?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. On the bottom part of the document, we see reference to a meeting
19 between the HRC
20 that refer to Mr. Gambotti?
21 A. Yes. The HRC
22 Q. And it goes on to the next page, if we could see that, please.
23 Is that an accurate representation of what occurred during the
24 meeting in your memory, Mr. Liborius?
25 A. It is a condensed and accurate version.
1 Q. And before drafting and indeed filing this report, I take it it
2 has been filed ultimately. Is that correct?
3 A. Oh, yes. ECMM reports were sent and filed in the headquarters of
4 the ECMM.
5 Q. Before doing that, did you discuss the contents of what you wrote
6 down in relation to that meeting with General Gotovina and Mr. Gambotti,
7 with Mr. Gambotti?
8 A. I discussed the meetings we had throughout the day and also, of
9 course, the one we had with General Gotovina. It was indeed a long one
10 and HRC
11 went before I drafted that report.
12 Q. On what basis did you draft this report? Did you have notes
13 which would have helped you drafting the report?
14 A. Several pages, yes. And the HRC
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, if this document could be tendered
18 into evidence.
19 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
20 Then Madam Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P822.
22 JUDGE ORIE: P822 is admitted into evidence.
23 Mr. Waespi, the previous exhibit is partly in Danish, partly in
24 English. How would you expect the Chamber to -- to digest that?
25 MR. WAESPI: Yes. We instructed an outside service to make a
1 translation, verbatim translation of the Danish parts and we will receive
2 it shortly. So I hope tomorrow morning we will have it for
4 JUDGE ORIE: I then put on the record that, of course, the
5 admission is conditional to receiving a full English text. Now, these
6 apparently are notes, may I take it handwritten notes, the original seems
7 not to be attached to it.
8 Mr. Misetic.
9 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I feel a need to step in here.
10 We have been produced his entire notebook and an entire diary and
11 I will work it out with Mr. Waespi but we believe and we'll tender both
12 in their entirety in the cross-examination. I will work out with him
13 whose going to pay for the translation but actually we'll have both
14 translated, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
16 MR. WAESPI: At the end, we all have the same UN background as it
17 comes to translation services.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that is the optimistic view on the matter.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Let's move to 65 ter 5434.
22 Q. Now, Mr. Liborius, can you tell us what you see on the screen?
23 A. I see my notebook.
24 Q. And can you specify which parts of your notebook?
25 A. That's my second notebook and it covers the dates for
1 27 October -- yeah. Both pages, I have the notebook at my availability
2 here for the Chamber, if that serves in their interests.
3 Q. Thank you. And on the right side, do you see a reference to the
4 meeting we were just discussing with you, General Gotovina and
5 Mr. Gambotti?
6 A. That is it indeed the first page of the many pages of notes I
7 took during the meeting.
8 Q. Let's go slowly through the pages.
9 MR. WAESPI: If the next page could be brought up, please.
10 Q. Is that the next sequence?
11 A. Yes. You see the questions discussed. They are in numbers 1, 2,
12 3, 4, 5, up until -- I should state that if I am required to relate and
13 reflect and reproduce what is in the notes I must suggest that I have the
14 notebook in front of me. It's in my bag. Because it is not really so
15 clearly visible here on the screen.
16 Have I seen a photocopy of it. It is much more clear on a
18 Q. The only purpose is to identify that this is a true copy of what
19 you have in your notebook and we do have another exhibit, a typewritten
20 version of this notebook.
21 If we can move on to the last page, please?
22 JUDGE ORIE: Just for my understanding, Mr. Waespi. Is this the
23 same notebook or a different notebook from which we got the transcript in
24 the previous -- one of the previous exhibits.
25 MR. WAESPI: It is the same one from the -- the same series of
2 Q. And this is the last page. Can you confirm that, Mr. Liborius?
3 A. Yes, I can. And in the interests of saving time, Your Honour, I
5 front of them. Under the condition that I receive it -- return.
6 Q. Now --
7 JUDGE ORIE: If this would not find any objection with the
8 Defence counsel, then of course we could have a look at the notebook.
9 THE WITNESS: Simply in the interests of time.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then could the usher please assist in ...
11 THE WITNESS: This the first one; this is the second one; this is
12 the one we're looking at now, the small one; and the first one covers the
13 previous month. They are my property.
14 Your Honour, you should look at the yellow mark in the little
16 JUDGE ORIE: We'll find our way through it, thank you.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. MISETIC: I would note that if there is it a colour
19 distinction or things like that in the notebook, we haven't been produced
20 anything in colour. So, I don't know what -- oh, I see, Post-It notes.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. If this could receive an
24 exhibit number, please.
25 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
1 Madam Registrar.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P823.
3 JUDGE ORIE: P823 is admitted into evidence.
4 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. Now in producing those notes, who did you do that? Did you take
6 them at the meeting or after the meeting.
7 A. At the meeting as it was in progress.
8 Q. How good of a note-taker are you?
9 A. I'm a fairly senior civil servant in the Danish administration.
10 I would suggest that my note takings have been trained and refined over a
11 couple of years. My prime minister relies on them, and will in a few
12 days' time.
13 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius. If we could go back to 5441, please;
14 that's the Exhibit we discussed at the outset of today. And if we could
15 move to page 5, please.
16 In front of you, do you see now a typed written version of your
17 notes as it relates to that meeting of the 27th of October?
18 A. Yes. I produced it myself.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, let's move to item 15, which is at the very end.
20 MR. WAESPI: If we can go back, please. Yes. Item 15.
21 Q. Now, using these notes here and your memory, can you let us, what
22 was discussed under item 15?
23 A. It dealt with the question of what would happen if a military
24 operation occurred in Sector East. How would the Croatian forces be
25 controlled. Prior to the item 15 had been a discussion of the tactical
1 manuals for increasing control. That had been the topic of the -- that
2 section of the conversation. The conversation had reached, I would say,
3 a very -- the atmosphere was good, it was tense, it was a give-and-take
4 conversation between Gambotti and General Gotovina.
5 The first sentence, [Foreign language spoken], if a military
6 operation comes, how will the HV forces be controlled, was the question
7 raised by Gambotti. And then follows the answer by General Gotovina. It
8 had been the subject prior 13, 12, 13, 14, the NCO corps. The
9 availability of them and the possibility for them for exercising control
10 in the military rank and the General focussed on the fact that they
11 lacked the sufficiently trained and skilled NCOs giving, among others,
12 the -- the result -- that was a result of the years under Marshal Tito,
13 the Yugoslav whole mentality, the way the armed forces were structured.
14 The fact that the NCOs -- some of them had also had bad experiences.
15 They were amongst all the people who were expelled from the Krajina-held
16 areas, that the feeling of harassment that they felt, that that taken in
17 total produced an environment in which the appropriate professional
18 execution of a NCO function as a controlling and commanding element in
19 the chain of command was not properly working.
20 However, the General stated that the professional soldiers were
21 of a higher quality.
22 Then the conversation ping-ponged forward and at a certain point
23 General Gotovina -- Gambotti, HRC designate Gambotti asked the question
24 whether, okay, we have discussed NCOs and the way they can exercise their
25 command but we all know that extraordinary events took place and the
1 General concurred in that. And then at that time, the silence kicked in
2 to that part of the conversation, because at that time it was, well,
3 admitted that extraordinary events did -- occurred at a quite a
4 large-scale and that the previous, so to speak, protection of the
5 integrity of the NCO corps and the developments trying to keep the
6 professional soldiers out responsibility of that has, so to speak, been
8 The conversation was conducted through silence, I would say. And
9 that was a distinct change in that meeting.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
11 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I just wish to note that the document
12 on the screen was prepared by the witness a few days ago. I have now
13 noticed that he transcribed his notes, it says in 15: "Professional
14 soldiers." And in his original notebook it says: "Professional soldiers
15 were controlled." The two words "were controlled" are omitted from
16 what Mr. Liborius put on the paper here. Just for the record, thank you.
17 THE WITNESS: If we could reproduce the notebook itself, it is
18 perhaps easier.
19 JUDGE ORIE: We're talking about 15. Under 15, prof soldiers, is
20 that the portion --
21 MR. MISETIC: Yes, yes, and the next words are "were controlled,"
22 in the original that I have been given.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I have the page in front of me. That's the page
24 with the pyramid on it.
25 MR. MISETIC: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Then we have to look at it. Could you perhaps
2 provide me with the --
3 MR. WAESPI: 65 ter number would be 5434.
4 MR. MISETIC: This is what I was produced by the Office of the
5 Prosecutor, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Let's see whether that looks more or less like the
7 original I have got here.
8 MR. WAESPI: It would be the last page in this document.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Now, we have it now on our screen.
10 What is missing in your version?
11 MR. MISETIC: Nothing it missing in my version. What was written
12 before -- on the document before was purported to be a transcript of this
13 and what I'm pointing out is that when Mr. Liborius prepared this
14 transcript, he put "professional soldiers" and then the sentence "were
15 controlled" is omitted from the transcript that he has prepared. The
16 typed version that was on our screen a few minutes ago.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Now, what is on our screen, what line do I find
19 MR. MISETIC: This is now the notebook which is P -- P821.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. One second.
21 I think a whole line is missing not only "were controlled,"
22 but --
23 MR. MISETIC: [Microphone not activated] Much improved, I think.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There seems to an error in the transcript.
25 THE WITNESS: That's the reason, Your Honour, that I would prefer
1 to refer to my written notes because those are in front of you, and if we
2 can relate to that I would feel more confident.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the issue dealing with at this moment could be
4 produced on your screen. I don't know what --
5 THE WITNESS: That's perfect for me.
6 JUDGE ORIE: You can see it on your screen at this moment?
7 THE WITNESS: Yes.
8 JUDGE ORIE: So the portion we are talking about, you'll see that
9 the words "were controlled" and then the "D," and then something that's
10 difficult to read for me, "improved," do not appear on your transcript.
11 THE WITNESS: Yes. The meeting at that time had gone on for
12 some -- I don't know --
13 JUDGE ORIE: I think it is just a transcript error.
14 THE WITNESS: Okay. Fine.
15 JUDGE ORIE: That's --
16 THE WITNESS: Let's take the original.
17 MR. MISETIC: On that basis I'd ask, Your Honour, that the P --
18 P823 be marked for identification until we can make sure that everything
19 has been transcribed properly.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And of course it is a selection of the
21 notebook anyhow.
22 MR. MISETIC: But even that selection should reflect what is
23 actually in the notebook at least.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No, no, there is no doubt about that. Then we
25 will have if marked for identification for the time being until the
1 portions transcribed have been fully checked.
2 How much time would you need for that Mr. Misetic.
3 MR. MISETIC: Given that I'm doing the cross-examination,
4 Your Honour, should we do it while the witness is still here, or I would
5 prefer to do it early next week -- to get back to you early next week, I
7 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, we'll get a translation later today
8 and so I can disclose it to Defence and we have an English translation of
9 everything that is in Danish.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps other counsel may be just as much
12 Someone has just to check it. It's as simple as that.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Q. Now earlier, Mr. Liborius, you said that it was admitted that
16 extraordinary events occurred, I believe. Do you recall that?
17 A. Yes. What happened between the line "professional soldiers were
18 controlled though much improved," and then "extraordinary" on one line
19 was that the ping-pong between General Gotovina and Mr. Gambotti,
20 narrowed in the -- the focus of the conversation into how was the control
21 exercised over, not only reserve units but also professional units.
22 The starting point of General Gotovina's explanation was that
23 professional soldiers were controlled, were completely free of
24 accusations of having engaged in irregular activities burning and looting
25 and that stuff, and as the discussion in 15 developed to a crucial point
1 where -- that is where "extraordinary," that word, is reflecting there,
2 had reached such a tense atmosphere. Now I want you to remember that the
3 two persons had in -- had a tete-a-tete before the formal meeting
4 started. They were speaking French.
5 Q. And by the two persons you mean?
6 A. Gotovina and Gambotti, who was a senior French officer. So there
7 was a good rapport between the two gentlemen. Gambotti being a senior,
8 old, experienced French officer and the General having a good rapport
9 with him. So you may say that it was difficult to escape the subject and
10 just giving lip service.
11 Q. Let me ask you --
12 A. And therefore, as the conversation became more focussed on, well,
13 there was these extraordinary events, yes, they were there, was the
14 silent admittance. I, as a note-taker, would not be -- keep -- working
15 with my pencil because it would seriously disturb the rapport between the
16 two gentlemen. It is not like, you know, you sit in the school and take
17 dictation. And we both interpreted that the silence there was -- the
18 silence by General Gotovina was, in fact, the answer. It was an a silent
19 exception that, yes, extraordinary events did take place and the soldiers
20 that General Gotovina -- Colonel Gambotti mentioned had indeed taken part
21 in that.
22 Q. And what is meant by extraordinary events?
23 A. Burning and looting mainly. But extraordinary events was at that
24 time the common phrase used by the Croatian government and Croatian
25 officials for all sorts of activities that -- that included killing,
1 burning, looting, extraordinary events.
2 Q. And you mentioned a couple of times NCO corps or NCOs. What are
4 A. They are the middle level commanders, sergeants and that stuff.
5 The level of soldiers that are so crucial in controlling the men in your
6 unit. Can you be a fine general, you can be a fine officer, but you need
7 the NCOs, the sergeants, in order to maintain control of your field
8 units --
9 Q. Thank you --
10 A. -- of the five to 15 unit size. And if I may relate to what I
11 said yesterday, when you do see a unit of say five to fifteen soldiers
12 moving around they will usually in their -- down to earth business, be
13 controlled by the NCOs. And if the NCOs do not react or act in a proper
14 way, they accept killing, burning, looting, whatever, then the entire
15 morale in the unit simply is eroded very fast. I can say that as a
16 previous soldier.
17 Q. Let me move on to item 16 on the same last page.
18 Can you tell us what was discussed?
19 A. 16 and 17, [Foreign language spoken] translates into who has been
20 arrested. A question by Gambotti. The reply from General Gotovina was
21 that General Cermak would have that information and he would continue
22 with some details there. But in general, the situation was okay. Saying
23 that well, okay, some people have perhaps been doing these extraordinary
24 events, discussed in 15, but in general the situation is under control,
25 it's okay.
1 And he continues: There are [Foreign language spoken]
2 extraordinary events. There is always extraordinary events, a repetition
3 of the 15 [Foreign language spoken] I don't have concrete information.
4 So the General flips between being, if you wish, honest with the senior
5 French officer that he has established a good rapport with and, on the
6 other hand, keeping the official line. That is the art of the -- the
7 conversation there.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I don't know whether we have this
10 document admitted already.
11 JUDGE ORIE: I think the document was admitted but the
12 transcription is now marked for identification, the selected portions.
13 Could I ask one question. In 16, we find the word "events." Has
14 that word been there when you wrote it or has it been changed at any
15 later stage?
16 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, certainly not. What you see in front
17 of you is what was produced in that meeting. And I can assure you under
18 oath that the diary and what you see in front of you is what was produced
19 at the time.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, everything you say is under oath, so
21 therefore that needs -- it's not specific for this answer.
22 Could I -- you rightly said that this is your property. Could I
23 nevertheless instruct you that should keep it so that the original is --
24 will always be available when needed.
25 THE WITNESS: Certainly, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
3 MR. KAY: Your Honour. I don't know whether Your Honour is
4 finished looking at the document, might the Defence bar have a look at it
5 as well in the original form.
6 JUDGE ORIE: The original. I take it that there's no objection
7 against temporarily leaving it and I take it that the Defence, certainly
8 in view of the instructions I just gave, has no concern to give it back
9 to you once they've inspected it.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Q. Let's move on to meetings you had with General Cermak. How many
13 times did you meet with him?
14 A. With General Cermak, I don't have the exact number. From time to
15 time we would meet to discuss different issues of running the ECMM
16 operation. We would sometimes discuss human rights -- humanitarian
17 issues. I would have some of the meetings, my humanitarian officer would
18 have some. So from time to time.
19 Q. Thank you. Let's turn to 65 ter 4002. This is a daily report of
20 5th August, and it refers to the fact that the new military governor is
21 General Cermak. I'm sure we will see it in a moment.
22 Now, that's the 5th of August, a report by you. Was that the
23 first time you heard of Mr. Cermak and the fact that he is the military
25 A. Could we have it enlarged, please?
2 Q. And why do you describe him as military governor in this report?
3 A. Because at that time we had information via UN and I believe also
4 public media that a new general had been installed in Knin as a military
6 Q. Now in the meetings you were present, how was he addressed, as
7 far as you recall?
8 A. Either as General Cermak or the military governor.
9 Q. As far as you were aware, did he ever protest as to the fact that
10 you called him military governor?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Let me turn to your second witness statement. That's P800. At
13 page 3, where you say that, and I quote: "Turning to the authority of
14 General Cermak, the military governor, there is reason to say that his
15 authority grew during the month of August and September."
16 And then you move on to discuss the rising authority in relation
17 to how you got through check-points.
18 Do you have other examples of how you saw his authority
20 A. As we discussed yesterday, frequently a -- a call to him or his
21 staff would resolve a restriction of movement problems. And as the weeks
22 progressed after Operation Storm, sometimes the mentioning of his name
23 would suffice to -- to solve the problems of restriction of movements or
24 in conversation with soldiers.
25 Q. In general, based on the meetings you had with him and perhaps
1 other people, how did you see his authority?
2 A. I saw General Cermak's authority indeed as military governor.
3 The senior figure in charge of the, you may say, housekeeping, not the
4 operational military figure. And his words to me was that he was sent to
5 ensure the upholding of law and order.
6 MR. WAESPI: If we could move back to 65 ter 5441. And I do
7 apologise that it might be exhibits already.
8 Q. And does it refer to a meeting you had with General Cermak on the
9 19th of October?
10 A. It was a meeting between General Cermak and a visiting troika
11 delegation of EU ambassadors, France, Spain and Italy
12 participated in the meeting.
13 Q. Now I see that there are subject matters that were discussed.
14 Was the issue of burning and destruction raised during this meeting?
15 A. Yes, certainly. If I am to relate to the meeting, I again prefer
16 that my notebook is produced on the screen, please.
17 Q. Yes.
18 MR. WAESPI: Perhaps if we can move on, what we have on the
19 screen, the next page -- or perhaps also it would be fair to have
20 temporarily the notebook given to the witness so he could refer to it
21 right now.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher.
23 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
24 MR. WAESPI:
25 Q. It's the 19 October 1995
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Now, can you let us know what was said in relation to the issue
3 of burning and destruction.
4 A. Throughout the meetings -- throughout the meeting, in the
5 different questions, burning and destruction was an element. In the
6 first question of the Spanish ambassador where, as a first, he dwelled on
7 the humanitarian problems, the reply of General Cermak was to contain
8 that denial of -- of that. That is carried in the word [Foreign language
9 spoken]. We should move up on the page. We have the second page in
10 front of us, in the printed version.
11 Secondly, in the questions of the French ambassador, now we are
12 on that page we have on the screen, later in the meeting where he
13 returned to the -- the French ambassador returned to the subject
14 specifically asking why Kistanje was burnt. FRA AMB is French
15 ambassador. And --
16 MR. WAESPI: Can we go back to the page we just had on the
18 A. FRA AMB
19 burned, why burned. General Cermak answered, Well, happened during
20 Operation Storm and the day after. Professional army is okay, but
21 reserve units and Home Guard, they are just people. The notes reflect
22 the statements by General Cermak that Kistanje was burned during
23 Operation Storm and just the day after. That he then continued on saying
24 that it was not the responsibility of the professional army but the
25 Kistanje had been burned by reserve units or Home Guards and as they are
1 just simple people, i.e., they act out of revenge, they are wanting to --
2 to repay for all the harassment that they have suffered and the issues we
3 discussed during the Gotovina meeting, the motivation for that.
4 If I may, Your Honour, refer to the discussion I produced in the
5 report for the visiting senators where I would said that I would, in that
6 report, produce input for the discussion. These were the elements that
7 were usually produced during discussions on what happened and who were
9 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius. Just one more question on this page.
10 Security of Serbs, what was discussed? Just below the entry you see on
11 the screen, Varivode.
12 A. Yes. The question was raised by the French ambassador, what
13 about the security of the Serbs? General Cermak replied, We have
14 increased the police presence. There are, of course, scattered hamlets.
15 They are far away, difficult to -- to come around in. Of course we know
16 that as the winter will start, we will see that -- that will mean
18 Q. Thank you, Mr. Liborius.
19 Let me move in the remaining few minutes, very briefly to two
20 subjects. Yes?
21 A. On the next page.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic. Is there anything?
23 MR. MISETIC: I'm waiting, patiently, Your Honour, until now, but
24 I thought that 3.15 -- is it one hour or ...
25 JUDGE ORIE: We started a bit later.
1 MR. MISETIC: Fine.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
3 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. Like the Defence, I have
4 to cover a number of topics because the evidence requires it.
5 MR. MISETIC: If I may respond, I only have eight hours, you've
6 had much more than that with the statements. Thank you.
7 MR. WAESPI: 65 ter 4359, please.
8 Q. You -- I think it has been mentioned already that you drafted a
9 special report dated 26 November 1995
10 Operation Storm in the former Serb Krajina. Is that correct?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. And did you have a chance to review it before you came to
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And is it an accurate description of what you observed, what
16 other people told you?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. WAESPI: I would like to have the report admitted,
20 Mr. President, once it comes on the screen.
21 JUDGE ORIE: No objections? Madam Registrar.
22 MR. WAESPI: It's a lengthy report, so it may take some time to
23 have it brought up.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit P824.
25 JUDGE ORIE: P824, in the absence of any objection, is admitted
1 into evidence.
2 MR. WAESPI: Thank you.
3 Q. And the last point is -- I'd like to refer you to your first
4 witness statement, 1995, now P799.
5 In the middle of the last page - it's your first witness
6 statement - middle of the last page: "HV MP and CRO POL
7 assessment of the number of the police was that it fitted the requirement
8 needed to control civilians, POWs and others in a sustained period of
9 combat operations. They were everywhere. In the Knin town and outside
10 and in the rest of Sector South, the personnel to control the whole
11 sector was in place."
12 Do you stand by this?
13 A. Yes.
14 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President. I don't have any more
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Waespi.
17 MR. WAESPI: Just, Mr. President, before I forget, of course we
18 have filed a 92 ter motion which has a few documents I haven't addressed
19 but they are in the witness statements addressed which are now in
20 evidence and a few photographs also addressed in the witness statements
21 so I would like to move these into evidence as well.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. They were attached to the statement or were
23 they just mentioned?
24 MR. WAESPI: They were just mentioned in the statement.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I have no -- I can't reproduce at this moment
1 an exact list. Could you please produce a short list in which we find
2 what has not yet been dealt with so that we can then ask the Defence
3 whether there are any objections to that.
4 MR. WAESPI: Certainly, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Your net time finally was four hours and 33 minutes,
6 Mr. Waespi.
7 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 Mr. Misetic, will you be the first to cross-examine the witness.
9 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, you will now be cross-examined by
11 Mr. Misetic. Mr. Misetic is counsel for the Prosecution -- for
12 Mr. Gotovina. I am -- I apologise. Gives me an opportunity,
13 Mr. Misetic, to point at a small mistake you made earlier, when you
14 said --
15 MR. MISETIC: That's impossible, Your Honour.
16 JUDGE ORIE: -- P823 be marked for identification whereas you
17 apparently wanted the transcript to be marked for identification which is
19 MR. MISETIC: Yes, I apologise, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Your mistake is minor. Mine is not.
21 Please proceed.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:
23 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
24 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Liborius.
25 A. Good afternoon.
1 Q. Mr. Liborius, first, I noticed when you came and sat in the chair
2 you immediately wanted to take notes and can I ask you why you needed to
3 take notes?
4 A. Because I know that you would ask me.
5 Q. Ask you what?
6 A. I do take notes in my profession.
7 Q. Something you -- it's standard practice for you?
8 A. When it's important for me, I do.
9 Q. Okay. In your diary, you make reference so something called
10 Dan Del.
11 Dan Del stands for?
12 A. Danish delegation.
13 Q. And can you tell us what Danish delegation you were referring?
14 A. The Danish delegation of the ECMM.
15 Q. And in that same diary entry you will recall it says you are
16 writing a report for UMN as part of the Dan Del monthly report. Can you
17 tell us what UMN stand for?
18 A. It stands for Unres Ministaire [phoen].
19 Q. And can you -- in English, what does that mean?
20 A. Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
21 Q. Of which country?
22 A. Denmark
23 Q. And -- thank you, sir.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic and Mr. Liborius, you are developing a
25 speed which is almost impossible to follow for transcribing what you say.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
3 Madam Registrar, if I could have P801, please. If we could go to
4 page 7 in the English version, please. And go to the bottom, please.
5 Q. I'd like to start by reading you that bottom paragraph of your
6 statement from 2005, Mr. Liborius. "I had met Gotovina previously in his
7 office in Knin sometime in August 1995. I don't remember the exact date.
8 When I protested about the fact that Gotovina wanted us to give up our
9 premises in Knin, as they were required for Croatian soldiers and that he
10 had reserved for his own purposes the large ECMM building. I refused to
11 give in, and he then said that ECMM must therefore leave Knin. I argued
12 that the Croatian government would not be complying with its own
13 obligations that the president had signed up to. This angered Gotovina
14 and he stormed out. The Croatian Senior Liaison Officer, I cannot recall
15 his name, he was bearded, told me that I was crazy to have responded in
16 this manner, as Gotovina, held life and death in his hands."
17 Now my first question to you, Mr. Liborius, is: It's true, is it
18 not, that that never happened. Correct?
19 A. I can't hear you, sorry there's a noise.
20 JUDGE ORIE: There apparently was a -- a problem. I also heard
21 something not normal in my earphones.
22 Could you please repeat your question.
23 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour. I'm trying to listen to the
24 French in order to keep on pace.
25 Q. Mr. Liborius, my question and I will repeat it from the
1 transcript, it's true, is it not, that that never happened what you
2 described there in your witness statement?
3 A. Your question is --
4 Q. It's true that you never had a meeting or a conversation with
5 General Gotovina where you had an argument with him about the ECMM
6 premises and the Croatian government taking it over and then subsequent
7 to that meeting that the CALO, the Croatian Army Liaison Officer, told
8 you that were crazy to have responded in this manner and that Gotovina
9 held life and death in his hands. That never happened, correct?
10 A. That is not correct. I had a meeting with him and he stormed
12 Q. You're a good note taker and the prime minister relies on your
13 notes so could you look in your notebook, please, and point out the
14 specific passage where the commander of the Split Military District had
15 an argument with you?
16 A. My --
17 Q. And let me take that back. This statement by the CALO that were
18 crazy to have responded in this manner as Gotovina held life and death in
19 his hands, that could be perceived as a threat to your physical security,
21 A. Colonel Lukovic was a generally --
22 Q. Mr. Liborius --
23 A. -- kind man so I did not consider that as a threat.
24 Q. You didn't consider that Colonel Lukovic telling you that
25 General Gotovina held life and death in his hands --
1 A. The conversation was right after the General had stormed out that
2 I must have been crazy. He said that with half a smile or that -- that I
3 should not have responded that way, that I had to move from the ECMM
4 accommodation and that of course the -- the words of the General were law
5 as he held life and death in his hands. I did not consider that as a
6 personal threat to my security at that time.
7 Q. So this was kind of a half-hearted, sort of joking statement by
8 the CALO, is that it?
9 A. You will have to ask him, sir, whether it was a joke. It was a
10 part of the housekeeping business where the ECMM could have its office
11 and its accommodation.
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. It was a subject that we discussed in numerous conversations
14 throughout August.
15 Q. Mr. Liborius, sorry to cut you off but I need to get through as
16 many factual --
17 A. Yes.
18 MR. MISETIC: And I understand, Mr. Waespi, I will allow him to
19 answer factually but given the constrictions on time, I am going to try
20 and get him focussed on specific answers to my questions.
21 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, could you please try to focus your
23 answers very much on the precise questions. If Mr. Misetic wants further
24 details, he will certainly ask you for it.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. MISETIC:
2 Q. Now, it caught my attention, obviously, that the prime minister
3 depends on your notes so if you could please refer to your notebook or
4 your diary or if you know of a daily report where you reported this
5 incident with General Gotovina and then we can proceed from there to
6 discuss those parts of your notes, diary, or the daily report.
7 A. The issue, as I said, was an ongoing one, so in that case, I did
8 not have to take notes in my diary for that and my diary served another
10 Q. You had to take notes when you sat down in this chair, but you
11 never wrote down anywhere, am I right, of this type of incident of
12 General Gotovina and the CALO; is that fair to say?
13 A. No. I did in my notebook once, I recall, had an entry on the
14 accommodation and office issue.
15 Q. That is true. And we'll take a look at that right now. However,
16 you have looked at your notebook and you know that there is no reference
17 to a meeting with General Gotovina there. Correct?
18 A. With regard to this issue here.
19 Q. Yes.
20 A. Not that I know of.
21 Q. That's right. Okay. Well, let's take a look at your diary, I
23 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, 1D50-0069. Sorry, I'll call up
24 the first page number which is 1D50-0001. And now if we could move to
25 0069, please.
1 Q. Now, I'm -- sorry.
2 Mr. Liborius, I'm going to read you three entries at the same
3 time in the interests of saving time, and then I will ask you a few
5 This is your entry for the 2nd of September --
6 A. I prefer to relate to my original notebook.
7 Q. That's fine. This is -- however, it has been stipulated by the
8 Prosecution that you actually have gone through this document reviewed
9 it, made corrections to it and returned it back to the Office of the
10 Prosecutor as an accurate representation of your diary. Is that correct?
11 A. If I'm asked a question with regard to my notebook, I would like
12 to refer to my notebook.
13 Q. That's fine. I'm just asking you to -- is it correct that this
14 transcript of your diary, not your notebook, is accurate because you were
15 the one who received it, the original draft, you made corrections to it
16 and then returned it back to the Office of the Prosecutor. Do you recall
18 A. Yes. But in all human activity there is a slight risk of small
19 error, so if I'm asked to relate to what I wrote, I would like to refer
20 to it and I have it with me.
21 Q. That's fine. You can use your diary; I'm going to use what is on
22 the screen. Because that is it all I have.
23 A. Your Honour?
24 JUDGE ORIE: We are working on the basis of the material which is
25 uploaded in the e-court system. If there's any reason at any moment to
1 have any doubt as to whether that is not a true copy of the original,
2 then please draw my attention to that, and then we'll see whether we --
3 we have to verify that.
4 MR. MISETIC: Bottom of the page, please.
5 JUDGE ORIE: And if you can't read it as it is reproduced --
6 MR. MISETIC: It is 00 -- yeah, good, it's the 2nd of
7 September in the original. Sorry.
8 Q. You'll see there, sir, it says you entered in your diary: "Today
9 we are moving the rest of the Knin office. I am going to a meeting with
10 the CALOs. Kreso, Stanko and Karolj are there." Do you recall the
11 CALOs, sir, as Stanko Bacic, Kreso Dragic and Karolj Dondo? Do those
12 names mean anything do you?
13 A. Dondo does.
14 Q. Bacic or Dragic?
15 A. What was their first names?
16 Q. Kreso Dragic and Stanko Bacic. Do you recall them as being the
18 A. Stanko Babic, yeah, I think so.
19 Q. "I come informally, casually, by and tell them that we have found
20 a good place. Chief of police office is aware of it and that it suits
21 our needs." Then skipping some sentences: "NATO planes are bombing BSA
22 positions again," that would be Bosnian Serb army. Is that correct?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. "The CRO
25 like they are almost in the same club as us. But no, dear friends, you
1 and not members of the EU, WEU, NATO, or the European Council. You have
2 committed far too many war crimes for that."
3 If we could turn the page, please, two pages.
4 For 6 September, again: "Meeting with CALOs about accommodations
5 for ECMM. I refuse to move because a General has gotten the idea to move
6 into our earliest RC Knin house. They are offering to find something
7 else for us. I'd really like to see that but everything turns out, as
8 expected, to be a pile of shit."
9 Then you go on down towards the middle of that: "Then I will
10 close the Knin office and report that ECMM work is not welcome in this
11 lawless country so they can expect to say farewell to DEM and FHARE,"
12 et cetera, et cetera.
13 And then if we can go to the 7th of September. Beginning part of
14 this so I don't spend a lot of time reading it out, you went to the RC
15 building in Knin. "The stench reaches all the way up to the top floor.
16 It seems as if it is destiny. After the property has been taken over,
17 the reek of cadavers and dog corpses is foul and hangs in the walls.
18 Here you go, General Gotovina. General, you can stick it up your ass. A
19 capable artillery officer and with suitably unscrupulous conscience to
20 shell civilian targets and aid from a well-tuned propaganda machine was
21 what gave the victory there." And finally, "more fuel and foreign
22 advisors than RSK and the Serbs."
23 Now, those are the entries in your diary concerning this issue
24 with the CALOs and the accommodations for the ECMM in Knin. Is that
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And in your entries there, you say meetings with CALOs. You
3 never actually met with General Gotovina; correct?
4 A. Again, that is not correct.
5 Q. Well, there's nothing in these entries saying that you met with
6 General Gotovina and that the CALO told you that you were crazy to
7 respond to him that way because he held life and death in his hands;
9 A. This touches on another issue whether I use my diary as an entire
10 stenographic reproduction of every word mentioned in the whole day. I
11 don't. What you can see in the diary, to respond to your first question,
12 is that I have a meeting on 2nd of September. Now, at that point in time
13 it had become an issue whether we could keep our accommodation or not, so
14 prior to the 2nd of September we have had that issue boiling.
15 Q. Okay. Then if you could direct me again --
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, excuse me. I know this is
17 unprecedented for me to stand but I'm the last guy to go here. I would
18 ask the Court to please ask this gentleman to answer the question because
19 if he is going to continue to answer like this, I'm not going to go till
20 next week. So, I would like this person to answer the questions that
21 Mr. Misetic is posing.
22 Thank you.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, the last question was whether we can
24 see something in this diary. You could just answer that question by
25 saying whether we see it or whether we do not see it. You are not an
1 accused here. There's no reason to defend even if sometimes the language
2 might sound a bit as if someone was blaming you for something, but please
3 focus on the questions and your answers.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
5 MR. MISETIC:
6 Q. Now, we have already tendered into evidence, Mr. Liborius, the
7 entry from your notebook on the 6th where you noted that at a briefing --
8 and I believe it is in your witness statement from this past weekend,
9 that -- here, let me find it.
10 Yes, paragraph 13 of your last witness statement from
11 September 2008. You referred to the fact that your notebook does have a
12 note about an UN Sector South headquarters staff meeting, that is P802,
13 held on 6 September, where you were informed that there had been a
14 meeting between the UN Sector South commander and General Gotovina and
15 that General Gotovina had apparently said there was sufficient material
16 for a case in court against Alun Roberts.
17 Now, you felt that sufficiently important to include it in your
18 notebook. You didn't feel it sufficiently important to include a -- what
19 could be construed as a threat to your physical safety by a CALO after an
20 alleged argument with General Gotovina, and I'd like to ask you why?
21 A. Your Honour, I'm afraid that it will develop into somewhat of a
22 detailed answer. As I take the question that it centres on how my note
23 taking is done, why, and when and for what purpose. Before I engage in
24 that answer, I would seek your counsel or ask your advice on how the
25 question should be interpreted.
1 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, it's okay. I will move on. Let's
2 keep moving to get as many facts in as we can, Mr. Liborius.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
4 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Just one comment also to what my friend
5 Mr. Kuzmanovic said. If a witness is confronted it did not happen what
6 he explained, let's be fair and give him a chance to explain and not just
7 by answering yes or no. I think we have to be realistic and respectful
8 of this witness.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I understand Mr. Misetic to move on, because
10 what he did is to put emphasis on something that came into his mind,
11 whether a matter was important enough. Of course you can say no, or yes.
12 That doesn't change that much perhaps because if suddenly we said, no, it
13 was important enough but it isn't this reason I didn't write it down,
14 then of course we would have an explanation.
15 If something of that kind comes to your mind, of course,
16 Mr. Liborius, give us an explanation. But if Mr. Misetic is mainly
17 seeking to your confirmation that you didn't write something down
18 Mr. Misetic would expect you to have written down, then, of course it is,
19 well, I would say.
20 THE WITNESS: I'm very well comfortable with the fact that
21 Mr. Misetic would like me to have written a lot of things down, but I
22 decide what is necessary to support my memory when I'm monitoring and
23 working in ECMM. I have my colleagues, I have my different reporting
24 formats, I have my loads of papers I should produce for ECMM. And if
25 there arises a doubt whether, first of all, as I heard earlier, that this
1 was a -- a true reflection of what was said in the meetings, or what is
2 said in my diary, I have to bring it to the attention of -- of the Court
3 here that what I wrote down was in my notebooks for the meetings. The
4 ongoing issues of housekeeping I did not have to write everything down
5 and I do think that all sensible people will have a recollection of what
6 happens in their immediate daily life.
7 The fact that something is not there in my notes or my diary is
8 not to suggest that it never take place and that was, I think, the gist
9 of Mr. Misetic's first question. I will follow, of course, your advise
10 to answer as short as possible.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
12 MR. MISETIC:
13 Q. Just following up on that, Mr. Liborius, you had this meeting
14 with the CALOs in your capacity as an ECMM representative, correct?
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. It was your obligation as an ECMM representative that if had you
17 been threatened directly or indirectly by the commander of the Split
18 Military District, in your capacity as an ECMM representative you had a
19 duty to report that, didn't you?
20 A. If there was a direct threat at gunpoint to me, I would report
21 it. If people said, You know you shouldn't be driving on that road
22 because you may enter a mine, that was a frequent threat to us during the
23 Krajina years, and in a wartime environment you do come across people who
24 uses threats or the perception that something can be a threat as a tool
25 in their everyday conversation and everyday conversations are not always
1 reported in -- in the ECMM format.
2 Q. Okay. Let's put aside the substance of the conversation. If you
3 have a meeting with the commander of the Split Military District
4 regardless of the topic, you had an obligation, at the end of the day
5 when preparing your daily reports to note you had a meeting with the
6 commander of the Split Military District, correct?
7 A. Not necessarily. If the issue was, for example, on accommodation
8 as you started out with, and it had become a topic that we would return
9 to, if you ask me if I had an obligation to report that in the ECMM
10 reports, the team reports would, for housekeeping issues like this that
11 develops, only be reported when the team felt it important.
12 Q. Okay. Mr. Liborius, on the 7th of September you talk about the
13 fact that the Croatians had more fuel and foreign advisors than RSK and
14 the Serbs. Who are the foreign advisors?
15 A. To the Croatian army?
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. I would believe that, among others, also US personnel.
18 Q. What type of assistance did the US personnel provide such that
19 they assisted in "giving the victory" here?
20 A. I would reckon that part of their advice was military advice.
21 Q. And what about Operation Storm led to you believe that it was
22 conducted with the advice of foreign advisors?
23 A. Primarily, the development of the Croatian army from the basis of
24 the JNA, the Yugoslav People's Army and the introduction of a mobile
25 warfare, that whole concept required military advice at a level I don't
1 think that the Croatian army, at that time, could produce itself.
2 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, at this time I'd like to tender the
3 entire diary which I will be making reference to throughout the
4 cross-examination. It is 1D50-0001.
5 MR. WAESPI: No objection, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Misetic, you also referred to 1D50-0069 as
7 the 2nd of September entry. The note I just passed to the registrar is
8 whether there are different numbers ...
9 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
10 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour. The confusion is I referred to
11 the handwritten page of the diary instead of the translated --
12 transcribed version.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And now I see that the numbering in the
14 translation is different from the numbering in the original.
15 Mr. Waespi, no objections against the diary.
16 Madam Registrar, that would be.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit D741.
18 JUDGE ORIE: D741 is admitted into evidence. I actually was
19 looking to the original.
20 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, it might be time for a break.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it is good that you assist me.
22 We will have break and we resume at ten minutes past 4.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 4.18 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
1 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 Madam Registrar, if I may have 1D50-0071.
3 Q. And while that is coming up on the screen, Mr. Liborius, if I
4 could ask you were there any other meetings that you had with
5 General Gotovina that are not in an ECMM daily report, your diary, or
6 your notebook?
7 A. No, I believe not. I met General Gotovina only a couple of
9 Q. Now, at this alleged meeting where you had this altercation with
10 General Gotovina, who else was present from the ECMM side?
11 A. Me.
12 Q. Anyone else?
13 A. No.
14 MR. MISETIC: Sorry, the B/C/S ID is 1D50-0170. Okay.
15 If we could turn to the next -- sorry, that's fine.
16 Q. Mr. Liborius, this is a letter dated 11 September 1995. It is
17 from Claudio Dei. First, can you tell us who Claudio Dei is?
18 A. Claudio Dei is the CC, Coordination Centre, Split, chief.
19 Q. Did you work with Mr. Dei?
20 A. I did not have him as a team member. He was in the CC Split
22 Q. Well, since we're not very familiar with how the structure
23 worked, were you within the structure that Mr. Dei was in?
24 A. Yes. At the 11 September ... I had leave sometime in
25 mid-September, but I know who Claudio Dei is, yes.
1 Q. Okay. Based on the fact that as of 11 September 1995, Mr. Dei is
2 writing to General Gotovina and ends his letter with: "Thank you again
3 for your continuous cooperation which is highly appreciated," that this
4 incident with General Gotovina and the CALO telling you that he had life
5 and death in his hands that you didn't report that internally within ECMM
6 either. Correct?
7 A. I don't understand your question.
8 Q. Did you tell anyone within ECMM that you had received that kind
9 of message from the CALO after having had a meeting with
10 General Gotovina?
11 A. It was discussed with my ECMM colleagues throughout August and
12 the beginning of September what about our accomodation. So, yes, we did
13 have frequent meetings on administration issues.
14 Q. Okay.
15 A. Does that answer your question?
16 Q. No, that is not my question.
17 My specific question is there is an allegation in your statement
18 of 2005 that you had an altercation with General Gotovina and that after
19 that altercation, the CALO told you that were crazy because he had life
20 and death in his hands.
21 My question is: Did you pass that information along internally
22 within the ECMM structure?
23 A. The information that we should leave the ECMM accommodation, yes.
24 But I'm not sure I understand your question.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, the question appears to be whether you
1 reported within your organisation that the words, You're crazy to do this
2 because Mr. Gotovina is -- he is mastering life and death. He has it in
3 his hands.
4 Did you report that?
5 THE WITNESS: No.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That is an answer to the question.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. MISETIC: That's fine.
9 Q. Now, turning back to this diary entry on the 7th and talking
10 about this choice of words you had for General Gotovina followed by a
11 capable artillery officer with an unscrupulous conscience to shell
12 civilian targets and aid from a well-tuned propaganda machine.
13 JUDGE ORIE: This brings me to an issue, Mr. Misetic, that might
14 come as a surprise. This same document apparently is there as a 65 ter
15 document. There is a translation which is not exactly the same as you
16 just quoted.
17 MR. MISETIC: This is --
18 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether it has -- as a matter of fact,
19 I asked the legal officer to send an e-mail.
20 MR. MISETIC: I can explain it, Your Honour, and I had a
21 conversation with Mr. Waespi about it. I assume what is with the 65 ter
22 is the original CLSS translation of the diary. OTP then sent that
23 original CLSS translation to Mr. Liborius, who then reviewed it, made
24 changes and corrections to it, sent it back to OTP, and that's the one I
25 was using.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that's not the one which at this moment
2 uploaded as 65 ter P00 -- is it, 361 or whether I have to look.
3 MR. MISETIC: 311.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Something like that. That is not the same.
5 Just that I know that the parties are aware of these
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, may I tender the document on the
10 MR. WAESPI: No objections.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
12 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit D742.
13 JUDGE ORIE: D742 is admitted into evidence.
14 Please proceed.
15 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
16 Madam Registrar, may I have P804 on the screen, please.
17 Q. Mr. Liborius, this is the daily report you filed for the 4th of
18 August. Under section 2, you wrote, and the time here is 2203: "The RSK
19 leadership have broadcasted message to the public that the army will
20 continue fighting, however, the RSK Supreme Defence Council decided the
21 evacuation to RS, Republika Srpska ..."
22 Is that correct sir?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. "... territory of elderly, women and children. Comment: This is
25 assessed to be very difficult in light of the intensity of fighting."
1 Mr. Liborius, could you tell us a little bit more, please, about
2 this broadcast message?
3 A. The broadcast message was done by via radio to the RSK
5 Q. Did you hear it?
6 A. I think that it was brought to me by a transcript. I would
7 usually hear in my OPS room radio broadcasts and in the rear, and if I
8 would require a printout, either our interpreters or the interpreters at
9 the UN Sector South headquarters would have the task, standing task of
10 summarizing and producing resumes of radio broadcasts.
11 Q. What time of day did the first broadcast occur with this type of
13 A. I'm not sure. I will have to see other documentation.
14 Q. In number 3, it says: "Knin received heavy artillery shelling
15 during the morning. The evening has been fairly calm but renewed
16 fighting with shelling in the entire southern part of Sector South is
17 expected by first daylight."
18 Is that accurate that the evening was fairly calm on the 4th?
19 A. There was a marked decline in the shelling activity, as opposed
20 to the heavy morning shelling. And I assessed it at that time that there
21 was a -- a wish to, so to speak, empty the area of -- of people.
22 MR. MISETIC: If we can move on to section 4, please.
23 Q. "Trains are seen being moved --"
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, just for myself, what was just read to
25 you is the leadership have broadcasted message to the public, that the
1 army will continue fighting, and then it reads, "however, the RSK Supreme
2 Defence Council decided about the evacuation."
3 You can read this in several ways. Apparently Mr. Misetic did
4 read it and I'm seeking your confirmation that that is the right reading
5 that the evacuation was also part of the message that was broadcasted?
6 THE WITNESS: The evacuation message was part of the broadcast
7 and it contained -- it concerned civilian and elderly.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That was also -- that is not unambiguous on
9 paper, therefore, I was seeking clarification.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. MISETIC:
12 Q. Section 4: "Trains are seen being moved in Knin. Comment:
13 Presumably used for military purpose but could these be used for the
14 evacuation of civilians?"
15 First, did you see the trains moving in Knin?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. How many times during the day -- or let me ask it a different
18 way. At what point in the day did you see trains moving?
19 A. I observed that from UN Sector South headquarters so that would
20 have been in the afternoon when we had evacuated there. And we did that
21 around 3.00 or so.
22 Q. Now you said presumably used for military purpose. What did you
23 presume that?
24 A. It could have been used to move forces. But it was in the end, I
25 think, abandoned.
1 Q. Okay.
2 A. I think they realised that the railroads were not the best option
3 for moving either civilians or military.
4 Q. Now, that very report, if I could take you back to section 2. On
5 the radio -- I gather from the statement on the radio it was said that
6 the evacuation is to the territory of Republika Srpska. Correct?
7 A. The evacuation was through RSK territory and it also had a final
8 destination in Belgrade
9 Q. No, I'm looking at the portion that says: "Decided the
10 evacuation to RS."
11 A. Republika Srpska.
12 Q. Right. So that's -- you heard in the radio message that the
13 evacuation had been decided to the RS or the Republika Srpska?
14 A. As I said, either it had the -- either I had heard it in a
15 background as being translated to me, or that it was brought to us by
16 fellow monitors. This is the RC Knin report and I was the operation
17 officer, so I'm compiling the information at that time. Some of it not
18 being my own observations. It is an important distinction between that
19 and the team reports.
20 Q. Okay.
21 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, if I could have again 1D50-0001.
22 This is the diary again. I'm sorry, D741.
23 And if we could go please to -- I only have the D numbers on the
24 bottom, so it would be 0062.
25 I'm sorry, I have the wrong document on the screen.
1 Madam Registrar, it is 1D50-0202.
2 Q. And this is your notebook that I'm going it bring up,
3 Mr. Liborius.
4 Do you recognise that as the cover page of the notebook we were
5 looking at this morning -- or this afternoon?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Okay.
8 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, if we could go to 1D50-0238,
10 Q. Now, Mr. Liborius, much of this is also in Danish. So I would
11 ask you to please translate this for us. I assume the Babel Fish online
12 translator that helped me translate portions of this is that it's titled,
13 Urgent report to DAN DEL
14 A. Could I have the date prior -- oh, sorry, yes, I have it here,
16 Say again?
17 Q. Is it titled, Urgent Report to DAN DEL?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Could you translate that for us?
20 A. [Foreign language spoken] Monthly report.
21 Q. Monthly report, okay. And then if you -- could you translate
22 line by line what it says?
23 A. Monthly report to DAN DEL
24 Sector South and in circled text out to the left about RSK. [Foreign
25 language spoken] The way things passed. RSK collapse. Fleeing.
1 Military RSK. RS help. Caught by their own propaganda. Village
2 population, situation as refugees now. Then there's a circle CRO,
4 questions. POWs, civilians, non-POWs. The tactic of the scorched earth
5 in a new form. Cattle, farms, why, an arrow, psy-ops, motivation or
6 grounds, revenge (ethnic cleansing). A circled text RS, spillover:
7 Psy-ops. Rivalry, political rivalry. Supplies, or lack of supplies,
8 [Foreign language spoken] indicates lack of. Basic recipe for collapse,
9 stricken out, and another word for collapse [Foreign language spoken] in
10 Danish. And then the rest of the page there's a [Foreign language
11 spoken] --
12 Q. I'm sorry, there's a what?
13 A. [Foreign language spoken] future, abbreviation for future.
14 Q. Okay. Now, who -- was this something that was dictated to you or
15 were these your own thoughts?
16 A. My own thoughts.
17 Q. Now, I'm interested in the sentence that -- on the RSK caught by
18 their own propaganda. What does that mean?
19 A. The RSK had a much overinflated belief, I think, in their own
20 military compatibilities. Secondly, their abilities to get constant
21 support from RS and the Belgrade
22 not properly interpret and assess the situation during the peace
23 negotiations that were conducted. And that led them to, apparently up
24 through the summer of 1995, believe that their capabilities were far
25 greater than they in fact were. And that their propaganda about
1 rejecting any cooperation, future relations with the state of Croatia
2 that they possessed such resources that they could just reject that.
3 Q. Mr. Liborius, just for future reference, and your answer is fine,
4 I'm just -- I'm reminded to tell that you I will pause after your
5 answers. There will probably be a long pause so I can allow the court
6 reporters and the translators to finish, so if there is an silence in the
7 room it is not because I'm expecting you to continue to answer. It has
8 happened with other witnesses before. You wouldn't be the first to think
10 MR. MISETIC: Your Honours, I would tender the entire notebook
11 into evidence, we've had the discussion before and we will have a
12 discussion about the translation of the entire notebook and I again will
13 be referring back and forth to various dates in the notebook.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
15 MR. WAESPI: No objection, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, the notebook would be ...
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit D743.
18 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I'm reminded to clarify for
19 Madam Registrar and the Court that we received it in two different parts
20 from the OTP, presumably because it is a such a large file, and therefore
21 I would ask that somehow we include the entire notebook even though right
22 now it is separated in e-court. It is two exhibit. And the other
23 Exhibit is 1D50-0080.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, is there a possibility to have the
25 two -- we are still talking about this notebook in two portions.
1 MR. MISETIC: Yes, correct. It's just divided, I think, around
2 October 23rd, if I'm not mistaken, and then continues on.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, is there a possibility to reunite
4 the several parts of the notebook, electronically.
5 MR. MISETIC: I think we may want to use two numbers because
6 until that is done I'm going to be referring to both portions today.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Then D743 is the portion of the notebook that has
8 been brought up on the screen.
9 Do you want to tender the other part right away? Yes. And that
10 would be -- you have given, I think, already --
11 MR. MISETIC: 080.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, that second portion of the notebook
13 would be exhibit number ...
14 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
15 THE REGISTRAR: The second document will be Exhibit D744,
16 Your Honours.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, I take it that there are no objections
18 either. D744 is admitted into evidence.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
21 Madam Registrar, if I could have -- this was on the Prosecution's
22 list of exhibits, so I think it is going to get a P number at some point,
23 but I will call it up by the 65 ter number, which is 5413 -- I'm sorry,
25 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, it was on the list of the documents
2 which the Prosecution intended to tender. I therefore suggest that
3 65 ter 5413 will be assigned a P number at this moment. It is then in
5 And Madam Registrar, 65 ter 5413, an ECMM Knin daily report,
6 dated the 2nd of August, 1995.
7 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour --
8 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour. I thought it was 4002, I think is
10 the number, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then I made -- oh, yes, I read up till the --
12 MR. MISETIC: My mistake.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Sorry, 4002 is the ECMM Knin daily report dated the
14 5th of August, 1995.
15 Madam Registrar, that would be ...
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number P825.
17 JUDGE ORIE: P825 is admitted into evidence.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. MISETIC:
20 Q. Mr. Liborius, under 2a you write: "Needless to say, RSK
21 south-western parts have now ceased to exist. Both military and civilian
22 leaders seem to have fled before the fighting started 4 August."
23 Can you tell us what information you had about that, about
24 leaders fleeing before the fighting started?
25 A. On 5 August, at that time, in the afternoon, we have had time
1 to -- to talk with people who had tried to get in touch with military and
2 civilian RSK leaders. Apparently they were not there in the RSK
4 So the basis was the colleagues and the fellow organisations.
5 Q. And if you could go to the next page, please. If could you go to
6 the next page, please.
7 Under 5 a, it says: "After the shelling, a first impression of
8 Knin town indicates that the town is still functionable. Water,
9 electricity and telephone system are fairly intact. Comment: This might
10 facilitate the refugee problem."
11 Does that accurately describe how you observed Knin on the 5th of
13 A. We only observed that the telephone system was working.
14 Electricity had been sometime cut. Water piping, apparently functioning.
15 Q. Okay. Now, Mr. Liborius, the crater analysis that you did was --
16 you did as part of your job as an ECMM monitor. Correct?
17 A. I did it as part of my -- my monitoring.
18 Q. Okay. And you testified on Monday that you were looking for good
19 craters because you wanted the quality of the crater analysis to be as
20 good as possible.
21 Do you recall that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, what I don't understand is, if you did a -- a crater
24 analysis, and you did it your capacity as an ECMM monitor and you were
25 looking for good craters so that you would do a quality analysis, why
1 isn't your crater analysis reflected in a daily report, your notebook, or
2 your diary?
3 A. The crater analysis is so-called in my perception of my job,
4 on -- on a fairly basic -- it's a first step in a chain of observations,
5 where you would, in the RC Knin daily report as the one we have here,
6 only be asked to produce a fairly -- you would compile a lot of
7 information, condense it, and transmit it on. If we had a system where
8 we should include in our reporting and in our notebook every single
9 observation, we would have filled libraries.
10 Q. Okay. Well, you understand that the Prosecution here is using
11 that -- the results of the crater analysis you say you did in order to
12 demonstrate shell fire from HV positions into a residential area where
13 you say you found these craters. Do you understand that that's the
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Okay.
17 A. Well, the purpose of the crater analysis was also just to get a
18 closer feel. Everybody understood that there had been fire. I mean, it
19 was like proving that the sun was shining today. Excuse me. It was a
20 statement to the obvious.
21 Q. Okay. But there's a reason, then, that would you go out and do a
22 crater analysis even if it was obvious you still wanted to --
23 A. Sometimes you -- oh, sorry.
24 Sometimes you just want a further input to your monitoring
25 activity, and the monitors in the field would decide how that should best
1 be done.
2 Q. Okay. Mr. Liborius, I'm going to show you again a whole series
3 of documents to describe sort of the -- some of the important issues on
4 these specific dates concerning shelling, and then I will ask you a few
5 questions about it.
6 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, I have a video first that I'd like
7 to show the witness which is 1D50-0177.
8 Q. Mr. Liborius, this is a video - and I believe transcripts have
9 been given to the booths. This a press conference by Carl Bildt. You
10 recall that Carl Bildt was the senior European Union negotiator for the
11 former Yugoslavia
12 A. Mm-hm, yes.
13 Q. This is in Geneva
14 record this is a press conference in Geneva after a meeting with the
15 Croatian foreign minister, and we can play the tape, please.
16 [Videotape played]
17 "We have a very strong position on any sort of military activity
18 that goes against the innocent civilians and the shelling of cities is
19 among those, and the shelling of Knin, I think, is a very, very grave
20 thing. And I've said to them that if they want to have that clarified,
21 the legal position of that, if they are interested in it it should be
22 taken to the Court to judge whether that was in conformity with the --
23 with the laws of war that are there on not. And they answered and said
24 that it was not a matter for individual governments to bring that up but
25 that the Court was free to take it up and I took that as -- that they
1 were prepared to accept a verdict from the International Court concerning
2 the shelling of Knin."
3 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I don't know if I should tender them
4 as we go along. If there's no objection I would tender them right now.
5 MR. WAESPI: No objections.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar, video and transcript.
7 THE REGISTRAR: That will be Exhibit number D745, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: D745 is admitted into evidence.
9 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, the next video is again of
10 Mr. Bildt. It is 1D50-0184. It is from the 7th of August on the BBC
11 [Videotape played]
12 "I don't think anyone was really tired [sic]. That's the
13 problem. When you do as was done in May concerning Zagreb and you have
14 sent a rocket in the general direction of Zagreb, you can never be
15 certain where it hits and it happened to hit civilians. And when you do
16 the kind of artillery shelling that we've seen in Sarajevo and that we've
17 seen now in Knin very extensively at the beginning of the offensive, I
18 mean, it is bound to be something that goes against civilian targets.
19 And that is something that I think the international community must react
21 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I would tender this exhibit into
23 A. Please.
24 MR. WAESPI: No objections.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number D746.
2 JUDGE ORIE: D746 is admitted into evidence.
3 MR. MISETIC: The next exhibit is 1D50-0187.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any technical problem that we do not see
5 the -- there we are.
6 MR. MISETIC:
7 Q. Mr. Liborius, this is a letter --
8 A. Sorry, I can't hear you.
9 JUDGE ORIE: We have some interference at this moment. I don't
10 know where it comes from.
11 Can you hear me, Mr. Liborius?
12 THE WITNESS: I can hear you through a lot of noise.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Still good enough to --
14 THE WITNESS: I will say if I can't hear.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Then we will ask the technicians to assist us, but,
16 at the same time, we move on.
17 MR. MISETIC:
18 Q. Mr. Liborius, this is a letter from the Croatian foreign minister
19 and the last page on the signature line has the date, which is 8
20 August 1995. It is to Jacques Santer.
21 If we can go to the last page of the document, please.
22 The Croatian foreign minister wrote: "I must inform you that the
23 activities and especially Mr. Bildt's recent public pronouncements have
24 been received with the deepest regret and dismay by the government of the
25 Republic of Croatia
1 meeting on August 7, 1995
2 Mr. Carl Bildt, as far as the Republic of Croatia
3 credibility for continuing mediating efforts, in search for a peaceful
4 solution to the conflict in southeastern Europe and therefore finds it
5 impossible to cooperate with the ICF mediator as the representative of
6 the European Union."
7 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I tender this letter into evidence as
9 MR. WAESPI: No objection.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number D747.
12 JUDGE ORIE: D747 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. MISETIC: Finally, Madam Registrar, 1D50-0185.
14 If we can scroll to the bottom, please. No, that's not it, I'm
15 sorry. That's the wrong one.
16 Just one moment, Your Honour.
17 [Defence counsel confer]
18 MR. MISETIC:
19 Q. Well, Mr. Liborius, I guess I'll have to find it later. It is an
20 ECMM report, I believe of the 9th of August, mentioning this conflict
21 between Croatia
22 My questions for you are, you are the -- an ECMM monitor in the
23 field, the European Union's chief mediator is in a serious diplomatic
24 incident, I don't know what the proper diplomatic categorisation of it
25 is. You find evidence of shelling from HV positions in Bosnia around the
1 ECMM building in a residential area.
2 My question to you, sir, is: Do you know of any written
3 contemporaneous evidence of the crater analysis that you did?
4 A. I don't understand the word "contemporaneous."
5 Q. Within two weeks of, let's say, the 7th of August.
6 A. The crater analysis, as a means to support the shelling, was not
7 required at that time. I took it that the beginning of your sentence
8 referred to Mr. Carl Bildt's, the foundation for his words did not
9 require any detailed crater analysis at that point in time. They were
10 inside the UN Sector South headquarters, as he had his first press
12 It doesn't really take a crater analysis to assess whether the
13 shelling is intense or if it is laid out all over the town.
14 So I'm not sure that I understand the link between Carl Bildt and
15 the crater analysis here.
16 Q. Let me ask you the first question and it should be a relatively
17 simple answer; it should be yes or no.
18 Are you aware of any written document between roughly, let's say,
19 4 August to 31 August, which contains the results of your crater
21 A. My specific crater analysis would not be tendered into ECMM
23 Q. So the answer is no?
24 A. They form the very basis --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, let's be -- the only thing Mr. Misetic
1 wants to know is whether the results of your crater analysis are found in
2 any report that was made at that time.
3 THE WITNESS: Yes, shelling from north-east.
4 JUDGE ORIE: No, no.
5 THE WITNESS: So that is the result of the crater analysis.
6 JUDGE ORIE: The results of your crater analysis understood as,
7 this is what I saw, I found 61 degrees, 63 degrees, such, whether, not as
8 an overall view but the specific results of that crater analysis of that
9 craters, whether that appears anywhere in reports made at the time.
10 THE WITNESS: At that specific time just around the 4, 5, 6,
11 August, no.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Any later anywhere where we found these figures that
13 were the results of your analysis?
14 THE WITNESS: We did a review of different shelling craters and
15 we handed it over to the RC Zagreb. I believe it was in the end of
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
18 MR. MISETIC: I will assume, Your Honour, that the answer is no.
19 JUDGE ORIE: The answer is what it is.
20 MR. MISETIC: Okay.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 MR. MISETIC:
23 Q. Okay. You just answered, "We did a review of different shelling
24 craters and we handed it over to the RC Zagreb."
25 When else did you do reviews of shelling craters and did you
1 provide written reports of those?
2 A. I remember that there -- I at one time handed in notes to
3 RC Zagreb of different -- an analysis of different shelters -- different
5 [Defence counsel confer]
6 MR. MISETIC:
7 Q. Did you write such a report that contained the results of crater
9 A. Not with the degrees, but where the shelling came from.
10 Q. Did you -- have you ever seen a copy of that document in -- from
11 1995 to the present?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Okay. Mr. Liborius, I'd like to take you now to a different
14 topic, which is your 2005 witness statement. It's P801 -- I'm sorry, let
15 me do one additional thing.
16 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, 1D50-0174, while we're on the
17 topic of crater analysis.
18 Q. Now, Mr. Liborius, from your notebook I saw an entry on the 25th
19 of October that you had a meeting with ICTY OTP investigators whom I
20 believe were Joakim Robertsson and Jul Hansen. Do you recall that?
21 A. Please repeat the date.
22 Q. 25 October 1995
23 A. What's the entry say again?
24 Q. It says meeting with --
25 Have you found the entry for 25 October?
1 A. No. I asked you because I don't know if you confused it with the
2 2nd of November.
3 Q. No.
4 A. So in which document do you find it?
5 Q. I have it, I'm sorry, 25 October.
6 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, I have it. If we can put it on
7 the screen first for him. It's 1D50 -- I'm sorry, it was a P [sic]
8 number already. D743.
9 Now, if we can go to --
10 A. I found it in the meantime, yes.
11 Q. 0087 of this.
12 A. No, it's a different book.
13 MR. MISETIC: D744, please. I apologise. There we go.
14 A. Yes, I found it.
15 Q. 25 October.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. ICTY investigating events, recent Storm investigation. Correct?
18 It talks about searching responsible command structure, HV, special
19 police, now collect evidence, have they witnessed victims, ICTY developed
20 a questionnaire.
21 Do you see that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now, this is a meeting that you had with Joakim Robertsson, an
24 OTP investigator. Is that correct?
25 A. I believe, yes.
1 Q. And this is a meeting you held with OTP investigator two days
2 before you met with General Gotovina. Correct?
3 A. Search my notebook ...
4 Q. Well, I think we established through Mr. Waespi --
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. -- yes, the 27th is when --
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. -- you met -- you and Mr. Gambotti met with General Gotovina.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Two days prior to that meeting you had already sat down with OTP
11 investigators. Correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Okay. Now, this questionnaire that is in your notes, I'd like to
14 turn your attention back to the exhibit that was on the screen, which is
16 MR. MISETIC: If we can just scroll through it a little bit. Let
17 say at the fourth bullet point: "(Was there a lot of women and children,
18 was the residential areas occupied.)"
19 The next bullet says: "Was there a lot of soldiers in town? If
20 yes, when and why were they there? Rotation."
21 The next bullet point: "Description of the attack on Knin, where
22 the shelling took place, residential areas, Knin hospital or other
23 protected installations. Type of weapons used, MR LS."
24 Mr. Waespi is on his feet.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I see he is on his feet but I thought he was waiting
1 until the question would be put to the witness.
2 Mr. Waespi.
3 MR. WAESPI: Is that the questionnaire that --
4 MR. MISETIC: No --
5 MR. WAESPI: What's the foundation to --
6 MR. MISETIC: I got it from Alan Tieger.
7 MR. WAESPI: Yes, but is that the questionnaires which is
8 referenced --
9 MR. MISETIC: Well, that's what I was going to get to.
10 JUDGE ORIE: That is what, perhaps, Mr. Misetic wanted to ask.
11 Therefore, Mr. Waespi, if -- if we wait until the question is put
12 to the witness then there's still time to --
13 MR. WAESPI: Yes. The only thing is the face of the document
14 might be helpful for the witness to start with, have you seen the
15 document before going to Court.
16 MR. MISETIC: That's why I'm walking him through it is to see if
17 he is familiar with the various portions of it but ...
18 If we could turn to the next page.
19 Q. The top category says: "Description about how the Croats should
20 have been able before and during the attack to monitor the situation and
21 take steps to prevent possible war crimes being committed - on all
22 levels; from the ground forces to the supreme CO of HV," and then it
23 lists the various methods.
24 And then if we could go to the final page, please. If we could
25 scroll to the bottom. And there's a note that says: "If you do not
1 know, do not guess. It is bullet points, so please feel free to describe
2 the facts as you wish (maybe in form of a letter) and do not answer the
3 questions on this questionnaire by referring to the above order."
4 And then it has the ICTY investigators on the bottom.
5 Is this the questionnaire that you're referring to in your notes
6 that was given to you as a basis to prepare your first witness statement
7 in this case, sir?
8 A. I don't recall having seen that questionnaire before. The
9 reference in my notebook, ICTY developed a questionnaire, was --
10 Q. Well, first before you answer that, if I could just call your
11 attention to refresh your recollection a bit. The first page of your
12 first witness statement. Do you have it in front of you?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. It's the cover letter that you sent back on the 13th of November.
15 MR. MISETIC: P799.
16 Q. Now, you're writing to Mr. Hansen and Mr. Robertsson and the
17 reference is: "A, our conversation in Knin on 2 November 1995; and B,
18 ICTY questionnaire from October 1995."
19 Now, was that the questionnaire that you used as a template to
20 prepare the first witness statement you did in this case?
21 A. My first witness statement was prepared as a chronological
22 expression of my observations.
23 Q. Why the reference to the ICTY questionnaire on the cover letter?
24 A. I think the ICTY developed a questionnaire reference originated
25 from my notebook here. I haven't had the questionnaire in front of me
1 when I did this.
2 Q. Did you receive a copy of that questionnaire, however?
3 A. I didn't have it in front of me, no.
4 JUDGE ORIE: That's not the question, Mr. Liborius.
5 THE WITNESS: Did I receive a copy? No.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The question was not whether it was in front
7 of you, you had said that already. The question then was whether you had
8 received it.
9 THE WITNESS: No.
10 JUDGE ORIE: You never received a questionnaire --
11 THE WITNESS: No.
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- prepared by the ICTY.
13 Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
14 MR. MISETIC: However the probative value may be, Your Honour, I
15 still tender that questionnaire into evidence.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, work product of the ...
17 MR. WAESPI: Well, if Alan Tieger gave it to Mr. Misetic.
18 JUDGE ORIE: You would not object.
19 Madam Registrar.
20 MR. WAESPI: I would like to talk to my colleague before I give
21 my final assessment.
22 MR. MISETIC: First of all, I mean, it is not work product if it
23 is given to third parties.
24 JUDGE ORIE: No, no. Of course, I was not to be taken really
25 serious at that moment.
1 MR. MISETIC: It's his fault. He made me say it.
2 MR. KEHOE: I'll take the rap.
3 MR. MISETIC: The -- I guess we would put on the record if that
4 is not the questionnaire and appears that there is a reference to the
5 questionnaire and if the OTP knows that there is another one that was
6 given to him that it be produced to us in its place, in the place of this
7 one. This is the only one I have been given.
8 JUDGE ORIE: We'll give Mr. Waespi time to consult with
9 Mr. Tieger.
10 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
11 JUDGE ORIE: But it could be marked for identification meanwhile.
12 Madam Registrar.
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that would be Exhibit number D748,
14 marked for identification.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
16 May we hear from you by tomorrow, Mr. Waespi.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Madam Registrar, can we go to P801, please. If we can go to page
20 5 in the English, please. All the way at the bottom, please. Thank you.
21 Q. Now, sir, I'm going to read this portion to you. "On some
22 occasions I interviewed HV soldiers and asked them why they were doing
23 this. The soldiers explained that the looting was their reward for
24 participating in the operation, as they were lowly paid, and it was
25 considered as part of their wages. They said that their senior
1 commanders had specifically authorised them to help themselves to the
2 goods. When asked about the destruction, the killing of livestock, and
3 the poisoning of the wells, they explained that this was to prevent the
4 Serbs from returning. I understood exactly what they were saying because
5 I come from a farming background and to destroy the infrastructure and
6 destroy the means of their livelihood would ensure that no one could
7 return and live in that particular region."
8 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, if we could now turn to P802,
9 please. At the bottom of the page in English, on page 5, please.
10 Q. I'll read this to you: "On page 5 of my 2005 statement, I refer
11 to being told by HV soldiers that they had been authorised by their
12 commanders to loot. I remember that I was told on three occasions by
13 different HV soldiers, the first being on the 7th of August at the old
14 RC Knin building. The soldier I spoke to was a Home Guard soldier. I
15 know that because he told me he was a member of the Home Guard, and I saw
16 the insignia for the Home Guard on his uniform. In my report of the 7th
17 of August, I referred to the 7th and 4th Guards Brigade soldiers looting.
18 There were two 7th Guards Brigade soldiers with us when I spoke to the
19 Home Guard soldier. Later that same day, I encountered three soldiers
20 from the 4th Guards Brigade who were just arriving at my own
21 accommodation and when I spoke to them, one of them said it was their
22 right to collect things they wanted."
23 And then you talk about the third occasion being later.
24 MR. MISETIC: Now, if we could turn to P805, please. If we can
25 go to the next page, please.
1 Q. You see this is the report co-authored by you and Mr. Bigland?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Okay.
4 MR. MISETIC: And if we can go to the next page, please. I'm
5 sorry, the previous page, I apologise, at the bottom.
6 Q. Now, at the bottom of the sitrep -- sorry, the daily report, on
7 the day that you say on two separate occasions that HV soldiers told you
8 that they had been authorised by their highest commanders to take war
9 booty because it was part of their wages, you and Mr. Bigland write a
10 report that says: "In the Knin area, it seems as if random looting and
11 destruction of houses and property is about to reach a degree where it
12 will get even more difficult to restart normal life here. Comment: It
13 is very unlikely that this is a deliberate policy of the authorities. It
14 is more likely that, as the front-line, more disciplined troops are
15 moving out, the second-line soldiers are less disciplined and more ready
16 to grab what ..."
17 MR. MISETIC: If we can turn the page.
18 "... they can."
19 Q. Now, Mr. Liborius, you would agree with me that an ECMM monitor
20 being told by Croatian troops in Knin on the 7th, that they had
21 authorisation to take property because it is part of their wages is an
22 important fact?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. A fact important enough that an ECMM monitor would be required to
25 report such information in a daily report. Correct?
1 A. Mm-hm, yes.
2 Q. Now, not only is it not only in the daily report, sir, but the
3 comment at the end is exactly the opposite. Is it not? Would you agree
4 with me?
5 A. Could you go to the top of the report, please.
6 Q. I said the comment at the end. Let's talk about -- the comment
7 at the end is a conclusion that is directly contradicted by what you say
8 you were told on the 7th but HV soldiers. Correct?
9 MR. MISETIC: Can we go to the previous page at the bottom,
11 Q. Would you -- let me ask the question a different way. Would you
12 agree with me that if HV soldiers told you that they had received
13 authorisation from their highest command to go ahead and loot, that that
14 would be inconsistent with a comment that it is very unlikely that this
15 is a deliberate policy of the authorities.
16 Can we agree on that?
17 A. Yes. But I didn't write that.
18 Q. Okay. So there was a failure to communicate between you and
19 Mr. Bigland. Is that what happened?
20 A. If I had signed off the report, the last line would not have read
21 like that.
22 Q. Is it typical that your name would be on the author line of a
23 report that you hadn't reviewed before it went out?
24 A. The RC Knin daily report, at that time, was, as I said yesterday
25 or the day before, the work of different people, so it would not be
1 inconsistent with what you suggest there.
2 Q. The question is very specific: Was it typical for your name to
3 be on the author line of a report that you hadn't reviewed before it went
4 out? Regardless of where the sources of information are, do you review
5 the reports before you send them up?
6 A. We certainly became aware that there was a need for consolidated
7 views on the report. This is one of the examples.
8 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I'd ask for an instruction that the
9 witness answer the question as posed.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let me read it.
11 I may have another little problem, Mr. -- let me just ...
12 [Defence counsel confer]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The question was whether that -- I take, it
14 often happened that you being the co-author of a report would let it send
15 out without you having reviewed it.
16 THE WITNESS: It did not happen often. But it did happen.
17 MR. MISETIC: Now --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
19 MR. WAESPI: Just an observation. The question was actually a
20 compound question. There were two different questions in one. The
21 witness just answered to the best of his capabilities.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Did you, Mr. Liborius, did you review this report
23 before it was sent out?
24 THE WITNESS: No, not in its final stage.
25 JUDGE ORIE: No. Because that was implied in your question. As
1 a matter of fact, I was checking whether that assumption was already in
2 the evidence, yes or not. That was --
3 MR. MISETIC: I wanted the first -- the general policy and then I
4 was going ask the specifics with respect to this document.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
6 MR. MISETIC:
7 Q. Mr. Liborius, given that you and I agree that that is an
8 important fact for whatever reason your finding didn't make it into the
9 7th of August daily report, so you must have made sure that it got into
10 the 8th of August daily report. Correct?
11 A. If you can show me the 8th of August report. It certainly made
12 it into the way of the subsequent reports.
13 Q. Sir, I can show you that report. What I'm asking you is very
14 simple. Do you believe there is a report on the 8th of August, where it
15 is reported that you were told by HV soldiers that their commanders had
16 authorised them to loot? Is that in the report for the 8th of August, to
17 the best of your knowledge?
18 A. I prefer to see the 8th of August -- if we're discussing text
19 here I really prefer to see the 8th of August report here.
20 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, it is P806.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Either the witness remembers, then he can ask
22 the question and apparently what he tell us is that I would have to check
23 in the report because I have no clear recollection of whether it is or is
24 not. And that's fair. So then I leave it up to you whether you want to
25 put it to the witness.
1 MR. MISETIC: That's fine.
2 Q. So you don't know, as we sit here, without looking at a document
3 whether you put it in a daily report or not. Correct?
4 MR. MISETIC: Well, it is on the screen now. We can scroll
5 through it.
6 A. And?
7 Q. Does that refresh your recollection? Did you report it in the
8 8th of August daily report?
9 A. The reference to looting is certainly there. It is again a
10 report written by Mr. Bigland and myself.
11 Q. Mr. Liborius --
12 A. So the question whether the words "they have been authorised to
13 loot" is in the report, I did not find that here. So, no.
14 Q. Okay. Thank you. One question to end this area, sir.
15 The house you were actually living in, it was owned by someone
16 named Mr. Urukalo who had actually been a mobilised ARSK soldier prior to
17 Operation Storm. Correct?
18 A. I think it was owned by the woman, but Urukalo, yes, family.
19 Q. So, in your diary you note that on the 1st of August the husband
20 had just come back from the front line. Correct?
21 A. Mm-hm, yes.
22 Q. So the house you were in was the house of a front line soldier?
23 A. He was seldom home. So I mainly met the housewife and the
25 Q. Again, your diary, I believe, and can you just tell me if you
1 know this or not, he was on the front line?
2 A. That was what I was told, yes.
3 Q. Okay. Thank you.
4 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, this would be a good time for a break.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it's a good time for a break.
6 We will have a break and we'll resume at five minutes to 6.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 5.35 p.m.
8 --- On resuming at 5.58 p.m.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
10 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, Prosecution has no objection for
12 D748, MFI
13 JUDGE ORIE: D748 is admitted into evidence.
14 MR. MISETIC:
15 Q. Mr. Liborius, following up on that topic we ended with before the
16 break, who from the ECMM was with you when these Croatian soldiers made
17 these statements that they had been authorised to loot?
18 A. I was alone when I encountered the soldiers in my own
20 Q. And without going through all the documents now, I'm just asking
21 you for your own recollection as you sit here, do you recall any document
22 ever, while you were part of the ECMM in Croatia, where you as part of a
23 daily report or your 100-day report or any other report, reported that it
24 had been reported to you by Croatian soldiers that they were authorised
25 to loot?
1 Do you have any recollection of any such document?
2 A. I remember that the issue that the soldiers said they were
3 authorised to loot, yes, it was brought up in some of the reports.
4 Q. Which ones, that can you recall?
5 A. I can't remember at this point in time. I will have to see the
7 Q. Okay. Well, do you have 100-day report, a copy of it?
8 A. I do, yes.
9 Q. I will ask you, whatever reports you have, your 100-day report,
10 tonight as you're reviewing things, and tomorrow preparing for the
11 session, to go through them and see if you can find a reference to such
12 an admission, okay?
13 A. I can do my best. But I don't have the entire ECMM library at my
15 Q. True. Just -- but whatever you need to refresh your
16 recollection, or whatever you have.
17 I'm reminded to ask you: You said you were alone when you
18 encountered in your accommodation. I also testified that this happened
19 at the old RC Knin building. Who was with you at the old RC Knin
20 building when these soldiers told you this?
21 A. My team colleague, Eric Hendriks. We had a tour through the
22 RC Knin house, and we went -- it was a quite large compound, so we went
23 through the facility, and I believe that Eric Hendriks was with us in
24 the -- one of the large rooms on the top floor. We later saw the
25 soldiers out in the field around the RC again, and I believe that
1 Eric Hendriks was also with me at that time.
2 Q. So Mr. Hendriks was there when these soldiers told you this?
3 A. Yes. And with regard to, I believe, your last question ...
4 Did you ask for the third reference as well?
5 Q. No, just those two. But if there's a third reference where you
6 were told that they were authorised to loot by their senior commanders, I
7 would like you to tell us when and who was with you.
8 A. The third instance where we encountered soldiers that said that
9 it was their right to take over property was at the -- the new ECMM
10 house --
11 Q. I'm not --
12 A. -- and the colleagues of the team was my Greek colleague --
13 Q. Mr. Liborius, I'm going to stop you there. We're talking about
14 apples and orange there, aren't we? That was a dispute over who had the
15 right to use that piece of property. That wasn't an issue of looting
16 property that was in the building. Correct?
17 A. It is both.
18 Q. Well, what you were talking about is the dispute with the CALOs
19 that we went through earlier in your diary about the use of the RC
20 Knin -- the old RC Knin building. Is that the general topic that you're
21 talking about?
22 A. Let me just make sure. You asked me who were in my company when
23 I had a chance to hear Croatian soldiers saying that it was their right
24 to loot and take over property, right?
25 Q. Let me be more specific because I don't want to have a broad
1 question which is unclear.
2 You testified that soldiers told you that they were authorised to
3 loot because it was part of their wages.
4 Now, the third time, did soldiers tell you that part of their
5 wages was that they could loot?
6 A. The third time the soldiers told me and my team colleagues that
7 they had the right to take over the property in order -- but it was
8 not -- the wage question was in the first instances.
9 Q. Okay. Thank you. I'm going to move to a different topic.
10 MR. MISETIC: I don't know if the Bench want to --
11 JUDGE ORIE: No.
12 MR. MISETIC: Okay.
13 Q. Let's talk about your meeting with General Gotovina on the 25th
14 and the days preceding. Now, we've established that you met with the
15 ICTY investigators on the 25th. From your first witness statement
16 there's also a reference in the cover letter to a second meeting with
17 them on the 2nd of November, 1995.
18 And in between that week, those two meetings, is exactly the --
19 the 27th, when you and Mr. Gambotti met with General Gotovina. Is that
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Okay. Now, let's talk -- first, this morning you discussed that
23 you had another meeting, you believe, on the 23rd with General Gotovina
24 and I believe you called him Mr. Selic. Is that right? It is actually
25 Mr. Zelic, okay?
1 A. Yeah.
2 MR. MISETIC: If I could pull up 1D50-0178, please.
3 Q. This is now a document the cover page is in Croatian. And if we
4 could flip to the next page, please. And there's a -- first let's --
5 let's look at the cover page together.
6 This is forwarded to General Gotovina on the 22nd. And it says:
7 "Today, on 22 October 1995
8 office Knin, requesting that we set up a meeting for the future chief of
9 the Regional Centre of the ECMM Zagreb, Mr. Gambotti, with the commander
10 of the Military District, General Gotovina.
11 "The said individual requests a meeting with you on 27 October,
12 possibly at noon
13 Now, if you look at the original, inserted there it says "da," to
14 the right, in the middle of the page it says "petak," which means Friday,
15 and then it says [B/C/S spoken] at 10.00 a.m.
16 And if we could flip to the next page, please.
17 Now, this is the letter you sent on the 22nd requesting a meeting
18 with General Gotovina.
19 Do you see that, sir?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So, you didn't meet with General Gotovina on the 22nd or 23rd.
22 What you were doing was making notes of your communications to schedule
23 the meeting with General Gotovina. And if we turn to your notebook,
24 D744, page 6, please.
25 Now, if we look to the right-hand side of the page it says 10.00,
1 Pasic, General Gotovina, Mr. Pupovac, timing, and I believe it says
3 A. Floating.
4 Q. Floating. What does that mean?
5 A. That it -- it has not been established precisely yet.
6 Q. Okay. So you see from the cover letter and the letter that you
7 wrote that in the handwritten notation on the Croatian version it was
8 written Friday, 10.00 a.m.
9 on the 23rd, say at 10.00 there's a meeting with General Gotovina.
10 Do you recognise that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. There would have been no need for you to go through the CALOs to
13 schedule a meeting to send a letter to General Gotovina if in fact you
14 had met with him personally and could have asked for that meeting face to
15 face. Correct?
16 A. This -- you asked for this particular meeting, because it would
17 inquire -- it would entail a quite detailed agenda and the HRC designate.
18 That would be a long meeting, not like a usual meetings.
19 Q. What I'm saying is, sir, is that you're trying to interpret your
20 notes today, and what I'm suggesting to you is what your notes are
21 referring to is your effort on the 22nd and 23rd to schedule a meeting
22 with General Gotovina for the 27th with Mr. Gambotti. Do you accept
24 A. And all else, yes.
25 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I tender the document 1D50-0178,
2 MR. WAESPI: No objections.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit number D749.
5 JUDGE ORIE: D749 is admitted into evidence.
6 MR. MISETIC:
7 Q. Now we looked at your notes for the 25th earlier where, amongst
8 other things in the notations of your meeting with the OTP investigators,
9 it was discussed command structure -- if we could flip forward a few
10 pages here. I believe it's on this document.
11 MR. MISETIC: Can we get to the 25th of October, please, so ...
12 there we go.
13 Q. Again, it looks -- on the right it says: "Investigate way." Is
14 that correct?
15 A. "Investigate event."
16 Q. Event. Okay. What's the next line say?
17 A. "Recent Storm." And then "investigate" and then "way."
18 Q. Okay. And then after that?
19 A. "Collect documents and papers, search, responsible." It says,
20 "until now."
21 Q. Mm-hm.
22 A. Command structure HV special police. Then, now collect evidence,
23 have they witnessed? Victims are searched. Ten persons witness
24 themselves. All lead to witnesses. And I believe that this is a
25 description of what has been going on for the ICTY so far.
1 Q. Can you complete that page so that we're sure what it says?
2 A. ICTY developed a questionnaire what happened in restriction of
3 movement days, what happened after. How to identify perpetrators, HV
4 plates, units. Suggests, Rick Bigland during and then questionnaire.
5 Q. Okay. Now, the notebook that you kept, you used this notebook to
6 assist you in preparing your daily reports. Is that accurate?
7 A. That's correct.
8 Q. Okay. Now, if we could turn it that daily report.
9 MR. MISETIC: I think Mr. Waespi used this document, but we
10 haven't recorded a P number for the 28th October daily report. I don't
11 know if it's our error or ...
12 It is 65 ter 4337 -- sorry P822, I'm told.
13 If we could turn the page, please. Yes. Okay.
14 Q. It says: "Asked about lessons learned in OPS Storm: Both
15 positive and negative. The latter being the lack of control with
16 'undisciplined soldiers of non-professional units doing extraordinary
17 things. The General stated that the HV lacked, and still lack, the level
18 of skilled NCOs and medium-level commanders able to control the
20 Now, if we turn to your notes, and I believe -- this is P821, I
21 believe. And I'd ask to you pay attention to the fact that when you
22 prepared your daily report and you saw the word "extraordinary" in that
23 report, it says that "extraordinary" refers to undisciplined soldiers of
24 non-professional units doing extraordinary things.
25 So you actually included the word "extraordinary" in quotation
1 marks in the daily report. Do you see that? Actually we've --
2 A. We lost the report.
3 Q. Let me take you here, if we could ...
4 [Defence counsel confer]
5 MR. MISETIC: Could we scroll through this, please.
6 One moment, please.
7 [Defence counsel confer]
8 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, I prefer to use the original, so
9 if we could go to D744, please. And it's page 18 of this document,
11 Q. Okay. Sir, if we can scroll down there now. In the original it
12 says: "Professional soldiers were controlled the --" can you tell us
13 what that word is?
14 A. Much improved.
15 Q. The much improved extraordinary ...
16 A. Extraordinate [phoen].
17 Q. Meaning extraordinary in English?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Now, that is the only time the word "extraordinary" appears in
20 your notebook. Is that correct? For that day, I'm sorry.
21 A. No, in 16, in view of the next page. There is also --
22 Q. Okay. Well, I'll stand corrected. If -- in this discussion
23 about discipline, that's the only time the word "extraordinary" appears.
24 Do you agree with me?
25 A. No, it also on 16. If look at the next page.
1 Q. Okay. Well, if we go through the context or the logical
2 progression of the discussion here, in that discussion, where you
3 referred to as the silent conversation between Gambotti and Gotovina --
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. -- the word "extraordinary" appears once. Correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Okay. Now when you wrote your daily report, for the 27th and the
8 28th, you used that word and put it in General Gotovina's mouth as him
9 saying: "The General stated undisciplined soldiers of non-professional
10 units doing extraordinary things." And then you continued on by saying:
11 "But all the professional units are still kept free from these
12 accusations despite the fact that numerous IO have witnessed such events
13 involving professional units."
14 That's in the daily report that you prepared.
15 So what I am again putting to you, sir, there was no silent
16 admission by General Gotovina when you wrote that report on the 28th. In
17 fact, would you agree with me that you wrote quite the opposite, that
18 General Gotovina continued to keep the professional units free from those
19 types of accusations. Do you agree with me?
20 A. No. What I wanted to say, as before, that Gambotti and I
21 carefully discussed the way the meeting went and how it should be
22 reflected in the report. That's what you have in the report there.
23 Q. Are you suggesting that you and Mr. Gambotti provided a report
24 that was inaccurate in terms of what took place in the discussion?
25 A. It was a consolidated effort of the two of us. And if you read
1 the report, if we could it have it up again, please.
2 MR. MISETIC: Yes, please. P822, please. And the next page,
4 THE WITNESS: If you read the report, "undisciplined soldiers of
5 a non-professional units doing extraordinary things," that was the
6 closest to the quotation I could come together with Gambotti. Then the
7 team comment, starting: "TC: Tailored to the presence of the HRC
8 designate that in our view promoted postwar image --" Sorry. Speak --
9 slow down.
10 "Speaking a lot about the role of the HV in a peaceful society.
11 Unlike previous meetings, the General now admitted that a lot of
12 atrocities were committed in Storm. But all the professional units are
13 kept free from these accusations, despite the fact that numerous IOs have
14 witnessed such events involving professional units. The lack of skilled
15 NCOs and medium-level commanders is maybe the understatement of the
17 That was as both the HRC
18 could take it at that point. Now what does that mean? It means that the
21 Now, he would later, in the further reporting in the ECMM
22 structure reflect his impressions.
23 So I do not see any -- dealing as you would suggest.
24 Q. I'm not sure I understood the answer, Mr. Liborius.
25 A. Then I didn't understand your question.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Let's try -- if you don't understand the question,
2 Mr. Liborius, I would invite you to tell us rather than to give an
3 incomprehensible answer for Mr. Misetic to a question you did not
5 Is that clear?
6 THE WITNESS: Yes.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
8 MR. MISETIC:
9 Q. You've come here to testify that there was a silent conversation,
10 whatever that may mean, between Mr. Gambotti and General Gotovina, where
11 General Gotovina silently admitted that professional forces of the HV
12 were involved in atrocities.
13 Is that -- have I fairly stated what you stated in the course of
14 your testimony thus far?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You write a report on the 28th where you write: "But all the
17 professional units are still kept free from these accusations."
18 And I put it to you again, that what you've told us here, about a
19 silent admission by General Gotovina, is inconsistent with what you wrote
20 in the report on the 28th.
21 Do you agree with me?
22 A. I -- I -- I'm afraid that the full understanding is perhaps
23 missed. But at this point in time, yes. But if the, Judge, Your Honour,
24 you require me to -- to elaborate further, I'll do so.
25 JUDGE ORIE: No. I first want a clear answer to the question,
1 the question being that where you testified about a silent conversation
2 apparently interpreted as an admission, that your report, as Mr. Misetic
3 puts it to you, says otherwise, is inconsistent with that testimony.
4 Could you answer that question, to start with?
5 THE WITNESS: The report itself, yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: That's an answer.
7 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that it's an answer to a question you
9 understood, Mr. Liborius.
10 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I think it is important that also --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Just there's no question about that.
12 Okay. Now would you like -- apparently you feel the need to give
13 a further explanation. If you want to give a brief explanation, please
14 do so.
15 THE WITNESS: Yes, please.
16 MR. MISETIC: I have no problem with that. I do want to state
17 and advise the witness that the longer we go into long explanations, the
18 longer the examination goes. But feel free to clarify on this particular
19 point, but just keep it in mind for future questions.
20 Thank you.
21 THE WITNESS: Well, Your Honour, I'm prepared to continue next
22 week on videolink if that is required.
23 It is important to understand the reporting structure of the
24 ECMM, that the RC Knin reports is only one and that the HRC would, in his
25 further work in the headquarters with his information gathered, work on.
1 So the RC Knin report is only one part. And I'm sure that the HRC
2 designate had his impressions that there was this admission. But, at
3 that time, it was a very sensitive subject, of course, and that it was
4 perhaps best that that be reflected in subsequent reports made at the
5 headquarter level.
6 Thank you.
7 The reflection is: "But all the professional units are kept free
8 from these accusations." What I said before was that the General was
9 walking a fine line between the official position and then the -- the
10 acknowledgment that the HRC
11 Now, that would of course require further conversations, if you
12 wish. Because it was a change of, so to speak, a policy of how you
13 related to the campaign by the Croatian authorities at that time then.
14 JUDGE ORIE: I see. Now, I'm the one who might not have
15 understood all of your answer.
16 Mr. Liborius, the beginning of your answer let's focus on that.
17 You say it is it important to understand that the HRC might have further
18 elaborated on the information gathered. So I understand this to be that
19 even if the report is not consistent with your testimony, that others
20 might have added something to that.
21 Is that --
22 THE WITNESS: Yes. The HRC
23 events, one of the meetings --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just try to understand that.
25 From what I see, this report is authored by you.
1 THE WITNESS: Yes.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Are you telling us that although you authored it,
3 that someone, some of your superiors, has instructed you to add something
4 or -- how do I have to understand this reference to your superior, the --
5 from what I understand, the head to add something in a report you
7 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, as I said previously, that we
8 discussed how to reflect the meeting, Mr. Gambotti and I, in the
9 afternoon after the meeting, knowing that he would, in his further work
10 in the headquarter level, be able to develop some of the points in, among
11 other things, also the question of extraordinary events by professional
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
14 [Defence counsel confer]
15 MR. MISETIC:
16 Q. Now, can you tell us what you meant when you said: "The lack of
17 skilled NCOs and medium-level commanders is maybe the understatement of
18 the month."
19 A. By that I mean that if you attribute all the destruction, looting
20 and burning and so on, to the sentence, well, we lacked the skilled NCOs
21 and medium-level commanders, that is a very, very ironically short way of
22 saying that this is a reason for all our problems. That the General
23 stated that we lacked the NCOs and medium-level commanders explains
24 everything that went on after Operation Storm --
25 Q. Well --
1 A. -- is like saying we failed to understand that there was an
2 earthquake coming. It just came.
3 Q. Well, sir, when did the Croatian army form its first NCO school?
4 A. What I have in my notebook as General Gotovina said, We have
5 created NCO centre that has worked for two years. I don't know whether a
6 NCO school has been there before. That was what the General told us at
7 that time.
8 Q. Did you check to see if there was NCO training that had taken
9 place for longer than two years?
10 A. I did not feel the need at that time.
11 Q. Did you ever look to see how many trained NCOs the Croatian army
13 A. No.
14 Q. Okay.
15 MR. MISETIC: I'd like to move on to a different topic,
16 Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to ask one additional question in this
19 You said that the reporting, after having discussed the matter -
20 and let me just check your answer - you said the -- Mr. Gambotti would in
21 his further work in the headquarter level be able to develop some of the
22 points in, among other things, also the question of extraordinary events
23 by professional soldiers.
24 Now, the report, unlike your testimony, may admit that
25 extraordinary events may have taken place, but not by professional
1 soldiers. Could you explain to me why saying that it was not done by
2 professional soldiers would enable Mr. Gambotti to develop some of the
3 points in the question of extraordinary events by professional soldiers?
4 Because the report says that it was not these professional soldiers.
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour.
6 The team comment, beginning "tailored to the present" and so on,
7 was the result of a conversation between Mr. Gambotti and I. We
8 discussed, in particular also this next sentence: "But all the
9 professional soldiers are kept free from these accusations."
10 Mr. Gambotti had the feeling that the General, having deployed both the
11 official line and also silently had admitted to his questions that wasn't
12 it right that extraordinary events that were also committed by
13 professional soldiers, both of them were deployed in the conversation,
14 but that the admittance part of professional soldiers, it was the first
15 time it was heard, and it would require further investigation, if you
17 So we decided the formulation carefully like you see it.
18 JUDGE ORIE: You said you heard for the first time what was said
19 in a silent conversation. Is that --
20 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, you should take into consideration
21 that the two gentlemen had a conversation in French, tete-a-tete, prior
22 to the formal part of the meeting. And as they both have a, so to speak,
23 French background, they developed a good rapport between the two. The
24 conversation was quite long.
25 When we reached point 15, as I said before, there was a -- a good
1 dynamic, ping-pong dynamic in the conversation, and the silent part of
2 the acknowledgment was interpreted by both Mr. Gambotti and myself as a
3 yes answer to the -- the gist of that particular subject.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then you said you heard that for the first
5 time ... it would require further investigation.
6 Now, is by not reporting it, is that furthering an investigation
7 or was the investigation in any other way developed or ...
8 THE WITNESS: The HRC
9 further the pursuit of that question.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And do you know how he did that? Have you any
11 knowledge of that?
12 THE WITNESS: I don't know now.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
14 MR. MISETIC:
15 Q. Just one question on that, sir. If that's true what you're
16 saying now, wouldn't you have just -- if there was any doubt about the
17 fact that General Gotovina kept professional units free from these
18 accusations, wouldn't you have just not written that sentence?
19 A. The sentence was the product, the conclusion of Mr. Gambotti's
20 and my conversation, how that should be reflected. So -- so the question
21 is answered no, I wouldn't write it in a different way.
22 Q. Let's clear this up. So what you are really saying is you and
23 Mr. Gambotti afterwards agreed to write a sentence that you both felt
24 wasn't true?
25 A. It was not the whole truth.
1 Q. Well --
2 A. Deploying both one line, the official line and then the silent
4 Q. Well, people are supposed to read this up your information chain.
6 A. He was supposed to read it. He is the HRC designate.
7 Q. As well as other people, correct?
8 A. Yes, but primarily he.
9 Q. So he is writing to himself?
10 A. In essence, the HRC
11 That was the reason why that this sensitive subject should be developed
12 further and he felt perfectly capable of doing that because he was in the
13 chain of reporting.
14 Q. Well, sir, the memo line says you're sending it to CC Split and
15 it says for information to RC Zagreb. So you are actually distributing
16 this beyond you and Mr. Gambotti writing a private little memorandum to
17 each other?
18 A. If could you go to the top, please.
19 Q. Sure, let's go to the first page.
20 A. There you see it is inside the RC Zagreb structure. It is inside
21 the HRC
22 Regional Centre Zagreb
23 Q. My point is you're sending it to more than just Mr. Gambotti?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And according to you, you and Mr. Gambotti decided to send false
1 information in a written report to people within the ECMM?
2 A. Omit the word "false," please. It's not -- it's the truth but
3 not the whole truth. And the HRC
4 what is going on inside the RC.
5 Q. And other people who go this report wouldn't have been able to
6 know of silent conversations and silent admissions, correct?
7 A. At that point in time, there would be follow-on meetings inside
8 the RC with the other members where we could meet to discuss our
10 Q. And it would be there that would you say, Listen, where we wrote
11 that all professional units were kept free from these accusations, what
12 we meant was no, he actually admitted it.
13 A. In order to appreciate the full answer, and with the risk of
14 repeating myself, if you deploy both the official line and you say, well,
15 not really. You can have that dialectic difference. I know it's a very
16 tricky issue and of course it goes to the core.
17 Q. Okay, Mr. Liborius.
18 MR. MISETIC: I'd like to move on to a different topic,
19 Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 MR. MISETIC: Sorry, I do have to ask a question as my colleague
23 reminds me.
24 Q. How many times in your reports did you not tell the whole truth?
25 A. It was the only meeting --
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 MR. MISETIC:
3 Q. It was the only meeting, is that what you said.
4 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President. I object that's not what the witness
5 said --
6 MR. MISETIC: He says it was not the whole truth in his report.
7 It is exactly what he said. "Omit the word 'false,' please. It is the
8 truth and not the whole truth."
9 Q. My question again for the witness is: How many times in your
10 daily reports did you not write the whole truth?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, let's try to avoid a semantic discussion
12 on whether not the whole truth still is the truth. That's -- it --
13 It appears from your testimony, Mr. Liborius, that in this report
14 not the whole of the truth was reflected and now Mr. Misetic asks you how
15 often this happened in reports you authored.
16 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, this is the only example I can recall
18 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
19 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, if I could have -- this is one of
20 the videos that went in yesterday. We will play it on Sanction.
21 Q. Before we play it, Mr. Liborius, this is a portion of the video
22 you did with the OTP in 1997. Now I'm going to play you two minutes of
23 the clip. This is the portion where you went to Kricke --
24 JUDGE ORIE: To?
25 MR. MISETIC: Kricke. It's in the Drnis area. And I'd like you
1 to -- after you watch the video what I'm going to ask you to do is help
2 the Trial Chamber to determine which houses that are burned are owned by
3 a Croat, which houses were owned by a Serb and whether the damage was
4 done before Operation Storm or after Operation Storm. First can you tell
5 me before we play the video when you were doing these patrols, how were
6 you able to determine whether a particular village was burned down before
7 or after Operation Storm?
8 A. We would have information from our usual patrols before
9 Operation Storm to relate to.
10 Q. If you saw a house that had been burned down on the spot, would
11 you be able to say -- assuming it is not still on fire. Let's say if the
12 fire ended and it is now two weeks after the fire has been put out. How
13 would you tell that that house had been burned down two weeks ago as
14 opposed to a year ago?
15 A. The ECMM information on the villages, houses there, was quite
16 detailed. It was very, very, very, seldom that houses or hamlets would
17 be burned down in the RSK period. I cannot recall of a village burning
18 just, say, a half a year before Operation Storm. It was a so-called
19 state, semi-state RSK. In our usual patrols through the area, we would
20 have that information to relate to when we saw destruction afterwards.
21 Q. How would you know --
22 A. I can't hear you.
23 Q. How would you know whether a village was majority Croat or
24 majority Serb?
25 A. Again, from our previous information, before Operation Storm, the
1 Regional Centre Knin with its ECMM teams had throughout the war, covered
2 the whole area.
3 Q. Okay.
4 MR. MISETIC: Let's play the video. It is from the 58 minute 58
5 second mark of P821 to the 1 minute and 56 second mark of P821.
6 Q. And again, Mr. Liborius, I would ask you to pay particular
7 attention to how do you know it is a Serb or Croat house and how do you
8 know when the damage took place.
9 [Videotape played]
10 "Unknown Male: ... May 1997. We are in the Drnis area
11 south-east of the Drnis in the village Kricke and we follow the road
12 towards south-east."
13 MR. MISETIC:
14 Q. Mr. Liborius, you see that that is Kricke?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Now, can you tell us how when you were in the theatre in
17 August of 1995 as well as on this patrol in 1997, how were you able to
18 first identify it as a Serb village?
19 A. There's still a noise here.
20 JUDGE ORIE: I take it that those who are -- there is still a
21 volume button on it and perhaps if we stop playing. There we are.
22 Please proceed.
23 THE WITNESS: Your question how we would know whether it was a
24 Serb or a Croat-dominated village, right?
25 Q. Yes.
1 A. Usually we would relate to the information that was gathered by
2 the teams prior to Operation Storm. Secondly, we would relate to the
3 government of Croatia
4 blue book on municipality structures. Secondly, whether it was a Croat
5 or a Serb-owned house, was that your question?
6 Q. Yes.
7 A. I would always myself hesitate to say a Serb or a Croat-owned
8 house. I don't do that in my report. Usually when coming to an area
9 after Operation Storm, where there were inhabitants, I would ask who
10 owned this house. Generally some of the houses would have a sign saying
11 Croatian house. That would be the sign that some of the houses had been
12 taken over by some Croats.
13 With regard to your question how to establish when the damage was
14 done, that would usually require us to be in the area close to the
15 houses, see if there were recent traces of burnings, see if there were
16 traces of battle damage, trees around the area, fences being demolished
17 by shrapnels, to inspect, so to speak, the way the damage was inflicted.
18 Q. Well, if you were just driving through a village without stopping
19 and you see burned out villages, how do you know, again, taking aside the
20 situation where the village or the houses are smouldering still, but just
21 looking at what we looked at on the video there, how would you know if
22 you were just driving through that it was a Serb village as opposed to a
23 Croat village and that was destroyed Operation Storm as opposed to before
24 Operation Storm?
25 A. Again, as I said, if I had patrolled or my team or colleagues had
1 patrolled in that area prior to Operation Storm, and most of the area
2 was -- was patrolled through many times, month and weeks prior to
3 Operation Storm, so there was an updated accurate knowledge of the level
4 of destruction prior to Operation Storm.
5 Now you come through a village, start of July, it is not
6 destroyed. You come to a village mid-August, destroyed. So you -- you
7 relate to your prior ECMM-gathered information.
8 Q. Okay.
9 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, I would like to call up again a
10 document that the Prosecution tendered right at the end of the direct. I
11 have it still under the 65 ter which is 65 ter 4350, which is
12 Mr. Liborius' 100-day report of 21 November 1995.
13 Q. By the way, Mr. Liborius, looking at that video, could you tell
14 anything from that video, as to when the damage occurred?
15 A. I was not participating, myself, in that particular trip, as it
16 was mentioned yesterday, to Drnis area. If you would re-wind the tape, I
17 would give some indications. Now, I'm very hesitant on second-guessing
18 from a video; I prefer being there in person. First observation.
19 Second observation. Drnis, as we knew it, became a part of the
20 RSK due to a problem of the pink zones, the army of RSK. So, again, we
21 would relate to the information gathered by monitoring prior to
22 Operation Storm.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, before we start with a new subject, I'm
24 looking at the clock. Perhaps we should spend two or three minutes or
25 further discussing scheduling.
1 MR. MISETIC: Can I just wrap this up quickly?
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. MISETIC: Madam Registrar, I just need to go to -- what the
4 Bates number on the bottom is 388731, which is ... it should be, I think,
5 43 pages in, if I'm not mistaken. That's not -- I'm sorry. The Bates
6 number is 388731. We're about 50 pages off now. Page 44 of the
7 document. There we go.
8 Q. Sir, if you look that line and you find Kricke, this is the UNMO
9 report you attached to your own 100-day report.
10 Now, the UNMO report says: "Kricke," with the coordinates -- and
11 I have checked the coordinates so they're the same as what was played on
12 the video. It says: "Kricke damaged prior to Operation Storm."
13 Now did you go through the videos with the Office of the
14 Prosecutor to determine what was being represented on the videos was for
15 sure damage that had occurred during or after Operation Storm?
16 A. When I went through the videos it was to ascertain whether my
17 voice was the one on the video. I did not dwell on the question on
18 each -- each and every hamlet that they went through, whether it was
19 destroyed prior to Operation Storm.
20 Now, in this particular case, it is the voice of Mr. Jul Hansen
21 who is going through and I did not participate in that particular trip.
22 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I will end here but I will pick up on
23 this subject tomorrow in light of your instruction.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 Mr. Liborius, some research was done on your travel schedule.
1 Although there is a plane to your destination which goes later Friday
2 evening, you would not arrive until 5.20 in the morning which might be a
3 bit too much for you.
4 Therefore, you were so kind to offer to say that you would
5 continue your testimony through videolink. Now usually whether there is
6 a videolink or not, is usually decided upon the Chamber upon application
7 by the parties and, of course, if you would express such a wish since you
8 are, at this moment, entitled to speak anymore with Mr. Waespi, of
9 course, we could consider that. But we ordinarily would hear the
10 testimony viva voce.
11 When would you be available to come back to The Hague if you
12 would leave on Friday evening?
13 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, that is a question I'm sorry that I
14 cannot answer right on the spot here. My government requires my
15 attention to a lot of details in September, and in the beginning of
16 October. However, when I indicated a videolink, the embassy is prepared
17 to provide that and I think it would facilitate a further discussion as
18 the case is still fresh in mind and perhaps also be the easiest one. We
19 have a lot of experience with detailed videolinking, so the quality is
20 usually very good.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Liborius, I'm working with videolinks so often
22 that although I appreciate that you explain to me that it can be done
23 with quite some good quality, my question was whether you would be
24 available to come back The Hague
25 consider the advantages of videolink.
1 THE WITNESS: I would have to go back to Moscow to answer that
2 question, Your Honour. The --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please get the relevant information you
4 would need by tomorrow so that you could inform the Chamber about your
5 availability in the very, very near future?
6 THE WITNESS: I'll see what I can do.
7 JUDGE ORIE: We will adjourn for the day. And, Mr. Liborius, I
8 again instruct you, and you know it by heart perhaps already, that you
9 should not speak with anyone about the testimony you have given or you're
10 still about to give. And although Madam Registrar gave me the right
11 information about tomorrow, I'm afraid that ...
12 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
13 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn, and we'd like to see you back tomorrow
14 at quarter past 2.00 in Courtroom I, unless it changes overnight again.
15 We stand adjourned.
16 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.04 p.m.
17 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 11th day of
18 September, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.