1 Friday, 21 November 2008
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone. Mr. Registrar, would you
6 please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
8 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, the
9 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 Could the witness be brought into the courtroom.
12 [The witness entered court]
13 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning, Mr. Theunens.
14 THE WITNESS: Good morning, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I would like to remind you that you are still bound
16 by the solemn declaration you gave at the beginning of your testimony.
17 WITNESS: REYNAUD THEUNENS [Resumed]
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, are you ready to continue the
20 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Good morning, Mr. President.
21 I think the last issue yesterday was the question I had put to
22 the witness, whether in relation to P1013, the order that was given by
23 General Gotovina pursuant to the order of the chief of the Croatian army
24 staff, whether that's an order General Gotovina could have given in his
25 own right or whether this was just following the order of the chief of
1 the Croatian army staff. I believe there was an objection.
2 JUDGE ORIE: There was an objection. That objection is
3 overruled. You may put the question to the witness.
4 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Examination by Mr. Waespi: [Continued]
6 Q. Mr. Theunens, could you please ask -- can you please respond to
7 my question.
8 A. Yes, Your Honours. I mentioned yesterday that P1013 does not
9 allow to draw any conclusions on that issue; however, when we look at
10 Article 61 of the Code Of Discipline -- and if you want I can explain the
11 article; otherwise, I will just summarise it. The Article 61 says that
12 the authorised officer can take any measures he considers necessary to
13 investigate breaches or violations of military discipline. This is
14 discussed on English page 173 in my report, part 1.
15 On English page 182, I include two examples of orders by
16 General Gotovina in relation to the enforcement of discipline where he
17 orders to establish -- among the measures, he orders to establish
18 commissions to investigate violations or breaches. Those can be found on
19 English page 182 and English page 183. I'm referring there to 65 ter
20 1783 and Exhibit P1019.
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Let's go back to the exhibit at hand,
23 MR. WAESPI: If we can move to the -- to page 7.
24 Q. Now, this is obviously a follow-up of what we discussed before.
25 Can you tell us the significance, if any, of this order, again of
1 General Gotovina, on the 8th -- on the 9th of August, 1995?
2 MR. MISETIC: It's the 29th of August, not the 9th of August.
3 MR. WAESPI: Yes, this is correct. The English translation is
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Apart from being wrong, will you take care
6 that a good translation will be uploaded.
7 MR. WAESPI: Certainly, Mr. President.
8 THE WITNESS: Well, based on what we see on the screen, I mean,
9 this is the 8th of September. This is the follow-up order 8th of
10 September following the initial order of 29th of August. Do you wish to
11 address me the 8th of September order or the 29th of August one?
12 MR. WAESPI:
13 Q. That's the one we see on our screen.
14 A. Okay. Indeed, Your Honours, on the 8th of September,
15 General Gotovina informs the chief of the HV Main Staff, General
16 Cervenko, of the measures he has taken following this -- the initial
17 order by General Cervenko. The measures are discussed. Of interest is
18 in this context at paragraph 7 or title 7, which is on the English page
19 5 -- I apologise.
20 I was looking at another document. I was looking at the report
21 Gotovina sends to Cervenko. But following that report, there's also an
22 order by Gotovina which we're looking at now. The problem is there is a
23 combination of documents under one ERN, so I apologise. I retract what I
24 said earlier.
25 Here, Gotovina issues orders to his subordinates, and those are
1 the 4th Guards Brigade -- members of the 4th Guards Brigade and members
2 of the 72nd Military Police Battalion, where he orders the command of
3 4th Guards Brigade to impose disciplinary measures against the troops
4 under his authority. And for the 72nd Military Police Battalion is
5 concerned, there, Gotovina orders that the commander of the 72nd Military
6 Police Battalion shall file criminal charges to the military prosecutor's
7 office in Split
8 Now, there appears to be a distinction in the treatment by
9 Gotovina between the members of the 4th Guards and the members of the
10 72nd Military Police Battalion, because we're talking about the same type
11 of violation; namely, the illegal occupation of apartments. I connect
12 this distinction in the treatment between these two units to Article 31
13 of the Code of Discipline, whereby the commander, if he considers that
14 the violation also includes elements of a crime -- and we have to take
15 into account the members of the 72nd Military Police Battalion have the
16 authority of policemen. So it's logical, at least from a military point
17 of view, that Gotovina is more severe when he deals with members of the
18 72nd Military Police Battalion. So based on Article 31 of the Code of
19 Discipline, Gotovina can order that criminal proceedings should be
21 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I'd ask for clarification because the
22 question was non-responsive, and I have no idea what was just said.
23 Although, let me say that the entire direct has been moving in a manner
24 that gets us to non-responsive questions, because it's just a question
25 of, Tell us what the significance of this is, which is a very broad
1 question, which allows the witness to have wide, wide latitude to start
2 speaking. I'm not sure what the last answer was or what it was an answer
4 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I asked him to tell us the
5 significance of this order which we see on the screen which has a direct
6 impact on --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps, before we go to the significance,
8 that the witness tells us how he understands exactly what this order
9 brings us, and I see that he has then put it in a certain legal context.
10 That first question that I put, would that meet some of your
12 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour. But there's a whole two or three
13 sentences there which --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Let's perhaps first analyse what is in the document,
15 what exactly is ordered by whom to whom and in respect of what.
16 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 Q. Can you tell us, Mr. Theunens, who is issuing the order, to whom,
18 and in relation to what?
19 A. Your Honours, as we can see from the contents of the document and
20 the signature at the end of the document, we see that this is an order
21 issued by General Ante Gotovina, commander of the Split Military
22 District. He issues that order to - and we can see, I mean, not only
23 from the list of addressees, but also from the contents - to the
24 commander of the 4th Guards Brigade, and I refer, therefore, to
25 paragraph 1(A); as well as to the commander of the 72nd Military Police
1 Battalion, which can be found in paragraph 1(B).
2 In those two paragraphs, he also explains what should be ordered,
3 i.e., in 1(A), he orders the command of the 4th Guards Brigade to impose
4 discipline measures under his authority. And in 1(B), he orders the
5 commander of the 72nd Military Police Battalion to file criminal charges
6 through his specialist staff to the military prosecutor's office in
8 In paragraph 2 of the document, Gotovina then specifies against
9 whom or against which members of the 4th Guards Brigade, as well as of
10 the 72nd Military Police Battalion, and the 73rd Military Police
11 Battalion, the measures he had explained in paragraph 1 should be
13 In paragraph 3 of the order, Gotovina instructs that his order is
14 to be carried out immediately after returning from combat zone to the
15 barracks. He also orders the commander of the 72nd and the 4th Guards
16 Brigade to report to him on the outcome, i.e., on the implementation of
17 the order, not later than the 31st of October.
18 Paragraph 4 simply explains that Gotovina holds the command of
19 the 4th Guards Brigade and the 72nd Military Police Battalion responsible
20 for carrying out his order, which is in line with the doctrine, what we
21 explained yesterday.
22 Q. And --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, could I ask one question from
24 Mr. Theunens.
25 Mr. Theunens, I see that in 1, under (A) and (B), the commanding
1 officers of the 4th Guards Brigade and the 72nd Military Police Battalion
2 are addressed apparently in relation to the behaviour of members, and we
3 find that in 2, the 4th Guards Brigade, the 72nd Military Police
4 Battalion, but also the 73rd Military Police Battalion.
5 Now, your explanation, more or less, is that 1(A) corresponds
6 with 2(A), and then 1(B) corresponds with 2(B). But then I have
7 difficulties in understanding who should take action against 2(C),
8 because there's no corresponding person or commanding officer addressed
9 in relation to that, which for me raises the question whether the
10 criminal charges under 1(B) are limited to the one member of the
11 72nd Military Police Battalion, or whether that would include the 73rd.
12 So the structure of this order is not entirely clear to me at
13 this moment.
14 THE WITNESS: Mr. President, the 73rd Military Police Battalion
15 is not an establishment unit of the Split Military District. It normally
16 belongs to the navy. However, before the start of Operation Storm, it is
17 subordinated to the Split Military District, whereby General Lausic, the
18 chief of the military police administration, appoints Major Juric to
19 organise the subordination of the 72nd and 73rd Military Police Battalion
20 to the Split Military District. There is a specific order for that which
21 is discussed in part 2 of the report.
22 I'm not in a position to establish whether on the date of this
23 order, the 8th of September, 1995, the 73rd Military Police Battalion is
24 still subordinated to the Split Military District. If it still is, then,
25 well, it may - It's sort of like speculation, but I am trying to analyse
1 the order - it may well be that Gotovina expects that the 72nd -- the
2 command of the 72nd Military Police Battalion, through what is described
3 elsewhere in my report as the professional line, i.e., for specialised
4 arms like, for example, military police, there is not only the vertical
5 subordination or operational subordination and operational line of
6 reporting, but there's also a professional line of reporting going
7 through the military police chain from top of the military police
8 administration towards bottom, the individual battalions.
9 So one option is that Gotovina expects the command of the 72nd to
10 inform the 73rd. That would also assume that the 73rd is still
11 subordinated to the -- to the Split Military District. I draw that
12 conclusion because if the 73rd was still subordinate --
13 JUDGE ORIE: May I interrupt you there. You said "one option
14 is," and then you say, "I draw this conclusion." Do you opt for that one
15 and are you explaining why, and will you then explain why you reject any
16 other option?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, indeed, Mr. President. I should have been
18 more precise.
19 In my view, if the 73rd was not subordinated any more to the
20 Split Military District, then General Cervenko would have ordered the
21 navy to take measures in relation to any violations of military
22 discipline by members of the 73rd Military Police Battalion. So I stand
23 corrected for the confusion I may have created in my initial answer.
24 JUDGE ORIE: You may proceed, Mr. Waespi.
25 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Q. Now, we see that the first order from General Gotovina dates
2 29th August, 1995
3 1995. What's the significance of the time-frame here, if any?
4 A. I don't think we can draw any specific conclusions from that.
5 The issue of the illegal occupation of flats is not a matter, I would
6 say, of operational urgency. So the -- the time period of a bit more of
7 a week to take care of the matter seems to be reasonable.
8 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
9 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to the next document, which is 65 ter
11 Q. This is a document dated 27 February 1995 from General Gotovina
12 to the command personally, but at least on page 5 several units; and the
13 subject is "The annual analysis of the state of order, work, discipline,
14 and unusual incidents."
15 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to paragraph 4 on page 2 of the English.
16 Q. Here, it says, and I quote: "The purpose of the analysis is to
17 use concrete indicators for 1994 to establish the basic reasons why an
18 unacceptably large number of unusual incidents (away from the front line)
19 occurred, in which people were killed or wounded with serious
20 consequences or in which extensive material damage was brought about.
21 The unusual incidents that have occurred should be placed in the context
22 of the state of order, work, and discipline in that unit."
23 And in paragraph 6, it details these incidents or breaches that
24 had occurred.
25 The order is addressed, and we see that on page 5, to the 72nd
1 Military Police, among various other units; and at the end, we have a
2 programme of analysis, pages 7 and 8.
3 Mr. Theunens, in relation to command and control and the
4 enforcement of the military discipline, what is the significance, if any,
5 of this document?
6 A. Your Honours, we know from Article 4 --
7 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, if I could just make an objection.
8 I'm not sure what the question, in relation to command and control,
9 what's the significance. If we could have more specific question.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, you asked several times what the
11 significance is. Of course, it very much depends on what you're looking
12 at. If you could be more precise and more focused in the question on a
13 certain matter, as you did with the last answer; for example, the
14 time-frame, where the witness said the time-frame seems not be a major
16 But could you please guide the witness? That certainly might
17 result in a more effective use of our time.
18 MR. WAESPI:
19 Q. In relation to the way General Gotovina used his command and
20 control during that period of time pre-Storm and apparently issued
21 detailed instructions of what has to be done, how do you comment on
22 what's within the prerogative of a commander in order to maintain
23 discipline in his subordinate units?
24 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I object just to the first part of the
25 question which is leading, in the sense it says "used his command and
1 control." As the Court itself has made clear earlier on in the case,
2 there is a difference between operational command and control, and that
3 difference and foundation has not been established with this witness yet.
4 Thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: I believe we established that the witness has
7 experience in the issues of command and control as it relates to the way
8 it's exercised, based on his experience, based on the review of these
9 documents; and he can certainly say what the significance of these
10 instructions here by General Gotovina in February is as to the way
11 command and control has to be exercised in this matter.
12 That's clearly within the experience, training, and skill of
13 Mr. Theunens.
14 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, there is a separate issues that we all
15 know about, which is the challenge to the qualifications of this witness
16 on command and control. What I am talking about is specifically in the
17 way the question was phrased, it assumes that General Gotovina has
18 command and control over, and in particular Mr. Waespi went out of his
19 way to highlight, the 72nd Military Police, which is highly disputed in
20 this case. So if he wishes to establish foundation for that unit of
21 command and control, then he should do it and not assume it in the
23 JUDGE ORIE: Well, in the question, it is assumed that in one way
24 or another he did or did not exercise command and control, it means the
25 way he used this leaves all relevant aspects open; and, of course, the
1 witness is expected then, if he relates it to the way in which
2 General Gotovina used his command and control, to explain clearly what he
3 means in this respect.
4 Therefore, the witness may answer the question, but is invited to
5 keep in the back of his mind what Mr. Misetic said. Usually, I do not
6 invite witnesses to analyse objections when answering a question.
7 But, Mr. Theunens, I think that you're sufficiently equipped to
8 make that -- to include that in your answer.
9 THE WITNESS: Indeed, Your Honours. As we have seen yesterday,
10 Article 4 of the service regulations of the Croatian armed forces
11 established the duties of commanders. Among these duties are that he is
12 responsible for discipline. This specific document which is sent to --
13 to prepare a meeting which will cover or will deal with the annual
14 analysis of the state of order, work, discipline, and unusual incidents
15 is a tool for the commander in order to familiarise himself with the
16 situation in his subordinate units, i.e., the units under his command and
17 control; as well as to communicate with these units' commanders about the
18 problems they may have, exchange ideas; and, last but not least, prepare
19 for himself measures, if such measures are necessary, to improve the
21 Also because of the previous document, but this document clearly
22 shows -- and, again, I refer to the Law on Defence where one of the
23 principles of command and control is the unity of command and control,
24 i.e., there's only one commander at a time. I assume we will later
25 address the military police regulations where the issue of command and
1 control, as well as management of the military police, will be addressed.
2 But staying at this order, the fact that the 72nd -- the commander of the
3 72nd Military Police Battalion is among the list of participants, i.e.,
4 among the addressees, as well as all the other subordinate commanders of
5 the command of the Split Military District, confirms that at that moment
6 in time the 72nd Military Police Battalion is subordinated to the Split
7 Military District.
8 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
10 Mr. Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P1120.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P1120 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Let's move on to the next document, which is 65 ter 1783.
15 Q. This is a document dated 18th March 1995, again by
16 General Gotovina, and again for the -- to the commander personally, and
17 has on page 6 and 7 in the English version a list of units.
18 Let me first ask you, on page 7 where we see 72nd Military Police
19 Battalion, what's the significance of this entry, Mr. Theunens?
20 A. All the addressees, including the 72nd Military Police Battalion,
21 are at that moment in time subordinate units of the Split Military
22 District commander.
23 Q. Now, how does this document relate to the previous one?
24 A. This document actually addresses the last item of my reply in
25 relation to the aim of such an annual analysis. In this order, the
1 commander of the Split Military District, General Gotovina, issues a
2 number of instructions, 15 of them, in order to improve discipline and
3 order in the units of the Split Military District.
4 I would like to draw attention to the third instruction Gotovina
5 gives, that is -- sorry, which can be found on English page 2, where
6 Gotovina orders that: "For each unusual incident within Split Military
7 District units that results in a death or serious injury, unit commanders
8 shall form a commission tasked with investigating the case and sending a
9 report to the Split Military District command operations centre."
10 I highlight that in context of the earlier questions about
11 whether or not the commander of a military district has the power to
12 establish a commission that deals with disciplinary issues or
13 disciplinary investigations.
14 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
15 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I'd like to tender this document.
16 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
17 Mr. Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P1121, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P1121 is admitted into evidence.
20 MR. WAESPI: And the last document in this section,
21 Mr. President, is 65 ter 3558.
22 Q. This is a document dated the 31st of May, 1995, authored by
23 General Gotovina, and it addresses problems in the Split 306th Logistics
24 Base; and in the order, several issues, measures, are taken.
25 Paragraph 1, I quote: "The commander of the 306th Logistics Base
1 shall urgently take measures -- necessary measures in order to establish
2 order, improve work and discipline, and introduce proper soldierly
3 relations in the 306th Logistics Base and its sections."
4 And item 3: "In addition to general measures, special measures
5 to improve the situation shall be undertaken," and lists several specific
7 Again, Mr. Theunens, the significance of this order to the --
8 from General Gotovina to the commander of a subordinate unit?
9 A. Your Honours, this is another example of the implementation by
10 General Gotovina of Article 4 of the service regulations that we can find
11 under D32. Among his responsibilities as a commander is to maintain
12 discipline. Discipline is necessary also to maintain combat readiness;
13 and because of what is described as problems in relation to the issues of
14 order, work, and discipline in one of his subordinate units, he takes
15 measures in order to improve the situation which falls within his
16 authority and duties as a commander.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
18 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President,
19 Your Honours.
20 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
21 Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number P1122, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P1122 is admitted into evidence.
24 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I'd like to move on to the second
25 topic, and this is the issue of the military police and the
1 subordination, and you can find relevant parts in paragraph 10 and 46 and
2 48 in the executive summary. I'd like to quote one conclusion in this
3 executive summary.
4 This is on page 31 English of the report, which is marked for
5 identification 1113 -- it's 1013, I'm told by Mr. du Toit.
6 Q. Now, while that's being done, I quote from paragraph 46; in B/C/S
7 it's on page 18: "Lausic," and you have already addressed his role,
8 "confirms the subordination for operational matters of the MP to the
9 operational commanders military district and OG, and appoints Major Ivan
10 Juric to assist with command and control over the 72nd and 73rd Military
11 Police Battalion."
12 Based on your analysis, who commanded the military police,
13 Mr. Theunens?
14 A. Your Honours, could you please clarify whether we addressed the
15 situation prior to Operation Storm, i.e., the situation as it is foreseen
16 by doctrine; or do we address the situation during and after Operation
17 Storm; or both?
18 Q. Let's first start with the pre-Storm situation. We'll go into
19 documents immediately, but just in very general terms, Mr. Theunens.
20 A. The doctrinal instructions that apply to the command and control
21 and management of the military police can be found in Articles 8 and 9 of
22 the 1994 rules on the military police, which, if I'm not wrong, have been
23 tendered here as Exhibit P880.
24 Q. Yes.
25 MR. WAESPI: I think that might be a good moment to pull P888
1 [sic] up. This is on page 5 in the English version and also in B/C/S.
3 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, in relation to Article 8, I would
4 like to make a brief comment on the English translation, because the
5 English translation states "command and control." Now, in military
6 language, the word "command" has a very specific meaning and the word
7 "control" has a very specific meaning, as well as the expression "command
8 and control." I have included these definitions in part 1 of the report,
9 the JNA definition, the US
10 British definition of command and control, because at the time of the
11 filing of the report, I didn't have a Croatian regulation defining the
12 concept of command and control.
13 These definitions show that control in the sense of command and
14 control does not -- cannot be dissociated from command, i.e., it is one
16 Of course, we can address particular subordination relations that
17 exist in NATO armies, where there can exist something like operational
18 command, which is different from operational control, which means
19 something else than tactical command, which is again different from
20 tactical control.
21 All these expressions have a particular meaning in a sense that
22 they define the responsibilities and the authority of the commander in
23 relations to the forces that are given to him. Again, I don't want to
24 draw this too long because it lacks relevance for the HV, because in
25 the HV, we didn't have the specific subordination relations in 1995, like
1 tactical command or tactical command or operational control or
2 operational control. But, still, I just wanted to mention that to
3 highlight the importance of terminology.
4 The translation in Article 8 states command and control; whereas,
5 in the B/C/S text, we see --
6 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, has the witness now been accredited in
7 B/C/S as well? If so --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, well, if there's anything -- he
9 apparently has paid attention to the language. Let him explain, not to
10 say that he is a linguistic expert. Of course, if there's criticism
11 about or if you could challenge that, of course, we could do that. But
12 let him finish his answer, and then we'll see whether there's any merit
13 or value in it, rather than to interrupt him now.
14 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I have to make my objection then,
15 because if it's going to be stated that he's also capable of reading the
16 original text, that is not something on his CV, it's not in the report,
17 it should be something that's disclosed to the Defence.
18 JUDGE ORIE: What I understand is that this witness has analysed
19 a lot of documents of which the originals are often in B/C/S, and they
20 were translated. And just as everyone here in this courtroom has, now
21 and then, made comments on translations, whether they're complete or not,
22 whether they're missing words, whether there are terms which could be
23 understood in a different way, let's first give an opportunity.
24 It also will give you some insight in how this witness worked.
25 And if it becomes apparent that he's totally wrong with this, I would
1 say, this small element, which certainly is not the core of his expertise
2 but apparently a tool, a tool he used, I take it that he has sought
3 advice on translation issues, as we all do constantly - you less perhaps
4 than we - and then to see what remains.
5 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, if in advance, Mr. Theunens and/or
6 Mr. Waespi were going to challenge the translation of what is not simply
7 a minor issue, the issue of command and control over the military police
8 is central to the Prosecution's case, if there's an issue in the
9 translation, why isn't this brought to our attention and corrected before
10 we get here?
11 JUDGE ORIE: No, Mr. Misetic. I think it's a different matter.
12 Translation is a linguistic exercise. If you have different systems,
13 it's not only a matter of translation, but it's also a matter of
14 understanding whether words sufficiently can express differences. That's
15 not just -- it's also conceptual issue.
16 Let me just give you an example. It's clear that if you would
17 translate the term "judgement rendered in absentia" in German, you would
18 have no problem. It's "abwesenheitsurteil," or "judgement of someone
19 that is not there."
20 If you would translate it into French, you would certainly find
21 that there are two different kinds of judgement rendered in absentia in
23 "jugement par defaut," but "jugement par contumace."
24 So, there, you see that the difference in structure may have some
25 impact on translation issues.
1 Now, what this witness tells us is that the concepts underlying
2 the language ask for specific caution if we are talking about translating
3 concepts, terms relating to certain concepts. The witness doesn't have
4 to be a linguistic expert to draw our attention to that.
5 Mr. Theunens, you may proceed.
6 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, I just wish to clarify that during
7 the informal meeting with the Gotovina Defence on the 17th or 18th of
8 January, 2008, I, indeed, stated that I do not speak B/C/S, but I have
9 tried, like in the other cases I worked on, to understand or to get a
10 basic understanding of military terminology, because I understand from my
11 training and studies that the correct definitions of terms are the
12 starting point and that there should be clarity about that.
13 What I tried to say is that the term "upravljanje" - and I
14 apologise for the wrong emphasis - in my understanding and based on the
15 context I had, for example, during the Vukovar trial, where we had
16 several issues with translation, in my understanding means "management,"
18 If command and control was meant in Article 8 in the military
19 sense of command and control like it is used in any army, the concept of
20 command and control, then I would have expected the Croatian expression -
21 and again I apologise for the emphasis -"zapovljedanje i vodjenje."
22 When we look at Article 8, it does mention "zapovljedanje," but
23 it uses "upravljanje" instead of "vodjenje." That's something I wish --
24 I wanted to highlight.
25 In my view, it doesn't have a major impact on the relations
1 between the military police and the military district commander or the
2 military police and the operational commander -- I apologise, the
3 military police and the military police administration commander, on one
4 hand, and the military police and the operational commander, on the other
5 hand. But I think it is useful that we use the correct terminology.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now we come at a point where the linguistic
7 aspect, how your views on concepts translate to language.
8 Mr. Waespi, we have -- the witness has drawn our attention to
9 these conceptual issues. He then continued to tell us what he would
10 expect the language which would properly express what he said. You and
11 the Defence are invited to see whether the translation as it is here,
12 perhaps with the assistance of linguistic experts, interpreters, to see
13 whether this is a correct translation or not, or at least a
14 correct reflection in English of what the original text tells us. If you
15 can agree on the matter, fine. If you cannot agree on the matter, you're
16 invited to make submissions in which you may rely on linguistic
18 I expect the parties to agree on what could be considered - let's
19 try not to have lengthy reports by linguistic experts on the matter - but
20 let's see whether the concerns expressed by Mr. Theunens, because that's
21 how I understand it and not the linguistic solution for it, how they may
22 be an obstacle for this Chamber to understand what this text, this
23 Article 8, tells us.
24 MR. KAY: Your Honour, may I just come in here, because it's
25 important in a number of ways. We need to check, of course,
1 Mr. Theunens's sources for his statement in court today; and, obviously,
2 that is the kind of material that would have to be assembled. So we --
3 we may review his opinion that he's just given, check how it came about
4 that he came to that opinion, and also have the matter reviewed by
5 experts to come in the court. As the Court knows, there will be experts
6 to come.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course, I see you're telling us you'll do
8 your homework. But in relation to the invitation I just sent to both
9 parties, has that any practical effect?
10 MR. KAY: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: You say you need more time to prepare for this?
12 MR. KAY: Well, we would need his sources for --
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, okay. We can ask. You mean the sources on
15 MR. KAY: Yes. How he's come to -- yes. He's said because he
16 was in a trial involving Vukovar that there were issues in that trial.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You'd like to know in what respect exactly.
18 MR. KAY: Exactly.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could you tell us what in the Vukovar trial
20 triggered your attention in this matter.
21 THE WITNESS: I will try to be as brief as possible, Your
23 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
24 THE WITNESS: The matter of management and command and control
25 did not arise directly in the Vukovar trial, but, for example, there were
1 translations like a "referent" were systematically related to a "clerk";
2 whereas, a "referent" is a B/C/S term for an "officer working in a
3 staff." Well, in English, in my view, it would be a "staff officer."
4 There are, obviously, clerks working in a military staff, but an officer
5 working in a staff is not a clerk, even though he will be called
6 "referent" in B/C/S.
7 There have been minor issues with like, for example, members of
8 the military police were at one moment systematically translated as
9 "military police officers." It is obvious that they are officer in a
10 military police unit like in any other unit, but not every military
11 policeman is an officer, even though in some languages, a member of the
12 police is identified as a police officer.
13 This is not an exercise in trying to be more clever or
14 criticising. Military language can be and is very specific. For
15 example, during staff course and military academy, you spend a lot of
16 time in understanding the right concepts that, for example, when you
17 receive, as a tank company commander, an infantry platoon under tactical
18 control, it will mean something totally different from if you mean -- if
19 you receive that unit under operational command.
20 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you, this the kind of observations you
21 made, did that trigger your attention? So let me try to understand what
22 the issue is. The issue is that a comparative functional analysis
23 reveals differences or lack of differences which are not always found in
24 the language, that is different language or the same language, when these
25 systems are described? Is that more or less what you're telling us?
1 THE WITNESS: Indeed, Mr. President.
2 Then in relation to the "upravljanje," I was asked by one of the
3 court translators who knew me, I think from the Vukovar trial, to find
4 out what "management" means the military sense and in the language used
5 here, B/C/S.
6 We have a JNA military lexicon which dates from 1988 -- 1981 - I
7 apologise - where all these terms are described. It's very similar,
8 obviously it's in a different language, but there's also a joint military
9 dictionary, for example. I am aware of the distinctions and the
10 differences between Serbian and Croatian.
11 I'm also aware about the distinctions in military terminology.
12 "Command and Control" in Serbian is "Rukovodjenje i Komandovanje, "RiK."
13 In Croatia
14 for the wrong pronunciation. "Upravljanje" is defined in the JNA
15 military lexicon as "management," and I have the definition here, if you
17 I asked my colleagues for a Croatian military lexicon, but it
18 doesn't seem to be available in the OTP. Now, it would be very useful if
19 such a lexicon exists that we would check in that Croatian military
20 lexicon how "upravljanje" is defined there.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kay, first of all, I invited the witness to tell
22 us what caused him to address the matter, where he said the Vukovar case,
23 it seems to me the kind of problem he describes, that he saw that in the
24 Vukovar case, rather than the language on this issue.
25 Is there any other matter you need for your further homework
1 apart from what the witness told you?
2 MR. KAY: No. That was very helpful in dealing with the extent
3 of it, at a preliminary stage and as best as we could here, without going
4 into further detail.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 Mr. Misetic was on his feet as well.
7 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour. If I understood the witness
8 directly, he apparently checked on this issue before he came to court or
9 before he began his testimony? Okay. He's nodding his head in
11 Once again, 750 pages, proofing sheets, addenda, corrections to
12 it. I don't know why issues are being prepared for trial, for direct
13 testimony, that are not being disclosed to the Defence that are going to
14 be dealt with on direct examination.
15 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know. I think as a matter of fact that
16 Mr. Waespi did not specifically ask about this, but the witness said,
17 "Before I answer the question, I'd like to draw your attention to ..."
18 So he introduced it. If it was on Mr. Waespi's mind already, then, of
19 course, your objection would make sense. But I think the witness --
20 MR. MISETIC: Topic number 3 is military police command and
21 control. Now, I would think that this issue at some point would come up
22 that: Let my alert you to the fact that we think there's a
23 mistranslation or there's a different interpretation of that language.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, were you at all at notice that the
25 witness gave this attention to this issue?
1 MR. WAESPI: Not in that detail. I do remember during proofing
2 when we discussed the article that he said that he thought the language
3 of "management" was an issue, but I didn't explore it any further, and I
4 wasn't meant to --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Let's proceed. Let's proceed at this moment.
6 The invitation for the parties is to agree on the matter or to
7 make submissions, because it seems to be a rather, well, vital issue.
8 The Chamber would like to receive the parties' views on the matter if
9 there's no common view on the matter.
10 Please proceed.
11 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
12 Q. Let's go into substance of Articles 8 and 9 as it relates to
13 command and control and subordination of the military police.
14 Who commanded the military police prior to Storm, number 1, and
15 during Operation Storm, number 2?
16 A. Your Honours, Article 9 stipulates that the military police,
17 while they are performing their regular military police tasks, the
18 military police is subordinated to the operational commander, i.e., it is
19 specified the military district commander or the navy commander or the
20 command of the air force or the highest HV commander by function in the
21 military police unit's area of operations.
22 Article 9 has to be seen in conjunction with Article 8, which
23 states, obviously, that military police are subordinated to the Ministry
24 of Defence military police administration. That's what I tried to
25 explain at the beginning. There are for specialised units, for example,
1 military police, there is what is defined in HV doctrine a professional
2 line and an operational line. At another moment in time, it was
3 described as the horizontal line or the vertical line.
4 It is obvious that issues dealing with, for example, the training
5 of military police, the procedures they apply, their administration, that
6 this has to be centralised in order to achieve and maintain uniformity in
7 these areas, as well as in the activities of the military police, for
8 whatever battalion wherever it is deployed in Croatia or to which
9 whatever military district it belongs. That is the role of the military
10 police administration.
11 Now, when the military police is conducting, is carrying out its
12 tasks, a company, military police company, can be subordinated to a
13 brigade or to an Operational Group. A battalion, like, for example, the
14 72nd is subordinated to the Split Military District, it means that it is
15 the operational commander for the 72nd Split Military District commander
16 who orders the military police to carry out military police tasks,
17 because you cannot centralise that. It would be impossible for the
18 military police administration to order each and every military police
19 battalion in its daily operations.
20 The same procedure exists in the United States armed forces,
21 where there is, indeed, a force provost marshall, as well as a provost
22 marshal lower echelons, which would correspond with military police
23 administration; however, he serves as an advisor to the operational
24 commander at that level and an advisor in procedural matters like how to
25 use the military police; but it is the operational commander who decides
1 about what to do with the military police when and where.
2 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I would submit that answer is
3 non-responsive to the question Mr. Waespi posed.
4 MR. WAESPI: That's not correct. I asked him who command the
5 military police based on his analysis. Looking at these two Articles, he
6 explained the distinction between operational command, on one side, and
7 what he describes as a professional line of reporting very well. I think
8 he perfectly answered the question.
9 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, the specific question was "prior to
10 Storm number one, and during Storm number two." If that could be
11 clarified, because I think he spoke more in a theoretical framework,
12 rather than the specific questions that Mr. Waespi posed.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
14 MR. WAESPI: We will look into right now a few documents that are
15 going to be specific --
16 JUDGE ORIE: You say you will deal with that, although it is not
17 yet -- the distinction is not clearly present in the answer, you will
18 give it follow-up.
19 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
21 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to the next document which is 3021,
22 65 ter 3021.
23 Q. This is an order by General Gotovina, dated 25th of July, 1995,
24 and it's addressed to the 72nd Battalion of the military police and the
25 military police of the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna.
1 It orders, in paragraph 1, that forces of the 72nd Battalion of
2 the military police shall set up check-points and patrols on the left
3 side of the OG North's zone of responsibility with specific locations.
4 And in paragraph 3, it talks about specific tasks of the military
5 police, for instance, to ensure order and discipline, prevent incidents
6 in the aforementioned zone of responsibility, oversee the allowed
7 distance and speed of vehicles, prevent the unlawful use of weapons, the
8 misuse of materiel and technical equipment and other goods.
9 Mr. Theunens, in relation to what is said before in theory, based
10 on the doctrine, what is the significance of this order of
11 General Gotovina?
12 A. Your Honours, this is an example of the implementation of
13 Article 9 of the rules of military police, because we see that the
14 operational commander issues orders on the use of the military police to
15 his military police. I refer specifically to the 72nd Military Police
16 Battalion, because the situation with military police of the so-called
17 Herceg-Bosna republic may very well be different.
18 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to -- I'd like to tender this document,
19 Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
21 Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P1123.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P1123 is admitted into evidence.
24 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Let's move to D267, Defence exhibit already admitted.
1 Q. This is an order by General Lausic, whom you have mentioned
2 already as the chief of the military police administration. It dates
3 2nd August 1995
4 to perform military police tasks in the areas of responsibility of the
5 Croatian ... military districts during the upcoming operations."
6 I would like to focus on paragraph 3, and it says: "IZMs of VP
7 battalions with all necessary officers and equipment shall be set up at
8 the IZMs of the HV military districts. The required minimum number of
9 officers and amount of equipment shall remain in parent headquarters to
10 ensure that the continuity of work is not interrupted.
11 "Within the daily operational chain of command, commanders of VP
12 battalions shall be subordinated to commanders of the HV ZPs," and it has
13 a deadline.
14 Mr. Theunens, what's the significance of this paragraph in
15 relation to subordination of the military police?
16 MR. MISETIC: Same objection, Your Honour. It's an open-ended
17 question. I'd ask for foundation as if this witness notes what "daily
18 operational" means before the broader question is posed.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could the witness include that in his answer,
20 Mr. Theunens.
21 MR. WAESPI:
22 Q. Yes, certainly.
23 A. Your Honours, this is another example of the implementation of
24 Article 9, i.e., for the daily or regular military police
25 administrations, military battalions are subordinated to the operational
1 commander. Now, because this order is dated the 2nd of August, this is
2 right before the launching of Operation Storm. We know that the Split
3 Military District has established forward command posts. It is logical,
4 in order to implement or to allow smooth conduct of command and control,
5 that there is a military police presence or military police command
6 presence at the forward command post of the Split Military District, as
7 well as the other military districts in Croatia.
8 Therefore, Lausic orders the military police battalions to set up
9 forward command posts at the forward command posts of the military
11 MR. MISETIC: I still don't think the definition of "daily
12 operational" has been established.
13 THE WITNESS: Your Honours --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens.
15 THE WITNESS: Indeed, Your Honours, the daily operational of the
16 military police, I would like to refer you, then, to the 1994 rules on
17 the military police, wherein, for example, chapter 3, which is on English
18 page 5 starting at Article 10, the duties of the military police are
19 described in general terms. I have also addressed this in my report
20 starting at part 1, English page 82.
21 If you want to go in more detail, there are also different
22 services within the military police whereby each service has its own
23 specialities. These are also addressed in the 1994 rules, and I have
24 attempted to summarise them in my report.
25 Now, if you want me to go into specifics or read them out, I'm
2 MR. MISETIC: It's not necessary as long as I understand the
3 witness correctly that he thinks that daily operational tasks are all the
4 tasks that the military police has.
5 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, that's not really what I said. I
6 have said that the tasks of the military police are described in
7 Article 10; and the tasks listed there, well, the protection of life and
8 the personal security of military personnel and other Republic of Croatia
9 citizens and the protection of their property is, for me, a daily task of
10 the military police. The second, the prevention and uncovering of
11 crimes, as we have also seen from earlier documents we discussed, is a
12 regular military police task. Number 3, ensuring safety of military
13 traffic is a regular military police task.
14 I mean, I can continue read them out, I don't know whether it's
15 efficient use of court time, but I do not rule out that the military
16 police administration can give specific tasks to military police
17 battalions. Some of them may touch upon the regular tasks.
18 However, my understanding from the review of the 1994 rules, as
19 well as of the documents both prior as well as during and after Operation
20 Storm, as well as my prior knowledge on the role and use of military
21 police, is that the military police - that is, the Croatian military
22 police and more specifically the 72nd Military Police Battalion - was
23 subordinated to the command of the Split Military District while carrying
24 out regular military police tasks prior to, during, and after Operation
1 JUDGE ORIE: Could I see whether I understand the issue. In your
2 answer, you often refer to regular tasks; whereas, I understood
3 Mr. Misetic to seek your views on especially the word "operational."
4 MR. MISETIC: Operational and, more specifically, daily
5 operational, and it's important for the purposes of being able to prepare
6 for cross-examination to establish what this witness's basis is.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens.
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Daily operational tasks, that's what Mr. Misetic is
10 seeking your views on, and your answer does not -- uses at least
11 different terms. To the extent you meant the same, please explain it; if
12 not, please answer.
13 THE WITNESS: I may have confused two issues. I have addressed
14 the regular military police tasks. Well, for me, regular military police
15 tasks are the same as daily military police task; however, I understand
16 that Mr. Misetic wants me to clarify the concept of 'daily operational
18 I would like to refer to that for --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
20 MR. MISETIC: Daily operational task, not daily operational
22 THE WITNESS: Well, then, yeah --
23 JUDGE ORIE: I think, as a matter of fact, that the text was read
24 was about daily operational chain or chain of command. The text read was
25 "within the daily operational chain of command, commanders of battalions
1 shall be subordinated to commanders of the HV IZPs." That was the text
2 we were seeing, Mr. Misetic, not daily operational tasks.
3 So could you give us your views on what that exactly means, daily
4 operational chain of command?
5 THE WITNESS: The operational chain of command is as it is
6 defined in Croatian doctrine is addressed on page 130 of the English --
7 excuse me, English page 130 of the first part of my report, where I refer
8 to an October 1995 HV regulation, which makes a distinction between
9 commanding along the direct line of command or the regular line, as well
10 as commanding and reporting along the professional or the functional
12 I will just read out what I put there, well, because it explains
13 what the operational chain means. It states: "The operational commander
14 directly commands the operational formations, higher tactical units, and
15 service units. The operational commander also exercises command over
16 units that are 'temporarily resubordinated to him or to his subordinate
18 If you want, I can also explain the command and reporting along
19 the professional line. It may be useful in the context of military
21 The professional line means that, and, again, I'm quoting from a
22 HV regulation: "In addition to the orders they receive from the
23 operational commander, subordinate commands and units can also receive
24 orders from the chiefs of combat branches and services in the staff of
25 the superior operational forces command. The orders that are passed
1 along the professional or functional line," I mean they mean both the
2 same, "deal with specific issues that are relevant for the implementation
3 of the task that has been imposed by the operational commander."
4 I have added there my personal comment: "The existence," for my
5 conclusion, "The existence of the professional line, therefore, does not
6 violate the principle of single and unified command."
7 So coming back to what is put here, daily operational chain of
8 command, it is my conclusion that this is the chain of command along the
9 operational line, i.e., from the Split
10 Staff to the military district commanders, to the OG commanders, the
11 brigade commanders, battalions, companies, and so on.
12 JUDGE ORIE: What's then the meaning of the word "daily" rather
13 than "operational" chain of command? Daily operational chain of command.
14 THE WITNESS: "Daily," in my view means, well, regular -- doing
15 operations. They wouldn't -- in my view, there is no need for this word
16 "daily." It is like the regular, the normal, the usual. Daily is not a
17 military expression. I've never seen the expression "daily command."
18 JUDGE ORIE: Well, it's quoted here, isn't it?
19 THE WITNESS: Indeed.
20 JUDGE ORIE: So that you have you've never seen it is
21 contradicted by the document we're looking at.
22 THE WITNESS: I haven't seen it in other documents. My
23 conclusion is that it doesn't reduce or influence in any way the
24 operational chain of command. It has no influence on the concept of --
25 on the authority of the operational commander over the military police,
1 as is specified also -- or is established in Article 9 of the 1994
2 military police rules.
3 JUDGE ORIE: The witness has explained what he understood.
4 Mr. Waespi, please proceed.
5 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Q. Just to clarify, the term "daily" within daily operational chain
7 of command, I understand your answer is you haven't seen it in a
8 regulation -- in regulation that forms part of the doctrine.
9 A. That is correct, Your Honours. The word "daily," yeah, I would
10 agree. that's correct.
11 Q. Let's move to paragraph 10 of this document, and it deals in
12 paragraph 2 with the appointment of Major Ivan Juric and a group of
13 officers from the regular VP session and VP administration crime section,
14 to assist in commanding and organising the activities of the 72nd VP and
15 73rd Split VP battalion, that shall perform tasks in its own area of
16 responsibility and provide necessary assistance to the 72nd VP battalion.
17 The commanders of the 72 VP battalion and the 73rd VP battalion shall be
18 subordinated to Major Ivan Juric.
19 You have mentioned it a moment ago, but please explain it again,
20 why based on a review of the materials, your knowledge of the doctrine,
21 Major Juric was appointed to this job.
22 A. Your Honours, as explained earlier, the 73rd Military Police
23 Battalion, even though it is located in Split, is not an organic unit of
24 the Split Military District. It belongs normally to the navy.
25 However, for operational reasons, the 73rd Military Police
1 Battalion has been ordered to assist the 72nd Military Police Battalion,
2 i.e., it becomes a unit of the Split Military District. And in order to
3 facilitate command and control and over these two units, a coordinator
4 or -- yeah, a coordinator has been appointed; namely, Major Ivan Juric.
5 This makes it easier both for the military police administration
6 as well as for the command of the Split Military District to give
7 instructions to the military police, as they only have to speak to one
8 person, i.e., Ivan Juric.
9 MR. MISETIC: I'm going to ask for more foundation for this
10 opinion, Your Honour. It's not in the report. Nothing has been
11 disclosed to us on this, and the witness is opining based on his theories
12 without any facts that have been presented or citation to documents.
13 You know, this is, all morning, new opinions.
14 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, this is an expert. He disclosed his
15 report. He included several opinions on distinct topics. He's clearly
16 entitled to provide these opinions on related areas that are included in
17 these documents. They have been disclosed to the Defence in advance.
18 That is nothing new. That is in line with his expertise, in line with
19 his opinions that he provided.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, the witness goes further. He draws
21 conclusions so that it's for whom it would be easier to deal in this way.
22 I think there's some merit in the request by Mr. Misetic, that the
23 witness further explains his last answer, that he gives further
24 foundation to his last answer.
25 MR. WAESPI: Yes.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE ORIE: I checked with my colleagues. They are of the same
4 MR. WAESPI: Can I make one additional point, Mr. President?
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. WAESPI: In your decision of the 21st May 2008, that was the
7 decision on part of the Gotovina Defence's Rule 73 motion in limine,
8 which addressed a similar issues, you ordered or you decided in
9 paragraph 7: "The Prosecution is obliged to give notice of evidence that
10 it intends to present through proper disclosure. If proper notice has
11 been given, a party may examine an expert witness with respect to matters
12 not included in his or her expert report as long as they are within the
13 knowledge of the witness relevant and probative."
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, I'm not objecting against the matter you
15 addressed. The issue here is the witness gives a few opinions which seem
16 to be related to the logic of the structure that was put in place, and
17 where these conclusions do not immediately follow from what the witness
18 has told us, Mr. Misetic invites the witness, and through me invites the
19 witness, to give, as I understand it, to give a basis apart from what we
20 have seen in this document.
21 He does not, just as I do not and just as the Chamber does, not
22 prevent you from putting these questions. The Chamber does not object to
23 Mr. Misetic insisting on, already at this stage, finding a foundation
24 going beyond to what the witness has offered us until now.
25 Mr. Theunens, it gave you at least one minute to think.
1 THE WITNESS: Thank you very much, Mr. President.
2 This order, which is D267, is also discussed in part 2 of my
3 report, English pages 208 to 210, where I agreed that I didn't go -- I
4 didn't explain why Juric is appointed.
5 However, I would like to draw your attention to another order
6 which is discussed on page 210 in my report. This is 65 ter 3111. This
7 is an order from the -- from Lausic further specifying the duties of
8 Major Ivan Juric. I quoted from that document that: "Juric is superior
9 to the commanders of the 72nd and the 73rd Military Police Battalion with
10 regard to the 73rd Military Police Battalion providing assistance to the
11 72nd Military Police Battalion."
12 The answer I gave to the previous question was based on my
13 experience in such situations, i.e., that in cases of temporary
14 subordinations and temporary grouping of units, it may be useful from the
15 point of view of command and control to appoint a coordinator or to
16 appoint one person who is superior over these two resubordinated units.
17 If you allow me, I can give another example. We know --
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic was asking for a foundation.
19 Mr. Misetic, the other example you'd like to hear.
20 MR. MISETIC: Yes, as well as, if I may, where he says "his
21 experience in such situations ..."
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Would you please give your other example to
23 start with.
24 THE WITNESS: The other example is, when we look at the Split
25 Military District order for attack for Operation Kozijak [phoen], or
1 Storm, which is 65 ter 3119, we see that the command of the Split
2 Military District establishes four operational groups. Operational
3 groups do not exist in peacetime, except maybe during exercises. But
4 when we look at the composition of these operational groups, they group
5 different types of forces. There are guards brigades included, there are
6 regular brigades included, there are Home Guard units included, as well
7 as artillery, engineers, and other units.
8 All these different units will operate in the same area, the zone
9 of responsibility of the specific operation group, all with the same
10 mission. Of course, the engineers will not carry out the same specific
11 mission as the infantry, but the overall mission for that operational
12 group will be one and the same.
13 It is logical from the military point of view that instead of
14 having the operational commander, Gotovina, issue an order to each and
15 every individual brigade, battalion, infantry, armour, artillery, and so
16 on, it is much easier to issue orders to the Operational Group commander,
17 who will then issue the orders to his subordinate units. This is exactly
18 the same that is happening here with the military police.
19 Instead of having both Lausic as well as Gotovina having to speak
20 to the commander of the 72nd Battalion and the 73rd Battalion, it's much
21 easier to be in contact with only one person who can also assist them.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens, it's not for the first time that you
23 referred to Mr. Gotovina as Gotovina. Since Mr. Gotovina is present in
24 this courtroom and whatever language you may use in internal discussions
25 within your team, I think it's basic politeness to address persons who
1 are present, either, as I do by, Mr. Gotovina or, as in the questions put
2 to you by Mr. Waespi, General Gotovina. That would be appreciated, if
3 you would keep that in mind.
4 I think you answered the question. I'm looking at the clock.
5 Mr. Misetic.
6 MR. MISETIC: Yes. I have one foundational question and the
7 break will give Mr. Theunens the opportunity on this, but my foundational
8 question based on his last answer is, if he can establish foundation for
9 General Gotovina issuing an order to Mr. Juric.
10 That would help in light of his last answer.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
12 MR. WAESPI: I'm just wondering whether these are issues for
14 MR. MISETIC: It's a foundation --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. It's --
16 MR. MISETIC: It's foundation, Your Honour, for --
17 JUDGE ORIE: It's mixed. To some extent, these are matters that
18 could be brought up in cross-examination. At the same time, they are --
19 for example, this example, the witness has given his foundation, and
20 whether you find it sufficient or not is -- so to that extent could have
21 been kept for cross-examination.
22 At the same time, it certainly assists the Chamber in better
23 following the evidence, better understanding the evidence, and not to
24 wait till what happens in eight or ten days from now.
25 At the same time, I also want to urge the Defence that we should
1 not unnecessarily interrupt the flow of evidence.
2 MR. MISETIC: I --
3 JUDGE ORIE: I get the feeling that as tension at this moment
4 between your need to often find foundation for what the witness says and
5 the need of the Chamber and the need of the other party to have an
6 uninterrupted flow of evidence, it's finding balance. The last example
7 where Mr. Waespi says it could have been kept for cross-examination,
8 where you say it relates to foundation, there's merit in both point of
10 Let's try to find a proper balance.
11 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, if I may just say this.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. MISETIC: I agree with you. And on the Defence side, we like
14 to get to cross-examination as fast as possible, I assure you. The only
15 reason I rise is on issues that are not addressed in the report or the
16 subsequent filings, I'm just asking for more information, so that we can
17 be prepared for cross-examination as to the basis for these additional
18 opinions that the witness is providing. Otherwise, I agree with you. We
19 do not object on foundation to the matters that are in the report.
20 Thank you.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, if you would pay proper attention to the
22 foundation for the answers you expect the witness to give and to
23 introduce the matter in such a way that no issue of foundation arises,
24 and if the Defence would consider what issues even in respect of
25 foundation could be left for cross-examination if the foundation is not
1 complete or if it's flawed in your view, to what extent it's really
2 necessary to deal with it and interrupt the flow of evidence, then we
3 might together find the balance I think we need at this moment.
4 Mr. Theunens, you've got 25 minutes to think about an answer of
5 the last question that was put to you by Mr. Misetic.
6 We'll have a break, and we will resume at 11.00.
7 --- Recess taken at 10.37 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 11.05 a.m.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens, the last question, you still remember
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, Mr. President.
12 I have not included any orders by General Gotovina to Major Juric
13 in my report because I didn't come across such documents while conducting
14 my research. However, I have included documents that indicate that
15 General Gotovina issues orders directly to the 72nd Military Police
16 Battalion, as well as orders indicating cooperation Major Juric and an OG
17 commander, OG Zadar, for example. That is 65 ter 419. I have also
18 included -- I apologise for the transcript.
19 I have also included documents in my report that indicate that,
20 for example, the 3rd Company of the 72nd Military Police Battalion
21 conducts combat operations. That can be found, for example, at page 221
22 of my report, 65 ter 1072.
23 The fact that a unit of the 72nd Military Police Battalion
24 carries out a combat task or combat operations implies, at least from the
25 military point of view, a subordination relation whereby this company is
1 subordinated to an operational commander.
2 JUDGE ORIE: In view of specific tasks then.
3 THE WITNESS: Exactly, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
5 Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Let's move to the next exhibit, next document, and this is 65
8 ter 3114.
9 Q. This is an order by General Gotovina, dated 2nd August 1995. The
10 subject line is: "72nd VP military police battalion," and it deals with
11 mobilisation. "Order: Mobilise to full strength. Time of mobilisation:
13 Mr. Theunens, please tell us the significance, if any, of this
14 specific order to mobilise the 72nd VP in Split for the subordination of
15 this unit.
16 A. Your Honour, this document shows that on the 2nd of August, the
17 72nd Military Police Battalion is a unit of the Split Military District
18 and is subordinated to General Gotovina.
19 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
21 Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: That is Exhibit P1124, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Exhibit P1124 is admitted into evidence.
24 Mr. Waespi, if the witness makes reference to a certain document
25 in his answer under a 65 ter number, I wonder whether it would not be
1 wise that in order to understand his answer, that it be made available;
2 and if it's a 65 ter number, it's not.
3 MR. WAESPI: We were planning to include that in a list of
4 documents tendered from the bar table at the end of his testimony. We
5 assume that the Defence will use quite a number of these documents in
6 their cross-examination, so our plan was to wait until the end.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, which --
8 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I don't necessarily have a problem --
9 I don't have a problem with whatever document he specifically referenced.
10 I just wondered in light of your order about how you wanted us to
11 approach the documents, and since we're waiting on guidance from the
12 Trial Chamber, in other words, you clearly stated in your order, you
13 didn't want us to be putting in a lot of documents from the report,
14 unless they're specifically disputed or --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Well, disputed. Here, apparently, in a specific
16 question put to the witness, he relies on a certain document for his
18 MR. MISETIC: Yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: There, of course, there is, I would say, there is a
20 need for the Chamber to --
21 MR. MISETIC: I was unclear. What I'm saying is I agree with
22 you. I have no objection to that. I am speaking now to the issue of a
23 bar table coming at the end. That may be what the issue is in light of
24 your order.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I understood the bar table aspect here to be
1 that it's saved for a rainy day, and that we then get them all together,
2 instead of having them introduced one by one through the witness.
3 The disadvantage, Mr. Waespi, is that we are deprived from an
4 opportunity to look at the documents when we're still hearing the
5 evidence of this witness, because it's not accessible for us.
6 So, therefore, perhaps you could -- if you could produce that
7 list in an ongoing fashion so that the documents can already be assigned
8 a number, if only being marked for identification, but that at least the
9 Chamber has access to this material.
10 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, again, and I don't want to belabour
12 this - so perhaps during the next break or afterwards, you can explain it
13 to us - but paragraph 30 of your decision of 17 November 2008 states in
14 the last sentence: "The Prosecution is invited to only tender documents
15 referenced in the expert report which are necessary for such an
17 However the Court wishes to deal with it is fine with me, just so
18 that we know in cross-examination whether we're still required per the
19 Court's order to challenge the summaries of the documents even if they're
20 not tendered in evidence.
21 JUDGE ORIE: We'll give you guidance on that.
22 MR. MISETIC: Thank you, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I'll have to look at it in more detail, also in view
24 of the experience we have at this moment.
25 Mr. Waespi.
1 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
2 Just on this point, obviously, in the time given, I can't go
3 through all the documents, the key documents, so I will address at the
4 end the documents that are remaining.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Within the limits of our decision.
6 MR. WAESPI: Certainly, Mr. President.
7 65 ter 3119.
8 Q. This is the offensive operation order with attachments, dated
9 2nd August 1995
10 General Gotovina.
11 And if we go back to the first page, we see that there is an
12 attachment, number 7, "Security Plan," to which we'll go in a moment.
13 But at this point, I would like to go to page 17, which addresses
14 transportation. That's at paragraph 4 at the bottom.
15 I'll read the relevant part on this page and the next one: "Use
16 establishment motor vehicles for the transportation of personnel,
17 materiel, and equipment.
18 "Send requests for additional transportation of personnel,
19 materiel and equipment to the superior command."
20 Next page in the English: "72nd VP battalion with reinforcements
21 shall be in charge of regulating and controlling traffic."
22 MR. WAESPI: Yes. This is page 14, 15 in B/C/S, which we have
23 found now.
24 Q. Mr. Theunens, this paragraph 4, as it relates to the VP section,
25 how is that related to the issue of subordination of the military police
1 72nd unit to General Gotovina?
2 A. Your Honours, this entry in the order for attack shows that the
3 72nd Military Police Battalion is subordinated to General Gotovina.
4 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender the document, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: No objection.
6 Mr. Registrar.
7 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit number P1125, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE ORIE: P1125 is admitted into evidence.
9 May I ask one question? If I look at this order and if I look at
10 the task assign, if I think about the earlier explanation you gave about
11 the daily operational command, I wouldn't consider this to be a daily
12 matter, but a rather, broad task, where I would expect that orders on
13 where to go, et cetera, that that would be the daily implementation of
14 it, perhaps left to others. I'm just trying to understand.
15 You said the word "daily" operational chain of command was
16 totally superfluous, where I see apparently that sometimes tasks are
17 assigned on a broad sense. Of course, on the basis of this, you wouldn't
18 know where to go, so there must be more.
19 Is that an idiotic thought? Well, apart from that, is that a
20 thought that you would --
21 Let me phrase it in a better way: Is it something that sounds
22 reasonable to you; or are there any reasons to say, no, that's not a
23 correct distinction you are suggesting?"
24 THE WITNESS: No, Mr. President. Your presentation is very
25 correct, if I am allowed to express myself in that way. Two comments.
1 Detailed instructions, for example, the military police but for
2 also the artillery or other units, will be included in the annexes. That
3 brings me to the second comment: This is the offensive order for attack
4 or the order for the offensive operation, which is the first order. It
5 sets the overall framework. I will not use too much time by going
6 through the order, but this is the start of the whole thing, at the level
7 of the Split Military District at least.
8 General Gotovina has received an order from the chief of the Main
9 Staff to conduct an operation. He uses that order to prepare orders for
10 his subordinate units. The first order is the offensive operation order.
11 The template looks very standardised. You start with an overview of the
12 enemy situation. You then, as a commander, you explain the submission
13 you have received. Subsequently, you explain what your unit will do, and
14 this is all done according to particular procedures. Then you explain
15 the orders or the task of the subordinate units.
16 This order is issued on the 2nd of August; however, once the
17 operation is launched, there will be new orders. That's what I have
18 tried to explain in part 1 of the report, when I talk about the command
19 process. Orders are given continuously, and then, of course, in that
20 context, the word "daily" makes sense, because then there will be an
21 order, for example, given at the evening meeting.
22 Certain instructions will be issued; that mission will be
23 implemented; there are new situational developments; and, again, these
24 developments, as well as other instructions from the superior command,
25 will bring the commander - in this case, the military district
1 commander - to issue again orders. It's continuously happening.
2 So that hopefully explains the expression "daily."
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Waespi.
5 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Now we go to the annex that was mentioned by the witness, which
7 is 65 ter 171.
8 Q. It's called Plan Of Security Measures. We see on the first page,
9 on the top left, the approval of General Ante Gotovina, and we see on the
10 last page the deputy commander OG North for SIS, Zeljko Pavic.
11 Now, before we go into details, could you briefly explain what
12 this document is, especially as it relates to the person who signed the
14 A. Your Honours, this is one of the annexes I mentioned, I mean the
15 annexes to the order for attack. This is the plan of security measures
16 for Operational Group North. As we see in the previously admitted
17 document, General Gotovina has decided to create four OGs: North, Sinj,
18 Sibenik, and Zadar.
19 It should actually be -- it's not the deputy commander, but
20 assistant commander for SIS, so for security and intelligence.
21 Zeljko Pavic, he here in this plan gives instructions to his
22 personnel, i.e., the units of OG North, in order to implement certain
23 measures before combat operations, during combat operations, and after
24 combat operations.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens. Let's go into a couple of entries.
1 The first entry I'd like to refer you to is on page 2, item 7;
2 and that's also on page 2 in the B/C/S version.
3 I quote: "Measures ..." -- the first column as we see from the
4 first page is "Measures."
5 "Energetically prevent any attempted intelligence activities and
6 access to the zone of operations by members of the UN and UNMOs" and as
7 executors, we have the military police and MUP.
8 MR. WAESPI: The second entry I'd like to look at is on page 3 of
9 the English, point 5.
10 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I apologise, but would it be possible
11 to also have the original on the screen when we're looking at these?
12 I don't know if it would be --
13 MR. WAESPI: Yes. We can actually -- we only need the left side
14 of the English translations. That's the key ones. So we can actually
15 keep both vertically divided, yes, if that suits Defence purpose.
16 Q. Number 5 is: "Collecting and transporting the population trapped
17 in liberated territory in collection centres." That's the measure; and
18 as the executor, we have units of the HVO VP 72nd Battalion.
19 Next item, 6, is: "Discovering, arresting, and bringing in enemy
20 soldiers and officers to the following locations," and locations are
21 listed. Executor units of OG North VP.
22 And the next item is item 9.
23 MR. WAESPI: I think it's B/C/S next page.
24 Q. Measures: "Prevent burning and looting of facilities in the
25 liberated territory, immediately station personnel of the MUP, special
1 MUP units, and VP in large towns to secure the town and important
2 buildings." The executors here commanders of the OG North units, PD, and
3 VP check-points.
4 Yes. These are the references I wanted to bring your attention
5 to. Now, what's the significance of those entries in relation to the
6 subordination of the MP units to the operational commander?
7 A. Your Honours, these -- these entries mean that the operational
8 commander can give orders to the military police in relation to the
9 implementation of these tasks. This does not rule out that at the same
10 time the military police unit can also receive instructions from the
11 military police administration as to how they will implement these tasks.
12 That second aspect is not visible from this security plan.
13 Q. Now, the plan is -- the document is called "Security Plan," or
14 "Plan of Security Measures."
15 What's the significance of a plan in this respect?
16 A. Your Honours, based on my review of not only the order for
17 attack, but the following orders, the plan -- I mean the word "plan"
18 refers to the fact that it's a schedule, but it doesn't mean to what --
19 it doesn't mean what we formally understand under plan, like that it's a
20 project. This is not a project.
21 It has been signed by the assistant commander for SIS of OG
22 North; and because of the approval by the commander of the Split Military
23 District, i.e., General Gotovina, it has become an order, and that's also
24 why this included as an annex to the order for attack.
25 I also just like to -- I like to draw your attention to the fact
1 that when you look at the table that's on the right side, okay, we
2 identify measures, executor. That is visible actually on the first page.
3 The third column establishes with whom the executor has to
4 cooperate in order to implement the measure. The timing states, okay,
5 when it is to be done. Very importantly is controls. Controls means
6 here verify. Who verifies or who is entitled to verify the
7 implementation or the degree of implementation of the measure.
8 That's a reflection of command and control doctrine.
9 MR. WAESPI: Mr. President, I'd like to tender 65 ter 161.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Since there are no objections --
11 Mr. Mikulicic.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, Your Honour. I have no objections, but I
13 would like to raise a question of foundation as it regards to count
14 number 9 referred to special unit police.
15 I would like witness to answer which is the special police meant
16 in this document.
17 JUDGE ORIE: I would not mind if he would be asked to explain
18 that, and I do agree with you that it's not an objection which could
19 oppose at this moment admission, but if the witness would know.
20 Now, you said item 9. We are talking about -- we have several
21 series of numbers. Is that on the third page of the document?
22 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, it is, Your Honour.
23 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour --
24 JUDGE ORIE: There is 9, which is --
25 MR. MISETIC: Since we're already on this topic, Mr. President, I
1 was going to save it for cross, but if he could also explain what he --
2 why MUP is included there and whether General Gotovina was issuing orders
3 to MUP.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Two questions, Mr. Theunens, in 9, which -- the
5 special police in 9, "special MUP units," it says.
6 You're referring to special MUP units, Mr. Mikulicic?
7 MR. MIKULICIC: I am, Your Honour.
8 MR. MISETIC: I'm referring to the one before that, which says
9 "personnel of the MUP, special MUP units" - no comma - "special MUP units
10 and VP."
11 So I'm referring to the the first part of whether --
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 Mr. Theunens, could you explain or give more details about who
14 were addressed under point 9.
15 THE WITNESS: Under point 9, indeed, there, mention is made of
16 special MUP units, as well as civilian police.
17 However, my understanding - and, of course, I base it also on the
18 analysis of the other documents included in my report - is that if units
19 or organisations are identified under "Measures," it has no subordination
20 implications. It is obvious that - and we can see that actually from the
21 other documents discussed in the report - that the implementation of
22 certain tasks will imply cooperation between different organisations.
23 One of the conclusions I draw in the report is that special
24 police units, at least those of the Republic of Croatia
25 subordinated to the military district commander during the implementation
1 of their tasks, and I'm -- I will obviously go into details when we
2 address that specific issue.
3 It is actually the entries in the "Executor" column that are the
4 most relevant in the context of command and control.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Mikulicic specifically asked about special
6 MUP units. Could you further clarify, if you know, what these units
7 exactly are.
8 THE WITNESS: My understanding, Mr. President, is that this is --
9 this means the special police, the SJP.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 Mr. Mikulicic, that answers your question, that it's a reference
12 to -- the witness understands this to be a reference to the SJP.
13 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, I'm sorry. But just in light of his
14 last answer on Executor, I would call his attention to page 2, column 7,
15 where MUP, is the, in addition to the VP, is the executor.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens, you see that?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 MR. MISETIC: So my question would be, if the witness thinks that
19 General Gotovina was issuing an order to MUP as the executor.
20 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, while reviewing or while preparing my
21 report, I have not come across documents indicating that General Gotovina
22 was issuing orders to the civilian police.
23 So it may be that this entry refers to a degree of coordination
24 or cooperation between the military police and the civilian police, as is
25 also visible through other documents discussed in my report and which has
1 been addressed in this trial already, in relation, for example, to
2 exchange of correspondence between General Lausic and Mr. Moric.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You say that the -- well, let me refrain from
4 my interpretation of your last answer.
5 Mr. Waespi.
6 MR. WAESPI: Yes. I'd like to tender 171.
7 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
8 Mr. Registrar.
9 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit number P1126, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: P1126 is admitted into evidence.
11 MR. WAESPI: The next document, Mr. President, Your Honours, is
12 65 ter 5797.
13 Q. This is a short order, one page, by the Split Military District
14 commander, General Gotovina, and it refers to an oral order of himself.
15 He orders in paragraph 5: "Police escort and insurance of the
16 column is to be conducted by the members of the 72nd Military Police
17 battalion, Zadar Company, who will wait for the moving column at
18 Zeleni Hrast."
19 And in paragraph 7, he holds the commander of the TRS-5
20 responsible for this order, which dates the 2nd August, 1995.
21 Can you tell us, first of all, what the -- who the commander of
22 the TRS-5 is?
23 A. Your Honours, TRS-5 stands for "Artillery Rocket Group 5."
24 I know it is based on the 14th Artillery Battalion which at that
25 stage is part of the OG Zadar, so one of the four OGs, but I don't have
1 the name of the commander at this stage. I can try to find it.
2 In any event, it is an order to the commander of the Zadar
3 Company of the military police. The order is not signed by Gotovina. It
4 is signed by somebody else for him.
5 Now, in the military, only the chief of staff is authorised to
6 sign in the name of the commander. The chief of staff of the Split
7 Military District at that time is Brigadier Ademi. That also explains,
8 actually, the first line of the order, "Based on the verbal order of
9 General Ante Gotovina."
10 This is an example of a daily or operational task for the
11 military police.
12 Q. And how does that relate to the issue of subordination?
13 A. It confirms the implementation of Article 9 of the 1994 MP rules,
14 as well as the order by General Lausic which we discussed earlier, where
15 the appointment of Major Juric was announced.
16 JUDGE ORIE: When you said that this was not signed, I take it
17 that you wanted to refer to Mr. Gotovina or General Gotovina.
18 THE WITNESS: Yes, I apologise.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please, please proceed.
20 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
21 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, we have no objection to the
22 Prosecution adding this to the 65 ter list or its admission into
24 MR. WAESPI: Yes. I'm grateful for my learned colleague. I'd
25 like to apply to have this added to the 65 ter list.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps the Chamber should have been more
2 precise in this respect as well.
3 If a document does not appear on the 65 ter list, if it's
4 tendered into evidence, and if there's any objection against adding it to
5 the 65 ter list, I would like to know, and this is limited to dealing
6 with this witness at this moment, so it's not a kind of a general ruling.
7 But for this witness tendered includes permission to add it into the
8 65 ter list. Objections should include specific reference to objections
9 against adding it to the 65 ter list.
10 Mr. Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this becomes Exhibit number P1127.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P1127 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Q. The next document I'd like to discuss with you, Mr. Theunens is
15 65 ter 209, again a one-page order, this time by a Colonel Ivan Vukic.
16 It dates the 6th of August, 1995, and it starts out as follows:
17 "On the basis of a verbal order by the commander of the Split Military
18 District of 6 August 1995
19 operational situation, I hereby order."
20 Then several recruitment issues are ordered, and I'm interested
21 in one, point 5, and I quote: "The joint MP company shall deploy its
22 troops in Drnis with the coordinator of the joint company, Major Zeljko
23 Maglov, attaching one platoon each to the 113th Infantry Brigade, the
24 142nd DP, and the 15th DP to their deployment areas."
25 What's the significance of this document in relation to the
1 subordination of the military police, Mr. Theunens?
2 A. Your Honours, this order follows the situation of the 5th of
3 August, which is addressed on English page 221 in my report, where during
4 which according to a report of the 72nd MP Battalion, the 3rd Company of
5 the 72nd MP Battalion and 4th of the 73rd MP Battalion liberated Drnis as
6 a part of the 142nd HV Brigade.
7 Subsequent to that operational activity, Colonel Vukic, commander
8 of OG Sibenik, whereby the 142nd Brigade is part of OG Sibenik, issues a
9 subsequent order to the joint military police company. "Joint" refers to
10 the fact that it includes members of the 72nd and the 73rd MP Battalion.
11 Major Zeljko Maglov, who is the coordinator for the joint company, is in
12 peacetime the commander of the 73rd Military Police Battalion.
13 The fact that the joint MP company is included in the list of
14 units of OG Sibenik, which are to implement a task, indicates that the
15 joined military police company is subordinated for regular or daily
16 operational tasks to the commander of OG Sibenik, i.e., an operational
17 commander who in his turn is subordinated to the commander of the Split
18 Military District, General Gotovina.
19 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
21 Mr. Registrar.
22 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P1128, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: P1128 is admitted into evidence.
24 MR. WAESPI: The next document is 1029, 65 ter 1029.
25 Q. It's an order by General Gotovina, dated 7 August 1995.
1 "In accordance with the need and newly created situation in the
2 zone of responsibility, and in order to have a more efficient
3 organisation and performance of the military police units, I order:
4 "1. The task of the military police and the barrier
5 check-points in the area of Bosansko Grahovo shall be taken over by the
6 military police units of the HVO.
7 "2. The VP unit form the composition of the 72nd VP battalion
8 which has so far carried out the tasks in the area of Bosansko Grahovo is
9 redeployed and shall reinforce the military police unit which is carrying
10 out tasks in the area of the town of Knin
11 And, lastly, in paragraph 3, we see that: "Responsible for its
12 execution are the commander of the 72nd Military Police Battalion and the
13 chief of administration of the military police of HVO."
14 We also see who the document is delivered to.
15 Mr. Theunens, the significance, if any, of this document to the
16 issue of subordination?
17 A. Your Honour, this -- Your Honours, excuse me, this order is also
18 discussed on English page 224 part 2 of my report, and it confirms the
19 subordination of the 72nd Military Police Battalion to the command of the
20 Split Military District, General Gotovina, for daily or regular military
21 police task.
22 Also of interest is that this document indicates that there
23 exists another subordination relation with the military police of the
24 HVO, whereby, according to this order, General Gotovina has the authority
25 to issue orders to the chief of the military police administration in the
1 HVO, which is not the situation in the HV.
2 Q. And can you explain what the HVO is?
3 A. HVO stands for "Croatian Defence Council" and is the name or the
4 acronym used to identify the Bosnian Croatian armed forces, i.e., Croats
5 who live in Bosnia-Herzegovina and who established their own armed forces
6 during the conflict.
7 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
8 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
10 Mr. Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit number P1129, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: P1129 is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 The next document, 65 ter 884, a two-page document in the
15 original, dated 11th August 1995
16 Q. This an order by General Gotovina, apparently signed for him
17 again, and it reads in the major part: "Due to an increase in requests
18 for sending military police to carry out military police tasks for
19 special interest and importance, I hereby order:
20 "1. The 72nd Battalion of the military police is relieved of its
21 tasks of securing the structures of the command, which they have been
22 securing on the basis of recent orders and a security plan."
23 Again, Mr. Theunens, this order in relation to the 72nd military
24 police, what is the significance in relation to subordination of the
25 military police to the operational commanders?
1 A. Your Honours, this order confirms the subordination of the
2 72nd Military Police Battalion for the regular or the daily military
3 police tasks to the commander of Split Military District.
4 It is also important to notice that securing structure of the
5 command, i.e., command post, is a regular task for military police, but
6 it can also be carried out by other forces. That is exactly what
7 General Gotovina is ordering here.
8 He orders the members of OG Sinj -- there is a renaming of the
9 operational groups around that time period or a reorganisation, whereby
10 the existing four operational groups are restructured into three
11 operational groups, if I remember well.
12 So General Gotovina orders the newly created OGs to organise the
13 security of command post with their own regular forces instead of with
14 the military police.
15 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
17 Mr. Registrar.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit number P1130, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: P1130 is admitted into evidence.
20 MR. WAESPI: There are two last documents in this section. The
21 first one is 65 ter 2062.
22 Q. This is an order again signed for the commander,
23 General Gotovina, 13 August 1995
24 order to secure tactical in-depth defence for the remaining or inserted
25 groups of enemy soldiers, I order:
1 "1. Commander of the 72nd Military Police Battalion shall
2 urgently send an ATG
3 search and mop-up the general area of Strmica for the remaining or
4 inserted enemy groups.
5 "2. The search of the terrain is to be carried out together with
6 parts of the 6th DP deployed in the area of Strmica.
7 "3. Details of the task will be given to ATG commander upon
8 reporting to the Split Military District command - Knin IZM in Knin."
9 The deadline is immediately.
10 Mr. Theunens, the significance, if any, of this order for the
11 issue of subordination?
12 A. Your Honours, it's -- this order's coherent with the earlier
13 orders we discussed, i.e., that the commander of the Split Military
14 District, the operational commander in general, can issue orders to his
15 military police battalion, i.e., that the military police battalion - in
16 this case, the 72nd - is subordinated to the operational commander for
17 regular MP tasks.
18 Maybe I can add that the anti-terrorist platoon of the
19 72nd Military Police Battalion is also at earlier stages used for what I
20 would describe as combat tasks, and I have included such a
21 resubordination record in my report, resubordination order by
22 General Gotovina, a similar order, but dated the 2nd of August. It's on
23 page 211 in part 2, English page 211.
24 And for your information, Strmica is located approximately 15
25 kilometres north of Knin on the border with Bosnia-Herzegovina.
1 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
2 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document.
3 JUDGE ORIE: No objections.
4 Mr. Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit number P1131, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: P1131 is admitted into evidence.
7 MR. WAESPI: The final document in this section is D567 [sic].
8 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, counsel. I think that's D, is it not? I
9 think it's on the screen as --
10 MR. WAESPI: Yes, that's what I tried to say.
11 MR. KEHOE: It came up on the screen as P. Sorry.
12 MR. WAESPI:
13 Q. This is the analysis of the use of the military police of the OS
14 of RH in Operation Storm, and it's signed by General Lausic, and it dates
15 16 September 1995
16 MR. WAESPI: The first one is at paragraph 4.1, which is page 6
17 of the English, at the bottom, and also B/C/S.
18 Q. I'll read out: "4. Participation of military police units in
19 combat operations in Operation Storm.
20 "At the order of the Split ZP commander, a company of the 72nd VP
21 battalion, which included the anti-terrorist platoon of the
22 72nd Battalion and members of the regular military police, was
23 subordinated to the 1st HGZ at the start of the operation to liberate
24 Knin and was in the echelon."
25 MR. WAESPI: Next entry is at page 8 English; page 7 B/C/S,
1 paragraph 6.2.
2 Q. The second subparagraph, I quote: "The anti-terrorist platoon of
3 the 72nd VP battalion continued its engagement in combat operations under
4 the direct command of the Split ZP commander and participated in
5 Operation Maestral."
6 MR. WAESPI: The next item is on page 10 in the English and 9
8 Q. At the end of paragraph 8 in the English, I quote: "A great
9 contribution to raising the general level of security in the newly
10 liberated area of RH can also be made by the commanders of HV units, from
11 the level of company commander to that of RH ZP commander and chiefs of
12 the HV GS and MORH Administration."
13 MR. WAESPI: The last paragraph is on page 11 of the English, at
14 the top under number 2, which is page 10 in the B/C/S.
15 Q. I quote: "That HV ZP commanders should analyse the proposition
16 of HV units in their area of responsibility, particularly Home Guard
17 units in places where their presence is not necessary, and redeploy them.
18 "Through the Defence administration and unit commanders, update
19 lists of mobilised and demobilised HV members, record the date of
20 demobilisation in the military reserve ID so it can be known who is a HV
21 member and who is not, because many people are wearing HV uniforms and
22 insignia, and we do not know whether they are mobilised."
23 This last quote is from one of the proposals that Major General
24 Lausic added to his analysis.
25 My question to you, Mr. Theunens, is, again, the significance of
1 these entries in this analysis by Major General Lausic to the issue of
2 subordination of the military police?
3 MR. MISETIC: Objection, Your Honour.
4 On this particular issue, and I'm sorry for causing the
5 interruption, but I do think that the relevant portions on that question
6 need to be put to the witness. Page 2, at the bottom in English is, I
7 think, the more relevant portion to that specific issue; and in fairness,
8 it should also be put to the witness. It begins "The combination of the
9 preparation ..."
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi.
11 MR. WAESPI: I'm happy to do that.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
13 MR. WAESPI:
14 Q. "The combination of the preparation, planning, leading, and
15 commanding by the VP Administration and the daily operational commanding
16 by the commanders of the HV ZP and the HV OS made it possible to carry
17 out all the tasks within the competence of the military police and use of
18 VP units in assault operations."
19 Mr. Theunens, can you please answer my question?
20 A. Your Honours, the analysis by the chief of the military police
21 administration, General Lausic, dated 16th of September - which I would
22 like to add is also sent to the commanders of the military districts,
23 together, of course, with other addressees, and they are mentioned on
24 page 12 - for command and control is concerned shows that the
25 instructions that exist in the PM Rules in 1994, i.e., Articles 8 and 9,
1 were according to Lausic implemented during Operation Storm.
2 Also of importance is, and I touched upon that earlier, that
3 Lausic specifically mentions that in the zone of responsibility of the
4 Split Military District, military police units, i.e., parts of the 72nd
5 and the 73rd Military Police Battalion, are used for combat tasks. The
6 fact that they are used for combat tasks together with other forces
7 implies command and control for the execution of that task by the
8 operational commander.
9 In relation to the observations Major-General Lausic makes on the
10 issue of security and also the proposals, I see it as a reflection of the
11 duties of the commander, which also includes the enforcement of
12 discipline among his forces, and this applies throughout the operational
13 chain of command.
14 I don't know whether you wish me to comment on the -- Lausic's
15 proposal in relation to the record-keeping for demobilised forces,
16 because I believe that is really not related to command and control.
17 Q. Yes. Please go ahead.
18 A. From the documents I reviewed for my report - and if you wish so,
19 I can point at the specific documents - we know that Home Guard units
20 also include people who originate from the areas that were under Serb
21 control prior to Operation Storm. These people, according to the
22 documents I have reviewed, are vulnerable to revenge; not all of them but
23 some of them. This is recognised, for example, by the commanders; not
24 only by the operational commanders but also by, for example, assistant
25 commanders for political affairs, as well as assistant commander for SIS.
1 There is, indeed, a problem also with, as Lausic points out,
2 people wearing uniform, military uniform, whereby it's not clear whether
3 they are members of the military or not. Therefore, in order to be able
4 to establish whether a person in uniform is, indeed, a service member or
5 not, one of the measures that can be taken is to keep proper records of
6 the forces who are demobilised. This is important, because once the
7 forces are demobilised, they do not fall any more under military
8 discipline, at least based on the reports and the documents I have
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Theunens, you may have noticed that it takes a
11 while to finish the translation, so if you would make a pause now and
12 then and speak a bit slower.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes, Mr. President.
14 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 I'd like to move to the next topic, and this is notice, which
16 it's discussed in paragraphs 57 to 65 in the executive summary.
17 So if P1013, page 31 in e-court and page 18 in B/C/S could be
18 brought up, please.
19 Q. It's a large document, so it might take a while to be shown. Let
20 me read out four lines from paragraph 57, starting at line 3.
21 MR. WAESPI: It's paragraph 57 -- yes, I think it's a later page.
22 I might have misspoken. Not page 31. You just need to move on a couple
23 of pages. Yes, here we are, 57.
24 Q. "Prior to Operation Storm, Oluja, General Gotovina is aware that
25 members of the 4th Guards Brigade, 7th Guards Brigade, 81st Guards
1 Battalion, 126th Home Guard Regiment, 134th Home Guard Regiment, and
2 other Split Military District units participant in widespread looting and
3 arson during and after 'Ljeto 95'."
4 Now, in your report, in section 6, you discuss what you call the
5 situational awareness, and that's on page 114 in your first report. Can
6 you tell us the relationship between situational awareness and notice as
7 you define it in your report?
8 A. Your Honours, situational awareness as such -- I mean, the
9 concept of situation awareness is not defined - excuse me - in HV
10 military doctrine. I found the concept of situation assessment, which is
11 described in the 1993 -- well, I will read out the title: "Instructions
12 on the Procedures Carried Out by the Command Staff on the receipt,
13 issuance, and the forwarding of decisions - orders." This is 65 ter
15 This is part of the command and control process whereby the
16 commander has to know -- I mean, situation assessment, it's a
17 comprehensive analysis of all elements that might complicate or
18 facilitate the execution of a specific combat order.
19 The relevance of notice is, of course, that a commander has to be
20 familiar with his troops. Not only with numerical aspects like how much
21 soldiers, how many tanks or guns, but also it's the reputation of these
22 troops, their combat readiness, their background.
23 When I talk about reputation, well, certain units may be better
24 trained than others. As I mentioned earlier in relation to the Home
25 Guard Regiments, the composition of units may have significant impact on
1 the manner, how they will implement the mission, and also how they will
2 act or can act once the mission has been accomplished. Therefore, I
3 consider this relevant in the context of -- for the issue of notice.
4 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to a few documents in relation to notice.
5 The first one is 65 ter 2883, and this dates 15th August 1995, and this
6 is authored by General Gotovina.
7 I'd like to go to English page 7, paragraph 1.7.
8 Q. The first one, it says: "Military discipline and combat morale
9 in the units was exceptionally high in the preparation, course, and
10 conclusion of combat operations."
11 And paragraph 2.2 discusses, or says, I quote: "Command and
12 control of units was uninterrupted and at the required level."
13 What's the significance in relation to the aspect of notice,
14 Mr. Theunens?
15 A. Your Honours, these are the conclusions drawn by General Gotovina
16 following a request by the chief of the Main Staff to inform him about
17 what we would call in the military lessons learned during Operation
18 Storm. And in relation to notice, it is relevant in the sense that
19 according to General Gotovina, his conclusion in relation to military
20 discipline is that, as was read out, military discipline and combat
21 morale were exceptionally high during the preparation, the course, and
22 the conclusion of combat operations."
23 This refers directly to Operation Storm, Oluja.
24 The fact that command and control was uninterrupted and at the
25 required level indicates that there were no problems on that level, and
1 that at all times the superior commander, i.e., the military district
2 commander, was in a position to issue orders to his subordinate units, as
3 well as receive information and reporting from these units on the degree
4 of implementation of the orders he had issued.
5 MR. WAESPI: I'd like to tender this document, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE ORIE: I hear of no objections.
7 Mr. Registrar.
8 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit number P1132, Your Honours.
9 JUDGE ORIE: P1132 is admitted into evidence.
10 MR. WAESPI: Now, Mr. President, the next document is a large one
11 in many senses, and I will -- this is the operational diary of the
12 military district. This is P71, and we will discuss quite a few entries.
13 We will start with the English page 43, which is page 22
14 in B/C/S.
15 Q. And while it's coming up can you explain, and I think you already
16 did it yesterday en passant, what this document is, who compiles it based
17 on your experience, your analysis of all these documents?
18 A. Mr. President, an operational diary is an official document which
19 is kept from the level -- I mean, depending on the army, from the level
20 of brigade onwards. During war, it can also be called a war diary. It
21 includes all the information that is considered important in order to
22 understand the development of the operations, as well as orders that have
23 been given, degree of implementation, as well as minutes of -- or
24 records, I apologise, records of meetings that are held at the command
1 The diary is kept in general by duty officers in the operations
2 centre or by clerks they may have, and it's the chief of staff who is
3 responsible for the contents of the operational diary or the war diary.
4 Of interest in this diary, in my view, is that they include
5 detailed records of the working meetings, the daily command meetings that
6 take place at the forward command post of the Split Military District.
7 These meetings -- at these meetings, the commander,
8 General Gotovina, or his deputy, General Ademi, is present and presides
9 the meetings. He will generally start by providing his views on the
10 current situation. Then the members of the subordinate units or other
11 attendees will provide their views on operations they have conducted,
12 proposals they may have for future operations, problems they have
13 encountered, and all other issues that are considered relevant in the
14 context of this command meeting.
15 Q. Let's go to the entry we see on the screen, and if you could
16 always, if you can, indicate which date we are talking about; and for
17 that purpose, you sometimes have to flip back a couple of pages.
18 This first entry says: "VP, military police, they entered
19 Grahovo and they are patrolling the town. The check-point in /illegible/
20 to assure /illegible/ in Grahovo. The ammunition warehouse in Grahovo
21 burnt down. The army is getting domestic appliances. The security of
22 helicopters in Sinj is OK."
23 First of all, what's the date of this entry and in which context
24 was it made?
25 A. Your Honours, if we go back to English page 39, we can see the
1 title. If we go to the top of the page, the title is, "Working Meeting."
2 I should have explain the methodology that is being used in the war
3 diary. The time refers to the time of the event, i.e., when the
4 information concerning the event is available or when the event takes
5 place. "Reported by" is the person or organisation who provides the
6 information, and "Contents" is -- corresponds with the information.
7 Here, we have the start of the record of the working meeting at
8 the Split Military District command on the 28th of July 1995, which is
9 one day after elements of the Split Military District have captured or
10 have taken control of Glamoc and Bosanska Grahovo during the conduct of
11 Operation Ljeto. Ljeto is addressed in part 2 of my report, on English
12 page 54.
13 So General Gotovina opens the meeting, and then, as I explain,
14 the subordinates of the units or their representatives address the issues
15 they consider relevant for the meeting.
16 I should also add that such meetings are actually a unique
17 opportunity where all the commanders or their representatives are
18 present, are physically present. They see each other. They exchange
19 ideas. It's also the occasion for the commander, i.e., in this case,
20 General Gotovina, if he has something important to convene that is
21 relevant for all his subordinate commanders, well, this is one of the
22 most appropriate occasions.
23 Q. Let's go back to that entry I quoted on page 43. In terms of
24 notice, situational awareness of the commander, what's the significance
25 of this entry by the VP?
1 A. The significance, Your Honours, of the information provided by
2 the military police is that according to their observations or their
3 information, certain acts are being committed by forces of the Split
4 Military District in Grahovo, and the commander of the military police or
5 the representative of the military police considered -- considers it
6 important for the commander of the Split Military District to be notified
7 and informed of these facts, of these acts.
8 MR. MISETIC: I would ask for some foundation that these are
9 forces of the Split Military District.
10 MR. WAESPI: No problem in asking him that, although that's a
11 question raised during cross-examination.
12 Q. But, Mr. Theunens, can you answer the question?
13 A. As I mentioned, Operation Ljeto is discussed in part 2 of my
14 report, English page 45. I have relied extensively on the book by
15 General Gotovina, which is introduced as P482.
16 And according to the information I found there, as well as other
17 documents, I conclude that it is the units of the 4th and the 7th Guards
18 Brigade who take control of Grahovo on the 28th of July, 1995. The
19 reference for that are P482; 65 ter 5712; P71, I mean the document we see
20 now on page 35, English page 35; as well as P5697.
21 I don't know, but maybe the easiest thing is to go to page 35 of
22 this document, if we want to.
23 MR. MISETIC: I should have been more clear in my objection. My
24 specific objection related to foundation with respect to this specific
25 entry on the 28th of August, that it was at that point in time as a crime
1 being committed by forces of the Split Military District, as opposed to
2 other forces who were involved in the operation.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Would you address that as well.
4 Please proceed.
5 THE WITNESS: Indeed, Your Honours. From the sources I
6 discussed, I concluded that the 4th and the 7th Guards brigade, which are
7 units of the Split Military District at that moment in time, have entered
8 Bosanska Grahovo at 9.40, and, subsequently, the -- I mean, the 7th at
9 9.40; and the 4th Guards Brigade is at 10.10. I apologise.
10 I agree that the entry -- the army is getting domestic
11 appliances. At first sight or when taken in isolation, it does not allow
12 to draw any conclusions as to which army you're talking about.
13 But from the military point of view, if units of the Split
14 Military District have entered the town we are talking about in the
15 morning, and at the same time the military police -- no, excuse me, if
16 later then that the military police reports that the army is getting
17 domestic appliances, it's not a task of the military police in general to
18 address activities of enemy forces. We have the intelligence officer to
19 do that.
20 So from the sources I reviewed, I concluded - and, again, I would
21 also invite the reader to look at the other entries in the diary - I
22 concluded that the army refers to the 4th, the 7th Guards Brigade, as
23 well as other units, but in any event, units of the Split Military
25 MR. MISETIC: Again, I apologise for the interruptions. I
1 sincerely do. I think there's an issue of terminology here with the
2 witness, which I think the witness will hopefully agree with me on. I
3 was referring to the difference between Split Military District units and
4 the HVO, and not enemy forces, unless the witness is arguing that HVO is
5 part of the Split Military District.
6 THE WITNESS: I should have been more precise, Your Honours.
7 Actually, I should have said forces under the command of
8 General Gotovina, which - and Mr. Misetic is right - did not only include
9 Split Military District but also elements of the HVO.
10 So I thank you for that comment.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, I'm looking at the clock and wondering
12 whether this would be a suitable time to have a break.
13 MR. WAESPI: Yes, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Before the last break, I said that we have to find a
15 balance. I think we're coming closer to that balance.
16 We will resume at 10 minutes to 1.00.
17 --- Recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 12.58 p.m.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Before we continue and before I forget, we have a
20 PDF version of the files, report of Mr. Theunens. We inquired with the
21 Prosecution whether there was any Word version available. Apparently,
22 there was not, and PDF files have some disadvantages. Well, since
23 Mr. Theunens provided at least draft reports to the Defence in a
24 searchable format, I think the equality of arms would -- no. That's, of
25 course, between the parties.
1 Is there any way that the Chamber could receive at any moment,
2 and I'm also addressing you, Mr. Theunens, the final version of your
3 report, I'm not talking about any earlier version, in a searchable
4 format, most likely Word?
5 THE WITNESS: I have, Your Honours, a Word version of the report;
6 but because during the trial I added the 65 ter numbers and the P and the
7 D numbers, the footnotes have become longer, and, therefore, the layout,
8 i.e., the pagination, is not identical to the filed version any more.
9 If that doesn't represent a problem, then I have no difficulty in
10 providing the Word version.
11 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, the Defence has converted the PDF file
12 into a searchable PDF format, and we would be happy to provide the
13 searchable PDF to Chambers, if that solves the problem.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Because the one we have is not searchable. I
15 think that would be preferable above having a version in which other
16 information appears, and may I take it that you would intend to share
17 that to Mr. Waespi as well --
18 MR. MISETIC: Yes, of course, Mr. President.
19 JUDGE ORIE: -- so that searches may done of the weekend?
20 MR. MISETIC: Yes.
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's appreciated, the assistance.
22 I don't take it that we make it a form of filing or anything.
23 The filing is the PDF as we have it, and this is just something that
24 assists us in our work.
25 That being on the record, Mr. Registrar, I take it that
1 Mr. Misetic will be in touch with you or with Mr. Nilsson.
2 Mr. Waespi.
3 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
4 Just in terms of scheduling, I tried to do my best, but it
5 appears that I won't finish today within these, I think, 5.5 hours
6 originally allocated to me. My sense is that I will need much of Monday
7 to conclude my examination-in-chief. And having --
8 JUDGE ORIE: We'll consider that. And always what is net time
9 and what is -- I'll ask Mr. Registrar to at least inform us on how much
10 time you effectively used, not being interrupted either by the Chamber or
11 the Defence or whatever, because we usually take net time.
12 Please proceed.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Let's go to the next entry in this exhibit. This is on page 47
15 in the English, and I think page 245 B/C/S.
16 Q. It has a note at 18.20, "Ademi - meeting," and I quote: "The
17 command-related problems in the units," and then it has the following
18 entry: "The commander of the 2nd Guards Brigade to Glamoc and the
19 commander of the 3rd Guards Brigade in the area of Halapici. Looting and
20 arson reported in the area of Glamoc, Bosanski Grahovo."
21 MR. WAESPI: The next entry I would like to refer you to is on
22 the next page; in English, page 48, and 25 I think in the B/C/S.
23 Q. The entry in the middle of the English, 1 HGZ: "Entry into
24 Halapic and joining with the 2nd HVO GBR
25 setting houses on fire."
1 Then the next entry, a little bit down, Ademi: "The purchases of
2 planks for the units which are setting houses on fire is forbidden."
3 Perhaps also, although it's not directly related but certainly
4 relevant, on the top of the English page: "An order has been given to
5 shoot the legs of all those who are setting fire to the houses and who
6 loot." Comment attributed to the 7th HV GBR.
7 What's the significance, if any, to the notice issue,
8 Mr. Theunens?
9 A. Here, Your Honours, this is the work meeting for the 29th of
10 July, which is presided by the chief of staff of the Split Military
11 District, Brigadier Ademi. We see that the command of the Split Military
12 District, as well as the commands of the subordinate units, are informed
13 of incidents of looting and setting on fire of houses in the zone of
14 responsibility of the Split Military District -- just to correct, in the
15 zone of the operations of the forces that are conducted Operation Ljeto
16 under the command of General Gotovina.
17 I have included the specific order for Operation Ljeto in my
18 report which is 65 ter 2116, which can be found on page 57, English
19 page 57, part 2 of the report.
20 Q. Just for everybody's understanding or reminder, what is Operation
21 Ljeto in all briefness?
22 A. Your Honours, Operation Ljeto is a continuation of operations
23 conducted by the units of the Split Military District and the HVO in an
24 area known as the Livanjsko Polje and continuing into the Dinara
25 Mountains, whereby these forces are advancing from the wider area west of
1 Kupres. They are advancing along the border between Croatia and
2 Bosnia-Herzegovina on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina in order to
3 capture terrain which, based on my review of the documents, is considered
4 of strategic importance in view of future operations against Knin.
5 There's also a linkage made with the situation of the Bihac
6 enclave or safe area in Bosnia-Herzegovina. And when I say there is also
7 a linkage made, this is, for example, done by General Gotovina in his
8 book "Offensive Operations of the HV and HVO," P482, when he talks about
9 the strategic importance of Operation Ljeto as well as the operations
10 that preceded Ljeto.
11 These operations started sometime in November or December --
12 November, excuse me, 1994.
13 Q. And when was it concluded?
14 A. I mean, the Ljeto component, if I can express myself that way, is
15 concluded 28th of July -- I'm sorry, 30th of July. I apologise.
16 Q. Let's move to next page, page 49, the second entry on the top,
17 reported by 72nd VP. "A warning last night about setting fire to houses.
18 There will be no shooting at Croatian soldiers. In Grahovo, all the
19 soldiers except for the 1st HGZ and 3/1 HVO GBR members took part in
20 setting fire to houses."
21 Let me read the next one as well, "HVO VP": "An order for
22 bringing the VP into Glamoc. There has been an attempt to prevent
23 setting fire to houses. All vital facilities have been insured."
24 Then General Tolj: "The church in Glamoc must not burn down."
25 Who is General Tolj?
1 A. General Tolj is the head or the chief of the political
2 administration at the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Croatia
3 Q. And what is the significance in terms of notice of these entries
4 here in this war diary?
5 A. Referring now to the comment or the information provided by the
6 representative of the 72nd Military Police Battalion, and keeping in mind
7 that we know that Grahovo was captured by forces of the 4th Guards,
8 7th Guards HV brigade, as well as other units, according to the
9 72nd Military Police Battalion, all these units except for the 1st HGZ -
10 that is, the 1st Croatian Guard which is also known as the Presidential
11 Guards - they were not part of the Split Military District, but for this
12 operation, at least elements of that unit were subordinated to
13 General Gotovina. The 3/1 is the 3rd Battalion of the 1st HVO Guards
15 So with the exception of these two units, according to the
16 military police, all other units participated in the setting on fire of
17 houses. Grahovo and Glamoc, they were previously under Bosnian Serb
19 Q. And based on your experience of the doctrine, the regulations,
20 why is it significant that General Tolj says that the church in Glamoc
21 must not burn down.
22 A. Well, Tolj doesn't specify which church we're talking about.
23 When I say "which," well, Glamoc being under Bosnian Serb control - and
24 if I remember well, there was a Bosnian Serb majority before the
25 conflict, or at least until the operations in Livanjsko Polje - it could
1 have been the Orthodox church or it could have been a Catholic church.
2 One would have to look at the municipal records in order to see which
3 churches exist in Glamoc at the time of Ljeto.
4 Now, if it was the Orthodox church, that could be seized by
5 media, international media, in order to criticise Croatian armed forces
6 or HV for the operations that were conducted there.
7 JUDGE ORIE: May I ask you one question in that respect? You
8 give a possible explanation. What about the explanation that one wanted
9 to fully respect the religion of those who used that church? That's
10 another reflection on the same entry.
11 What makes you prefer to tell us that it could have a bad impact
12 on publicity, rather than that it could be that one wanted to fully
13 respect the religious feelings of the Serbs?
14 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, of course, what I -- the conclusion I
15 drew is one of the possibilities. The reason why I drew that conclusion,
16 but I don't exclude any other options, is that, well, if the setting on
17 fire of houses is generalised or is taking place on such a scale as being
18 described here, that seems to indicate that one wants to change the
19 ethnic make-up in the area. Because why do you set houses on fire?
20 Hopefully, the people living in these houses are not there any more when
21 the houses are is set on fire.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, let me --
23 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour. Yes, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
25 THE WITNESS: So the houses, I mean based on the information
1 included in the war diary as well as subsequent documents, these are not
2 individual or isolated acts of -- you have frustrated or, I mean,
3 isolated soldiers, but it seems that even the most professional units of
4 the HV, i.e., the Guards Brigades, are generally participating in what
5 appears wide scale or large-scale burning and looting.
6 Again, based on my understanding of the conflict and what I've
7 seen before, these activities can have a significant or usually have a
8 significant impact on civilians in the area. There will not be many
9 civilians who will stay when they see that the houses, maybe not their
10 house but all other houses, are being burnt. Maybe the civilians left
11 before, I don't know.
12 Now, of course, Tolj may have intended with his order or his
13 instruction to respect the religious feelings of the Serbs, but the
14 question will be: How many Serbs are still there. So I certainly do not
15 claim that, well, it must be the Orthodox church and it must be for
16 publicity motives; but in the context of the events that we are seeing
17 here, I think it is a quite likely option that the first concern is,
18 well, what will outside observers think of what we are doing, and what
19 will these thoughts or these opinions of these outside observers - I mean
20 by that media or the UN - what will be the possible impact on the
21 reputation of the armed forces or even at the higher level the
22 international position of our country.
23 JUDGE ORIE: To what extent do you consider that your expertise
24 allows you to make these kind of assessments, what you consider the most
25 likely explanation in view, for example, of the question of whether
1 burning houses of persons would have any better impact on publicity?
2 I mean, I do understand that if you say, Don't put the church to
3 fire, that a possible explanation among many others would be that it
4 would have a bad impact on publicity.
5 Burning houses, would that not have a similar bad impact, and
6 didn't we see a lot of documents in which concerns were expressed in
7 relation to arson? I mean, you're interpreting this entry perhaps not in
8 a very neutral way.
9 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, the main reason for me to interpret
10 it in that way - and, again, I don't want to give an exclusive
11 interpretation; I'm just trying to give what I consider the most likely
12 explanation - is a document by -- well, I'm not sure any more whether it
13 was an assistant commander for political affairs or representative of
14 SIS, during Operation Storm.
15 It is in my report, but I have not yet been able to locate it,
16 where - and I'm summarising the report - he states that, "Well, we have
17 been very good at directing the international media towards Orthodox
18 church, which were preserved, and other important cultural or religious
19 symbols of the Serbs. We even showed to the media how a female HV
20 soldier was handing out cigarettes to UNCRO"; whereby, at the same time,
21 the report shows that efforts were undertaken in an organised manner to
22 prevent international media from accessing areas -- or other areas than
23 those authorised by the members of the military.
24 JUDGE ORIE: So what you're telling us is that that report gives
25 some support for your opinion as to the likelihood of this explanation,
1 rather than other explanations.
2 Of course, what I'm concerned about - let me be very frank with
3 you - is that you didn't, say, have difficulties in finding an
4 explanation, but one could think of this which is supported by that or by
5 another. Rather, you just gave us that one explanation and didn't show
6 any inclination to draw our attention that you were talking in terms of
7 likelihood based on considerations which are certainly not fully
8 supported by what was established to be the basis of your expertise.
9 THE WITNESS: I agree with you, Mr. President.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Whether you agree or not, it's just what I would
11 like to express as my concern.
12 Mr. Waespi, you may proceed.
13 MR. WAESPI: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Let's move on to page 82 in English; and in B/C/S, it's on
15 page 46.
16 Q. The first entry I would like to show to you is on the bottom
17 right of page 82.
18 MR. WAESPI: I think it's the right side, second column in the
19 English version, please. Yes. Thank you very much.
20 Q. Now, this relates, as we can see, and I can put that on the
21 record, on page 47, this relates to the 4th of August, and the entry
22 says: "Civilians entered 144th GBR HV and move with the army."
23 Now, based on your analysis of these documents, what is your
24 comment of this entry.
25 A. One would have to establish --
1 MR. KEHOE: Counsel, could you just point us to where this is on
2 the screen. I'm having a little difficulty.
3 MR. WAESPI: It's on the left side on the screen right now, on
4 the bottom of it.
5 MR. KEHOE: Oh, I see. Thank you very much. Apologies.
6 THE WITNESS: Your Honours, one would have to establish the
7 nature, I mean, of these civilians and what their intentions are. I
8 believe that there is a typo or a writing error. There's no 144th Guards
9 Brigade. It's 144th Brigade, so there's not much more I can say about
11 MR. WAESPI: The next entry is on the next page, 83, left column.
12 Q. Just before General Gotovina talks, it says, as reported by PZ:
13 "Morale is good. Knin must not experience the same treatment as Grahovo.
14 Prevent burning and destruction. OG reinforced with PD members."
15 What's the significance of this entry in relation to notice?
16 A. Your Honours, this is the representative of the department for
17 political affairs or political activities who is speaking. He issues, I
18 won't call it a warning, but a piece of advice to all attendees.
19 I mean, this is the report of the working meeting of the Split
20 Military District command at the 4th Command Post on the 4th of August,
21 to say, Look, Knin shall not or must not experience the same treatment as
22 Grahovo, i.e., the looting and the burning. He also adds like prevent
23 burning and destruction, and he says that in the presence of the other
24 commanders, including General Gotovina.
25 Q. Now, the comment of General Gotovina: "Write an order for the
1 commander of ZM Split and arrest him." What's the significance of that?
2 It obviously doesn't go into notice, but back into disciplinary matters.
3 A. Your Honours, this entry has to be seen in connection with
4 incidents that occurred between the commander of the Split garrison and
5 UNCRO troops, and I have discussed that on English page 353 in the second
6 part of the report.
7 I also refer there to the arrest of the commander of the Split
8 garrison on the orders of Gotovina, and this can be found in this diary
9 at an earlier entry for the 4th of August. Yeah, it's the 4th of August
10 in the morning, and I thought it was 9.50, but I'm not able to locate it
11 at this moment.
12 Q. Can you explain briefly without reference to the entry what this
13 is about?
14 A. Well, from a later order - and that is 65 ter number 1618, which
15 is discussed on page 353 in the English version, part 2 of the report -
16 this is an order by General Gotovina, where he refers to, I quote:
17 "Based on the most recent information on the activities of the Split
18 garrison and particularly the Split
19 the name but maybe it's not necessary, "in relation to today's event in
20 Pakovo Selo, I issue the following order."
21 So, during the command meeting, General Gotovina states, "Well,
22 write an order," or instructs to write an order for the commander of the
23 Split garrison and arrests him. This order is then issued on the 5th of
24 August, whereby General Gotovina explains the background to this order
25 and issues a number of instructions.
1 Now, this order of the 5th of August, which is 65 ter 1618, is
2 not specifically mentioned in the war diary here.
3 Q. Is that within the authority of General Gotovina to fire the
4 commander of the Split
5 A. It is within his authority to arrest him, like to arrest any
6 other subordinate who is allegedly or suspected of having committed
7 serious violations of military discipline, and that can be found in the
8 1992 Code of Military Discipline.
9 Q. Yes. We will come to that in more detail.
10 MR. WAESPI: Let's move on to the next entry, and this is on page
11 94 in the English and page 56 in B/C/S.
12 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, I apologise for rising to my feet.
13 But if the 65 ter that was referenced by the witness concerning this
14 garrison commander is going to be tendered into evidence, I've looked at
15 it and I notice that there are -- there is a translation error in that
16 document. So before it's tendered, if it could be corrected.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. May I then take it that you'll inform
18 Mr. Waespi about your concerns --
19 MR. MISETIC: Yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: -- and that you'll address them before you include
21 them in your list of documents?
22 MR. WAESPI: Yes. In fact, it's already on it when we discuss
23 item number 5. That's tab 46.
24 Thank you, Mr. Misetic, Mr. President.
25 Q. Let's move to the right side of English page 94, the bottom.
1 "Minister: The minority steals and destroys the reputation and honour of
2 Croatian forces."
3 Mr. Theunens, what is the significance of this comment by the
4 minister, and do you know who the minister is?
5 A. This refers to the command meeting of the 9th of August, and we
6 can see that information on page 93.
7 On the same page as there is a reference to an unknown minister,
8 there is also a reference at the top of the page to a Minister Soljic --
9 or Solic. It was my understanding that he was the minister of defence at
10 the time of the entity known as the Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna.
11 When you go to the left side of the page, at the bottom, mention
12 is made there of a General Jelavic who was at the time an assistant
13 minister of defence of the CRHB, Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna, or
14 so-called Croatian Republic of Herceg-Bosna.
15 Q. Thank you. I'll just conclude on this comment. The significance
16 in terms of notice?
17 A. Well, I'm not familiar with the background or the basis for this
18 Minister Solic to make the comments that he makes, but he indicates that
19 he has visited the zone of responsibility, or at least parts of it; and
20 he has made certain observations which he considers important to be known
21 by not only the command of the Split Military District but also his
22 subordinate commanders.
23 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to entry on page 99. Again, it's a Split
24 Military District command briefing, this time on the 11th of August,
25 1995. In B/C/S it's page 60; English, as I said, page 99, on the left
1 column, bottom, OG Sibenik.
2 Q. The comment in the middle is as follows: "Everything is looted.
3 The looting is the problem."
4 Do you know who is reporting that?
5 A. Your Honours, this is the command or the representative of the
6 command of OG Sibenik, which is one of the -- at that stage, there are
7 three OGs. I mean, the order for the reorganisation -- the order by
8 General Gotovina for the reorganisation of the Split Military District
9 forces is issued on the 9th of August. But based on the documents I
10 reviewed, it takes a number of days to implement it. So, at that stage,
11 there is still an OG Sibenik.
12 When we look at page 93, we can see this comment is made at the
13 briefing of the 11th of August, 1995. The entries in the operational
14 diary do not allow to conclude whether General Gotovina attended the
15 meeting or not, at least list name is not mentioned among those who spoke
16 at the meeting.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
18 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to the next entry. This is English page
19 105 and B/C/S 65.
20 Q. We see on the top left that this is a working meeting, dated 14
21 August 1995. The entry I want to focus on is on the second column of
22 this page, the bottom right.
23 PD: "Create lists of officers for all decorations and
24 promotions. Complaint against burning of village Benkovac, /illegible/,
25 et cetera, where there are no Chetniks."
1 Based on your analysis of all these documents, what's your
2 analysis of this entry, Mr. Theunens?
3 A. Well, the entry indicates that there has been burning at
4 Benkovac. It's not clear when this burning has taken place. The use of
5 the term "Chetniks," it's not clear whether the term is used for members
6 of the local Serb forces or for Serb civilians. But the term "Chetnik,"
7 I mean, has been also used in other instances in the diary. It's not an
8 official name.
9 One could call it a nickname which actually refers to Serb
10 fighters of the Second World War, whereby there was a very violent
11 conflict between, not only with the German occupational forces, but
12 between units known as Partisans, forces of the Independent Republic
14 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to page 111 in English, and we'll come to
15 that in the next session in more detail.
16 Q. General Gotovina: "It's forbidden to burn down houses. This
17 issue is to be resolved urgently."
18 What is the significance in terms of notice, Mr. Theunens?
19 A. Well, the entry shows that General Gotovina is aware of the fact
20 that houses are being burnt down. It is also relevant to note that
21 this -- that the burning down of houses, according to this information,
22 still occurs on the 16th of August; whereas, we have also seen earlier
23 entries in relation to these activities. Here, General Gotovina issues a
24 clear instruction to his subordinate commanders at the command meeting on
25 the 16th of August, which can be seen from English page 109.
1 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Theunens.
2 MR. WAESPI: Let's move to the next entry, and this is on page
3 115 in English and 72 in B/C/S.
4 One moment, please, Mr. President.
5 [Prosecution counsel confer]
6 MR. WAESPI:
7 Q. The entry I'm interested in is: "Military police: Control in
8 Otric area. The MP check-point was established. The burning of houses
9 and killing of cattle is being continued."
10 Again, the significance, if anything, in relation to notice,
11 Mr. Theunens.
12 A. These comments are made or referred to the command meeting on the
13 18th of August, which can be found on English page 114. The information
14 provided by the military police shows that the burning of houses and
15 killing of cattle, yeah, continues on the 18th of August.
16 MR. WAESPI: The next entry is page 119 and 120 in English. It's
17 B/C/S page 75.
18 Q. The entry at the bottom, assistant commander for political
19 activities: "Burning down of houses is a huge problem. The journalists
20 and others who come to visit the area could prove that it was the arson."
21 Mr. Theunens, the significance of this entry?
22 A. The significance is not only that the problem which has been
23 existing for some time has been reported sometime at the command meeting,
24 continues to be a problem, but also that members of the Split Military
25 District command, or at least the assistant commander for political
1 activities or political affairs, is aware that these activities can have
2 negative implications, in particular in relation to visits by journalists
3 and, I assume, articles that they might write about these activities.
4 MR. WAESPI: The next entry follows immediately thereafter. It's
5 on the next page in English, page 120.
6 Q. "Therefore, I request commanders of the units to take rigorous
7 care in preventing of such incidents in all possible ways. I also appeal
8 the stealing and robbing of properties and cattle to be banned."
9 To whom is this comment attributed?
10 A. It is a continuation of the comments made by the assistant
11 commander for political activities or political affairs. The request he
12 makes falls within the purview of his profession activities, and I have
13 discussed those -- I mean, the role of assistant commander for political
14 affairs, I have discussed that in part 1 of the report.
15 MR. WAESPI: The final entry here is on the same page, attributed
16 to the chief of anti-aircraft defence.
17 Q. He says: "As for the issue of houses being burnt down, it's
18 necessary the commanders of units to take care of the area in depth."
19 Yes, Mr. Theunens, what's the significance, if anything, for the
20 issue of notice and perhaps command and control?
21 A. The chief of anti-aircraft defence, physically his units will be
22 located in depth. They're not on the front line. His comment suggests -
23 I mean, I cannot draw a clear conclusion from it - so suggests that, in
24 his view, the commanders of units, and I assume he refers to combat
25 units, appear to be more concerned by the situation on the front line,
1 i.e., where the first line forces are deployed and conducting activities,
2 than by the situation in the depth of the zone of responsibility.
3 Each unit will have a zone of responsibility which has -- covers
4 a certain surface. It is not limited to the first line. It also goes in
5 depth. The chief of anti-aircraft defence who, in the concept of warfare
6 is deployed further in depth, wants to share his observations and
7 recommendations with the members of the Split Military District, as well
8 as the subordinate commanders of combat units who are generally deployed
9 at the first line.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, I'm looking at the clock.
11 MR. WAESPI: Yes. Thank you. I'm done with this Exhibit P71.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I'd like to spend two words on further scheduling,
13 but I don't think that we have to bother Mr. Theunens with that.
14 Mr. Theunens, I have to bother you, however, with my instruction;
15 that is, you should not speak with anyone about the testimony, whether
16 already given or still to be given, and we'd like to see you back on
17 Monday, the 24th of November.
18 Mr. Registrar, that would be in the morning, at 9.00, in this
19 same could the room.
20 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, would you please escort Mr. Theunens
22 out the courtroom.
23 [The witness stands down]
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Waespi, at the beginning of this session, which
25 was at least at 1.00 today, you had spent a little bit over five hours on
1 the examination-in-chief. So you're approximately at the time you
2 indicated. At the same time, I'm aware that sometimes you are, well, if
3 you would say it very strongly, you were forced to deal with some matters
4 which you may not have chosen to deal with.
5 As far as the continuation is concern, I carefully listened, for
6 example, of course, to the whole of the testimony, but especially the
7 last few questions. You asked the witness what the significance is of
8 entries in a logbook, and then he more or less tells us what it says. He
9 tells us that if someone talks about events, that he's aware of that.
10 Well, you do not need expert knowledge to understand that if someone
11 raises an issue, that he's aware of the issue. Then he says, "Well, this
12 was still the case on the 16th of August." Well, if you were able to
13 read the logbook, you look at the dates, then it doesn't need expert
14 knowledge that this was the case on the 16th of August. Then he tells us
15 it was prohibited to do certain things. Well, that's what the text tell
17 It's just one example, but many of these were more drawing the
18 attention of the Chamber to what apparently you considered to be relevant
19 information in this logbook, rather than to rely on expert knowledge of
20 the witness.
21 I'd like you to keep that in mind if you put further questions to
22 this expert on Monday. As always, the Chamber -- I now commented a bit
23 on at least part of an impression of what I had from your
24 examination-in-chief. I'll further discuss with the other Judges on how
25 much time we would still give you. If that would deviate from what you
1 intended to do, we'll let you know, Mr. Waespi. Therefore, it might be
2 important for us to know exactly what you intended to do, how much time.
3 MR. WAESPI: I think I would need about - and I'll try to focus
4 on the exhibits that haven't been tendered - I would need almost the
5 entire Monday, which means about four hours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: So you're asking approximately double of the time.
7 MR. WAESPI: Yes. But as you are aware, I don't know how the
8 calculations were done. A lot of time was spent on methodology and CV
9 and experience, rightly so; but this came out I think a little bit more
10 in the order of the 17th of November which forced me, and I was happy to
11 it, go into more detail. That's perhaps one of the explanations why I
12 needed more time.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I'll check with Mr. Registrar whether those times,
14 that is the first 12 minutes you took on the genesis of the report and
15 then the time you took on the other, whether that was included in the
16 little bit over five and a half hours.
17 We adjourn until --
18 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Your Honour. May I just raise one issue.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, just briefly.
20 MR. KEHOE: Very, very briefly, Judge. I just had a request on
21 behalf of the Defence, if we have some indication as to the witness's
22 fields of expertise prior to cross-examination, so we could narrow our
23 crosses accordingly.
24 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber, of course, we have considered the
25 matter that has been raised. The Chamber has decided that it will not
1 set out in detail that we considered the witness to be an expert on
2 artillery but not on mortars, but, however, on ammunition of artillery,
3 yes. I think it may have become clear also from some questions of the
4 Chamber that we take a critical approach to where the witness has
5 specific skills and where his knowledge, skills, and experience might not
6 justify to draw certain conclusions.
7 I'm afraid the Defence will have to do with that. We're not
8 going to delineate exactly this, it is, and that's not.
9 I can, however, tell you that when the Chamber followed, and
10 after having listened to it, discussed the usefulness of saying, here
11 you're an expert, there you're not an expert, and I think we had a
12 similar example this morning, the witness certainly is not a linguistic
14 But, nevertheless, from his expertise we may learn certain
15 matters which are related to other matters on which he may not be an
16 expert, but which are so linked to what he brings to our attention that
17 we shouldn't cut him off just because he's not a linguistic expert.
18 This guidance, I'm afraid - and I also understand that you might
19 have difficulties in focusing your cross-examination and that sometimes
20 you might be a bit uncertain - we have to live with that.
21 MR. KEHOE: I understand.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. With the apologies for the last seven
23 minutes not only to interpreters, transcribers, and all others assisting
24 us, but also to the Chamber who may have to use this afternoon this
25 courtroom. We stand adjourned.
1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.53 p.m.
2 to be reconvened on Monday, the 24th day of
3 November, 2008, at 9.00 a.m.