1 Friday, 19 September 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.06 a.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
7 Mr. Registrar would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
9 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, The
10 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina, et al.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 Before we continue, there is an outstanding motion in relation to
13 Witness 167 due to start giving testimony on Monday.
14 Is there a possibility that the Chamber would receive responses
16 MR. MISETIC: We're in the process of filing it right now, Your
18 JUDGE ORIE: That's -- other Defence teams.
19 Mr. Mikulicic.
20 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, we will join the motion.
21 JUDGE ORIE: You will join the motion.
22 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cayley.
24 MR. CAYLEY: Yeah, Your Honour, we will need to take a look at
25 this, but certainly we'll final something today, yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: If it is not filed could there be --
2 MR. CAYLEY: A courtesy copy, yes.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Then, Mr. Dzolic, you would like to start yesterday
4 as I did yesterday with reminding you that you're bound, still bound by
5 the solemn declaration you gave at the beginning of your testimony.
6 Mr. Mikulicic, are you ready to continue.
7 MR. MIKULICIC: I am, Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
9 WITNESS: BOSKO DZOLIC [Resumed]
10 [Witness answered through interpreter]
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Mikulicic: [Continued]
12 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Dzolic. We will continue from where we left
14 off yesterday and I will ask to you go through a document which is D567.
15 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Could the registrar please bring
16 up the document on the screen.
17 Q. Mr. Dzolic, this is a document dated the 16th of September, 1995
18 which the chief of the administration, Major-General Mate Lausic,
19 prepared for the Minister of Defence and for the chief of the Main Staff
20 of the Croatian army. This is an analysis of the use of the military
21 police of the armed forces of the Republic of Croatia
22 I'll ask to you go through this document briefly and to tell me
23 whether the statements I will point out to you correspond to your
24 recollection, that is your understanding of the events in the course of
25 and immediately after Operation Storm.
1 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Please could we have a look at
2 page 2 of the document.
3 Q. Yesterday we spoke briefly about the military police units, which
4 were called AT units, anti-terrorist units. These units had some sort of
5 special training in comparison to other units, general units of the
6 military police, did they not?
7 A. Could you please repeat your question.
8 Q. Is it correct that the anti-terrorist units of the military
9 police underwent special training?
10 A. You mean in Operation Storm or in general?
11 Q. I mean before Operation Storm and in general. A special sort of
12 training as mentioned in paragraph 2, saying that by means of training
13 they were prepared for the stages of assault operations, the treatment of
14 prisoners of war, the sanitization of the terrain and so on?
15 A. Well, I cannot confirm that. I don't recollect anything about
16 these things. However, after Operation Storm, in 1996, I was the
17 commander of the an anti-terrorist company in Zagreb, and there, to the
18 best of my recollection, there was a training topic concerning these
19 matters. But I can't be sure about all this.
20 Q. Do you recall that members of these anti-terrorist units of the
21 military police were colloquially referred to as the specials,
22 specijalne, the military specijalne?
23 A. Yes, that's correct.
24 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Could we now move on to page 3 of
25 this document.
1 Q. In paragraph or item 3, we can see there is mention of the way
2 military police units were used in the beginning of the attack and during
3 the liberation of the occupied territories. It says that check-points
4 were set up from 0400 hours to 0600 hours in the morning of the 4th of
5 August, that 80 control -- 80 check-points were set up in the area of
6 attack operations, and then it says that this was done to prevent
7 uncontrolled entry into and exit from the war operations zone and to
8 prevent the uncontrolled bringing out of war booty.
9 You also told us that immediately on your arrival in Knin you set
10 up four check-points at the main entry points into the town. Is that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your activity was, in fact, in
14 accordance with the general purpose for which the military police is used
15 at that time. Is that correct?
16 A. Could you please repeat your question.
17 Q. After you established check-points at the entry to Knin, the fact
18 that you did this was not your own initiative. It was the general way in
19 which military police were used. Is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. You see, Mr. Dzolic, the last paragraph on this page, which
22 mentions the search and mopping up of built-up areas, larger towns, and
23 areas along the main roads on the newly liberated territory and that this
24 was done immediately upon the passage of HV units by members of the
25 anti-terrorist units of the military police and parts of the general
1 military police.
2 Does this correspond to your recollection from that period?
3 A. To the best of my recollection, that's how it should have been.
4 However, I don't know where and in what areas anti-terrorist military
5 police were used.
6 Q. Thank you.
7 We can move on to the next page, page number 4.
8 Mr. Dzolic, yesterday we spoke about how immediately after the
9 liberation of the occupied territories military police units were
10 established in the towns.
11 You can see that the 72nd Military Police Battalion Split,
12 established a military police company in Knin. That was your company,
13 was it not?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And further on, you see that the 71st Military Police Battalion
17 Donji Lapac, another one in Donji Lapac, right underneath that. We spoke
18 about this yesterday.
19 Does that correspond to your recollection?
20 A. Yes, it does correspondence to my recollection, but I would like
21 to correct myself. It was -- it says here on the 5th of August at 12.00
23 evening, around 7.00 or 8.00 in the evening.
24 Q. But it was on that day, the 5th?
25 A. Yes, that's correct, it was on the 5th.
1 Q. Towards the bottom of the page, it says that these units of the
2 military police took over the carrying out of military police tasks on
3 the newly liberated territory in cooperation with the Ministry of the
4 Interior of the Republic of Croatia
5 And that's how it was, was it not?
6 A. Yes, that's how it was.
7 Q. We can move on to the next page. That's page number 5.
8 At the top of the page, it says that the military police
9 concluding with the 10th of September, 1995, escorted and processed in
10 the crime investigation sense 1576 persons in cooperation with the SIS,
11 which is the security and information service of the Ministry of Defence
12 and the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Croatia
13 criminal reports and special reports were filed to the judicial bodies,
14 and then it says 659 persons were handed over and it says that this was
15 carried out successfully in collaboration with units of the Croatian army
16 and the Ministry of Interior.
17 Of course I don't expect you to know the precise number of
18 persons who were brought before the courts, but does it correspond to
19 your recollection that the military police, in cooperation with the
20 civilian police, carried out this type of task? Is that correct?
21 A. To the best of my recollection, it did carry out such tasks, but
22 as to specific incidents and cases, I'm not aware of any while I was the
23 commander in Knin.
24 Q. We can move on to the next page, page number 6.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, may I ask one question to the witness
1 in relation to this.
2 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE ORIE: This number of 659 persons, what do I have to
4 understand this number to be? Would this be HV military men, or would it
5 also be RSK military men, or civilians? How do I have to understand this
6 number of 659?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as I understood the
8 question, whether this is a collective report, a report on members of
9 the -- whether it refers to HV military men or to RSK military men or
10 civilians, I cannot answer that question, because I did not compile this
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, we will come to that particular
15 questions a couple of pages next.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dzolic, likewise, the military police
17 secured safety and unhindered passage for convoys of citizens and
18 military personnel leaving the area of the so-called area of the republic
19 of Serbian Krajina after their defeat. Is that correct?
20 A. I'm not aware of that information.
21 Q. I'm referring now to paragraph 3.5. That is the previous page.
22 We no longer see it on the screen. Page 5 where it says that there were
23 16 convoys with 1600 passenger vehicles and so on and so forth, 1436
24 tractors. These were convoys secured by the military police, according
25 to this document.
1 Mr. Dzolic, if you're not aware of this, then your company in
2 Knin evidently did not provide security for convoys of refugees and
3 defeated Serbian soldiers who were retreating, withdrawing from the area.
4 A. To the best of my knowledge, we did not provide such security. I
5 don't know about such things on the territory of Knin
6 report drawn up by the chief of the military police administration. It
7 covers all the units of the military police on the territory of the
8 Republic of Croatia
9 Q. I understand.
10 We can now move on to page 6.
11 In paragraph 4, there's mention of the participation of military
12 police units in combat activities.
13 And in paragraph 4.1 it says that a company of the 72nd Battalion
14 of the military police, which comprised the anti-terrorist platoon of the
15 72nd Battalion and the members of the general military police
16 participated in combat activities.
17 However, you have already told us that you have no knowledge of
18 the anti-terrorist platoon. Does this, however, jog your memory, as to
19 the participation of military specialists in these combat activities?
20 A. Yes, it does, but they were not on the territory of the town of
21 Knin. As it says here, they were transferred by helicopter to Rovanska
22 and that was the axis along which they advanced. They were under the
23 command of Mr. Primorac.
24 Q. Thank you. Likewise, in paragraphs 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 there is
25 mention of anti-terrorist platoons of the 71th, 70th and 67th Military
1 Police Battalions which also participated in combat activities.
2 We can now move on to page number 7.
3 Mr. Dzolic, when we spoke with check-points, you see here in
4 paragraph 6.1 it says that after the assault operations, the attack
5 operations, the -- of the HV the military police set up check-points at
6 the border towards the free parts of the Federation of Bosnia and
8 Do you know of such an activity of military police units that in
9 the first days after Operation Storm they secured the border between the
10 Republic of Croatia
11 A. I'm not aware of this information. I don't recall any such
13 Q. In paragraph 6.2, again there's mention of anti-terrorist units
14 of the military police. And it says that they were withdrawn from combat
15 operations and from the 13th of August, 1995, that unit, either
16 independently or together with the MUP, mopped up or combed the terrain
17 in the newly liberated area.
18 This is in accordance with what we said about their being
19 specially trained to carry out such activities.
20 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Could we now move on to page 8
21 where criminal investigations are mentioned.
22 Q. Mr. Dzolic, in the second paragraph, it says that the military
23 crime police, in cooperation with the crime police of the Ministry of the
24 Interior, carried out criminal processing for 321 crimes, and then the
25 crimes are specified.
1 It says 13 murders. 18 cases of HV members dying accidentally.
2 191 cases of torching. 13 cases of setting explosives. And 86 other
3 crimes, chiefly theft.
4 Further, it says that of the known perpetrators of the above
5 crimes, 79 were HV members and 274 were civilians.
6 Mr. Dzolic, you told us yesterday that in cases where a civilian
7 was caught in the act committing a crime by the military police or
8 committing a crime together with a soldier, the military police could
9 process that person and take that person to the competent body. Is that
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. We can now move on to page 9, which is the last topic I want to
13 deal with.
14 In this analysis by the chief of the military police
15 administration, at the end, the measures that the military police
16 undertook and continued to undertake to raise the general level of
17 security in the newly liberated area of the Republic of Croatia
18 mentioned. It says here that the measures that were taken gave certain
19 results but that they did not completely prevent the perpetration of
20 crimes, especially theft, torching, torching houses, and individual acts
21 of murder.
22 And in connection with this, on the 15th of September, 1995, in
23 Plitvice, a working meeting was held of all the chiefs of the police
24 administrations and commanders of RH OS VP units and do you know of this
25 meeting, Mr. Dzolic, which was held in Plitvice on the 15th of September?
1 Did you hear about it?
2 A. I don't recall. I can't say with any certainty now that I either
3 heard of it or not.
4 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, for the record this is a already
5 been established in the document D595, the meeting in Plitvice.
6 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Dzolic --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, on this page, the second
8 paragraph under 8 reads in translation "the measures produced certain
9 results but did not completely the commission of prevent crimes."
10 I don't know, is it meant to say "did not completely prevent --"
11 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: "-- the commission of crimes."
13 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, that will be the exact translation, Your
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Mr. Dzolic, in view of the fact that you did not know about this
19 meeting, I don't want to take up anymore time. I would like to thank you
20 for your answers, and I have no further questions.
21 A. You're welcome.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.
23 Mr. Misetic.
24 Mr. Misetic is counsel for Mr. Gotovina and he will now
25 cross-examine you, Mr. Dzolic.
1 Cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:
2 Q. Mr. Dzolic, good morning.
3 A. Morning.
4 Q. Mr. Dzolic, in your 2004 statement at paragraph 31, you were
5 asked some questions by the Office of the Prosecutor about a videotape of
6 a meeting that was held by General Gotovina on the 6th of August and that
7 you heard about it in the press.
8 The first thing I'd like to do with you is show you that video
9 and then I'm going to ask you a few questions. I'd ask you to pay
10 particular attention to the faces at the meeting, because I'm going to
11 ask you at the end if you can help us identify as many people as you can
12 who were present at this meeting.
13 MR. MISETIC: For the Court, this is a meeting of General
14 Gotovina with military officers on the morning of 6th August at 11.00
15 a.m., in a conference room on top of the Knin fortress.
16 Mr. Registrar, this is 1D26-0045. And we've played this in the
17 opening statement again for Your Honours. We have translations for the
18 booth. There may be a value to the Chamber to hear the actual tone and
19 if the Court wishes, we can play back -- I will replay certain segments
20 to him. If the Court wants to hear the tone and the inflexion of voice,
21 we can certainly replay it.
22 [Videotape played]
23 MR. MISETIC:
24 Q. Mr. Dzolic, were you able to recognise some of the faces that you
25 were present at this meeting?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Right now, can you tell me who you were able to recognise as
3 present at the meeting?
4 A. Well, present-day Generals. I don't think if they were generals
5 at that point in time, that is to say the commander of the 7th Guards
6 Brigade, Mr. Korade; then Mr. Krsticevic; Mr. Royce. I think I see here
7 General Blaskic. Then over here I think it is the minister of the
8 Croatian council [as interpreted]. Then on the other side I saw my
9 commander, my commander, Colonel Budimir. Then Mr. Cermak. I saw some
10 other persons but I don't know exactly what their names are now but I
11 know them by sight.
12 Q. General Krsticevic was the commander of which unit?
13 A. The 4th Guards Brigade.
14 Q. You mentioned your commander, Budimir, as present, and I'd like
15 it take you back to a portion. This is at the -- the 3 minute, 56 second
16 mark of the video. I'd like to ask you if you recognise that General
17 Gotovina is directing his remarks to Mr. Budimir in this clip and then
18 I'd like to ask you in this short portion -- I'll ask you a few questions
19 about what General Gotovina says in this segment.
20 [Videotape played]
21 MR. MISETIC:
22 Q. In this portion of the video were you able to see who General
23 Gotovina was talking to there?
24 A. He is probably talking to the commander of the military police.
25 Q. Who is Mr. Budimir. Correct?
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. You -- as a military policeman, what does it mean to you to hear
3 General Gotovina say military police is the executor of the code of the
4 armed forces and guarantees its application in the field?
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I object to that. I don't know
6 how the witness can be asked to speculate exactly what General
7 Gotovina --
8 JUDGE ORIE: He's not asked to speculate. He's asked how he
9 understood -- how he understand this to be. It could be language which
10 was used but we'll hear from the witness.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Could the question please be
12 repeated. I don't know what it is that I'm exactly supposed to say now.
13 MR. MISETIC:
14 Q. In the video General Gotovina says to Mr. Budimir the military
15 police must obey, it is the executor of the code of the armed forces and
16 guarantees its application in the field.
17 What do you, as a military policeman, understand those words to
19 A. In my view, in my understanding of these words it is supposed to
20 mean that I should carry out all my tasks as a military policeman in
21 accordance with all the legal provisions that require me to do that.
22 That is to say all the tasks derived from the rules on the military
23 police. And that I'm supposed to carry out my duties honourably,
24 honestly and at a high level.
25 Q. Would you have understood that then as part of your duties was to
1 ensure law and order among members of the HV?
2 A. That would be correct.
3 Q. Now, in your statement, again 2004 statement at paragraph 31, you
4 say that on that day, on the 6th, "Colonel Budimir spoke to me and
5 stressed the need to intensify our work and to work very professionally
6 and to have a very forceful approach to our problems."
7 Do you recall whether Commander Budimir gave you those
8 instructions in the afternoon of the 6th of August, or later in the day?
9 A. As far as I can remember, it was sometime before the top people
10 of the armed forces arrived.
11 Now, when this happened, whether it was noon, 1.00, 2.00, I
12 cannot say that with any certainty. It was before the supreme commander
14 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I'd ask that this video be marked and
15 I tender it into evidence.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection in principle, Mr. President, but
17 we have another -- we have the same videotape at 65 ter 3780 and I have
18 been told that it could be a longer version. We may be permitted to
19 compare it during the break, I would inform you exactly whether there is
20 more footage in our version.
21 MR. MISETIC: There may be more footage, Your Honour, but the OTP
22 regularly -- we don't put in long raw footage.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I think that if a party tenders part of a book or
24 part of a video-clip and if the other party thinks that that same
25 material that it is better put into context by giving a bit broader
1 image, then that that is usually -- that's usually then tendered and we
2 could admit it then with more context.
3 If that is what you seek to do, Ms. Mahindaratne.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: That is so, Mr. President. I just ask time
5 till the break, I have instructed them to compare to see if there is more
6 footage that would --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, then we already reserve a number for
8 this footage.
9 Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number D792,
11 marked for identification.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. D792 is marked for identification.
13 And we'd like to hear from you, Ms. Mahindaratne, if you want
14 to -- want it to be extended, and then I take it will still be a D
15 exhibit but then the broader version.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. MISETIC: Thank you.
18 Q. Mr. Dzolic, you were also asked some questions in both of your
19 statements about Grahovo and about incidents that occurred in Grahovo
20 before Operation Storm.
21 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, there is a problem in the
22 translation of P71, which is the diary of the Split Military District.
23 Actually I'm addressing the Chamber, not Mr. Registrar, but there's a
24 portion that was not translated from the original. We have uploaded a
25 translation of the missing portion and then we've sent an e-mail this
1 morning to the OTP to check it and make corrections, assuming we agree
2 that's it is missing and then to upload the correct version in as P71.
3 But for right now, I would ask Mr. Registrar to call up
4 1D52-0022. This is the English translation.
5 There we go.
6 Q. This is now at a meeting on the 1st of August, in the Split
7 Military District diary. I won't read everything to you, but in the
8 middle it says: "The greatest problem in OG north," which is Operative
9 Group North, "is the lack of discipline which is why we ordered unit
10 commanders to pay attention to this and to strictly forbid looting and
12 And now that was on a meeting on the 1st of August and now I'd
13 like to call up, Mr. Registrar, 65 ter 2916.
14 This is an order from General Gotovina on the 3rd of August,
15 wherein General Gotovina states that for the purpose of having a
16 uniformed command and control of the units, "I order staff brigadier
17 Rahim Ademi is temporarily appointed commander of operation group north.
18 He shall perform the said duty alongside his establishment duty."
19 Point 2: "The outgoing commander of the Operative Group North,
20 Colonel Slaven Zdilar is to resume his duty of acting chief of infantry
21 at the Split ZP command."
22 Mr. Dzolic, did you have any knowledge of the fact that General
23 Gotovina replaced the commander of Operative Group North on the eve of
24 Operation Storm?
25 A. I do not remember that I knew about that. But I do know that on
1 the very eve of Operation Storm General Ademi was at the command of the
2 operative group.
3 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, I would like to tender 65 ter 2196
4 into evidence -- or Your Honour.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number D793.
8 JUDGE ORIE: D793 is admitted into evidence.
9 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
10 Q. Some of my colleagues on the Defence side have already taken you
11 through Mr. Lausic's orders, so I won't repeat that here. However, there
12 are a few questions I think you might be able to help us with.
13 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, if I can call up 1D52-0023.
14 Q. These are the notes of a meeting that was held on the 3rd of
15 August in Zagreb
16 military police administration and the SIS administration: "For the
17 purposes of coordinating the action of the MUP, military police and SIS
18 in the preparation of and during the planned offensive activities of the
19 HV in the coming period."
20 And it records who said what at this meeting.
21 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, if we could turn to page 3 in the
22 English, please. And page 2 at the bottom in the B/C/S.
23 Q. Now, under the paragraph in the middle of the English version,
24 and at the bottom of the Croatian version, is what Major-General Mate
25 Lausic said at the meeting. And in point 2 he said in noting what the
1 problems were in Operation Flash, he says: "Lack of coordination (in
2 terms of dynamics and distribution of forces) under specific conditions
3 on the ground, which reduced efficiency and unnecessarily created the
4 illusion that the number of members engaged was insufficient. He also
5 emphasised that he had now authorised UVP officers," which is the
6 military police administration officers, "to replace the commanders of
7 military police units on the spot, should they notice any irregularities
8 in their work."
9 Now, Mr. Dzolic, when Mr. Juric arrived in the field, did you
10 have any knowledge that Mr. Juric had been authorised by General Lausic
11 to replace commanders in the 72nd Military Police Battalion on the spot,
12 if he should notice irregularities in their work?
13 A. I was not aware of that. I do not remember knowing things like
15 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I tender 1D52-0023 into evidence.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number D794.
19 JUDGE ORIE: D794 is admitted into evidence.
20 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, can I please have D269, please.
21 Q. Mr. Dzolic, you will see on the first page this is the order that
22 General Lausic issued to various military police battalions, including
23 the 72nd Military Police Battalion. It was an order that was issued on
24 the work of the military police, cooperation between and joint work of
25 the civilian and military police and obligations of the military police
1 towards detained members of paramilitary and parapolice formations.
2 The next section discusses the fact that the order is being
3 issued subsequent to the meeting which was recorded in the notes that I
4 just saw -- I just showed to you and to implement what was agreed upon at
5 that meeting between the MUP, chiefs, and the military police
6 administration chiefs. And then General Lausic hereby ordered.
7 If we go to point 1, which is on the next page in the English.
8 It is it General Lausic that issues the orders under 1.1 to establish
9 strict check-points.
10 1.2 is to follow the advance of the RH OS, which is the armed
11 forces of the Republic of Croatia
12 Territory with joint patrols and ensure law and order, traffic for the
13 needs of the HV and the isolation and evacuation of civilians for their
15 Let's stop at that point right there, sir. Did you receive a
16 copy of this order, do you receiving a copy of this order from General
17 Lausic or that it was passed on to you a similar order from either Major
18 Juric or Colonel Budimir?
19 A. Never. As far as I can remember, I never received any order in
20 writing. For me to see, that is.
21 Q. How would you understand an order to isolate and evacuate
22 civilians for their security? In what context would you be isolating and
23 evacuating civilians for their security?
24 A. I would put them up at a particular place. As for isolation of
25 civilians and military men, I was given oral orders. I can't remember
1 exactly whether it was Colonel Budimir or Major Juric, but we were
2 supposed to take all such persons to I think it was the secondary school,
3 in the town of Knin
4 remember this big hall where such persons were gathering.
5 Q. Was this for their safety, or why would you be escorting
6 civilians to the school in Knin?
7 A. Well, for the following reasons. Perhaps some criminals, if I
8 can call them that or -- I don't really know how to express myself when
9 speaking of such persons. Maybe some criminals, such persons would do
10 something and later on the Croatian army could be held responsible.
11 Q. Moving on to point 1.3.
12 "In populated places by means of joint patrols ensure law and
13 order and everything else as listed in point 1.2. The RH MUP will take
14 over the security of vital buildings in liberated towns, while the
15 military police will provide the required assistance."
16 Now, you have testified that you did in fact set up check-points
17 in Knin. Do you recall whether the setting up of check-points or -- let
18 me ask it a different way.
19 Who passed an order on to you, and when, to set up check-points
20 in Knin?
21 A. This order was issued to me, as far as I can remember, by Colonel
22 Budimir before I left from Rujani, in order to go to the town of Knin
23 Q. 1.6 says: "To set up VP platoons in RH MUP PU centres in
24 liberated areas, and military police substations, the strength of a squad
25 to a platoon, in larger urban areas for as long as the HV stays in them."
1 Now, you actually set up more than just a squad or a platoon in
2 Knin. Correct?
3 A. That is correct.
4 Q. Who passed the order to you to put more men in Knin than just a
6 A. I did not know about the necessity of having a platoon in town.
7 The only thing I know is what I heard from my commander, Budimir, that is
8 to say that I should go to Knin and establish a unit of the military
9 police there. I was given treatment at the level of company command, so
10 I don't know who it was that decided it should be a company rather than a
11 platoon, as was defined in this paragraph here.
12 Q. Okay. If we can turn to the next page in English, please, which
13 is paragraph 4 -- numbered paragraph 4.
14 General Lausic ordered: "VP unit commanders shall brief all
15 levels of command in VP units and all members of the military police on
16 this order during the night and ensure that it is implemented."
17 Again, I think you have answered this but let me ask you one more
18 time, do you recall being briefed in Sajkovici on the 3rd of August,
19 about this order that had come from General Lausic?
20 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, question was asked and
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And the reason to ask the witness again where
23 you say that he answered the question already, Mr. Misetic.
24 MR. MISETIC: I specifically now asked him about a specific place
25 and time that he may have had a briefing where this was passed or as more
1 of a general question.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you add anything to the earlier question,
3 the witness may answer it.
4 MR. MISETIC: Sajkovici. Let me ask him a different question.
5 Q. On the evening of the 3rd, before Operation Storm, did you attend
6 any briefings either in Rujani or in Sajkovici?
7 A. As far as I can remember, just before Operation Storm, I attended
8 a meeting that was chaired by the battalion commander.
9 Q. And where was that meeting?
10 A. I think, as far as I can remember, in Rujani or Sajkovici. I
11 think it is Rujani, rather. Because the command was there or, rather,
12 the premises where the battalion commander was.
13 Q. Do you recall what was said at this meeting in Rujani on the 3rd
14 of August?
15 A. I was then made aware of an order on attacks -- or, rather, the
16 beginning of Storm. This order was not read out to me but an order of
17 General Gotovina, I think. Namely, that action should start.
18 Q. Okay.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I just wish to point out on record the witness
20 did not say it was 3rd August. He just said before, and however,
21 Mr. Misetic has read into the record again that it was 3rd August. Just
22 to clarify that on record.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, isn't it true that this refers to
24 what we find in paragraph 18 of the 2004 statement wherein the witness,
25 your witness in the evidence you have presented talks about the 3rd of
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I apologise, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
4 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Mr. Registrar, call up 1D52-0019.
6 Q. And this is an order from General Lausic. Yesterday or the day
7 before yesterday, I believe, on direct examination if I'm not mistaken,
8 you were asked some questions about Major Juric issuing you orders and
9 you referenced one order that could you remember was about securing the
10 facility in Golubic. Do you recall that?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. I'd like you to take a look at this order which is an order from
13 General Lausic which is issued to, amongst others, to the 72nd Military
14 Police Battalion forward command post but to the attention of Major Ivan
15 Juric. And in the order of the 7th of August, in point 2, it says: "To
16 evaluate a method of physically securing all warehouse facilities and
17 establishing physical security of the mentioned facilities from 0000 to
18 2400 hours."
19 Do you recall receiving this type of order from Major Juric and
20 to the best of your knowledge is this order related to the order you
21 discussed about securing the Golubic facility?
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: A compound question, Mr. President. There are
23 two questions in that.
24 JUDGE ORIE: To speed it up, could you reformulate.
25 MR. MISETIC: Sure.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
2 MR. MISETIC:
3 Q. Does this order -- to the best of your knowledge is this order
4 related to the security of the Golubic facility?
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I object, Mr. President. What's the
6 foundation? First and foremost, has this witness seen this order, when
7 he was issued the order regarding Golubic facilities, was he informed
8 person to what orders that order was being issued.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 Mr. Misetic.
11 MR. MISETIC: He's already testified he received an order from
12 his commander, Major Juric, to secure the Golubic facility. I'm asking
13 him to look at an order. He is a military policeman in the chain of
14 command. Is this order related to the order he has already testified
16 JUDGE ORIE: The witness may answer the question.
17 Could you please put it to him again.
18 MR. MISETIC:
19 Q. Mr. Dzolic, you testified either yesterday or the day before
20 yesterday, I can't remember, that you received an order from Major Juric
21 to secure the facility at Golubic.
22 Do you recall that testimony?
23 A. I do recall. My order was a verbal one, an oral one.
24 Q. As a military policeman, looking at this order from major --
25 sorry, General Lausic to Major Juric, can you tell whether this order is
1 related to the oral order you received from Major Juric?
2 A. I assume that it is related. It is a logical sequence. The
3 commander in this case, Major Juric, on the basis of this order, issued
4 that task to me.
5 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I ask that the Exhibit be marked and I
6 tender it into evidence.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number D795.
11 JUDGE ORIE: D795 is admitted into evidence.
12 Mr. Dzolic, your last answer you started saying that this is
13 logic. Now, is it just on the basis of logic that you answered that
14 question or do you have any specific knowledge? Was ever reference made
15 to the order when you received further orders?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] As far as I can remember,
17 Major Juric did not invoke any order. Rather, sometime in the evening he
18 came up to me and ordered me to assign a certain number of members of my
19 unit and that we should go together to the Golubic warehouse and that we
20 should take over the security of that warehouse.
21 JUDGE ORIE: So the link between the order given to him and the
22 order given to you is looking at it, you find that all very logical,
23 which I'm not contesting. But I'd like it know under all circumstances
24 what is just your logical conclusions and what you -- what you observed,
25 whether by hearing or by seeing, as a fact.
1 Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
2 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
3 Q. Mr. Dzolic, I'm now going to show you a series of reports from
4 Major Juric to General Lausic. In the interests of time I'm going to
5 show you the three reports and then ask you a few questions about them.
6 MR. MISETIC: The first is, Mr. Registrar, D732, please.
7 Q. This is Major Juric's report from the 9th of August. It is sent
8 to the chief of the military police administration, Major-General Mate
9 Lausic, reporting on the execution of military police tasks in OG north
10 by 1600 hours on the 9th of August.
11 Paragraph 1 says: "A number of household appliances were seized
12 and receipts issued in exchange."
13 The second paragraph, last sentence says -- actually, the second
14 line: "It can be stated that the situation in Benkovac and Obrovac is
15 now under control except for a few cases of seizing of items usually
16 seized at check-points anyway."
17 If you can turn the page, please: "The VP post in Sinj reports
18 that a tractor was seized from Lieutenant Grgic and handed over to the
19 Vrlika leadership for use. A Labin Progres milling machine and an Agria
20 milling machine were seized from Private Marko, and then his last name
22 You will note, Mr. Dzolic, that the report does not appear to be
23 copied to anyone and is sent directly to Major-General Lausic.
24 MR. MISETIC: If we can go to the next, Mr. Registrar, which is
25 D733, please.
1 Q. This is again a report from Major Ivan Juric directly to military
2 police administration to the attention of the chief. No one is copied on
3 it. Again, reporting on the military police tasks carried out in OG
5 Under point 2, reference is the guarding of the monastery in
6 Kistanje. And also it says: "No violations of public law and order were
7 registered in the observe period?"
8 MR. MISETIC: If we could go, Mr. Registrar, to D211, please.
9 Q. Same -- this is now 12 August and I'm going to take you back to
10 the day before. I forgot to show you that one. This is the 12th of
11 August. Again Major Ivan Juric reporting directly to the chief of the
12 military police administration. No one is copied on the report and you
13 will note that he says at paragraph 4: "In the crime military police
14 section, no crimes have been recorded."
15 "5. The VP have not arrested or brought in any persons."
16 If we could go back now to D734. This is from the day before.
17 Page -- this is at paragraph 4, and again it is Major Juric
18 reporting directly to the chief of the military police administration.
19 No one is copied. Paragraph 4 says: "In the crime VP section,
20 perpetrators of crimes, misappropriation of property from the liberated
21 areas are being processed daily."
22 Now, I have shown you four documents, Mr. Dzolic.
23 My question to you is: Through most of these documents you were
24 present in Knin. Do you recall having to assist Major Juric in preparing
25 daily reports of the work of the military police?
1 A. I do not remember helping him in preparing reports. However, I
2 do allow for the possibility that in my segment for my own company I
3 provided to him on a daily basis parameters for compiling this kind of
5 Q. Did you have to send reports to Major Juric on a daily basis?
6 A. I do not recall with any certainty, but I think that that was the
7 way it was supposed to be. Namely, that I was supposed to provide
8 reports to him every day, in terms of my segment of work.
9 Q. Do you know if the crime section of the military police submitted
10 reports to Major Juric, on a daily basis?
11 A. Don't know.
12 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, may I have Exhibit D595, please.
13 Q. This is the meeting that Mr. Mikulicic referenced during his
14 cross-examination that took place -- I'm sorry, the minutes or notes of a
15 meeting that took place in Plitvice between representatives of the MUP
16 and the military police on 15 September 1995 at 11.00 a.m.
17 MR. MISETIC: If we could go to page 5 in the English.
18 Q. I know you weren't present for this meeting but there is a
19 statement made about this meeting, and I would like to see if it is
20 consistent with your understanding.
21 MR. MISETIC: This would be page 3 of the Croatian version, at
22 the bottom.
23 Q. It says that -- the people present at this meeting were listed on
24 page 1 and they are the members of the RH MUP and the members of the
25 military police administration. And General Lausic is reported as having
1 said: "Members of the MUP and the military police are the promotors of
2 the state policy and the only people responsible for its implementation
3 are present at this meeting. The objective is clear: Protection of
4 people and property and creation of positive security situation in the
5 entire area of the Republic of Croatia
6 Now, this statement that "the members of the MUP and the military
7 police are the promoters of the state policy and the only people
8 responsible for its implementation are present at this meeting," was it
9 your understanding, Mr. Dzolic, that the MUP and the military police
10 working together were the organs of the Republic of Croatia
11 responsible for the protection of people and property and the creation of
12 a positive security situation in Croatia?
13 A. Could you please repeat your question.
14 Q. Who was responsible for providing security in the area? Was it
15 the MUP and the military police?
16 A. That's correct.
17 MR. MISETIC: Mr. Registrar, if I may have 1D52-0016, please.
18 Q. Mr. Dzolic, this is not a document that was addressed to you.
19 However, you have been posed some questions about what daily operational
20 tasks mean, et cetera.
21 This is an response that General Gotovina issued on the 12th of
22 April, 1995 to the commander of the Vrgorac garrison.
23 MR. MISETIC: For the Court, just it let the Chamber know, we are
24 still searching for the original request from the Vrgorac garrison to
25 General Gotovina which we still have not been able to locate but this is
1 the response and from the context it appears that the Vrgorac garrison
2 commander had requested a deployment of the military police, and General
3 Gotovina's response was at point 1: "According to the formation and the
4 rules of the military police, military police units are not designated to
5 implement tasks such as the one requested above."
6 "2. The use and deployment of military police units for tasks
7 of a longer duration as stated in the request by the Vrgorac garrison
8 command are decided on and approved by the military police
9 administration, i.e., chief of the military police administration in
11 Now, I know you were a company commander, but do you have any
12 knowledge of the fact that longer-term deployment of the military police
13 could only be done by the military police administration?
14 A. To the best of my recollection, all long-term transfers or
15 movements of military police units were -- fell within the purview of the
16 military police administration. The commander of a military police
17 battalion, at his level, could also transfer or relocate a certain unit.
18 But probably he would previously need the approval and agreement of the
19 chief of the military police administration.
20 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I ask that this exhibit be marked and
21 I tender it into evidence.
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No objection, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes exhibit number D796.
25 JUDGE ORIE: D796 is admitted into evidence.
1 MR. MISETIC:
2 Q. Mr. Dzolic, I thank you for coming to testify and I have no
3 further questions for you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Misetic.
5 The Cermak Defence still --
6 MR. CAYLEY: I'm sorry, I didn't catch all of that. The Cermak
7 Defence still.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Has no questions.
9 MR. CAYLEY: No. We have no further questions.
10 JUDGE ORIE: I just wanted to verify that. Matters can change
12 We will first have a break.
13 Ms. Mahindaratne, you indicated yesterday that you would need a
14 certain time for re-examination. Has the estimate changed? You
15 yesterday said as matters stand now.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President, it is about the same
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll resume at 11.00.
19 --- Recess taken at 10.34 a.m.
20 --- On resuming at 11.05 a.m.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, please proceed.
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, before I start, with regard to
23 the videotape, in fact what we have is more footage. We have two tapes
24 of the same meeting, and one tape begins much before the clip that was
25 shown by Mr. Misetic and then goes on through the meeting, that part that
1 we saw, and even after the meeting after what was seen, there is much
2 more at the meeting itself.
3 And then the second tape has further footage of the same meeting,
4 so I propose, Mr. President, that we are permitted to tender both tapes
5 so that the Chamber could view as much footage of the meeting as
6 possible. I think it would place the clip that we saw in context.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
8 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, obviously the Prosecution can submit
9 its open exhibits. I have looked at what they have and theirs is,
10 respect to things that I showed the witness, is deleted from the video on
11 the -- where General Gotovina says the military police needs to be -- to
12 its job, et cetera, that portion has been deleted from the
13 Prosecution's videos, so --
14 JUDGE ORIE: From both.
15 MR. MISETIC: The section that we're talking about here as I
16 recall is only one of the two Prosecution videos and within that section
17 the issue of General Gotovina yelling at the military police battalion
18 commander does not appear in their video of that event.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Therefore, replacing the broader version would
20 not -- certainly not serve the purposes of the Defence, Ms. Mahindaratne.
21 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President, may I just say that on the
22 contrary, we do have that segment, but I don't want to quarrel --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Let's not quarrel in court about what is in what
24 version of a video. I do understand that the Prosecution would like the
25 Chamber to look as broadly as possible to the video of that meeting. The
1 Defence wants to be sure that the portion played in court certainly is in
3 Now, may I take it that this matter can be resolved --
4 MR. MISETIC: Yes.
5 JUDGE ORIE: -- that the parties could agree meeting both wishes
6 and then come up with the video for which -- and upload that, the video
7 which was assigned already a provisional exhibit number.
8 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour. We'll talk to them.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Talk with them, yes. Yes.
10 MR. MISETIC: That's what I meant, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 Ms. Mahindaratne, are you ready.
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President. Thank you.
14 JUDGE ORIE: For one reason or another, my screen on exhibit,
15 et cetera, gives a nice blueish colour, which I like very much, but I
16 even prefer white.
17 Is there any way that this apparent technical problem can be
19 Please proceed.
20 Re-examination by Ms. Mahindaratne:
21 Q. Mr. Dzolic, now, your testimony yesterday was that on 20th
22 August 2008, when you met with members of the Office of the Prosecutor,
23 you examined your 2004 statement and made certain changes to that.
24 Now, in fact, you -- one of the changes amongst many that you
25 made on 20th August 2008
1 And let me read out the correction that you made, which is recorded in
2 paragraph 15 of the 2008 statement that is --
3 MR. CAYLEY: I'm sorry, Your Honour, to interrupt my learned
4 friend but I think it would be helpful at this point if the witness was
5 given both the statement in B/C/S, his first statement, and his second
6 whatever euphemism is referred to, but I think the clarification or the
7 proofing notes so that he can see what we're talking about.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I'm sorry, Mr. President, I was under the
9 impression it was in front of the witness. May the usher --
10 JUDGE ORIE: I can't see it. If Madam Usher could assist so that
11 the witness has both his 2004 statement and the statement of 2008.
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
13 Q. Mr. Dzolic, could you take a look at your 2008 statement and let
14 me take you to paragraph 15. And reading out, this is the correction
15 that you made to paragraph 37 on 20th August 2008. You say: "In
16 paragraph 37 I refer to General Cermak being introduced to me as a
17 general and government commissioner. I should like to change that to a
18 general and garrison commander for Knin."
19 Now, that was the correction you made to paragraph 37 of your
20 2004 statement on 20th August 2008
21 Now, Mr. Dzolic, when you came to testify on Wednesday, about
22 what time were you brought into this building?
23 A. A little before the session began, some 20 minutes before, or
24 half an hour before the beginning of the session.
25 Q. And at that time you were given your two statements, is that
1 correct, to peruse?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. And when you came into court, you informed court that you did not
4 have -- have the opportunity to examine your 2008 statement and that you
5 wished to in fact examine the 2008 statement prior to confirming the
6 accuracy of the contents?
7 A. [Microphone not activated].
8 Q. Now, yesterday when it was -- when Mr. Kay put it to you or asked
9 you if you agreed that in -- that the contents in paragraph 37 of your
10 2004 statement and let me just -- I will be precise. Let me read that
11 particular paragraph.
12 Your statement to the effect that in paragraph 37 of 2004: "The
13 way I understood it was that I was still under the command of Colonel
14 Budimir and that I was also under the command of General Cermak and I was
15 to obey any order that General Cermak gave."
16 As to whether you -- whether you considered that an accurate
17 statement, yesterday you said that you did -- that it was wrong. Now --
18 MR. CAYLEY: Can Ms. Mahindaratne actually read back to the
19 witness what he said yesterday because all she's read now is the
20 statement, and I think for the purposes of fairness to the witness it
21 should be read back to him the questions and answers that my learned
22 friend Mr. Kay put to the witness and which he affirmed yesterday. Thank
24 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Ms. Mahindaratne, could you please --
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, if I could --
2 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... to the witness?
3 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Yes, Mr. President if I could take parties to
4 transcript 9035 going to 9037.
5 Q. Mr. Dzolic, this is what you were asked. And you were read back
6 that passage.
7 And then you -- "are those your words, Mr. Dzolic, did you say
9 "The way I understood it was I was still under the command of
10 Colonel Budimir but that I was also under the command of General Cermak
11 and I was to obey any order that General Cermak gave me. Did you say
13 "I don't think that is the way I put it."
14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, if you make always clear what the
15 witness says and what the question was.
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Your answer then to that question was: "I don't
18 think that's the way I put it."
19 Please proceed.
20 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And then asked a further question, Mr. Dzolic,
21 by Mr. Kay. He asked you this question: "Is that statement wrong?"
22 And that is referring to that particular passage we read out.
23 And your answer was: "For a part, yes."
24 And then going to page -- transcript page 9037, again you were
25 asked this question: "Is it wrong as written here that I was also under
1 the commander of General Cermak and I was to obey any order that General
2 Cermak gave me."
3 And Mr. Kay was reading again a passage from your 2004 statement.
4 And you answered in court: "As I understand the statement, it is
6 You were asked this question by Mr. Kay: "First of all, is it
7 wrong to say you were under the command of General Cermak? "
8 Your answer was: "I was not under the command of General Cermak.
9 I was under the command of Colonel Budimir."
10 The question is asked again by Mr. Kay: "Is it wrong to say that
11 you were to obey any order that General Cermak gave you?"
12 Your statement was: "That is correct."
13 Now, Mr. Dzolic, what happened between the morning of Wednesday
14 and yesterday for you to change your mind that what you had stated in
15 paragraph 37 of your 2004 statement was incorrect? What led to you
16 change your mind?
17 A. Your Honours, reading my statement of 2008, because there was so
18 little time and because I was very tense prior to my testimony before the
19 Court and before Your Honours, probably I made a mistake in that I did
20 not notice this sentence as it is written down in my statement. I did
21 not see at the time that it was erroneous. While I was preparing to
22 testify, I didn't read the entire 2008 statement.
23 Q. Mr. Dzolic, I'm not referring to your 2008 statement. I'm
24 referring to your 2004 statement. That passage Mr. Kay read to you was
25 from the 2004 statement and on 20th August you made several corrections
1 to your 2004 statement. In particular, you made a correction to
2 paragraph 37. But you never, ever raised this -- the fact that this
3 particular statement about not obeying orders.
4 MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, I'm objecting at this point. If the
5 witness could remove his headphones.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Would you take off your earphones for a second,
7 Mr. Dzolic.
8 Mr. Cayley.
9 MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, I think my learned friend has to be
10 extremely careful about how she's actually putting this to the witness.
11 We know that the original statement was heavily corrected in a
12 clarification statement or in these proofing notes. We then know that
13 the proofing notes were also incorrect. It could be that the witness is
14 actually saying that when he read the correction in the subsequent
15 statement correcting the original paragraph 37, that he hadn't noticed
16 that in fact he hadn't also corrected that other part in the original
18 I mean, I don't want to interpret what the witness is saying, but
19 I think we have to be fair to him because it's clear that there were a
20 lot of errors in his written statement.
21 JUDGE ORIE: There are other opportunities as well, Mr. Cayley.
22 You hint at one possible explanation. There are other possible
23 explanations and Ms. Mahindaratne will certainly be careful but is
24 entitled to fully explore the issue.
25 Please proceed, Ms. Mahindaratne.
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 Q. So, Mr. Dzolic, my question to you is: You did not -- you in
3 fact made a particular correction to paragraph 37 itself on 20th
4 August 2008. How is it that did you not correct it then but you did so
6 A. I don't remember why I didn't notice that then, but probably
7 because looking at this paragraph, I wasn't paying that much attention to
8 the other paragraph.
9 Q. Mr. Dzolic, do you recall at that proofing meeting, you know, you
10 said you read slow and you read your 2004 statement very carefully. And
11 how is it that you correct a sentence in the same paragraph but not
12 another sentence at that time, and now you're saying that you missed
14 A. It's my mistake that I missed it. I don't know what response
15 would satisfy you. I just didn't notice it at that time. I corrected
16 what I noticed. At that time, I didn't notice this.
17 Q. Moving on. You were also questioned about reporting to
18 Mr. Cermak.
19 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. Registrar, may I have document P886,
20 please, and if you could go to the English page 7453. English page 7453,
21 page 8; and B/C/S page 11.
22 Q. And, Mr. Dzolic, if you could focus on the entry at 1305.
23 There's a reference to a patrol reporting to -- being ordered to report
24 to General Cermak.
25 Now, can you say as to why military police patrols were reporting
1 to General Cermak?
2 MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, can I object to this point, can -- it
3 doesn't actually say that a military police patrol should report to
4 General Cermak.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let's read literally.
6 MR. CAYLEY: What it says.
7 JUDGE ORIE: What it says.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: [Overlapping speakers] ... Mr. President, I
10 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ...
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Let me read back to you what it says and you
12 can possibly read for yourself, Mr. Dzolic. It says: "Information comes
13 from," and this illegible. It says, it looks like MUP, you can correct
14 me if I'm wrong, to the -- to a person in the -- the duty station and it
15 say: "Mosor 1 should report to General Cermak. "
16 Now what is Mosor 1? For the record M-o-s-o-r. Can you tell
17 Court what Mosor 1 is.
18 A. Mosor 1 is probably a code-name used over the radio for the
19 commander of that company.
20 Q. What company?
21 A. If this is the log-book of the 7th Company, then it would be the
22 commander of that company.
23 Q. And when you say 7th Company you're referring to the joint Knin
24 company, isn't it?
25 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, could I just make an interruption at
1 this point, but I think there is a problem with the translation of the --
2 JUDGE ORIE: The translation issues are be dealt with when the
3 witness doesn't listen.
4 Could you take off your earphones for a second.
5 MR. CAYLEY: My understanding from my Croatian speaking colleague
6 is that the word javni, which is being translated as -- javi, which is
7 being translated as translated as report can also mean contact. Should
8 contact. Which would change the meaning of this significantly.
9 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, we will upload the revised
10 translation but at this stage perhaps if the interpreters --
11 JUDGE ORIE: I know that the interpreters are not tasked with
12 reviewing written translations. But of course I could make an entirely
13 separate from that.
14 The two meanings of the word javi as just presented by Mr. Cayley
15 can it be confirmed that it this word has two meanings? I'm not asking
16 to review the translation but whether there is any possibility that
17 perhaps one is chosen where another could --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Yes, Your Honour.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So, Ms. Mahindaratne, now if you -- you can
20 put the question again to the witness and now include that Mosor 1 should
21 report or contact General Cermak.
22 Please proceed.
23 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Could you please put on your earphones again.
25 We were dealing with a translation issue, Mr. Dzolic.
1 Ms. Mahindaratne.
2 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
3 Q. I think I didn't get an answer from you, Mr. Dzolic, for my last
4 question, which was: When you referred to 7th Company, that is the
5 reference to the joint Knin company, isn't it?
6 A. Yes, the joint company. But as far as I can see here, it is
7 dated the 19th August, and if I remember correctly, when I left that
8 company was given a number and it was under the command of Luka Orsulic.
9 It was no longer the joint company but the 7th Company.
10 Q. And can you say -- or are you able to say as to why Mosor 1 is
11 required to report or to contact General Cermak there at 1305?
12 A. Your Honours, this question should be put to that commander and
13 to General Cermak, if he remembers why, on that day at that hour, he
14 asked to speak to that person.
15 I really don't know why he should want to call him, but it would
16 not be in order for me to speculate now.
17 Q. Thank you for that. I just move on.
18 Mr. Dzolic, if you could look at paragraph 11 of your 2008
19 statement and in fact yesterday you were extensively questioned on
20 Major Juric. Now, this is what you told us on the 20th of August 2008
21 about Major Juric and in fact having examined this 2008 statement during
22 the break you came back and confirmed that this was accurate in court.
23 You say: "I refer to Major Ivan Juric. Even to this day I do
24 not know what his real role was. He seemed to have both a command role
25 and that of a coordinator. According to the organisational structure
1 Budimir was my superior although I think I may have seen an order stating
2 that all the military police units would be put at the disposal of
3 Major Juric. "
4 So clearly what you're saying is you say "I do not know what his
5 real role was."
6 Now, what happened or what material was placed before you from
7 the point you made this statement which you confirm in court as accurate
8 and yesterday when you agreed with Mr. Kay's suggestion that Major Juric
9 was the commander of the military police --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: -- in the zones of responsibility --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, apparently the issue is repeatedly
13 the same, that the way in which you present the evidence is contested by
14 the Defence. So, therefore, if you just read literally what the
15 testimony was, then --
16 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I'll do that, Mr. President. I was in fact
17 reading it because I had just taken down the exact notes. But I will
18 read it now from the transcript so that we don't quarrel anymore.
19 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. President, could I add here too -- maybe the
20 witness should take his headphones off again because I -- I know we all
21 agree about the nature of this kind of question, but --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Dzolic, could you take off again your earphones.
23 MR. CAYLEY: And I will be very brief so that we can move ahead.
24 Ms. Mahindaratne knows exactly why the witness responded as he
25 did because certain documents were put in front of him so that should be
1 made clear to him so that he doesn't misunderstand what is actually being
2 put to him, that Mr. Kay put a number of documents to him with which he
3 then responded with certain answers, having seen those documents.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that of course raises the question whether he
5 is interpreting the documents or whether he is giving the answer.
6 So, therefore, if Ms. Mahindaratne would put to the witness that
7 after certain documents have been shown to him.
8 MR. CAYLEY: Thank you, Your Honour.
9 JUDGE ORIE: That's fine. But she doesn't have to put these
10 documents again to him and can put her questions on the basis of just the
11 recollection of the witness.
12 MR. CAYLEY: Thank you.
13 MR. MISETIC: And, Your Honour, for the Gotovina Defence I would
14 say that I believe it is improper impeachment given that in the statement
15 he says he seemed to have both a command role and that of a coordinator
16 it would be improper impeachment then to it to the witness as if the
17 witness has said something contradictory of the Prosecution's own witness
18 when -- rather than just asking him to clarify. It shouldn't be put to
19 him that he has said something inconsistent if in the statement he says
20 he seemed to have both a command role that of a coordinator. I don't see
21 the inconsistency, so I'm not sure if the witness would either and it
22 should be put to him more fairly.
23 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I -- he clear says that even to
24 this date he does not what the real role of Major Juric is, and my
25 question would be what material or based on what material is he now
1 agreeing with the suggestion made by the Defence and that is not
2 necessarily impeachment.
3 JUDGE ORIE: I don't think it is impeachment. Of course if you
4 say it seems to be this and that, that is already different from what
5 someone knows. It looks as if he is drawing conclusions on what he now
6 sees or -- but no thorough knowledge. Put it as neutral as possible, ask
7 for clarifications or explanations and do not put too many suggestions in
8 your question, because that would be leading.
9 MR. MISETIC: I would also say again in fairness to the witness,
10 Your Honour, he did testify that he received orders and specified at
11 least one order that he received from Major Juric, so again I would say
12 that it shouldn't be put to him that he is saying something inconsistent
13 if in fact he believed that Juric could command him.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne.
15 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I will phrase it according to your
16 instructions, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
19 Q. Mr. Dzolic, now, yesterday you agreed with the suggestion from
20 the Defence that -- to read the exact words the suggestion was: "Would
21 you agree he was," referring to Major Juric, "the commander of the
22 military police in the zones of responsibility of the 72nd and 73rd at
23 the time?"
24 And your response was yes.
25 Now you agreed with that suggestion. And previously you had
1 informed the Office of the Prosecutor that you were not aware of what his
2 real role was. Now can you explain to Court, Mr. Dzolic, what it was
3 that led you to agree with the suggestion in Court, whereas on 20th
4 August you did not know what the role of Major Juric was?
5 MR. MISETIC: Judge, I have the same objection. If she is going
6 to put it to him, then she should show him paragraph 11 in its entirety
7 and not select a sentence.
8 MR. CAYLEY: And we join that.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, could you show the witness what he
10 said, at least take him to the relevant portion.
11 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President.
12 Q. Mr. Dzolic, can you look at your paragraph 11 of 2008 statement.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Now you say there: "I refer to Major Ivan Juric. Even to this
15 day, I do not know what his real role was."
16 Is that correct?
17 A. That is correct.
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I will move on, Mr. President, from that.
19 MR. MISETIC: So there is no further --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, just so there is no further dispute
22 later on when the transcript is read, I'm not sure that we interpret his
23 yes -- she put it to him that's what it says, so that is what it says, we
24 with stipulate that that's what it says in paragraph 11.
25 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
1 Q. Mr. Dzolic, when you said that is correct, were you agreeing that
2 what I read to you says exactly that in the paragraph, or when you said
3 that is correct, is it correct that you do not know what Major Ivan Juric
4 real role was?
5 A. I was referring to what it says in paragraph 11. I said that
6 it's correct that that's what it says.
7 Q. And do you agree with that statement that you made?
8 A. I made this statement in context, because I didn't know which
9 role of Major Juric was more prominent, whether on the ground his role
10 was that of commander or that of coordinator, which was the predominant
12 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I'll move on from that, Mr. President.
13 Q. Now, your testimony was that you received your orders from
14 Colonel Budimir, and in fact in paragraph 35 of the 2008 statement, if I
15 could ask to you look at your 2008 statement, Mr. Dzolic, paragraph 35.
16 You say: "All my orders from my battalion commander Colonel Budimir were
17 delivered verbally. I cannot recall him ever informing me that an order
18 had been issued by General Gotovina to prevent or investigate crimes. I
19 wish to add that Colonel Budimir had sufficient authority that he did not
20 have to use the name of Gotovina to get things done."
21 Now, when -- when Colonel Budimir issued you verbal orders, did
22 he ever inform you that he was issued any orders pursuant to General
23 Gotovina's orders?
24 A. Could you please repeat your question.
25 Q. Now you said all your orders were issued to you by your battalion
1 commander. When he issued you orders did he ever tell you --
2 MR. MISETIC: Object to -- mischaracterizes what paragraph 35
3 says, says all my orders from my battalion commander, not all my orders
4 were delivered by my battalion commander.
5 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Sorry, Mr. President, I will read it back
7 JUDGE ORIE: Please do it again, yes please.
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE:
9 Q. Mr. Dzolic, you say, "All my orders from my battalion commander
10 Colonel Budimir were delivered verbally."
11 Now, when Colonel Budimir issued you verbal orders did he tell
12 you pursuant to whose order, that is, did he tell you I received these
13 orders from such-and-such of my superior commander and now I'm issuing
14 you this order pursuant to his order -- that person's order. Did he
15 inform you pursuant to whose orders he was issuing you orders?
16 A. No. He didn't tell me whether it was pursuant to orders from the
17 chief of the administration or from General Gotovina. And I never asked
18 him to give me that information, nor did I consider it necessary, if my
19 battalion commander was issuing me with a certain task.
20 Q. And did you ever see any written orders issued by Mr. Gotovina to
21 Mr. Budimir?
22 A. No, I did not.
23 Q. Now, I know in court we saw a lot of documents, a lot of orders
24 issued by General Lausic. Did you see any written orders during that
25 time issued by General Lausic to Colonel Budimir?
1 A. You mean in the course of this trial or do you mean in the course
2 of my work in the town of Knin
3 Q. In the course of your work in the town of Knin.
4 A. No. I did not see a single order issued by General Gotovina, or,
5 rather, General Lausic to the battalion commander while I was in the town
6 of Knin.
7 Q. Now, did you ever refuse an order or an invitation or a -- a
8 request, so that we cover all those words, from Mr. Cermak to you?
9 A. Could you please clarify your question.
10 Q. Now, during the course of Operation Storm and in its aftermath,
11 actually in its aftermath when you were in Knin, did you ever --
12 MR. CAYLEY: Your Honour, I'm objecting to this question because
13 it is far too general. I think we need to be specific. Which invitation
14 are we talking about. We can't just talk in generalities. Mr. Kay
15 covered all of this ground yesterday. Let's be specific, a specific
16 invitation for a specific task.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Cayley, I had the same question on my mind.
18 Therefore, I will put it to the witness. He apparently did not
19 understand the question.
20 Yesterday a lot of questions were put to you about how you
21 considered your position in relation to Mr. Cermak. Some orders were
22 shown to you, signed by Mr. Cermak, and you finally explained that, in
23 light of paragraph 37 of your 2004 statement, that you felt that were not
24 under a duty to obey any orders. You considered them to be invitations.
25 You corrected your statement, where it said he invited me to go there, so
1 you -- you gave quite some details on that matter.
2 Now, was there ever, and could you identify, ever any invitation
3 or order, or whatever you considered it, that you deliberately have
4 decided not to follow. So could you identify from any of your meetings
5 with Mr. Cermak, do you remember any instance where you thought he asks
6 or requests or orders or suggests that I would do so-and-so, but I will
7 not do it for this and this reason.
8 Could you identify any such instance?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, to the best of my
10 recollection, there was a task from General Cermak where it was suggested
11 to me that security should be set up for a protected facility. I can't
12 be sure anymore what the name of the facility was. I know, as far as I
13 can remember, that at the time, I told General Cermak that I could not
14 carry out this task because I did not have the men available who were
15 needed to carry out that task, and I suggested that, if possible, this
16 should be delegated to the civilian police, for them to do it on their
18 How many other similar instances there were, I can't tell you
19 right now, but I do know that such things did occur.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you -- you said you do not remember the
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It was a civilian building. It
23 might have been a factory, a post office, or something similar, but I
24 can't remember precisely what building it was.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Do I understand that you found yourself in an
1 impossibility to do what he asked you to do? Is that how I have to
2 understand your answer? And that you then told him that this was the
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That's correct, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, you said there were "such things did
6 occur." Could you be more precise. How many other similar instances
7 there were you couldn't tell me but you know that they did occur.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't remember, Your Honour.
9 This is one instance that came to my memory when you put the question to
10 me as to whether there were any situations where General Cermak asked me
11 to do something and I didn't carry it out.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, you may proceed.
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, just for the record the
14 incident that he just referred to is also included in paragraph 47 of the
15 2004 statement P875.
16 Q. One last question, Mr. Dzolic. Now, we had some evidence about
17 what tasks were carried out at check-points yesterday and even today.
18 Mr. Misetic showed you some documents.
19 Yesterday Mr. Kay showed you your daily orders where you sent off
20 military police patrols and set up check-points or sent people -- shifts
21 for check-points. What was the main -- what were the principle tasks of
22 the military police patrols, what were they supposed to do, patrolling
23 the area?
24 A. To best of my recollection, the tasks of the patrols in the town
25 of Knin were the following: Visiting the check-points to check whether
1 everything was in good order; monitoring the situation in the town; and
2 in accordance with their powers, taking action in relation to
3 perpetrators of breaches of discipline or criminal offences.
4 Also, military police patrols could be sent by the duty officer
5 in the company to a certain location if the duty officer had information
6 that something was happening at that location.
7 Q. And can you also tell us what the tasks of the check-points were?
8 MS. MAHINDARATNE: And that would be my last question.
9 A. To the best of my recollection, the tasks of the men in my
10 company at the barrier check-points were those stemming from the rules of
11 work of the military police. That is, to monitor entry and exit into and
12 from the town of Knin
13 take action in accordance with their powers.
14 Q. Can you be a little bit more specific about the last sentence:
15 "To take action in accordance with their powers."
16 What were their powers and what were the actions they could take?
17 A. If, at the barrier check-point, they stopped a motor vehicle and
18 established that the vehicle was being used to transport things and
19 equipment which could be assumed to have been stolen, that person was to
20 be detained at the barrier check-point until the arrival of a military
21 police patrol, which would then take over the suspect, and, if a warrant
22 had been issued for the arrest of a person or for a certain piece of
23 equipment, if this was found at the check-point, they were authorised and
24 had the task of confiscating the vehicle or confiscating the piece of
25 equipment or the object that was being sought.
1 I hope that clarifies that question.
2 Q. It does, Mr. Dzolic. Thank you very much for answering my
3 questions. I have no further questions for you.
4 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, I apologise for going beyond
5 the time I estimated.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Judge Gwaunza has one or more questions for you.
8 Questioned by the Court:
9 JUDGE GWAUNZA: Yes, Mr. Dzolic.
10 If you could refer back to your statement of 2004, paragraph 9.
11 It is recorded there that, and it is attributed to you that: "If the
12 military policeman saw a crime being committed by a civilian, then he was
13 obliged to contact the civilian police and hand the civilian over to the
14 civilian police."
15 My question is: Would you know what happened in the case where a
16 civilian police or civilian police witnessed or saw soldiers committing
17 crimes, what would happen in such a situation?
18 A. To the best of my recollection, and also the way I understand the
19 status of an authorised official and the powers and tasks of such an
20 official, a civilian policeman should act in a similar manner. That is
21 to say bring into custody that person or rather to the station, then the
22 military police would be informed, and then the perpetrator of the said
23 crime would be taken to the military, if it is a member of the Croatian
24 military, that is.
25 JUDGE GWAUNZA: Thank you. I have another question for you, and
1 this pertains to paragraph 23 of the same statement. Sorry, it's
2 paragraph 24 of the same statement.
3 You mention there that: "The reason for us guarding the cemetery
4 was to protect those who were bearing bodies."
5 I want to ask, why was it necessary to guard those who were
6 bearing the bodies?
7 A. Your Honour, I've already answered a similar question put by the
8 Prosecutor. However, I believe that I need to repeat that to you as
10 What happened was a particular situation, namely when we received
11 information to the effect that an unknown person had fired at or towards
12 soldiers who were carrying out exhumation at that cemetery. For that
13 reason it was decided to put a security detail there, so that the people
14 involved could continue doing their job unhindered.
15 JUDGE GWAUNZA: Yes, thank you. And the last question I have
16 pertains to your 2008 statement, paragraph 22. And there you were
17 clarifying what you had said in paragraph 61 of your 2004 statement.
18 You talk about in the middle of that paragraph : "After stopping
19 the vehicles, the brigade commander's authority was given retrospectively
20 to alloy those guards to be transported."
21 I think this was in reference to what happened at check-points.
22 I want to know whether you recall any instance in which such
23 authority was denied, the brigade commander's authority, and what would
24 happen then.
25 A. Your Honour, in that case, the same kind of action would have
1 been taken as I have already explained when I spoke of what official
2 persons did at barrier check-points.
3 The said person would be kept there, a patrol would be called in,
4 and then the said person and the vehicle would be taken to the military
5 police unit. The equipment would be confiscated. The person would be
6 handed over to the crime police, and further action would be taken in
7 accordance with legal procedure.
8 JUDGE GWAUNZA: Yes, thank you.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE GWAUNZA: Sorry. I said that was my last question, but I
11 have another question and that will be my last question.
12 The following paragraph, the same statement of 2008,
13 paragraph 23, towards the end, you mentioned there or in the middle of
14 the paragraph: "Depending on the seriousness of the crime and the value
15 of the property stolen, the perpetrator could be sent to the military
16 prosecutor or the matter was treated as a misdemeanour."
17 I want to know whether you know what would be regarded as a
19 A. Your Honour, as far as I can remember, a misdemeanour was a
20 situation in which the benefit in terms of property did not go beyond a
21 certain level that was defined by law.
22 As far as I know from that time, well, I don't know whether this
23 is the actual amount of money involved but it was up to 1.000 kuna. That
24 was supposed to be -- considered to be a misdemeanour. Beyond and above
25 that, it was a crime and there was criminal responsibility involved. It
1 is this that sense that I spoke when I said that there was a difference.
2 JUDGE GWAUNZA: Thank you for those answers.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Could I ask one additional question in that respect.
4 At that time how much Deutschemarks would a thousand kuna be?
5 A. Your Honour, right now, I really cannot say whether it was 150 or
6 whatever. I don't know exactly. I really do not remember how much it
7 was at the time, the value of that money, that is.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
9 Judge Kinis has one or more questions for you.
10 JUDGE KINIS: Thank you.
11 Referring back to your statement 2004, paragraph 61, 62 and 63,
12 and Judge Gwaunza also touched up on this issue but I would like to ask
13 this question a little bit in different style.
14 How do you know about such orders that brigadier commanders can
15 authorise for persons to do some illegal acts regarding property and you
16 should justify this?
17 Did you have some written instructions or how do you know this?
18 A. Your Honour, I think that by making my statement to the
19 Prosecution, I did touch upon this, because I said that there were one or
20 two cases when we stopped a column of the Croatian military when there
21 was a change of shifts on the ground.
22 We noticed certain objects that could lead one to believe that it
23 had been stolen, that they had been stolen, rather. Then I contacted my
24 superiors because the persons in those vehicles, that is what the
25 commander of this column claimed, namely that they had been allowed to
1 take this with them.
2 Then I sought guidelines in terms of what should be done with
3 regard to this matter. What I was told was that if the brigade commander
4 states in writing that that was now army property and that it would be
5 used for meeting the needs of the army, then such a column should be
6 allowed to pass.
7 JUDGE KINIS: Which superior directly issues this order for you?
8 A. I -- well, I don't remember whether I asked for approval or
9 guidelines from Budimir or Juric. I don't know if they contacted the
10 commander of the said unit and whether they decided or defined that.
11 At this point in time, I cannot say.
12 JUDGE KINIS: And then is next my question: In the first annex
13 which are also on the roads, [indiscernible] the rules governing the
14 structure and operation of the military police was then in force in the
15 Republic of Croatia
17 You are policeman, a person who has some kind of legal knowledge.
18 I don't know whether you know or what is a public law and what a private
19 law, but my question is what do you understand that the term security in
20 public law and order should be task of military police, whether it could
21 include also such situations that you are -- can obey a law, simply?
22 A. Yes, I should obey the law.
23 JUDGE KINIS: You should obey the law. Could you please tell me
24 were such directions from your superior should be recognised as a law at
25 that time or police should follow to -- by law.
1 A. The police was supposed to comply with the existing law.
2 However, by your leave, Your Honour, may I explain what this was all
3 about, in this particular case, when these approvals were given.
4 I, and my superiors probably, believed that if the brigade
5 commander had signed an approval to let such equipment pass, then
6 possibly this equipment had been exempted from military facilities that
7 were in the town of Knin
8 JUDGE KINIS: But could you please tell me or maybe you name a
9 title of law on which you based your activity in such style. I cannot
10 recall every country where commander order can replace a law, and you are
11 a policeman. You know very well what is the law and what is just order.
12 A. I do understand what the difference is.
13 JUDGE KINIS: That's why I'm asking you questions.
14 A. Could you please repeat your question.
15 JUDGE KINIS: Could you please name title of law under which you
16 operate at that time.
17 A. I cannot give you the exact name of that law.
18 JUDGE KINIS: Why?
19 A. I don't remember the name. I don't know what I would call it,
20 was it the Law on Criminal Procedure, was it the penal code?
21 JUDGE KINIS: And penal code or law replace articles which are
22 included in penal law by others of army commanders.
23 A. I am not saying that they were suspended by an order issued by my
24 commander. In this case, I'm not saying that there were any violations
25 of the law.
1 JUDGE KINIS: I cannot understand. Was there violations or
2 not or there wasn't violations of law under your understanding at that
4 A. At that time in such situations, to my understanding there were
5 no violations of the law.
6 JUDGE KINIS: Okay.
7 JUDGE ORIE: I have a few questions for you as well.
8 You just explained, answering a question by Judge Gwaunza, that
9 you secured the cemetery on the 6th of August, because soldiers who were
10 carrying out exhumations were shot at. Is that -- it may be there that
11 an a translation issue, but that's how I understood it. That's how it
12 appears on my transcript.
13 A. Your Honour, I did not say that the military police were securing
14 soldiers at that point in time. These were members of the civilian
15 protection who were in charge of burying dead bodies.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So they were active in burying bodies and they
17 were shot at.
18 How did you -- was it a patrol you sent there or was it expected
19 and did you have a -- a small team there? Because I do understand that
20 you secured that cemetery during more than one day. You said "until it
21 was taken over by the civilian police."
22 A. I don't remember that I said that the civilian police had taken
23 over that particular job. For how many days we provided security, I
24 cannot say with any certainty. I think it was a day, or two, or three.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, what caused, exactly was it reported to
1 you, someone is shooting at those who are burying people at the cemetery,
2 or ...
3 A. These were these officials who were carrying out this job. They
4 provided this information to us that they had been shot at and it's on
5 the basis of that information that we took these security measures.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you have a clear recollection that that
7 happened on the morning of the 6th or the afternoon or the evening?
8 A. Your Honour, I don't remember exactly when this was.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Did you -- did you include this securing the
10 cemetery in your daily orders on -- well, let's say the 7th and the 8th
11 or the 9th?
12 A. I cannot remember that. However, it is possible that this should
13 have been recorded in written form in the daily order. If not, then
14 probably a particular person would be appointed who would be made
15 available for that particular day.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Did you send one person, did you send more persons?
17 A. I cannot tell you exactly whether it was one or two persons, but
18 it certainly wasn't more than that.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Could you check in your daily orders whether
20 this task appears for those days? That's D787.
21 Mr. Registrar, perhaps we could ask the witness to look at page 4
22 out of 79 and following in the original. Or to have -- I don't know
23 there's a possibility otherwise to have it printed out for him.
24 A. Your Honour, I cannot see it there now. What I can see here are
25 barrier check-points.
1 If it can be scrolled down a bit.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and perhaps for the other days to see whether
3 it appears in this ...
4 Perhaps the next four or five pages and then ask the witness
5 to ...
6 A. Nothing's moved.
7 JUDGE ORIE: No. You'll be provided with a ...
8 Could you try to find this task in the ...
9 A. Your Honour, I don't see the task for the 6th.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Do you see it for the 7th or the 8th?
11 Mr. Registrar, 7 and 8 would go up to and include the tenth out
12 of 79 pages.
13 A. Your Honour, I cannot see it here. Namely, that the task had
14 been spelled out precisely for that day. Or, rather, for securing the
15 cemetery. It is not stated very specifically.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Could I take you to paragraph 32 of your
17 2004 statement.
18 Yes. Would you please read it. Numbers are appearing in this
19 paragraph. First, it says that -- that additional military police
20 arrived and you give a number of 70 to 80 people.
21 And then a bit further down it says: "That gave us about 140 to
22 150 mainly experienced military policemen in total in Knin."
23 Were these 140 to 150 all under your command or is this the joint
24 company with a total strength of 140 or 150, or do I misinterpret your
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, including the forces
2 with which I entered Knin and then the additional forces that came in,
3 all of that made up that joined or combined company.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And that was -- they were there on the 6th or -- and
5 the days following until you left on the 12th. Is that ...
6 A. That is correct. They stayed behind, after me.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 A. I think --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Now, if I look at the daily order, I find tasks
10 assigned to a number of persons by far smaller than 140 to 150. For
11 example, for the 9th of August, I find tasks assigned to, at least by
12 persons named, 61, in total. You may not have the 9th, but I counted the
13 small lists.
14 If you want to look at the 9th, then, please, it could be put on
15 the screen.
16 A. You can put it there, but I think there is no difference between
17 that and the orders that were on the previous days.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that's numbers not amounting to 140 to 150
19 but rather 70 or 80 or 60.
20 A. Your Honour, as far as I can see here, the Drnis barrier
21 check-point involves a total of 12, three shifts of four men
22 respectively. Then 34, 46, 48.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You're looking at the 9th? What date are you
24 looking at?
25 A. I'm looking at the 7th of August.
1 JUDGE ORIE: It's not the same for all days, I do agree with you.
2 I didn't look at the 7th primarily. If you say it amounts up to 140,
3 150, then ...
4 It may be that I have difficulties in finding my way through the
5 original and you're looking at the 7th. I was looking at the 9th, as a
6 matter of fact, but you might not have that in front of you.
7 You may understand, were all the tasks included in this -- in
8 these lists or were there tasks assigned to persons which do not appear
9 in these lists?
10 A. Your Honour, those people who were not engaged in writing over
11 here, they were supposed to be available. They were resting. So it is
12 from that shift that these persons would be engaged, if necessary, for
13 similar tasks, like the one that we mentioned, providing security for the
14 cemetery or, say, a task involving going to collect the mail, carry
15 something, whatever.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Were they having rest or were they on various
17 duties? I do not -- is it your testimony that you said, Some of my men
18 did not have just a daily rest but they were not on the schedule for that
19 day at all. They had a day off?
20 A. My statement is that those persons who were not on the list here,
21 in terms of being engaged but who were available nevertheless there in
22 the unit, then these persons were engaged or, rather, could be engaged
23 for other tasks.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would that mean that this daily order does not
25 cover the complete activities of the joint company?
1 A. I cannot claim that with certainty. They should be here on this
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let me move to another subject, Mr. Dzolic.
4 Briefly, I think your testimony was that you took civilians to
5 the school in Knin in order to protect them.
6 A. That is correct that is correct.
7 JUDGE ORIE: And you said how should I call them criminals. That
8 is at least what is my recollection of what the threat may have been to
9 these persons.
10 What criminals did you have in mind? What -- what did you want
11 to protect them against, what information you had about criminals going
12 around and threatening civilians?
13 A. Your Honour, I did not have any information. Rather, I had an
14 order stating that these people should be taken to the collection centre.
15 Probably Commander Lausic, when providing such guidelines, had had
16 experience from previous actions. I'm primarily referring to
17 Operation Flash. For the sake of prevention, that is, so that something
18 similar would not happen. These people were taken care off in collection
19 centres. They were not taken away only to be taken care of but also in
20 order to be registered as being there, and, as far as can I remember, in
21 order to have official IDs of the Republic of Croatia
22 personal IDs, things like that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Now I hear a lot of explanations. Were they taken
24 there to protect them against criminals on the basis of earlier
25 experience; or were they taken there for documents to be issued to them.
1 You said, Maybe the order I received was based on ... do you know what it
2 was based on exactly, or is it just that you are guessing or speculating?
3 A. Your Honour, I do not know on the basis of what the order was
4 issued. I -- well, probably it seems that I was speculating, when I say
5 that I assumed that that could have been the basis for that kind of an
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now were you aware of issuing documents to
8 those persons in the school, was it organised there? Did you have any
9 knowledge of that?
10 A. I do not have any knowledge in order to be able to make any
11 assertions. It is just that I remember, on the basis of memory, that it
12 was said that such documents would be issued.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, could I -- and that might be the last
14 subject I will cover.
15 Some questions were put to you in relation to your statement,
16 your 2004 statement in relation to war booty. In paragraph 61, you're
17 talking about military taking electrical property like stoves,
18 televisions refrigerators in trucks through a check-point.
19 In paragraph 63 of your statement, you're talking about war booty
20 being property belonging to the enemy army, which, as you stated -- now,
21 I'm seeking clarification of what you observed and what your view on
22 transporting such goods were. Did you consider televisions, stoves,
23 refrigerators to be goods that could be legally transported and pass
24 through check-points?
25 A. Your Honour, I did not consider this to be equipment that could
1 legally be taken across check-points or through check-points but if there
2 were one or two TV sets, that did not lead me to think that it could have
3 been stolen from civilian properties. These TV sets could have been at
4 military installations. It is from that aspect that I was assessing the
5 situation. If that is what it was, then it could have been the military
6 property of the enemy army.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Did you ever further check or investigate
8 whether these televisions came from army facilities?
9 A. I do not remember that this kind of an investigation was carried
10 out. Because if the commander had signed that this equipment was
11 military property, I thought that this was a regular thing.
12 I've already stated earlier on that if the commander would notice
13 that a soldier of his is committing a disciplinary infraction then he was
14 supposed to take certain steps in according with the rules on military
16 If the commander guarantees by way of his own signature that it
17 is a regular thing, then I believed that there were no elements there
18 involving the commission of a crime.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, at the end of paragraph 61, you say: "As
20 a policeman, I did not agree with this."
21 And you were talking about that authorities was signed -- was
22 obtained and that these goods were let through. You said: "As a
23 policeman I did not agree with this, although it was better for the
24 property to be removed than burned or destroyed, which was happening."
25 I'm trying to reconcile your testimony until now, and I see the
1 following, that on the one hand you say well, these television sets could
2 been, well, say, military television sets. I take it then that the same
3 is true for the refrigerators and the stoves. Why did you then not agree
4 because they could be seized they would fall within the -- within your
5 definition of war booty, that is, property belonging to the enemy, which
6 was legally, rightly taken over by the Croatian forces. Would did you
7 then not agree and why did you say that it was better to be removed than
8 to be burned or destroyed, which seems to be inconsistent with your
9 definition of war booty and how to handle property taken from military
11 A. Your Honour, to the best of my recollection, when I uttered this
12 sentence saying that I disagreed with this, I think I was referring to
13 the investigator's question as to whether I agreed in general to the
14 theft of property in such a way.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You considered it to be theft. What you were
16 talking about in --
17 A. I considered it to be theft if people were taking away equipment
18 belonging to civilians. In this case, I did not have any awareness or
19 information that these things were being taken out of civilian buildings.
20 Rather, I considered that the property was being taken from military
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then again why did you disagree that a signed
23 authority was obtained? I mean that is exactly what you would expect if
24 these were military goods. It comes as a surprise did you not say this
25 is exactly what should have been done because it was my definition war
1 booty, and therefore I did fully agree with that to happen and comes as a
2 surprise that you apparently look at it as something illegal.
3 A. Your Honour, I agree that if the equipment was taken from
4 military facilities, it was regular; but when the investigators were
5 putting questions to me to which I was responding, saying that I don't
6 agree, I don't know whether they were asking me whether I disagreed with
7 the taking out of military equipment from facilities, military property,
8 that is.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for those answers.
10 Yes, I have to look at the clock. Before we -- will there be any
11 need to put further questions to the witness, Ms. Mahindaratne, on the
12 basis of the issues raised by the Bench?
13 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Just one question, Mr. President, from the
15 JUDGE ORIE: And for Mr. Misetic, how much --
16 MR. MISETIC: I have several questions.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Several questions. Then I think it would be better
18 to allow -- to give Judge Kinis an opportunity to put the one question he
19 has on his mind, then have a break and then ...
20 Judge Kinis.
21 JUDGE KINIS: Thank you.
22 One small question. Yesterday during cross-examination Defence
23 counsel Mr. Kay presented -- submitted as evidence two orders issued by
24 General Cermak.
25 On one of them was provide inspections under all UNCRO convoys,
1 including helicopters.
2 My question is simple: Did you obey this order? This is the
3 first question, and the second, if yes, what specific tasks you carried
4 out for the purposes.
5 A. Your Honour, I do not know whether there was any talk of
6 inspection or of providing security. As regards military helicopters.
7 We neither could nor did carry out inspection of UNCRO soldiers.
8 JUDGE KINIS: Unfortunately, I don't have D number at my disposal
9 right now but I would look at this -- there was something --
10 MR. CAYLEY: Judge Kinis, I can assist you on that, it is P512.
11 JUDGE KINIS: Thank you. Could we put on screen, please.
12 As you can see the first point first is: UNCRO helicopters must
13 be inspected before each flight. The inspection should be carried out by
14 military police. That's what my question is.
15 A. Your Honour, we carried out no inspection of UNCRO men. We only
16 provided security when they were taking off and landing. I don't
17 remember that we acted pursuant to this order.
18 JUDGE KINIS: It means that you didn't obey this order?
19 A. One could say that. I don't remember that this order was ever
21 JUDGE ORIE: One question in relation to this before we have a
23 Would that mean that you said we -- you provided security taking
24 off when helicopters would take off. Was there a special team assigned
25 to that or was it -- would you receive a call one helicopter is now
1 taking off or will take off in ten minutes? How did it -- how was this
3 A. Your Honour, I don't remember, but most probably a flight would
4 be announced and then either a patrol would be sent or an officer -- a
5 police officer would be designated to carry out this task of providing
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
8 We'll have a break. We will resume at ten minutes past 1.00.
9 --- Recess taken at 12.49 p.m.
10 --- On resuming at 1.16 p.m.
11 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber understands that the name of the cells,
12 being holding cells, has taken a rather literal meaning at this moment as
13 far as Mr. Markac is concerned, because they can't open the door anymore,
14 from what I understand. So that then really becomes a holding cell.
15 Mr. Cayley, we understood that there was no objection against
16 proceeding and we hope to see Mr. Markac.
17 MR. CAYLEY: Mr. Mikulicic.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, yes, I'm sorry.
19 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, we already discuss it. No objections, Your
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
22 Then an opportunity will be put to the parties to put further
23 questions to the witness, although the Chamber has mainly -- has not
24 raised any new issues so, therefore, the parties are not invited to start
25 full new series of questions. Only matters that were triggered for the
1 Defence of course in your re-examination and for all the parties during
2 the questions put by the Bench.
3 Perhaps it is most practical, Ms. Mahindaratne, if I give you an
4 opportunity first so that the Defence can then cover everything what is
5 included in your questions and then we'll conclude.
7 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 Further re-examination by Ms. Mahindaratne:
9 Q. Mr. Dzolic, in response to a question from the Bench with regard
10 to measures taken to protect civilians, I'm referring to that situation
11 where you were required to take civilians to the Knin school, you
12 responded in this manner. You speculated, actually, and you said, you
13 speculated: "Probably commander Lausic in issuing guidelines may have
14 used it -- issued such guidelines based on his previous experience and
15 previous action."
16 And then you went on to say I primarily refer to Flash.
17 Now, did you have any information --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Ms. Mahindaratne, in one of the follow-up answers,
19 as you already explained, the witness said that it was speculation,
20 should we now investigate that background of what appears to be
21 speculation rather than anything else?
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: No, Mr. President. I was simply -- on the
23 speculation part of it, I was just on a follow-up question and perhaps if
24 is not --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but --
1 MS. MAHINDARATNE: But I ask --
2 JUDGE ORIE: -- now to explore Flash where the witness says that
3 whether it was inspired by the experience in Flash is purely speculation
4 that would start -- the Chamber is not encouraging you in exploring Flash
5 in any further detail at this moment.
6 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Very well, Mr. President. Then I will not ask
7 any further questions.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 Mr. Misetic.
10 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 Further cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:
12 Q. First as a housekeeping matter, I'm advised, Mr. Dzolic, that in
13 an answer you gave to me earlier when I asked you who was present at the
14 meeting in the video that I showed you, the translation came back as a
15 minister of the Croatian council, and let me just ask you if what you
16 intended to say was the minister of the Croatian Defence Council or the
18 MS. MAHINDARATNE: Mr. President, these are not questions which
19 arise from --
20 JUDGE ORIE: I do agree, Ms. Mahindaratne, that they do not
21 arise, so therefore, Mr. Misetic, if you would have followed my
22 instructions very precisely you would have asked permission for that, but
23 it is so obvious that if something is on our transcript not in the right
24 way, then of course it doesn't -- it is just seeking to avoid errors and
25 mistakes which can be avoided but I formally do agree with you that
1 Mr. Misetic should have asked and if I would have been in his position, I
2 might not have done it either because it is so obvious that no one could
3 possibly could complain about it.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
5 MR. MISETIC: Thank you Your Honour, and I apologise, Your
6 Honour, I just didn't want to -- wanted to make sure it wasn't the
7 Croatian minster of defence but rather from the other side of the border.
8 But since it is clear ...
9 Q. Mr. Dzolic, in response -- or to follow up from some questions
10 from the Bench, in this case, we have evidence that in the town of Knin
11 the ARSK had three military barracks, the northern barracks, the Senjak
12 barracks, the southern barracks, two schools that were used to garrison
13 soldiers of the ARSK, a police station, the ARSK headquarters, the
14 location of an intelligence service of the Republika Srpska Krajina and
15 that the old hospital in Knin was used to house officers of the ARSK.
16 My question to you is: At a check-point, after Operation Storm,
17 how do you as a military policeman determine whether a TV set, a
18 refrigerator, a bed, a stove, was taken from one of the facilities that
19 I've just identified or was taken from a private apartment? How do you
20 make that distinction when you're standing at a check-point?
21 A. We can't tell that. We can't distinguish.
22 Q. That the only thing you can do is rely on a certification by a
23 commander of a unit as to where the goods were taken from in order for
24 you to then let them pass through a check-point?
25 A. I think that's correct. That's what I attempted to tell the
1 Chamber through my explanation. But I don't know whether I was
2 sufficiently clear. I seem not to have been very clear. It was not my
3 wish nor is it my wish to confuse Their Honours.
4 Q. I understand that. When we were talking with regard to certain
5 portions of your statements, sir, when you called up the commander of the
6 unit that was at the check-point, was it so that you could obtain from
7 him information as to where these goods had come from, whether they had
8 come from one of the facilities I had just read out to you or whether
9 they had come from a private residence?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, do we have a basis -- are we talking
11 about 61?
12 MR. MISETIC: Basis for what, Your Honour?
13 JUDGE ORIE: A basis for the factual ...
14 MR. MISETIC: We don't have a basis for the other factual in
16 JUDGE ORIE: No. It only says in both cases assigned authority
17 was obtained and they were allowed through.
18 The role of the witness in this respect is factual role he played
19 or whether he tells what -- what was reported to him by his men is not
20 clear to me. If we are talking about 61.
21 MR. MISETIC: We are talking about 61, Your Honour, as well as
22 paragraph 22 of his 2008 statement.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. MISETIC: Which was a clarification of 61 --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. MISETIC: -- that wasn't read out to him where he says in 61,
2 paragraph 61 from 2004 --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
4 MR. MISETIC: -- I gave the impression that truckloads of
5 personal electrical goods were being transported by military trucks.
6 What I wanted to say --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
8 MR. MISETIC: -- was in a couple of instances, in a military
9 convoy --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Still -- still ... one second, please.
11 I'm mainly referring to line -- page 73, line 3. And I will
12 check it again. When you called up.
13 MR. MISETIC: I could be wrong. I understood his answer to -- in
14 response to one of the questions from the Bench that he contacted the
15 commander of the unit. I could be wrong, but that's what I thought he
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That was the only issue, yes.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. MISETIC: Would you like me to check on it before I --
20 JUDGE ORIE: You may do so, yes.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 MR. MISETIC:
23 Q. Did you contact the commander of the unit to obtain his
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could we first ask whether he was present at the
1 check-point. That's the issue which is -- was bothering me primarily.
2 MR. MISETIC: Okay.
3 Q. Were you at this check-point?
4 A. No, I wasn't.
5 Q. So how did you come to find out what transpired at the
7 A. The men who were at the check-point informed me of the situation
8 happening at the barrier check-point.
9 Q. And did they tell that you they contacted the commander of the
11 A. They didn't tell me that they had contacted the commander of the
12 unit, but they contacted me and I contacted my superiors. They, in turn,
13 contacted the commander of that unit.
14 Q. So in these conversations with your superiors -- between your
15 superiors and the commander of that unit, you don't know how it was
16 determined whether those goods had come from one of the military
17 facilities in Knin or not, do you?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Now, in paragraph 22 of your 2008 statement you clarify and say
20 that this only happened in a couple of instances.
21 How much is a couple of instances? Let's be specific.
22 MS. MAHINDARATNE: I object to that, Mr. President. He doesn't
23 say that this happened in a couple of instances. What he says, what I
24 want to say was that in a couple of instances in a military convoy. He
25 is describing the event in relation to a couple of instances, not that it
1 happened in only a couple of instances.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
3 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Rephrase the question that takes the least time.
5 MR. MISETIC: Fine.
6 Q. Did it only happen in a couple of instances? Is that what you
7 meant to say, sir?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Now, what does it mean "a couple of instances," how many?
10 A. Twice.
11 Q. Two, okay. Do you recall which brigade it was?
12 A. I don't remember, Your Honours.
13 Q. We've heard some testimony in this case about TVs. How -- being
14 at a check-point, again I have to put it to you, how do you know where
15 the TV came from?
16 A. I don't know where that TV came from.
17 Q. You say -- I believe you've testified that you were -- let me --
18 strike that.
19 Confiscated goods from check-points were ultimately relocated
20 into the Senjak barracks. Is that correct?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Do you recall that the Senjak barracks was the logistics barracks
23 of the ARSK before Croatian army took it over?
24 A. I don't recall, but there were depots in that barracks with
25 military equipment and food, as far as I remember.
1 MR. MISETIC: If I could go back, Mr. Registrar, to D734,
2 please. If we can go to the next page, please.
3 Q. This is from the 11th of August. Again, this is the report of
4 Major Juric to General Lausic.
5 And again at paragraph numbered 4 on the 11th of August,
6 Major Juric says: "In the crime military police section perpetrators of
7 crimes (misappropriation of property from the liberated areas) are being
8 processed daily."
9 Now, we've talked now about these two incidents of a convoy being
10 allowed to pass. Was it also your experience that at these check-points
11 people in fact were being detained and then processed by the crime police
12 section for misappropriation of property?
13 A. I don't remember.
14 Q. Well, I showed you earlier this morning and if necessary I can
15 show it again, Mr. Juric reporting about an Ursus, U-r-s-u-s, tractor
16 seized from Lieutenant Grgic, a Labin Progres milling machine seized from
17 Private Marko Gutic.
18 If these items were in fact being seized, would that indicate to
19 you that military personnel were in fact having property seized from them
20 at check-points?
21 A. I can't respond to that, because Colonel Jenjic had his own area
22 of responsibility.
23 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction captain, Captain
25 A. So I don't know how this happened.
1 MR. MISETIC:
2 Q. Turning to the issue of civilians in Knin, were you going -- was
3 the military police in Knin forcing civilians out of their homes and
4 taking them to the school?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Is this -- to what extent is this triggered by?
6 MR. MISETIC: A series of questions on civilians being taken to
7 the school, why they were being taken.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But not whether they were taken by force or
9 not. Just the witness has given an answer under why and I think the why
10 was explored, not the methods by which.
11 MR. MISETIC: The matters by which may be relevant to the why.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then you could have asked about it. Of course
13 everything triggers a new element. You can make a chain with that, but
14 the only thing I explored is the source of knowledge of what the witness
15 said about it. That's the only thing I explored, nothing else.
16 MR. MISETIC: I mean he is the military police in Knin so --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm not saying-- but I'm not saying that the
18 witness might not have knowledge about it, but at this stage in the
19 examination of the witness more is required than just that the witness
20 has knowledge about a certain matter.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. MISETIC: Okay. Thank you.
23 Q. Going back to the issue of the check-points, this is my last
24 question, when you allow -- you. When the military police allowed the
25 convoy to pass after an authorisation had been received from the military
1 commander, was it your understanding therefore that the commander was
2 certifying that these goods were not -- had not been seized from private
4 A. According to my understanding, yes. That would be correct.
5 MR. MISETIC: [Previous translation continues] ...
6 Q. Is that why you told the Trial Chamber that you did not believe
7 that a crime had been committed in the first place?
8 A. Correct, yes.
9 MR. MISETIC: I have no further questions.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Any of the other Defence counsel.
11 MR. CAYLEY: Nothing arises. Thank you, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic.
13 MR. MIKULICIC: No, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 First of all, Mr. Markac, it's good to see that your holding cell
16 has not held you for the remainder of the day. It was an unfortunate
17 matter that you could not leave your holding cell. The Chamber is glad
18 to see you back.
19 Then ...
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE ORIE: Since the Bench has no further questions to you
22 either, Mr. Dzolic, this concludes your testimony. I'd like to thank you
23 for having come to The Hague
24 by the parties and by the Bench and I wish you a safe trip home again.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
1 [The witness stands down]
2 JUDGE ORIE: We have booked sessions for this afternoon. It
3 might not be a good idea to start now for seven minutes with the next
4 witness. There are two options, I would say. The first one is that we
5 would continue until 2.00 and then start later, not at 2.30 but -- for
6 example, but that not be a good idea because then the lunch break would
7 be too late.
8 So I suggest that we take an early break now, that we resume in
9 52 minutes that's at 2.30.
10 Mr. Hedaraly, you needed one hour from what I was -- more or
12 MR. HEDARALY: That is correct, Your Honour. I am quite
13 confident that I can complete the examination in less time, maybe 30 to
14 40 minutes. I'll do my best.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And then the estimates of the parties are such
16 that we could conclude this afternoon.
17 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. I believe that absent some things
18 that come up, I think that I will be doing most of the cross. I don't
19 think my learned friends have much.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That would mean that we'll still try to finish
21 in the second afternoon session.
22 We will have a break, and we resume at 2.30.
23 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.40 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 2.34 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon.
1 Mr. Registrar, we are still in a follow-up session, which means
2 that there's no need to call the case, which was done during our first
3 session this morning.
4 Mr. Hedaraly, are you ready to call your next witness?
5 MR. HEDARALY: We are, Mr. President, thank you.
6 The Prosecution would like to call Mr. Lennart Leschly to the
8 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher.
9 From what you just said, no application for protective measures.
10 Did I understand well that meanwhile all the parties have made their
11 submissions on the 92 ter application and that there are no objections
12 against either the statement, dated the 6th of February, nor against any
13 of the attachments?
14 MR. KEHOE: That's correct, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
16 [The witness entered court]
17 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon, Mr. Leschly. Before you give
18 evidence in this court, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence require you
19 to make a solemn declaration, the text of which will now be handed out to
20 you by Madam Usher.
21 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will speak the truth, the
22 whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
23 WITNESS: LENNART LESCHLY
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Please be seated, Mr. Leschly.
25 Mr. Leschly, English is not your mother tongue, or is it?
1 THE WITNESS: No, it's not.
2 JUDGE ORIE: It's not. If you have any difficulties in
3 understanding questions or in expressing yourself, please let me know.
4 You're first examined by Mr. Hedaraly, who's counsel for the
5 Prosecution. Mr. Hedaraly, please proceed.
6 MR. HEDARALY: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Examination by Mr. Hedaraly:
8 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Leschly. Could you please state your full
9 name for the record.
10 A. Lennart Leschly.
11 Q. And what is your current occupation?
12 A. I am retired, having been in the Danish Army with a gap of 22
13 years where I was not serving in the army.
14 Q. And when did you retire?
15 A. I retired in 2003, when Danes turned 60.
16 Q. Thank you. If we could have 65 ter number 5433 on the screen,
17 and if I could have Madam Usher provide a copy of the -- hard copy of the
18 statement and the reports prepared by the witness.
19 First of all, could you confirm that the document that is on the
20 screen in front of you is the same that you have in tab 1 of the
21 documents that were just given to you?
22 A. Yes, it is.
23 Q. Do you recall providing a statement to the Office of the
24 Prosecutor on 6 February 2008
25 A. Yes, I do.
1 Q. And is that statement in front of you the statement that you gave
2 on 6 February?
3 A. Yes, it is.
4 Q. I'm sorry, it should be 6 February 2007.
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. My apologies. And did you have a chance to review the statement
8 A. I did.
9 Q. Does this statement accurately reflect what you said to the
10 representatives of the Office of the Prosecutor in the course of the 6
11 February 2007 interview?
12 A. Yes, it did.
13 Q. And are the contents of the statement true to the best of your
14 knowledge and recollection?
15 A. Yes, to the best of my knowledge.
16 Q. Finally, if you were asked the same questions today in court that
17 you were asked on 6 February 2007
18 A. That, I thoroughly assume, yes.
19 MR. HEDARALY: Your Honour, at this time I would like to have
20 65 ter 5433 admitted into evidence pursuant to Rule 92 ter.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no objections, Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P888.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P888 is admitted into evidence.
24 MR. HEDARALY: I would also tender at this stage the six weekly
25 reports prepared by Mr. Leschly, covering the events of August and
1 September 1995
2 one at a time.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so so that we have them all on the record.
4 MR. HEDARALY: The first one is a weekly report dated 13th of
5 August, 1995
6 THE INTERPRETER: Counsel is kindly asked to slow down and to
7 make pauses between questions and answers. Thank you.
8 JUDGE ORIE: The next one would be, Mr. Hedaraly?
9 MR. HEDARALY: The next one will be 65 ter 4110, the weekly
10 report dated 20 August 1995
11 JUDGE ORIE: And the next one would be ...
12 MR. HEDARALY: 65 ter 4155, weekly report dated 27 August 1995.
13 JUDGE ORIE: After that?
14 MR. HEDARALY: 65 ter 4248, weekly report dated 17 September
16 JUDGE ORIE: And then?
17 MR. HEDARALY: 65 ter 2124, weekly report dated 24 September
19 JUDGE ORIE: And the last one?
20 MR. HEDARALY: 65 ter 4269, the weekly report dated 1 October
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, numbers in this sequence to be
23 assigned to these documents would be ...
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, these would be Exhibit number P889
25 up to and including P894.
1 JUDGE ORIE: P889 up to and including P894 are admitted into
3 You may proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.
4 MR. HEDARALY: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 I would like to read out a short summary of the evidence of the
6 witness contained in his statement to inform the public of the contents
7 of the witness statement that has just been admitted into evidence.
8 "Lennart Leschly was a field monitor for the European Community
9 Monitoring Mission
10 until April 1994. From October 1994 until January 1995, he worked in the
11 Information Section of the Croatia
12 officer for the ECMM in February 1995.
13 "On 6 July 1995
14 in Zagreb
15 various ECMM teams, including the team that was based in Knin after
16 Operation Storm.
17 "Based on the information contained in these reports, he produced
18 weekly summaries of the political, humanitarian, military, economic and
19 infrastructural situation in Croatia
20 headquarters in Zagreb
21 As the head of the Regional ECMM Centre in Zagreb, he met with a number
22 of civilian and military leaders in the Krajina, including
23 General Ante Gotovina, who he met in Knin in September 1995."
24 This concludes my summary, Your Honours.
25 Q. Mr. Leschly, can you please briefly explain to the Court the
1 reporting structure within ECMM, sort of the teams, the CC, the RCs and
2 the headquarters?
3 A. Yes. The starting point of reporting comes from the teams. The
4 teams are in the field. They conduct meetings and they report on their
5 findings, both facts and impressions. They send their report to a
6 coordination centre, so-called CC, that will typically have two, three,
7 four teams attached to it. The CC then will make their report and send
8 it on to the Regional Centre that will gather the information both from
9 the CC reports and the team reports. These reports all go to the
10 information section in the headquarters. That's where I was at the
12 all the reporting is gathered and used for the daily report which was
13 sent out to the foreign offices of the EU countries.
14 Q. And can you tell us, the teams that were reporting in the former
15 Sector South, which CC or RC did they come under?
16 A. All right. Well, we have to -- we have to distinct between
17 before late August 1995 and after. Before late August 1995, the
18 Regional Centre in Sector South was in Knin, and it was a regional centre
19 reporting directly to headquarters. And it was -- in that respect, it
20 was a colleague to Regional Centre Zagreb. So Regional Centre Knin did
21 not report to me until around 1st of September.
22 Q. Thank you. And you said that the teams reported directly to the
23 Regional Centre in Knin, but earlier you said that the teams would report
24 to a coordination centre. So was that an exception?
25 A. There was an exception. In Sector South, inside the RSK, there
1 were only three teams, and they would report directly to RC Knin, mainly
2 because of the geography. It was more practical. They were co-located.
3 On the other side of the frontline at that time, there were teams
4 in Split
5 Coordination Centre Zadar.
6 Q. And you mentioned there was a distinction before late August and
7 after late August, so what was the reporting situation after that change
8 was made?
9 A. When Regional Centre Knin was closed down, there were some
10 times -- I mean, today I can't quite remember in which order they
11 happened during these, well, couple of weeks. At a certain time, RC
12 Knin, still calling themselves "RC Knin," apparently showed up in Zadar,
13 but eventually it became a CC in Split
15 longer existed.
16 Q. And that CC in Split
17 A. Yeah.
18 MR. HEDARALY: Thank you.
19 Mr. Registrar, if we could have Exhibit P889 on the screen.
20 Q. And that is, Mr. Leschly, your weekly report of 13 August 1995,
21 which is the second tab in the package in front of you, and it's going to
22 come up on the screen for everyone else to see. And I want to ask you
23 about the summary of that -- of that report, in the top half, and it
25 "The Croatian execution of Operation Storm delivered to Croatia
1 exactly what the country wanted; land without people. It revealed HV as
2 equal to any other Balkan army when it comes to unnecessary looting and
3 brutality, and it created the largest single voluntary ethnic cleansing
4 during the entire Balkan conflict."
5 I'll just pause for the translation.
6 My first question for you, Mr. Leschly, is: What did you mean by
7 "voluntary," when you mentioned it in that summary?
8 A. I have to admit when I look at it now, it's perhaps not the
9 best-chosen word. "Voluntary," at that time, I'm quite sure I meant
10 "without putting up a real fight."
11 One could then argue that "voluntary" means that it is something
12 you do even if nobody had asked you to do it, and I'm quite sure that the
13 civilian population there did not want to leave, so the "voluntary" is,
14 you're right, it's not a very good word, but it was an ethnic cleansing
15 without any major fighting.
16 Q. So when you're talking about "without putting up a real fight,"
17 are you talking about the army of the former RSK?
18 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I just object to leading. If he wants
19 to ask him what he means, that's fine, but I don't want him putting words
20 in the witness's mouth.
21 MR. HEDARALY: I'm just trying to clarify the witness's answer.
22 JUDGE ORIE: The problem is that if there's no fight, it's
23 difficult to define between whom there was no fight. But you could ask
24 the witness who was involved in these events.
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. HEDARALY:
2 Q. Mr. Leschly, who didn't put up a real fight?
3 A. It was the army of the RSK. We had expected perhaps some more
4 fighting, because at some time earlier, I can't remember whether it was
5 July or June, there had been a parade in Sector North which apparently
6 was showing, from what one of our monitors had reported, a renewed
7 military strength inside the RSK, so on the basis of that observation it
8 was very noticeable how little resistance took place.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, isn't it true that there was a basis for
10 this question in the written statement?
11 MR. KEHOE: The answer to -- the question should be, "What do you
12 mean," don't say -- you know, give him the lead of exactly what
13 Mr. Hedaraly wants to say.
14 JUDGE ORIE: But isn't the lead not yet in the written statement
15 which is in evidence?
16 MR. KEHOE: It depends exactly what angle of that version. I
17 take it it's not just a written statement that we're discussing, but the
18 Prosecution --
19 JUDGE ORIE: No, no, but of course, if a clue to an answer of the
20 next question has been given already by the witness, then of course it's
21 rather a follow-up than leading the witness.
22 MR. KEHOE: But if we go back --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Let's --
24 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Your Honour. If we go back to the actual
25 question, the line, if we could put it down "without putting up a fight,"
1 that's not in the statement, if you look in the statement.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's proceed and not spend more time on the
4 MR. HEDARALY:
5 Q. If we go to the bottom of the page in this report, the last four
6 or five lines, and I'll read it to make sure I don't mischaracterize
7 anything and draw an objection, it says:
8 "At the time when it had become quite apparent that the methods
9 of the HV was as deplorable as those of the" and that's "Bosnian Serb
10 Army," "BSA, the US
11 disturbed earth in the Srebrenica area, pushing the Croatian stories down
12 the list of news worth covering."
13 Now, my question for you, Mr. Leschly, is: Are you equating what
14 happened in Srebrenica to what happened in the Krajina?
15 A. No. It's not nearly -- no, no, no, but there was at the time, if
16 I recall it correctly -- we are, as we all know, these 13 years back. An
17 interesting difference between the press coverage internationally of
18 atrocities made by one side and atrocities made by the other. But you're
19 absolutely right. Srebrenica, as we know today, is in a different league
20 from what happened in RSK.
21 Q. And what was so interesting about the difference between the
22 press coverage?
23 A. I'm -- now we get to the memory. I'll be 65 on Monday, so -- but
24 I remember one CNN bit where they claimed that some European observers,
25 which of course was us, had noticed something, and then after that it was
1 immediately turned down. That was in the Croatian area. And then came a
2 very, very thorough, for good reasons, coverage of Srebrenica, but it was
3 a noticeable sort of putting these two things up next to each other.
4 Q. If we just go to the third page of your report, that third full
5 paragraph, the first one under the heading "Humanitarian Situation,"
6 there is a figure there of 200.000 Krajina Serbs that you say had left.
7 Now, just to be clear, does that figure reflect both Sector North and
8 Sector South?
9 A. Yes, it does. From the best of my knowledge, I remember when I
10 arrived in 1993, the figures -- the figure that was normally mentioned
11 for the population of Krajina was 400.000, and then apparently quite a
12 lot had left during that period, so that the number in August 1995 was
13 then down to 200.000; not that any one of us were able to count it, but
14 that was the figure normally referred.
15 Q. Is if we can now go to --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly, I'd like to ask the witness: You said
17 the figure that was normally mentioned for the population of Krajina was
18 400.000 and then it went down to 200.000. Were you referring to the
19 whole of the population or were you referring to the Krajina Serbs?
20 THE WITNESS: Krajina Serbs.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, thank you.
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. HEDARALY: If we can go to P890, and that is your 20 August
24 weekly report in tab 3 of the package that you have. It's going to come
25 up on the screen soon, and I want to ask you about the first page, the
1 second paragraph, under "The Political Scene," the first two sentences:
2 "All through the Balkan conflicts, the creation of a Greater
4 there seems to be just as much relevance in talking about a Greater
6 Q. Can you please tell the Court what you meant by "Greater
8 A. Well, the word "Greater" here again perhaps is not the right one,
9 but Croatia
10 which of course hadn't been the case as long as Krajina existed. So it
11 was -- it was the Croatia
12 Q. And what about the composition of Croatia?
13 A. The composition, I'm not quite sure I understand the word. What
14 is put together of --
15 Q. I'm sorry. I meant the ethnic composition of Croatia.
16 A. Well, it was my impression all through -- as I mentioned also
17 earlier, that Croatia
19 Q. And did that impression -- was that impression related to you
20 using the term "Greater Croatia"?
21 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Your Honour, I just ask for facts. I mean
22 impressions, et cetera, is not facts.
23 JUDGE ORIE: You could ask for the source on which he based this
25 Please proceed.
1 MR. HEDARALY:
2 Q. Can you please tell the Court, what was the basis for this
3 impression, to the extent it was reported in your -- in this weekly
5 A. Right now, when I search my memory, I wouldn't be able to do
6 that. No, I don't know. Not a specific.
7 JUDGE ORIE: To the extent non-specific?
8 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I mean, in a mission like that, you know, you
9 talk and you meet people, and you discuss, and probably it came up at a
10 certain time. I can't even remember who it should be with. But the two
11 words -- yeah, the two words look similar, so Greater A, Greater B, and
12 I think it -- now I'm really digging deep. It was something like what
13 did not -- what Milosevic did not manage to do, Tudjman seemed to be able
14 to do.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, although there may be some confusion,
16 Mr. Hedaraly. I think you were asking about on what Mr. Leschly's
17 impression was based that Croatia
18 inside its border.
19 Could you tell us on what you based that impression, whether with
20 specific or less specific sources?
21 THE WITNESS: Well, I would say all through -- all through my
22 duties as a monitor, also in the first one which was in Sector South and
23 in Split
24 did not want to be part of Croatia
25 were not keen on having the Serbs inside their border. That was -- that
1 was a general trend all through all the meetings that we had with a lot
2 of people.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You're more or less confirming and, to some
4 extent, repeating your impression. The question was specifically about
5 your last answer. You said something about meetings. Meetings with
6 whom; what was said at these meetings? Either you have a specific
7 recollection on what was said on a certain meeting or you have a general
8 recollection of the kind of things said by ambassadors, by Croatian
9 authorities, by Bosnian authorities. I'm just -- that's what
10 Mr. Hedaraly is seeking and what might assist the Chamber.
11 THE WITNESS: Yeah, and I can just say that I -- I can't
12 recollect that.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.
14 MR. HEDARALY:
15 Q. I want to move on to a meeting that is ascribed in your statement
16 that you had with Mr. Gotovina. Can you, first of all, describe for the
17 Court what were the circumstances of that meeting, how it got organised
18 and so on?
19 A. Are we talking --
20 Q. I'm talking about a meeting in September.
21 A. In September. Where are we? We are --
22 Q. I'm just asking generally, from your recollection, what were the
24 A. Okay, yeah. When Regional Centre Knin was closed down and
25 Regional Centre Zagreb
1 a very natural thing that I, as head of that regional centre, toured the
2 area now under my area of responsibility, and met with the important
3 people in that area.
4 Q. And can you tell the Court who you met with as part of this trip?
5 A. I met with the chief of police in Gospic, Zupan in Zadar, the --
6 what was it. You're much better remembering names than I am. The --
8 MR. KEHOE: I want to help the witness. It's reflected in P893,
9 which is the witness's report of the 24th of September, 1995; 65 ter
10 2124, tab 5 in your book.
11 MR. HEDARALY: I wanted to ask the witness, without first
12 referring to his report, what his recollection was, but it's fine for
13 that -- for that purpose.
14 Q. Can you please tell the Court -- you referred to the Zupan of
15 Zadar in Zadar. Can you tell the Court what that is, what the position
17 A. Zupan is the head of a "zupanje," which I think the best English
18 word is "county."
19 Q. Now, going to the meeting itself that you had with Mr. Gotovina,
20 what was the -- what was the atmosphere in the meeting? Was it a formal
21 meeting, was it informal?
22 A. It was -- well, I think all of the meetings that we had with
23 people, they were always quite friendly and always, you know, a bit
24 relaxed, but then naturally, during these meetings once you get to
25 perhaps some of the more difficult points, then you may have periods
1 where the temperature cools down. But otherwise I think we tend to
2 always act in a polite way. We were a diplomatic mission, and therefore
3 we never wanted to create anything other than a good atmosphere between
4 the people with whom we meet or met.
5 Q. And throughout this series of meetings that you had in those days
6 with the various responsible people there, what was the -- what was the
7 main purpose -- or what was your main purpose in talking to them?
8 A. The purpose, of course, was to find out the new situation and
9 find out how they looked at it so that, and again back to our main
10 mission was to make sure that the European governments were as well
11 informed and briefed on matters in the former Yugoslavia.
12 Q. And what were the topics that you would generally bring up at
13 those meetings?
14 A. Well, what is the situation, any news, "What do you think
15 of ... " if there were any specific encounters. There might have been --
16 I can't remember specifically here. Now I'm talking on how did we
17 conduct our meetings and what did they expect from the future. Was there
18 any new developments that, you might even say, they would like Europe
19 know about.
20 Q. And referring specifically to your meeting with Mr. Gotovina, how
21 did that meeting start? What was the first -- what was the questions
22 or -- if you remember?
23 A. No, I mean, probably said, "Hello." I can't recollect any
24 specific opening remarks.
25 Q. If we go to your report that has been pointed out to you by
1 Mr. Kehoe, at P893, the second page, the bottom paragraph, you state in
2 your report:
3 "When Lieutenant General Gotovina, commander of the Split
4 Military District was asked if he shared the Zadar Zupan's opinion about
5 the need for a state of emergency in order to have avoided the killings,
6 lootings and burnings, his only remark was, 'What killings,' after which
7 he went into an attack."
8 Let me just stop here.
9 A. Yeah, this --
10 Q. No.
11 A. Okay.
12 Q. Let me just ask you, first of all, my first question. Do you
13 remember that portion of the conversation taking place?
14 A. Reading what I wrote some time right after the meeting means, of
15 course, I have a recollection of what basically took place, but if you
16 ask me about specific sentences and statements, I have to pass. But
17 there was no question about it that when it was mentioned about why do
18 these things take place, I must have thought at the time that
19 General Gotovina did not recognise killings or lootings or burnings.
20 I think that what -- "killings" covers these activities overall.
21 Q. I just want to make sure that it's not a translation issue or a
22 language. When you say --
23 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, excuse me. If we want to talk about a
24 specific translation, we're speaking English here. I don't believe that
25 there is any translation issue between two English speakers, so I would
1 object to going back into this.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, Mr. Hedaraly said, "It's not a
3 translation issue or language." I take it that translation must have
4 been a slip of the tongue, because there is no translation. If there's a
5 language issue, Mr. Hedaraly, you can raise the matter in several ways;
6 either by putting the question again, where you may have some doubt as to
7 whether it was fully understood. If you want to discuss or raise what
8 the language issue is, then we would have to ask the witness to leave the
9 courtroom so that the witness will not be influenced by your remarks.
10 MR. KEHOE: I will note that the witness did not raise a language
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly did, and please proceed, Mr. Hedaraly.
13 MR. HEDARALY: First of all, I want to clarify something that he
14 says, and this is my examination, so I'm entitled to clarify something
15 that the witness has said if I don't think it's clear.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I think I allowed you to proceed.
17 MR. HEDARALY: Thank you.
18 Q. What did you mean by -- I'll have to scroll back up now. Just a
19 second. What did you mean by, "General Gotovina did not recognise
20 killings or lootings or burnings"?
21 A. That when it was mentioned, he certainly did not say, "Yes, we
22 have been conducting lootings and burnings and killings." He rather
23 said, "What," as if it was something that was nonexistent. And when I
24 look at it today, what I'm saying is that if he had said, "What
25 killings," that doesn't mean that he has admitted lootings and burnings.
1 I think that covers general atrocities, if that's a better word.
2 Q. Then in your report, you go on to discuss another portion of the
3 meeting, where it says:
4 "New nations are naturally very nationalistic in the early
5 stages, and as he put it, once Sector East is home, he would possibly
6 become more liberal, but not for now."
7 What did you take that comment to mean?
8 A. Well, I -- I might have noticed this specifically, because I've
9 had some experience with new nations and nation-building. I lived five
10 years in Singapore
11 that they talked a lot about nation-building and what you need to do in
12 the early stages of a nation. And I come from Denmark with a
13 1.000-year-old monarchy still the same family ruling, so to me that is
14 something which I noticed, this thing about a new nation will do a lot to
15 build a nation and make its mark.
16 And once Sector East is home -- this is something I recall from
17 that period in time, that a lot of talk always came up about now, now
18 Sector West in May, Sector North and East -- and South in August. What
19 about Sector East? And when we talk about Croatia proper, then of
20 course, that should also include Sector East.
21 And from what I read here, this is now -- you know, we've -- as
22 if General Gotovina could have said that, "We are not quite there yet
23 because there's still a sector that needs to be included, and then once
24 it's included, maybe we didn't have to be so tough in our
25 nation-building." That's the way I recall it.
1 Q. And what do you mean by "tough in our nation-building"?
2 A. Well, I've written the word "liberal," so probably I think it's
3 something that we can't afford to be liberal in this early stage, but
4 this is now -- we're not talking fact. We're talking impressions of some
6 Q. Let me just clarify. In your report, when you said that "once
7 Sector East is home, he would possibly become more liberal," is that
8 something that Mr. Gotovina said that you reported?
9 A. I would expect so, since I wrote it down. But, I mean, we are 13
10 years back. I would think -- I would think so. And then as always with
11 these meetings, you hope that the interpreters are good, because --
12 because that's where I get it. I don't get it directly.
13 Q. And what did you take the word "liberal" to mean in this context?
14 A. Well, normally you would think easy-going, allowing some things
15 that you otherwise wouldn't allow, words to that extent.
16 Q. Do you remember who else was at that meeting?
17 A. Yes. From ECMM, we had the deputy head of the CC, who was an
18 Italian, and I can't remember his name. The other one was a monitor, and
19 I can remember his name because he happened to be a Dane, Stig
21 MR. HEDARALY: If we can have 65 ter 3419 on the screen, please.
22 You don't have a hard copy of that document. You'll have to look on the
24 Q. This is -- can you first please confirm what that document is?
25 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Counsel. I don't mean to interrupt. I do
1 believe that there was a disclosure from the Prosecution without the
2 redactions with regard to the authors here and 65 ter 3419.
3 MR. HEDARALY: That would have been an inadvertent disclosure.
4 This is how we were allowed by ECMM to use these documents, so --
5 MR. KEHOE: My apologies, Your Honour.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
7 MR. HEDARALY:
8 Q. Can you first of all tell the Court if you can recognise this
9 document or if you can say what it is?
10 A. Yes, I can. I saw it yesterday and I probably also saw it in
11 1995, but yeah.
12 Q. And can you tell the Court what it is?
13 A. Well, this is a team report from a team by the name of "Kilo 1,"
14 and "Kilo" is Knin. And they send it to the CC, which at that time was
16 the same time, and the other teams. And there you had the teams in
17 Zadar, Gospic, Bihac, Karlovac and Velika Kladusa. UNMOs, UNHCR unit
18 staff also get a report like this.
19 Q. And if we go to item 2, "Military Situation," it says "HRC
20 and TL K1 met General Gotovina." Can you explain who HRC, DHCC and TL K1
21 would be?
22 A. Well, I was HRC
24 might have it somewhere. And then you had the team leader of Team Kilo
25 1, and that was Stig Marker-Hansen.
1 Q. And if you look at the second paragraph under that heading, it
3 "Asked about the ongoing looting, arson and harassment, the
4 general's opinion is that police has to control the situation and Croatia
5 is still a nation with constitution, law and order. Any person
6 committing crimes will be charged. However, a war is always followed by
7 disasters and now things are under control."
8 I'll just pause here for a second, and I want you to focus on
9 this last part:
10 "The general has no objection for Serbs to live in Croatia
11 he regards as a human feeling to hate an enemy who has burned, looted and
12 expelled one's family. The war will not be stopped by nice words of
13 international organisations. Only a strong Croatian Army can do that."
14 Now, is that consistent with your recollection of that meeting?
15 A. Yes, it is, although we do not write in exactly the same way. It
16 is very much the same. When I said something like "too early to become
17 liberal," I think that is supported by "only a strong Croatian Army can
18 do that." That means to be sure that things are under control.
19 MR. HEDARALY: Thank you, Mr. Leschly.
20 I have no further questions, Your Honour.
21 MR. KEHOE: Just, counsel, if you will, I don't know if you're
22 going to offer that document into evidence, but ...
23 MR. HEDARALY: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe. Yes, I would like to tender
24 that document, 2D419.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Which gives you an opportunity to tell me whether
1 you object or not.
2 MR. KEHOE: No, Your Honour, I was going to offer it myself if
3 they didn't. I just assumed that counsel was going to. It was on the
4 65 ter list.
5 Mr. Registrar.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P895.
7 JUDGE ORIE: P895 is admitted into evidence.
8 Mr. Leschly, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Kehoe.
9 Mr. Kehoe is counsel for Mr. Gotovina.
10 You may proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
11 MR. KEHOE: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
13 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Leschly. Mr. Leschly, I just would like to
14 take you through a flow chart of -- excuse me -- of ECMM, and I'd ask you
15 if you'd take a look at this and tell me if it's incorrect in any
17 So if I could bring up 1D 530007.
18 Now, Mr. Leschly, this is a flow chart that we have developed
19 from the ECMM documents we've prepared, and of course this is before the
20 reorganisation that you talked about on direct examination. And I'd just
21 ask you to take a look at this. And frankly, Mr. Leschly, it appears to
22 be correct, with the particular individuals involved.
23 A. Yeah, those -- those few, I actually remember the names, they are
24 correct, and the others are not in my brain.
25 Q. But the head of the ECMM at the time was Mr. Sanchez Rau from
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. I guess maybe I'll ask this question in the back way. Do you see
4 anything wrong with this particular document?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Now, let me flip to the next page, and what I've done -- we have
7 done - again this is prior to page 2 of this document, please - and this
8 is again prior to the organisation, that we're just giving you a snapshot
9 of RC Zagreb and RC Knin. Is that basically the structure that you had?
10 A. Yeah.
11 Q. Now, Mr. Leschly, as part of your duties, and you were the head
12 of the Regional Centre Zagreb, but you were also head of the Danish
13 delegation. I think they call it Dan-Del; is that right?
14 A. Well, not ECMM.
15 Q. Well, you were head of the Danish delegation?
16 A. Danish delegation, yes, head of the delegation, HOD, head of
17 delegation. That was the normal abbreviation.
18 Q. I've just seen the variation called -- an acronym for the Danish
19 delegation called Dan-Del, but maybe not. Okay. And the individual that
20 I have in Topusko here is Mr. Ben Jensen. Do you recall him?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And he was part of the Danish delegation, and Topusko was in RSK
23 area then, was it not?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And I think the other individual, for instance, down in Knin, in
1 Knin was Soren Liborius; is that right?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. And they reported to Mr. Augarde?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Do you remember Mr. Augarde?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Did you confer with Mr. Augarde over the time when you were RC
9 A. Yes. As you can see from here, at this time we were two, well,
10 colleagues. He had his regional centre and I had my regional centre, so
11 at this time we were -- we were, both of us, reporting to headquarters.
12 And later on, when Knin was closed down, then you have a different setup.
13 Q. Now, did you confer with Mr. Augarde during your time when he was
14 the HRC
15 A. What do you mean by "confer"; that we would compare notes before
16 report-writing, because in that respect I would say, no. We did our own
17 reporting, and that would then meet in headquarters.
18 Q. I'm talking more about just discussing matters with Mr. A ugarde.
19 A. Yeah, but we -- we didn't have that many meetings. We -- we took
20 care of our own area.
21 Q. Now, under "U", the various coordination centres, and just
22 looking at Mr. Jensen in Topusko, you relied heavily on those
23 individuals who were in the coordination centres for the information you
24 were receiving; is that not correct?
25 A. That is correct, because these were our eyes out in the field.
1 Q. Now, let me just go to the next chart, which is what I believe is
2 the situation after the changes within ECMM. If we can go to the third
4 Once again, Mr. Leschly, if you could take a look at this, and to
5 the extent that you can advise us of anything that is incorrect in an y
6 fashion to the best of your recollection.
7 A. Yes. I would like to say to the best of my recollection, I
8 wouldn't be able to draw that myself now, but when I look at it, it
9 doesn't look wrong.
10 MR. KEHOE: Okay. Based on that answer, Your Honour, we'll offer
11 into evidence, 1D 530007.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
13 MR. HEDARALY: Your Honour, the fact that the witness can't see
14 anything wrong with it after examining it for a few minutes, when he
15 clearly does not recollect anything, does not authenticate this flow
16 chart, so for that reason I'd be very cautious that it be admitted for
17 the purpose that is there without the underlying material used for that.
18 I mean, to the extent the witness can confirm some of the organisation,
19 it's fine, but he's saying -- but then Mr. Kehoe changed his question,
20 "Did you see anything wrong with it," and he looks at it for 30 seconds
21 or a minute and says, "I'm not sure, I can't remember." I think we have
22 to be careful.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Is this about weight or admission?
24 MR. HEDARALY: It's about admission, the authentication of this
1 JUDGE ORIE: When we're talking about documents, authentication
2 is -- I think it's clear that it's a document created by the Defence, so
3 I think that unless you would like to make any dispute about who made
4 that document. But perhaps I have a wrong understanding of what
5 "authenticity" means, bit I always understood that to be that can we --
6 is there any doubt as to where this document came from, who created it,
7 et cetera? Is that the issue?
8 MR. HEDARALY: No, if that's Your Honour's view, then it's fine.
9 Then it should go to weight, but it should be --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. If you have any other perception of what
11 "authenticity" means, because I do understand that authenticity may be an
12 admissibility issue, but then I want to understand what you actually
14 MR. HEDARALY: Very simple. To the extent that it's about what
15 the witness says about this document that gives this document its value,
16 that's the concern.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The witness says that the Defence is not -- from his
18 recollection, he has not seen anything wrong. I can imagine that you
19 would not give much weight to that if there is no support elsewhere in
20 the evidence for this, but then it's a matter of weight.
21 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, frankly, the Defence jointly just wants
22 to get this document correct. It comes from the documents that we
23 received during the course of this, and if the OTP -- I -- even if they
24 dispute any line in here, certainly we'll amend it.
25 JUDGE ORIE: It seems to be a matter on which the parties could,
1 if it's accurate, could easily agree without spending time on it in
2 court, Mr. Hedaraly, because of course we --
3 MR. HEDARALY: It's the first time I see this document,
4 Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm not blaming you for immediately saying, "I
6 do agree," but these are typically matters on which I would expect the
7 parties to see whether they could agree, rather than that we have to
8 discuss on whether there were 30 seconds or 45 seconds available for the
9 witness to look at it and to come to the conclusion that he has not
10 discovered any inaccuracy in it.
11 Please proceed.
12 The matter going to weight. Mr. Registrar, the --
13 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this becomes Exhibit number D797.
14 JUDGE ORIE: D797 is admitted into evidence.
15 MR. KEHOE:
16 Q. Mr. Leschly, I'd like to talk to you a bit about the reports that
17 you have, and like the Prosecution, I'm interested in your first report
18 of the 13th of September, where you talk, in the summary, about the
19 situation involving Storm -- excuse me, the 13th of August, I apologise.
20 You write the report for the period of time of 6 August to 12 August, and
21 you're talking about the largest single voluntary ethnic cleansing during
22 the entire Balkan war. And I'm interested, sir, in the word "voluntary."
23 Now, if I may, sir, prior to this you were well aware of the
24 situation in Western Slavonia in an operation that was known as
25 Operation Flash; is that right?
1 A. M'mm-hmm, yes.
2 Q. And I'd like to show you a document, and it is D60. This is a
3 United Nations report dated 5 July 1995
4 page of that document, under the item "Refugees."
5 Now, you recall, do you not, Mr. Leschly, that Operation Flash
6 took place in May of 1995; correct?
7 A. M'mm-hmm.
8 Q. And let me just read this item for you from July of 1995:
9 "During the first two days of military operation, as many as
10 10.000 people fled from the Serb-held area of Western Slavonia, mostly
11 from the Okucani area, across the Sava River bridge into northern Bosnia
12 and Herzegovina
13 evacuation drills, and there are reports that some of the refugees may
14 have been forced into leaving against their will."
15 Now, tell me, before we move on to the next bit, about the
16 regular evacuation drills that were being held in Western Slavonia. Do
17 you know anything about that, sir?
18 A. No.
19 Q. You didn't learn anything about that during your time as --
20 A. It doesn't ring any bell to me today. I see this report, as far
21 as I know, for the first time. There were quite a lot of reports, so
22 I can only say that, yeah, that's taken place.
23 Q. Putting this report aside, if you will, do you recall learning at
24 the time that the --
25 JUDGE ORIE: I'm sorry, could I first ask: You're looking at a
1 report. You say that's taken place. At the same time, you say, "I don't
2 know anything about it, I haven't learned about it." Is it your
3 testimony now that you say that this report says that this took place and
4 that you take it for face value or do you have anything to add from what
5 you learned from other sources? I would like to have your testimony
6 clear on this issue.
7 THE WITNESS: Inasmuch as I haven't seen this before and as much
8 as I was not very much involved in that area at all, I do not have any
9 substantial knowledge that can either turn it down or accept it. What I
10 more or less said was, this is a report, yeah, well --
11 JUDGE ORIE: You say it's in the report, it's there?
12 THE WITNESS: Yeah, yeah, yes. I don't have any -- any strong
13 opinion on it, because I wasn't involved in this at all.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, please proceed.
15 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
16 Q. Putting the report aside for a moment, Mr. Leschly, did you ever
17 learn anything about the fact that the RSK had been conducting regular
18 evacuation drills in Western Slavonia?
19 A. No, that's -- it's new to me. I mean, if I search --
20 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just -- I think that question was answered.
21 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I was trying to put the report aside. I
22 mean, I understand that --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but then if you put a report which says there
24 were evacuation drills, then you ask the witness, "Do you know anything
25 about it," the witness says, "No," then I verify whether he has any
1 knowledge, apart from looking at it, at that document, and I say, "Put
2 the document aside. Do you know anything about evacuation drills?"
3 MR. KEHOE: You're right. I'm trying to clarify based on what is
4 in the document, and --
5 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers]... I just said --
6 MR. KEHOE: I understand, Judge, but I'm trying to conduct this
7 cross-examination to put it aside and to just ask him about whether or
8 not he knows about the evacuation drills, report aside.
9 Q. Now, Mr. Leschly --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Repetitious questions, whether in chief or in cross,
11 is similarly a bad use of our time.
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
14 Q. Mr. Leschly, were you aware of an initiative by the UN called
15 "Operation Safe Passage," where the United Nations assisted Serbs from
16 Western Slavonia to leave the area?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Now, let me show you something. This is a video D136, and we're
19 moving now into the Krajina in July of 1995. This is, in fact, a video
20 from July of 1995, if I may.
21 [Videotape played]
22 MR. KEHOE: Stop right at this point.
23 Q. Now, during the time, Mr. Leschly, when you were in RC Knin --
24 excuse me, Zagreb
25 into evidence as evacuation drills being conducted by the RSK, were you
1 aware that the RSK was conducting evacuation drills prior to
2 Operation Storm?
3 A. No.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
5 MR. HEDARALY: I mean, that -- he answered the question.
6 JUDGE ORIE: The witness has answered the question. It's for a
8 Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
9 MR. KEHOE: Yes. Let us turn attention to D138.
10 Q. Now, sir, this is a report from 31 July 1995. If we can just
11 blow that up. And I'm interested in -- this has to do with preparations
12 for evacuation. If we can go to the middle of that page, starting with
13 the word "Special," do you see that, sir?
14 A. "Special emphasis"?
15 Q. "Special emphasis and the measures and actions that they are
16 obliged to take in this regard. Special emphasis was put on sheltering
17 and preparatory actions for an evacuation. The commission has completed
18 their task reports from all local communes were submitted to the
19 municipal Civilian Protection Staff today. Lists of people to evacuate
20 have been updated. The fuel distributed in November 1994 has been
21 checked, as has the roadworthiness of vehicles."
22 Now, did the people that you had down in any of your regional
23 centres in the Krajina tell you about, in their interfacing with the RSK
24 administration, that these preparations, putting lists together, checking
25 fuel, checking the worthiness of vehicles, that they were doing that in
1 preparations for an evacuation, before Storm even occurred? Did they
2 tell you that?
3 A. The way I remember it today, no, I don't -- I don't recall that,
4 as I think it -- it would have -- it would have not been consistent,
5 I think, with the impressions that we got. But I wouldn't -- I mean,
6 yes, there's bound to be some reports that I have missed 13 years ago,
7 that today I wouldn't know. But it was not a major thing that was
9 I had another report -- you mentioned Ben Jensen, and he reported
10 about a military parade which he very much thought showed that now the
11 RSK, contrary to what at a certain time we thought, was able to put up
12 some resistance. So -- and, again, as we have -- earlier today, I have
13 explained the word "voluntary." That does -- I mean, this is a wrong
14 word used, because it never, even in my mind, meant the civilian
15 population voluntarily leaving, but it was -- there was no military real
17 Q. So is it your testimony, Mr. Leschly, that as you sit here now,
18 you do not know anything about evacuation preparations that were made by
19 the RSK prior to Operation Storm?
20 A. I wouldn't rule out that it could have been mentioned somewhere,
21 but it's -- it's -- if I had been asked to say were there evacuation
22 exercises like that, I would probably say, "No," today.
23 Q. Turning your attention to the actual day of Operation Storm, and
24 if we can just put on the screen D137, which is the evacuation order
25 signed by Milan Martic at 1645 on the 4th. This was the evacuation order
1 of 1645 on the 4th, where in item 1 President Martic talks about the
2 planned evacuation; item 2, the evacuation to be carried out in a planned
3 manner according to existing plan direction, are you familiar with that
4 evacuation order?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Is it a situation, Mr. Leschly, that you don't recall or your
7 people in Knin did not inform you?
8 A. I -- I don't recall having been informed about this. We know
9 that the civilians, of course, left, and then as always when somebody
10 goes on the move, they probably try to do it in as orderly a fashion as
11 possible. But any specific paperwork behind that is something that I
12 haven't come across.
13 Q. My question to you, more specifically, is: Did the people in
14 Knin tell you that the RSK authorities told the civilian population to
15 evacuate according to the evacuation plan that they had established?
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
17 MR. HEDARALY: If he doesn't recall, how can he ask him if he was
18 informed? He just said he doesn't recall.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. First of all, Mr. Kehoe, it's now the second
20 time that you ask this question, and we all saw the witness struggling to
21 see whether there was anything on his mind that could assist him.
22 MR. KEHOE: I'll move ahead, Judge.
23 JUDGE ORIE: And then to ask a witness, "Were you not informed or
24 do you have no recollection," of course is a question which --
25 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE ORIE: -- would never provide any additional information.
2 Please proceed.
3 MR. KEHOE:
4 Q. In Sector North, do you recall the RSK requesting the assistance
5 of the UN to evacuate the civilian population?
6 A. No.
7 MR. KEHOE: If I may, I could to this from the bar table, Judge,
8 rather than taking any time now. It's just a document that I will share
9 with counsel, a UN document.
10 Q. Now, when you wrote this report back in -- and I'm talking about
11 P889. When you wrote this report concerning the voluntary ethnic
12 cleansing, you make no mention in the preface of this that this pertains
13 to the voluntary ethnic cleansing, meaning the army, do you?
14 A. I didn't quite get that.
15 Q. Well, when you say "voluntary ethnic cleansing," what you've told
16 us today is -- and I turn to your statement that voluntary was -- and
17 this is paragraph 14, "was the early withdrawal of the army." Is that
18 what you said?
19 A. No. What I meant was that it really meant that there wasn't any
20 now I say major fighting. I have to say that was probably more of the --
21 some of the more civilian in the ECMM. Quite a lot the others were
22 serving officers. I wasn't. A bit too civilian there. But the fight
23 that they might have put up, based on, for instance, this military parade
24 that had been a month earlier, didn't happen, and that's why I write
1 I may also cast a little light over the report I have seen,
2 because one of the -- one of the interesting things about early August
3 was that I was on leave when Operation Storm started, so reports coming
4 on the 4th and the 5th of August would have arrived in Zagreb while I was
5 in Denmark
6 I left, but I was necessary in Denmark
7 had a very able deputy, [indiscernible].
8 So there could have been some reports during those days where I
9 was in Denmark
10 the 9th or 10th, something like that, and so therefore this was sort of
11 based on what I then picked up on when I came back.
12 Q. Mr. Leschly, who was voluntarily ethnically cleansed?
13 A. Put that way, I would probably say nobody, because nobody wants
14 to be ethnically cleansed.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I think the question was which ethnicity, because
16 when you're talking about ethnic cleansing, you're talking about an
17 ethnicity which was cleansed? No, no, wait.
18 THE WITNESS: What word was that? Is that the ethnic background
19 or --
20 JUDGE ORIE: The ethnic background of those who apparently, you
21 said, were voluntarily cleansed.
22 THE WITNESS: Well, this is what I have tried now -- we're at the
23 fourth time to withdraw that word when it comes to the Serb population.
24 I would like to withdraw that word, because I realise, of course, that
25 it's not -- it's not a good word, and it should be reinterpreted into
1 that there wasn't a major fight put up to avoid the leaving of -- and
2 then the number of 200.000, I don't know, but that was a number we very
3 often heard.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
5 MR. KEHOE:
6 Q. Mr. Leschly, in your statement, which is, if I may, P888, at
7 paragraph 14, you say, in the last line, that the term "voluntary" was
8 the early withdrawal of the ARSK. Do you see that?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Now --
11 MR. HEDARALY: I'm sorry, Your Honour. "Do you see that?" I
12 want to make sure the witness has it in front of him, but it's not on the
14 THE WITNESS: I see that, but it's just been written.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Of course, we have it. Do you have your statement?
16 If not, it could be provided to you so that you can read paragraph 14.
17 Yes, that's your statement, apparently at least from what I can
18 see at this distance. If you would just go to the page 3.
19 THE WITNESS: Okay.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Do you find number 14?
21 THE WITNESS: 14, okay, yes.
22 Yes, I want to say in relation to the military. It was certainly
23 not the population that voluntarily -- but the military, that from where
24 we looked at it in the international, they did not put up a very
25 dedicated resistance.
1 MR. KEHOE:
2 Q. Well, as we can see --
3 A. Somebody might disagree, but that was the way it looked.
4 Q. As we can see, there's no mention of that in your statement that
5 you wrote at the time, and my question is: With regard to this
6 "voluntarily ethnically cleansed," are you talking about the Serb
7 civilians, the military, or both?
8 MR. HEDARALY: I'm sorry, Your Honour. I would say the witness
9 has now answered this five times.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it has been addressed a couple of times. I'm
11 just wondering what would be the best way.
12 Mr. Leschly, apparently we all are trying to understand what you
13 say in paragraph 14 to the best of our abilities. Now, there are several
14 aspects in this statement, in this one.
15 When you say they launched single voluntary ethnic cleansing, you
16 said "I meant that in relation to the military." There seems to be two
17 issues. First, ethnically cleansing on a voluntary basis apparently
18 refers to people leaving an area. Now, when you were talking about
19 ethnic cleansing, were you referring to the people as civilian
20 population, or the military, or both?
21 THE WITNESS: Mainly, the civilian, and this is where the word
22 "voluntary," I mean, it should be removed, because it's something which,
23 in my mind, related to the military, which is the thing that I -- I
24 never -- in comparison to a lot of my colleagues, I was very little into
25 the military aspect of it, because I was civilian at that time.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I thought I understood your explanation and the
2 language you used in your statement to tell us and it has been dealt with
3 today as well, that you use the word "voluntary," primarily, but --
4 correct me when I'm wrong, but primarily to express that the people
5 leaving the area were not forced to leave by combat activity, and that to
6 that extent it was voluntary, where you say it may not have been of their
7 own free will to leave, because as you earlier told us, who would want to
8 leave? Is that how I have to understand that basic --
9 THE WITNESS: Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- what you basically say in paragraph 14?
11 THE WITNESS: Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Then if the parties would like to seek further
13 positions, please. Mr. Kehoe.
14 MR. KEHOE:
15 Q. So just to clarify this, the "voluntary" pertains to the army,
16 and the "ethnic cleansing" pertains to the civilians?
17 A. Yes, that -- yeah.
18 Q. But the civilians didn't leave because anybody forced them to
19 leave; they left when the army was leaving?
20 A. Because the situation forced it, you might say.
21 Q. Well, let us continue on with your report, I mean, just staying
22 with this 889. This comment that the -- in the second line:
23 "The Croatian execution of Operation Storm delivered to Croatia
24 exactly what the country wanted; a land without people."
25 Now, the comment "land without people," now, did you get that
1 comment from Mr. Jensen?
2 A. It might be. I mean, I will not say "yes," but I will say that I
3 would not rule that out, because that could have been -- the way I know
4 him, it could have been something he could have said.
5 Q. And do you know if Mr. Jensen got it from Milan Martic?
6 A. No, I don't.
7 Q. Do you know that?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Okay.
10 A. I have no recollection of it.
11 Q. Now, when you talked about this in paragraph 12 of your
12 statement, if you can, you said that:
13 "When I said that the country wanted land without people, it was
14 based on what I had read, heard and later what I had experienced ..."
15 Now, when you wrote this report on the 13th of August, 1995
16 hadn't been to Sector South since Operation Storm, had you?
17 A. No.
18 Q. And you wrote this -- if I read what you say correctly, this
19 comment that you wrote on the 13th of August about Croatia wanting a land
20 without people was written before you say you later experienced it; isn't
21 that right?
22 A. I don't quite understand what you're saying.
23 Q. Read your --
24 JUDGE ORIE: If I try to understand the question, is that
25 Mr. Kehoe is asking you, but please correct me when I'm wrong, whether
1 you wrote that and that the reference to the later experience, that you
2 had not had that experience yet. Is that --
3 MR. KEHOE: That's right.
4 JUDGE ORIE: So you wrote about -- now, it's perfectly unclear to
5 me, Mr. Kehoe. Perhaps I leave it to you to put the question in such a
6 way that the witness and, preferably, the Chamber as well understand the
8 THE WITNESS: I have to say that today I cannot recall my
9 whereabouts in those days, but I wouldn't rule out -- I can't make it
10 more precise than that -- that I had been down to Sector North when I
11 returned from Denmark
12 MR. KEHOE: Well, sir -- I'm sorry.
13 Q. The fact is that you wrote it, and you wrote in paragraph 12, you
14 then -- that statement is based on what you experienced after you wrote
15 it? Isn't that what you said in your report -- in your statement in
16 paragraph 12?
17 A. Well, paragraph 12 here of course is -- that's something from
18 February last year.
19 Q. I understand, sir. Read the first sentence to yourself.
20 A. Oh, okay. It says later what I had experienced, so, yes, it is
22 Further down in 12, there is another thing which is really --
23 again, like the "voluntary," I shouldn't have put it like that, "the
24 actions on the ground as personally observed." I would say that what I
25 personally observed was not action, because ECMM was normally kept away
1 if there was any kind of military action. So that is -- that is a wrong
2 expression to say "personally observe," because what I could personally
3 observe was the evidence after things. We saw the slaughtered livestock.
4 We saw burned houses and things like that. I was not near any kind of
5 military action.
6 Q. And when you wrote here that it's based on what you have heard,
7 the person you were hearing this from, in part, was Mr. Jensen?
8 A. Could be. I would not rule that out.
9 Q. Let me bring up 1D 410149. This is a statement taken by the
10 Office of the Prosecutor that was offered in the Martic case -- excuse
11 me, the Milosevic case. The individual's name is Slobodan Lazarevic.
12 MR. KEHOE: We will, Your Honour, just offer this for
13 identification at this time, and we will offer this pursuant to 92 bis,
14 after the proper certifications for 92 bis are set forth.
15 JUDGE ORIE: And then the question arises whether it should be
16 92 bis or 92 ter.
17 MR. KEHOE: We will make a motion pursuant to I believe it would
18 be 92 bis, Your Honour. Mr. Lazarevic doesn't talk specifically about
19 any of the accused in this matter, so I think we can meet the hurdles or
20 the qualifications of 92 ter. But be that as it may, at this point we'd
21 just like this --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly, at this moment this statement
23 Mr. Kehoe wants to put to the witness, may I take it that there is no
24 objection against that?
25 MR. HEDARALY: As long as the proper procedure is followed, that
1 the matter was put to the witness first.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That the matter is first raised with the witness.
3 But it might be that it has -- I do not know yet what you're going to put
4 to the witness, Mr. Kehoe, so therefore if there is anything in the
5 statement you want to put to the witness which has not yet been raised
6 with him, you're invited to do so first, but it might well be that you
7 have already extensively dealt with the matter you have put to him.
8 MR. KEHOE: I have not.
9 JUDGE ORIE: You have not.
10 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Then please first raise the issue with the witness,
12 and if there is any need, then put Mr. Lazarevic's statement to the
14 MR. HEDARALY: Your Honour, just one additional point.
15 I mean, for the procedure to actually have a point, it shouldn't
16 even mention that there's a witness statement that he wants to be shown
17 and ask for the procedure, the matter should be put forth. Otherwise,
18 it's relatively pointless.
19 JUDGE ORIE: But is done has been done. Mr. Kehoe is now invited
20 to raise the issue with this witness before putting any statement to the
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. KEHOE:
24 Q. Mr. Leschly, we talked about Mr. Jensen on the flow chart being
25 in Topusko and that the Topusko office was in ARSK territory. Was
1 Mr. Jensen collaborating with the Serb authorities?
2 A. That, I don't think. He spent a lot of time with them, no
3 question about that, and talked about that, but the word "collaborate"
4 means, you know, "do you want me to do something for you?" That, I
5 doubt. I know -- I know he was -- he was certainly among the Danes, the
6 one that was most pro-Serb, and he didn't hide that. I have to say that.
7 But directly collaborate, na, I will not believe that.
8 Q. Did you know that Mr. Jensen was showing his reports to RSK
9 officials before he sent them up to Zagreb?
10 A. That, I'm not aware of, no.
11 Q. Do you know his interpreter? Her name is Tanja Zoric. Do you
12 know her?
13 A. Doesn't ring a bell, no. I could have met her, certainly.
14 Q. Well, you don't recall her at all?
15 A. No, no.
16 Q. Do you know whether or not Mr. Jensen was provided with a
17 girlfriend by the RSK Intelligence Service?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Did you know that the RSK or the Serb Intelligence Service was
20 working inside the ECMM to obstruct the work of the ECMM?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Let me show you this statement by Mr. Lazarevic and see if it can
23 clarify matters in any fashion.
24 If we can turn to page 10 of this document.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, I'm looking at the clock. Perhaps -- I
1 didn't want to interrupt you in the last series of questions, but if we
2 start now looking at documents, I think we first should have a break.
3 We'll have a break, and we'll resume at half past 4.00.
4 --- Recess taken at 4.10 p.m.
5 --- On resuming at 4.32 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, the Chamber has considered what we would
7 expect you to do now, because you have the statement of Mr. Lazarevic
8 apparently in your hands. We've got no idea what's in there, although --
9 well, "no idea" is too much, but what the Chamber would avoid to happen
10 is that you put to the witness what other people might think about
11 persons, for example, to be found in that statement, if this witness has
12 no knowledge of the factual basis on which the other person has formed
13 his opinion or his conclusions. So, therefore, the Chamber invites you
14 to first focus on factual elements that may be in that statement, rather
15 than on the conclusions, and to first verify whether those factual
16 elements are known to this witness, whether he has -- if they are known,
17 whether he has included -- whether he has included them in the thinking
18 which is at the basis of his previous answers, because he was quite clear
19 on Mr. Jensen. So, therefore, please focus on factual elements rather
20 than on conclusions of other persons, on the basis of facts this witness
21 might not know anything about. That should be verified first --
22 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
23 JUDGE ORIE: -- as guidance for your next line of questions.
24 Please proceed.
1 Q. Now, Mr. Leschly, you told us that Mr. Jensen was very pro-Serb,
2 and tell us a bit about why you concluded that Mr. Jensen was very
4 A. Well, he said so.
5 Q. What did he say, exactly?
6 A. Oh, that I don't know.
7 Q. And let me take the word "exactly" out of that. Basically, what
8 did he tell you?
9 A. I don't know. We talked a lot of words 13 years ago, and I
10 couldn't be able to -- but he never -- he never made it a secret that he
11 thought that the RSK was okay and should be allowed to be maintained. As
12 well, he started in Sector East, so his first posting was out there. I
13 mean, specific words, I don't know.
14 Q. But your general impression, in talking to him, was he was very
15 much in favour of the position of the Krajina Serbs?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, I don't want to rehash old ground, but you noted for us that
18 you didn't know Tanja Zoric, his interpreter?
19 A. That's to say I'm certain that I met her, because when I visited
20 him and when we met, then he would very often of course be with his
21 interpreter, as we all did, but --
22 Q. And I mentioned to you, if you knew that the Intelligence Service
23 for the RSK had provided Mr. Jensen with a girlfriend, and let me just
24 take that one step further. Do you know if Mr. Jensen had a Serb
25 girlfriend by the name of Jelena?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Now, during the course of Mr. Jensen being in Topusko, did you
3 know that the RSK provided him with a house and a police guard so it
4 looked like a miniature Danish embassy?
5 A. No, I certainly did not. He's managed to keep that quite secret.
6 He's a policeman, so he should know how to do that.
7 Q. How to do what?
8 A. Well, I don't know, make sure that only what he thinks should be
9 known outside is known outside.
10 Q. So if Mr. Lazarevic has told the Office of the Prosecutor that
11 Mr. Jensen would draft reports for the ECMM and show them to the RSK
12 first to see if they agreed with them, that would be something that he
13 would hide from you?
14 A. Yes, that I take it, because I hadn't heard it before.
15 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, being guided by what Your Honour had to
16 say, I do have some passages in this statement to highlight for the
17 Chamber. I am --
18 JUDGE ORIE: If it's highlighting for us, then I would rather
19 wait for the 92 bis application. We will then see what is in the
20 statement. We will then hear from the Prosecution when they -- whether
21 they think that it would be admissible evidence without
22 cross-examination, and then we'll see the highlighted portions. You can
23 highlight them then.
24 MR. KEHOE: Yes, sir.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
1 MR. KEHOE: One last issue with regard to Mr. Jensen.
2 Q. Mr. Jensen, after he left the Krajina and went to the ECMM office
3 in Bosnia
4 interpreter, from the Topusko office to Bosnia? Did you know that?
5 A. No, no.
6 Q. Now, one last issue with regard to Mr. Jensen. During the course
7 of your conversations with Mr. Jensen, did he inform you that he had
8 obtained the plans for Operation Storm and that he had provided the ARSK
9 with it?
10 A. No, certainly not.
11 MR. KEHOE: We can come back to that in one second. May I have a
13 [Defence counsel confer]
14 MR. KEHOE:
15 Q. Now, the other person --
16 JUDGE ORIE: Microphone.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
18 MR. KEHOE: I'm sorry.
19 Q. The other person that you relied upon as part of the Danish
20 delegation was Soren Liborius; is that right?
21 A. Well, yes, but I would object to the phrase that I would rely
22 more on compatriots than on other monitors. I would not be utterly
23 favourable towards a fellow Dane. Yes, of course we could speak our own
24 language, but apart from that, I hope that I dealt with all monitors in
25 the same way.
1 Q. Now, in the course of your report, 889, in the first paragraph --
2 excuse me -- yeah, in the first paragraph -- before I ask you a specific
3 question: These reports are weekly reports, assessments, and they're
4 designed to do what, Mr. Leschly?
5 A. Well, it was something I inherited, that HRC is supposed to
6 summarise on a weekly basis. It was something which didn't really link
7 into the normal proceedings where you had the teams to the CCs, to the
8 RCs, to the daily report, because the main thing that left the mission
9 was the daily report. So I think this -- well, this was a tradition you
10 did that, and that was handed to the headquarters, and they used it for
11 some special report, if need be, that they might produce.
12 Q. Now, this is basically giving the headquarters a snapshot of
13 what's happening during that week; isn't that right?
14 A. M'mm-hmm, yes.
15 Q. And in the paragraph that you have on the first one, you complain
16 about the Serbs using their flag and the particular currency. Do you see
17 that on your 889? Do you see that, sir?
18 A. Well, apparently you have another numbering system than I do.
19 Q. I'm talking about the Croats -- I'm talking about 889, your
20 report of the 13th of August --
21 A. 889, I see nowhere.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, 889 is an exhibit number.
23 MR. KEHOE: Yes, P889.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Well, we could not expect this witness to remember
25 the exhibit numbers.
1 MR. KEHOE: I understand.
2 Q. Witness, it's your report of the 13th of August.
3 A. Okay, yeah, that's the one called --
4 MR. HEDARALY: [Overlapping speakers]... 2.
5 THE WITNESS: R 0265056?
6 MR. KEHOE:
7 Q. That's it, in that paragraph. You're complaining about the flag
8 and the currency? Do you see that?
9 A. Okay, yeah, yes. So what?
10 Q. I mean, are those yet more complaints coming from Mr. Jensen
11 about what the Krajina Serbs are complaining about?
12 A. No. I think this was actually, in general, something that I met
13 right from the beginning. Now, my first stationing was in Knin, so you
14 can imagine that's where I heard it, and I heard it from Krajina Serbs.
15 Q. And when was that?
16 A. That was in 1993.
17 Q. And this is in 1995?
18 A. Yeah, but this is -- this is something that came on all the time.
19 I mean, this was -- that was normal. It's not something which is linked
20 up with a specific meeting, specific words.
21 Q. And these were issues that the Serb propaganda was complaining
22 about, weren't they?
23 A. Well, when you have a war, you have propaganda on both sides.
24 Q. And the Serbs, Krajina Serbs, were complaining that the Republic
25 of Croatia
1 A. Well, one of the things that struck me very much, when I arrived
2 there, was I was told how brutal the Croats were and all the things they
3 had done to the Serbs, and then I asked, "When was that, last week?"
4 "No, no, no, 1941."
5 Q. Let's speak about World War II.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, unfortunately I have not yet found the
7 passage where the flags are --
8 MR. KEHOE: It's on the 13th of August, 1995 exhibit. If you
9 look at the summary, Your Honour, under "The Political Scene," that
10 paragraph about midway -- about the third line.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I found it, yes. Thank you.
12 MR. KEHOE:
13 Q. Now, if you can turn your attention, sir, to I believe it would
14 be the fourth tab, which is your 27th of August, 1995 report.
15 A. Yeah.
16 Q. In the last -- the second-to-last paragraph, and this is for the
17 week 20 to 26th August, 1995, do you see that "travelling by train"?
18 A. Oh, yeah, that one. Yeah, I got some clobbering for that one.
19 Q. "Travelling by train through newly-conquered territory, President
20 Tudjman delivered speeches at several stops, finally to arrive in Knin.
21 His televised triumph tour and speeches nevertheless left the linguistic
22 ignorant of the reminders of somebody else's arrival in Paris in 1940."
23 That "somebody else who arrived in Paris in 1940" is Adolf
24 Hitler, wasn't it?
25 A. M'mm-hmm.
1 Q. Now, you, in this, are equating Franjo Tudjman with Adolf Hitler,
2 aren't you?
3 A. Yes, and as I said, I have been clobbered for this one, even when
4 I was there, and I have to say apologies to very nice Croat interpreters,
5 and I'm fully aware that this is something I shouldn't write, but still,
6 I mean, this was a triumphant tour, it was, but probably the picture I
7 use is not the best from somebody in a diplomatic mission. That is what
8 you are aiming at, and that is what I agree.
9 Q. Well, you would agree with me --
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. -- that when Adolf Hitler was going through Paris in 1940, he
12 wasn't riding through land that was part of Germany, was he?
13 A. No, no, there were a number of -- yeah.
14 Q. Now, let me take a look at D741, which was Mr. Liborius' diary,
15 page 18. This is Mr. Liborius' diary, page 18, the second paragraph,
16 again on the 26th of August, talking about President Tudjman's liberty
17 train tour:
18 "Tudjman promised in his time that he would open the Zagreb-Split
19 railway line via Knin. He was good to his word. He is cheering like the
20 father of a country and holds a 12-minute speech with oratory results and
21 vocal pitch, and often changes in tone of voice. His hoarseness today
22 makes it time to remember an earlier head of state of approximately 50
23 years ago, not to mention any names."
24 Now, Mr. Leschly, were you and Mr. Liborius talking about the
25 speech given by President Tudjman and referring to him in terms of him
1 being like Adolf Hitler?
2 A. I honestly don't know. We -- when we met, of course, we talked a
3 lot, but to have today to say that, yes, we specifically talked about --
4 absolutely sure that we make this comparison, I just wouldn't know. But
5 it could have come up. I would not say that's impossible.
6 Q. Now, you refer yet further about President Tudjman in your first
7 statement, and you talk about him in paragraph 17 of your statement to
8 the Prosecutor. Do you have that tab 1?
9 A. Paragraph 17?
10 Q. Paragraph 17, the last sentence.
11 A. "It was my perception ..."?
12 Q. Yes.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. "It was my perception that Tudjman would not support a negotiated
16 A. Yes, but that was -- wasn't that the military parade? Yeah,
17 which of course should show the military strength, the capability of
18 taking matters into military hands.
19 Q. Well, had you ever met President Tudjman?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Well, were you familiar with the Vance Plan?
22 A. Yes, not that I could mention any paragraph of it, but the Vance
23 Plan as a, yes, name, of course.
24 Q. Did President Tudjman negotiate for the Vance Plan?
25 A. Was that a question or a statement?
1 Q. In the various peace plans that were presented in the former
3 A. I don't know.
4 Q. Are you familiar with the Z4 Plan?
5 A. Z4, yes, yes. I'm not familiar with it, but I know it -- it
6 rings a bell, this "Z4."
7 Q. And do you know that the Z4 plan, does this ring a bell, that
8 part of the things to negotiate in the Z4 plan was a large degree of
9 autonomy for the Krajina Serbs within Serbia?
10 A. Not that I -- yeah, that's probably true when you say so. I have
11 no recollection. I have to say I didn't operate at that level.
12 Q. Now, and this was -- just to clarify that yet further, I mean,
13 the Z4 plan was a discussion about the Krajina Serbs within Croatia,
14 wasn't it?
15 A. Well, don't ask me, because I don't know the -- I don't know the
17 Q. That's fine.
18 A. I know the existence, that there was a plan called this, but what
19 it contains, I have no idea.
20 Q. Now, just going back to your report on the 13th, you note, at the
21 top of page 2, and that should be tab 2 in your document -- it's P889.
22 You note massive -- there was massive ethnic cleansing. Do you see that?
23 A. M'mm-hmm.
24 Q. Now, what is the basis of "massive ethnic cleansing," sir?
25 A. The basis of it?
1 Q. Well, the people were gone, weren't they?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. How do you cleanse an -- ethnically cleanse an area when the
4 people are gone?
5 A. Always the word "subsequent." Yeah, that's funny, yeah. I've
6 removed "subsequent," because you're absolutely right, yes, they -- they
7 went when things happened and not later on.
8 Q. Well, this report you wrote on the 13th. That's the date of this
9 report, and let me show you a document, 1D 530001, an ECMM document of 15
10 August 1995, two days after you filed your report.
11 Now, Your Honour, I know we have raised this in writing before,
12 but of course this is a document that was produced by the ECMM and I'd
13 just like to repeat for the record our objection to the redactions to
14 this document that were placed in it by the ECMM.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I think that was -- there was a motion and it was
16 decided, so it's already on the record, isn't it?
17 MR. KEHOE: It is on the record, and you've granted our --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Let's not put on the record the decisions of
19 the Chamber. Please proceed.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
21 Q. Now, this document is Mr. Rau's report, isn't it? This is the
22 format he used for his reports, is it not?
23 A. I don't know. I can't -- it starts with 15/08/95, subject --
24 Q. If we can scroll down a bit, scroll up so we see the top of the
25 page. This is a report coming from the European Community Monitoring
2 A. Yeah, they may have looked like that. That may change from
3 presidency to presidency, how they put it up.
4 Q. Well, was this the format that was being used by Mr. Rau, who we
5 know was the head of mission in Zagreb
6 A. I honestly don't know.
7 Q. Well, let's turn to page 3 of this document. Now, the first full
8 paragraph, we're talking about the Serbs leaving:
9 "Their departure seems to be final. The Krajina authorities and
10 particularly President Martic, encouraged their citizens to leave,
11 stressing that 'the Croats wanted the territory without its population.'"
12 Now, looking at that quote that's in that document, and referring
13 back to your statement where you said that the Croats wanted a land
14 without people, can you clarify for us again whether or not you got that
15 statement from Milan Martic?
16 A. I did not. I mean, we're talking about a sentence which is
17 hanging in the air, more or less, during those days, and who started the
18 sentence, I haven't got a clue. You seem to have a clue, because you
19 have these reports, but I do not recall that I've had any specific source
20 for that.
21 Q. Now, the conclusion in this report is that the Krajina Serbs
22 encouraged their citizens to leave. Now, that is contrary to the
23 statement that you put into headquarters two days prior to that, isn't
25 A. It looks that way, yes.
1 Q. So let me set the scene, if I may, starting with your report.
2 You are -- you are upset at this time because you believe that the Croats
3 waited for the attention of the International Community to be focused on
4 Srebrenica to launch Operation Storm --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
6 MR. HEDARALY: That mischaracterizes the witness's testimony. If
7 he wants to refer to specific --
8 MR. KEHOE: That's fine. We'll just go straight back to the
10 JUDGE ORIE: Let's do so.
11 MR. KEHOE:
12 Q. We're talking about the second -- tab 2 in your document, your
13 13th report. So the second-to-last paragraph, mid paragraph:
14 "So Croatia
15 Now, who are the international friends?
16 A. Well, during my stay there it was quite obvious that the two
17 nations that supported Croatia
18 Q. So they waited until their international friends had helped them
19 create "in a remarkably short time and in spite of an arms embargo, a
20 fighting machine that could deliver the result. President Tudjman's
21 timing was perfect. The world news had been saturated with stories of
22 Serb atrocities in Bosnia
23 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you for slowing down.
24 MR. KEHOE: I'm sorry.
25 Q. " ... so it was almost amusing to follow how the international
1 media got confused, when it became clear that there was more than one
2 Balkan army capable of unnecessary brutality. At the time when it had
3 become quite apparent that the methods of the HV was as deplorable as
4 those of the BSA, the US
5 freshly-disturbed earth in the Srebrenica area, pushing the Croatian
6 stories down the list of news worth covering."
7 Now, Mr. Leschly, at this time Srebrenica had taken place,
8 Operation Storm was over. You have a report coming from ECMM, saying
9 that the population -- or that the President Martic encouraged the
10 citizens to leave, and you and Mr. Liborius and others then decided to go
11 out and do an investigation to dig up evidence of your allegations of
12 ethnic cleansing; isn't that right?
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
14 MR. HEDARALY: First of all, there's a mis-characterization. The
15 report from ECMM Mr. Kehoe was referring to was on the 15th of August, so
16 that's after the report, but just generally that's a very argumentative
17 question. I mean, read that paragraph, ask the question about those
18 facts, that's fine, but then to just sort of make up and argue with the
19 witness about what is in there, I mean, if he has specific questions
20 about the facts and what he said is one thing, but then to say, "You and
21 Mr. Liborius made that up," that's clearly improper.
22 MR. KEHOE: I didn't say they made anything up.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I beg your pardon?
24 MR. KEHOE: I didn't say they made anything up. I said that they
25 saw this information, they -- he made an allegation of ethnic cleansing
1 and then they went -- got together after this --
2 MR. HEDARALY: Have you got evidence?
3 JUDGE ORIE: "You and Mr. Liborius and others then decided to go
4 out" --
5 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: -- which is at least ambiguous language, as to
7 whether they decided together or not. Let's focus -- I'm aware that of
8 course the reporting is not limited to facts. To that extent, if a
9 witness is presented that has reported, and as he said at the beginning
10 of his testimony, on facts and impressions, we can't exclude impressions
11 from his testimony to further explore on what his impressions were based.
12 At the same time, I agree with Mr. Hedaraly that even admitting
13 that it's not just about facts, that we should put certain limits to how
14 argumentative the questions should be.
15 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. Your Honour, at this time I'll
16 offer into evidence 1D 530001, the ECMM report of 15 August 1995.
17 MR. HEDARALY: No objection.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit D798.
20 JUDGE ORIE: D798 is admitted into evidence.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. KEHOE: Let us turn our attention to D741, page 13, again
23 back to the diary of --
24 JUDGE ORIE: It will appear on your screen.
25 MR. KEHOE:
1 Q. -- Mr. Liborius.
2 A. Okay.
3 Q. The top of the page. Now, the report I just read to you was the
4 15th. The 16 of August:
5 "Today, first contact with UMN."
6 What is that?
7 A. That's the Danish Administrative Foreign Affairs.
8 Q. "What in the world is going on with the Spanish presidency."
9 Now, Javier Solana was the ECMM president at the time; correct?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And I believe that the head of mission in Zagreb, Mr. Sanchez
12 Rau, was Spanish as well.
13 A. Yes:
14 Q. "Mette and I are quickly coming to agree that I sent her 36 pages
15 of documents that differentiate the picture."
16 Now, Mette is Mette Neilsen; right?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And Mette Neilsen is from the Danish Foreign Ministry?
19 A. She's the one I reported to, yes.
20 Q. And Mette Neilsen right now is the Danish ambassador to Serbia
21 isn't she?
22 A. That, I don't know. I haven't followed these people for many,
23 many years.
24 Q. Well, when was the last time you spoke to Mr. Liborius?
25 A. Oh, all the way back to when I left September 1996.
1 Q. The next paragraph:
2 "Now I have a sense that I am away from Knin, away from the
3 center of events in this part of Croatia
4 with HRC
5 That's you, isn't it?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. "And suggest I go quickly to Knin and again to put some of the
8 emphasis there."
9 So, Mr. Leschly, you had a discussion with Mr. Liborius, after
10 this ECMM report came out, that Martic encouraged the citizens to leave,
11 and did you tell him --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
13 MR. HEDARALY: He can finish the question. I just want to
15 MR. KEHOE:
16 Q. Did you tell him that he should go out and develop evidence of
17 ethnic cleansing in Sector South?
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
19 MR. HEDARALY: I mean, first of all, I think that he has to ask
20 the foundation to the witness if he remembers that meeting. Just showing
21 him someone else's diary of a meeting is not a foundation for that
22 meeting. And we should actually do the same thing with someone else's
23 statement. Ask him independently if he remembers such a meeting before
24 putting something to suggest to the witness what occurred.
25 JUDGE ORIE: If there is a clear reference to it, to a meeting, I
1 don't consider it inadmissible to put it to the witness, and I expect
2 you, that if a question is asked about a meeting where you would come to
3 the conclusion that you don't remember that meeting, that you would tell
5 THE WITNESS: Yes.
6 JUDGE ORIE: But I do not impose on the parties the duty that if
7 such a clear clue is already in evidence, that it should be verified. It
8 may also depend on what witness is in front of us.
9 Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
10 MR. KEHOE:
11 Q. Did you have a discussion with Mr. Liborius to go out and put
12 together a report concerning the consequences in the RSK of
13 Operation Storm to support your allegations of ethnic cleansing?
14 A. No, I don't have a recollection of that.
15 Q. Do you have a recollection of having a conversation with
16 Mr. Liborius after you received this report that we showed you from the
17 15th of August?
18 A. No. I have -- we -- I don't know. If he was in Zagreb then, we
19 would talk to each other many, many times during the day, and if he was
20 elsewhere, we might be on the phone. We did not conduct meetings. It
21 was as one monitor to the other.
22 Q. Well, sir, it was a little more than one monitor to the other.
23 You were the head of the Danish delegation, weren't you?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And Soren Liborius --
1 A. Took over after me and was employed by the foreign ministry, had
2 a very -- well, he was very well respected, much more than I. I was just
3 a normal, old reserve officer, taking care of the delegation. He was the
4 sharp brain that would write the sharp reports, and our role was very
5 much like that and in respect of each other's capabilities.
6 Q. So because he was the one who would write the sharp reports, did
7 you tell him to go out and write a report about consequences in
8 Operation Storm?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Did he -- let me show you P815. This is a report by Mr. Liborius
11 of the 26th of August, where he has the initial consequences in former
12 RSK of Operation Storm. Do you remember this report, sir?
13 A. I'm sure I've seen it, yes, but I don't -- if you ask me to tell
14 you what's in it, I wouldn't be able to do that in any detail, but yes.
15 Q. So if we went through the contents of this report, you wouldn't
16 have any recollection of this report?
17 A. Some of it, I may recognise when I see it.
18 Q. Okay. Let's go through some of it, then. Go to four pages in.
19 One more page, please.
20 Now, let's just look at this report, and in this report is a list
21 of villages. As you can see at the top, it notes burning and
22 destruction, observations of burning and destruction by ECMM operating in
23 the southern part of Sector South.
24 Do you remember reviewing this list of villages being destroyed?
25 A. Specifically, no.
1 Q. You have no knowledge of that. Okay. Now, just looking at this
2 as an ECMM head of the Regional Centre and looking at the timing of this,
3 being the 26th of August, let me just look, for instance, at the Gradac
4 document. Do you see that, right below -- towards the bottom of the
5 page? Just scroll back down before that.
6 It says:
7 "Visit on 1245, houses being set on fire, deserted."
8 Do you see that?
9 A. M'mm-hmm.
10 Q. Now, when you looked at that, sir, would you assume that that was
11 a Serb village that -- without any further explanation, that that was a
12 Serb village that was being set on fire?
13 A. Yeah, that particular time, yes, I would probably, because the
14 date says "9th of August, 1995."
15 Q. Now, sir, during this period of time, did anybody ever explain --
16 or you don't recall this report, so I would take it that you don't know
17 that, for instance, in the 1991 census, that Gradac had a 96 per cent
18 population of Croats. Now, as a head of the regional office, HRC, would
19 you expect that type of detail to be set forth in a report like this so
20 that you, as his superior, would completely understand the full nature of
21 the damage in Sector South and who it was done by?
22 A. Well, when you look at -- I don't know. Perhaps I should have
23 the -- let's see the question.
24 JUDGE ORIE: The question is rather complex.
25 THE WITNESS: Yeah. It's not a "yes" or "no."
1 MR. KEHOE: Let me rephrase it for you, sir.
2 Q. This village, Gradac -- and there are pages of them. This
3 village, Gradac, it's on the first page, had a census -- in the 1991
4 census, that was a Croat village, 96 per cent?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. When you read this, you told us you would have concluded that
7 this was a Serb village being burnt?
8 A. Yeah, well, I -- actually, Gradac was one of the first areas I
9 actually went to as a monitor in the field, and it was very noticeable
10 that there were a lot of burned-out houses and they had burned out four
11 years before -- no, two years before. We're now talking 1993. But in
12 August 1995, if a house is burning, it's probably not a Croatian house in
13 Gradac, because, as you said yesterday, it was mainly Croatian or Croat,
14 but there were some Serbs as well.
15 Q. So based on your answer, you would have concluded that the Croats
16 were burning their own houses?
17 A. No, that's not what I said.
18 Q. Okay. Let's go into this meeting with General Gotovina if we
19 can, and I think that that's if we can. That should be your tab 6, sir.
20 A. Yeah.
21 Q. And that is P893, for the record.
22 Now, in this report --
23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
24 MR. KEHOE: I'm sorry.
25 Q. On the first page of the report, you were talking about having a
1 meeting with the Zupan, and I'm talking about the bottom of that. And
2 you note in this report that Croatia
3 "The damage to Croatia
4 ethnic cleansing measures undertaken by Croatians, with or without
5 consent from official authorities. Zupan was very forthright in his
6 regret that not more had been done to establish law and order through a
7 state of emergency in the newly-liberated areas and maybe even martial
9 Now, the Zupan was telling you that they made a mistake not
10 declaring a state of emergency or declaring martial law, wasn't he?
11 A. Now, 13 years after that meeting, and with this text, all I can
12 say, that apparently it was his regret. I'm not saying that he would --
13 what was the word you used -- that they had made a mistake. That, I
14 mean, I don't know what -- what the word was, but apparently I've written
15 "his regret," and that's not the same as saying it's a major mistake. He
16 felt a little bit sorry, that's probably the way he said it, since I had
17 written it like this.
18 Q. That he regretted it didn't happen?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Now, martial law states that the army takes over the area; isn't
21 that right?
22 A. I believe that varies from country to country. I don't know.
23 I'm not a lawyer.
24 Q. You do know that as of the 6th of August of 1995, the civilian
25 institutions took over at least in Sector South, didn't they?
1 A. Could be. I don't know.
2 Q. Well, did you -- when you took over your position in September of
3 1995 as the head of the Regional Centre in Zagreb, did you learn that,
4 when the Republic of Croatia
5 authorities took over in Sector South?
6 A. Now I'm utterly confused. I took over -- I took over on the 6th
7 of July. That's one thing.
8 Q. When you took over the Regional Centre Zagreb under the
9 reorganisation plan and Sector South came under your control or your
10 chain of command --
11 A. Okay, yeah, yeah.
12 Q. -- did you learn at that time that the Republic of Croatia
13 constitutional order and civilian authorities took over on the 6th of
15 A. I probably have been told.
16 Q. But you don't recall at this time?
17 A. No, no.
18 Q. Let us turn your attention in this report to your conversation
19 with General Gotovina, if we can. I'm just getting this number correct.
20 Now, you write:
21 "Lieutenant General Gotovina was asked if he shared the Zadar
22 Zupan's opinion that the need for the state of emergency in order to have
23 avoided the killings, lootings, and burnings, his only remark, only
24 remark, was, 'What killings,' after which he went into an attack on the
25 International Community that had no moral right to moral slapping of
2 Now, let us turn our attention to P895, which is the report of
3 the 20th September, 1995
4 Now, in this report, Mr. Leschly, in paragraph 2, it notes that a
5 number of issues were discussed, among them the possibility of ECMM to
6 patrol at the Bosnian side of the border:
7 "So far it is not possible, and the general promised to inform us
9 "Asked about the ongoing looting, arson and harassment, the
10 general's opinion is that the police have to control the situation ..."
11 Did General Gotovina, in your conversation on the 20th of
12 September, tell you that the police have to control the situation?
13 A. According to Stig Marker-Hansen, he did, and if you ask me now if
14 I remember it, no, I didn't, because I don't remember individual
15 sentences from a meeting 13 years ago.
16 Q. Well, do you have any reason to question that Stig Marker-Hansen
17 wrote down that he said that the police have to control the situation?
18 A. No, I mean that's -- that's quite likely, oh, absolutely, but --
19 Q. You would agree with me, then, that that is not in your report?
20 A. That is true, that is true.
21 Q. So when you wrote in your report, back on the 24th of September,
22 1995, that this was General Gotovina's only remark, that wasn't accurate,
23 was it?
24 A. It looked that way -- looks that way.
25 Q. In fact, it's not the whole truth as to what happened during the
1 course of that meeting, was it?
2 A. No, apparently not.
3 Q. He next said that:
5 Any person committing crimes will be charged."
6 Now, he said that too, didn't he?
7 A. Excuse me -- yes, oh, yeah.
8 Q. And I think you will agree with me that that is not in the report
9 as well.
10 A. M'mm-hmm.
11 Q. Now, Mr. Hansen writes in the report that:
12 "A war is always followed by disasters, and now things are under
13 control. The general has no objection for Serbs to live in Croatia."
14 Did he tell you that, too?
15 A. Probably. I mean, during a meeting of 45 minutes, and you're
16 down to lines, you can't expect every single sentence to go in there.
17 Q. Well, I understand, sir, but you had this meeting on the 20th of
18 September, 1995. You wrote a report on the 24th of September, 1995
19 where you note that the only thing that General Gotovina said was
20 expressing --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, you have done this now several times. In
22 the statement of the witness, he said his only remark was in response to
23 what apparently the witness raised, and then he continues that:
24 " ... after which he went into ..."
25 And then apparently refers to many, many words Mr. Gotovina would
1 have spoken at that time. So to say -- you to say the only words he
2 spoke was, that appears to be not a proper reflection of what the
3 evidence of this witness is.
4 Please proceed.
5 MR. KEHOE:
6 Q. Well, suffice it to say, without going into this, your report
7 concerning what General Gotovina said concerning controlling -- area
8 being controlled by the police, that Croatia being a country of law and
9 order, and that crimes -- people committing crimes were being charged,
10 were not included in your report?
11 A. Correct.
12 JUDGE ORIE: The witness has given these answers already,
13 Mr. Kehoe.
14 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I do see that you want to emphasise certain matters,
16 but let's not put the same questions where the answers are crystal clear
17 that it was not part of his report. And from your questions, it's
18 perfectly clear to the Chamber as well that these are important issues
19 for us.
20 MR. KEHOE: Very important.
21 JUDGE ORIE: You say "well, suffice it to say." May it suffice
22 that the Chamber is well aware, without being told two or three times,
23 what you find of importance.
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. Obviously this is a very important
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
3 MR. KEHOE: And we have this opportunity under the Rules to put
4 this to the witness, and this is our opportunity.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but under my guidance you have not the
6 opportunity to put it two or three times to the witness.
7 MR. KEHOE: I understand.
8 JUDGE ORIE: And would you please --
9 MR. KEHOE: I'll move on.
10 JUDGE ORIE: And would you please -- I'm concerned about your
11 last response, that what right you have under the Rules, where a minute
12 before I told you that our guidance was that you should not repeat
13 questions just to emphasise matters, because nowhere in the Rules it says
14 that you can seek repetitious evidence in order to emphasise your point
15 of view.
16 Would you please proceed.
17 MR. KEHOE: Let me turn our attention to 65 ter 4254.
18 Q. This, Mr. Leschly, is an ECMM daily monitoring activity report.
19 Are you familiar with this format, sir?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. If we can turn to page 2, the second-to-last paragraph from the
22 bottom on page 2. I'm sorry, I think I might have the wrong document
23 here, Your Honour. I might have pulled up the wrong document. It should
24 be 65 ter 2448. My apologies. I read the wrong number.
25 My apologies, Mr. Leschly.
1 A. Well, it's ...
2 Q. This is a daily monitoring report of 21 September for activities
3 of 20 December, and going to the second page -- I misspoke. It's the --
4 it is a report of the 21st of September for activities of the 20th of
5 September. The second page, again in the second-to-last paragraph,
6 denotes the conversation with General Gotovina, the commander of the
7 operation zone of Split:
8 "General Gotovina said to ECMM that burning, looting and
9 harassment must be stopped by the police, but added that he regards
10 'hatred towards an enemy who has burned, looted and expelled one's family
11 as a normal human reaction.'"
12 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, at this time we'll offer into evidence
13 65 ter 2448.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
15 MR. HEDARALY: Was there a question being put to the witness
16 about this report? I have no objection. Just wondering.
17 MR. KEHOE: I'll ask the witness after I offer -- ask the
18 question after I offer it.
19 JUDGE ORIE: There seems to be no objection. Although the usual
20 way is to first put questions, it's not a major problem.
21 Mr. Registrar, that would be ...
22 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number D799, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Exhibit D799 is admitted into evidence.
24 MR. KEHOE:
25 Q. Mr. Leschly, these reports that we have discussed written by
1 Stig Marker-Hansen say nothing about any questions about killings or
2 doubt about killings that were -- that you say were raised by
3 General Gotovina. Do you have any explanation for that, sir?
4 A. None other than every report cannot cover everything. No, I have
5 no explanation why.
6 Q. Now, General Gotovina's comment in the report about hatred
7 towards an enemy who burned and looted and expelled, you understood him
8 to mean that there was an element of revenge coming from people who had
9 been persecuted by the Krajina Serbs; isn't that right?
10 A. Well, this is not something that I wrote. This is something that
11 Mr. Hansen wrote. And, yes, the way it's presented here, yes, the word
12 that pops up in one's brain is the word "revenge," and I think that's a
13 fair comment.
14 Q. And whether or not it is wrong or right, you understood the
15 "revenge" element that was taking place in the Krajina, didn't you?
16 A. Yeah.
17 Q. Now, we mentioned that there was nothing in either
18 Stig Marker-Hansen's report or the ECMM headquarters report of the 21st
19 of September about killings. Could it be, sir, that this was simply a
20 conversation with General Gotovina about burning, looting and harassment?
21 A. I -- it's -- I mean, when it's put down a few days after what had
22 happened, then I would imagine that it must have been said, because I
23 don't think I would -- I would never sit down and write something which I
24 know is deliberately wrong. But we also have, of course, to --
25 hopefully, that the interpreters are doing their job so that we don't get
1 even the small tilting of words.
2 Q. You say that, sir, but you know what you wrote down in your --
3 A. Oh, yeah.
4 Q. -- report is not the whole truth; right?
5 A. [No verbal response]
6 Q. Now, when you -- oh, there was no verbal -- you were nodding your
7 head "yes" to that?
8 A. Yes, okay, all right.
9 Q. Now, let me turn your attention to -- not only from your report,
10 but you note in the last item of P893, which is the 20th of September --
11 excuse me, the 24th of September document:
12 "New nations are naturally very nationalistic in the early
13 stages, and as he put it, 'Once Sector East is home,' he would possibly
14 become more liberal, but not for now."
15 Let us turn attention to paragraph 44 of your statement, starting
16 in the second sentence:
17 "In the context of our conversation, I understood that the
18 statement of General Gotovina referring to Sector East, to mean that once
19 Sector East was captured, he would be more of a peacetime commander and
20 less strict in his conduct against the Serbian population."
21 JUDGE ORIE: "Community."
22 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, "Serbian community." Thank you,
23 Your Honour.
24 "This was to be an indirect admission that the looting and
25 destruction of Serbian property was allowed to go on."
1 Q. Now, given that General Gotovina told you that the police have to
2 control the situation, that Croatia
3 that criminals will be charged, on what basis did you conclude that he
4 made an indirect admission that the looting and destruction of Serbian
5 property was allowed to go on? What fact did you learn of that allowed
6 you to conclude that?
7 A. Well, first of all, when you mention the things that were said
8 about the Croatian policies, one of the main problems in this time was
9 the discrepancy between what the official Croatia said that they wanted
10 to do and what happened in the field, because there was a huge
11 difference. And you've had all these administrative harassments, which
12 are also mentioned elsewhere, so when you've -- let's see, it's 44.
13 Sector East then came up, as I mentioned earlier today. Sector
14 East was very much on everybody's mind at the time, because that was the
15 remaining part not under Croatian control, and when General Gotovina then
16 said that -- that once that is under Croatian control, he might be less
17 strict, he probably has felt that while it was still there, there was a
18 kind of state of war or a state of not at least peace, because things
19 haven't finished, and therefore he had to be strict. And when I then say
20 that the looting and destruction of property was allowed to go on, the
21 fact of the matter was, in the field, that, yes, they did go on at that
22 time, regardless of what the official Croatia claimed.
23 Q. Mr. Leschly, was this -- was this some silent admission by
24 General Gotovina?
25 A. Well, that was the way apparently I interpreted it at the time.
1 That's all I can --
2 Q. So you interpreted it as a silent admission?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Is that right?
5 A. Yes, I have done that, from what I can see.
6 Q. Did you talk to Mr. Liborius about this silent admission?
7 A. Not that I know of.
8 Q. Would you agree with me that your comment about this silent
9 admission by General Gotovina that looting and destruction of Serbian
10 property was allowed to go on, is in direct contradiction to
11 Stig Marker-Hansen's report reflecting the conversation with
12 General Gotovina that criminals will be prosecuted?
13 A. Yes, it is, but there is a discrepancy between what was being
14 said during these months and what actually happened.
15 Q. And you, based on what he said, concluded that he made an
16 admission about allowing looting and burning to go on in the same
17 conversation where he told you that criminals would be prosecuted; is
18 that right?
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, that's now again -- I thought I had been
20 clear enough on repetition, and the matter has been dealt with
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
24 [Defence counsel confer]
25 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, I have no further questions.
1 Mr. Leschly, thank you very much, sir.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.
3 Other Defence counsel.
4 MR. CAYLEY: Nothing arises. Thank you, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic.
6 MR. MIKULICIC: No questions, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly, is there any need to put further
8 questions to the witness?
9 MR. HEDARALY: Briefly, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Please proceed.
11 Re-examination by Mr. Hedaraly:
12 Q. Mr. Leschly, before the reorganisation in late August of ECMM,
13 did you receive the reports by RC Knin to the ECMM headquarters?
14 A. Not automatically. They came separate. If I wanted to see it, I
15 could see it. And I can't remember whether it was c.c.'ed. Maybe it
16 was. Did we send them to the others as well?
17 MR. HEDARALY: Could we have P830, please, on the screen.
18 THE WITNESS: No, we didn't send it sideways.
19 MR. HEDARALY:
20 Q. On the screen in front of you is a report from the 10th of August
21 from -- the contents of it are not to my interest. I just want to see
22 the top part, the send line. So it's from RC Knin to the ECMM
23 headquarter; is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And then you see in the info, it goes to RC Zagreb is included?
1 A. It is, yes. Okay, so we were c.c.'ed. Yes, I couldn't remember
2 whether -- I think in certain periods, we did, and in certain periods, we
4 Q. And when you would prepare your -- when you would prepare your
5 weekly reports, you would review all the reports that you had received in
6 the preceding week?
7 A. Yes. Mostly, of course, our own, but, yes, a Knin report would
8 also be there but not -- normally not Bosnia.
9 Q. Now, Mr. Kehoe asked you several times, apparently in a
10 formulation that he likes very much, whether your --
11 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, please, please, I object to the comment.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. KEHOE: Come on.
14 JUDGE ORIE: You're right. Mr. Hedaraly, would you please
15 refrain from commenting. Even without your objection, I might have
16 intervened, Mr. Hedaraly.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. HEDARALY:
19 Q. Mr. Leschly, Mr. Kehoe asked you several times about whether your
20 report was the whole truth. Now, Mr. Leschly, did you ever write
21 anything in your report that you knew was false?
22 A. No, I never did that. I may have -- as I -- if I'd been in
23 doubt, I would have left it out, in anything.
24 Q. So when you said that it may not have been the whole truth, what
25 did you mean?
1 A. Well, it meant that, of course, during a meeting lasting one
2 hour, and you had to sum up, you can only take this and take that, and
3 there will be a lot which hasn't been covered. That's the nature of
4 report-writing. Of course, you can hope that you take out the more
5 important parts, but that is up to one's own discretion.
6 MR. HEDARALY: Thank you, Mr. Leschly. I have no further
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Leschly, one question, which is the following:
9 Questioned by the Court:
10 JUDGE ORIE: You used the word, I think - let me just find
11 it - looting, arson and killings. You've seen it in documents, "looting,
12 arson and harassment" has been used. Looking at these reports, does
13 there come any doubt in your mind as to whether you raised the issue of
14 arson, looting and killing? Because earlier it was said that you never
15 know with translators, but in your statement we read that you asked him
16 whether he shared Zadar Zupan's opinion about the need for a state of
17 emergency in order to have avoided the killings, lootings and burnings.
18 Even if it would have been translated wrongly to you in your
19 conversation, are you -- having seen this, comes there a doubt to your
20 mind as to whether you mentioned "killings" in this when you put it to
21 Mr. Gotovina?
22 A. I have no way today to even substantiate at that time, but if I
23 wrote it, what was it, three or four days after, it must have been said.
24 That would be what I -- what I think.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I wanted to put this in order to be -- that
1 there could be no ambiguity in this respect.
2 Have the questions by Mr. Hedaraly or by the Bench, have they
3 triggered any need for further questions?
4 MR. KEHOE: If I have more clarification on your question, Judge.
5 Further cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
6 Q. Mr. Leschly, this is on page 17 of -- page 17, line 14 -- 15,
7 excuse me.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Today's transcript?
9 MR. KEHOE: Today's transcript.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Leschly, you are not able to --
11 THE WITNESS: Okay.
12 JUDGE ORIE: -- manipulate it. We'll have a look at it, please.
13 MR. KEHOE:
14 Q. So there is no question about it, this is what you just testified
15 to previously this afternoon:
16 "So there is no question about it that when it was mentioned
17 about why do these things take place, I must have thought at the time
18 that General Gotovina did not recognise killings or lootings or burnings.
19 I think that what 'killings' covers, these activities overall."
20 So in response to --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hedaraly.
22 MR. HEDARALY: It was "these atrocities" on the one he said, and
23 it's a draft transcript, but that's what the witness had said.
24 MR. KEHOE: It says "activities."
25 MR. HEDARALY: It says "activities."
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, how is this triggered by my question or
2 by Mr. --
3 MR. KEHOE: By your question, Judge, because with regard to these
4 killings, what he's talking about there and what he said in the
5 transcript was that that encompassed not just killings, and your question
6 was isolated to just killings, when the witness, in his testimony, is
7 talking about virtually all crimes are encompassed in that comment that
8 he made.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, put the question to the witness, if you want
11 MR. KEHOE:
12 Q. Now, when you put that in your comment about what killings, you
13 were talking about General Gotovina raising a question about what crime,
14 "What crimes are you talking about"; isn't that what you meant to say?
15 A. Well, as I say, to the best of my knowledge, if I wrote down that
16 he had used the word "those killings," I would have -- I would think that
17 that was being used. But what it covers, I think that -- I think that
18 doesn't mean that he has admitted to the other -- this is what I'm
19 saying. I'm sure that it covered everything, what -- always, "What are
20 you talking about?"
21 Q. So, "What are you talking about" with regard to crime; right?
22 Isn't that what you're saying, sir?
23 A. No. I'm saying that this answer that he I'm quite sure has
24 given, otherwise, I wouldn't have written it, I'm sure that that would
25 take care of the other words that we're talking about here in rejecting,
1 in rejecting the conduct of that.
2 Q. This is a conversation that is taking place at the same time that
3 he is saying that criminals should be prosecuted?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, you're really restarting your
5 examination. That's not -- you said you would seek a clarification. You
6 have sufficiently done that, and you could have done that at an earlier
7 stage, by the way, because Mr. Hedaraly, exactly on those same lines,
8 said that he had a language issue, whether he fully understood, and then
9 you objected against that question put to the witness. So, therefore,
10 I think that the clarification -- the question about the clarification
11 has been put to the witness and the witness has answered those questions.
12 Any other questions triggered by the questions by the Bench?
13 This means, Mr. Leschly, that this concludes your evidence in
14 this court. Of course, we're happy that you could travel back after you
15 had given your evidence rather than to travel back and then have to
17 I'd like to thank you for coming to The Hague, for having
18 answered the questions that were put to you by the parties and by the
19 Bench, and I wish you a safe trip home again.
20 We adjourn, and we will resume on Monday, the 22nd of September,
21 quarter past 2.00, in Courtroom I.
22 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 5.53 p.m.
23 to be reconvened on Monday, the 22nd day of
24 September, 2008, at 2.15 p.m.