1 Monday, 23 February 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Good morning to everyone.
6 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning to
8 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T,
9 The Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
11 Mr. Russo, I was informed that you would like to deal with a few
12 matters prior to continuation of your examination-in-chief.
13 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Mr. President, very briefly.
14 There is one unrelated matter with respect to the
15 Helsinki Committee report, 65 ter 4674. We're simply seeking to get a
17 the next MFI
18 redactions those are being taken care of. I just wanted to have it
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, could you please assign a MFI number
21 for 65 ter 4674.
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honour, this document shall be given Exhibit
23 P2345, marked for identification. Thank you.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
25 Next, Mr. Russo.
1 MR. RUSSO: Next, Mr. President, if we could briefly move into
2 private session.
3 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
4 [Private session]
25 [Open session]
1 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
3 MR. RUSSO: The final thing, Mr. President, was -- I just wanted
4 to alert the Chamber, on Friday I sent around a spreadsheet indicating
5 all of the documents that I intend to tender from the bar table at the
6 close of my examination. Those being the remainder of the attachments
7 and annexes to the reports of Mr. Rajcic. I will be doing that at the
8 conclusion. I didn't know if there was any issue with respect to those.
9 MR. KEHOE: Of course, Mr. President, we have the issue that
10 obviously it wasn't attached, but we also have the issue of what the
11 preference of the Trial Chamber was with regard to artillery documents
12 being tendered through a witness to allow that witness to explain them.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 Mr. Russo, of course, it's up to you to consider have these
15 documents admitted through the witness, if there is no 65 ter issue left.
16 Although there is a preference if you choose to tender it through the bar
17 table then, of course, we would expect you to follow the guidance of the
18 Chamber; that is, to give a brief description to draw your attention to
19 any specific portions of the document, which are of primary interest and
20 then to give this to the Defence first so that we have the usual
21 procedure in place to considered a mission.
22 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Mr. President, part of the reason I didn't do
23 that to begin with is primarily these documents that -- the
24 contextualisation that the Court sought preference for was -- I believe,
25 is provided in the reports themselves to the extent that Mr. Rajcic cites
1 to these annexes within the reports which have already been ordered into
2 evidence, and by that, I believe he is demonstrating the relevance of
3 those particular portions --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But even then if in a table you set out -- see
5 report, Mr. Rajcic, page so-and-so where he draws attention to this
6 document then we know where to look. Otherwise we have to do all the --
7 all the research ourselves to reconstruct what -- what apparently was on
8 the mind of the witness.
9 So even if it follows from the report, then we'd like to know
10 which part so the report, so that we can easily verify that.
11 MR. RUSSO: I will submit an amended spreadsheet, Mr. President.
12 MR. KEHOE: The only issue with regard to the report is -- I mean
13 the spreadsheet is not commentary on the probative value of this. If it
14 is pointing the Chamber to a particular page in the report, that's fine
15 but that -- we dont object to that per se other than our prior previously
16 stated objections. What we do object to is any commentary going to the
17 net worth of that.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think I earlier said that it has to be given
19 to the Defence first, and if there is any disagreement on how neutral the
20 reference could be, of course, Mr. Kehoe, to some extent drawing your
21 attention to a certain portion, of course, has always some argumentative
22 value or lack of value.
23 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: But if would you please keep that in mind and if
25 would you choose formulas which are as neutral as possible and mainly for
1 purpose of drawing our attention to specific parties, so we don't have to
2 find our way just by ourselves.
3 Any other matter Mr. Russo.
4 MR. RUSSO: No, Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Then one thing, there is a pending motion for
6 protective measures, and if the Witness 13. Is my recollection right
7 that we have not yet received the response.
8 MR. MISETIC: That is correct, Mr. President.
9 MR. CAYLEY: We've drafted a response, and I know that,
10 Your Honour, but I'm not certain whether it has been filed. But it will
11 certainly be filed this morning.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. In view of our schedule, is there -- could all
13 parties finally give their views on the matter this morning, either in
14 writing or orally.
15 MR. MISETIC: I will take a look at it, Mr. President, but it
16 would help if we knew exactly when Witness 13 is supposed to be coming to
18 JUDGE ORIE: I think tomorrow.
19 MR. MISETIC: I'm sorry I have my witness numbers confused. I
20 thought we had --
21 We'll check and get back to you, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
23 Mr. Russo, are you ready to continue your examination-in-chief?
24 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Could then, Mr. Usher, could you then escort the
1 witness into the courtroom.
2 [The witness entered court]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, please be seated.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, I would like to remind you that you are
6 still bound by the solemn declaration you have given at the beginning of
7 your testimony.
8 Mr. Russo will now continue his examination-in-chief.
9 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
10 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
11 WITNESS: MARKO RAJCIC [Resumed]
12 [Witness answered through interpreter]
13 Examination by Mr. Russo: [Continued]
14 Q. Good morning, Mr. Rajcic.
15 A. Good morning.
16 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I'd like to get back to where we left off on Friday,
17 and get some more information about you -- from you about
18 General Gotovina's movements during the operation.
19 I believe you've already indicated to us that General Gotovina
20 was at his forward command post in Sajkovici when the attack began on the
21 4th of August; is that right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Do you know if he left Sajkovici at all during that day?
24 A. I think he did.
25 Q. Can you tell us where you believe he travelled to on that date?
1 A. To my recollection, he visited the Sibenik Operations Group as
2 well as the Zadar one, I believe.
3 Q. And how exactly did he travel from one area to another on that
5 A. To my knowledge, he had an MI-8 helicopter at his disposal.
6 Q. Thank you. And other than the areas that you have already
7 mentioned, do you know if he went anywhere else on the 4th of August?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Did he return to Sajkovici towards the end of that day?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And did he hold any meetings in Sajkovici with the senior staff
12 or anyone else concerning the operation on the 4th of August?
13 A. We didn't discuss that.
14 Q. To your knowledge, did General Gotovina discuss with anyone on
15 the evening of the 4th of August the decision to continue firing
16 artillery at targets in Knin on the following morning?
17 A. I don't recall the details.
18 Q. Can you tell us, if you know, why General Gotovina did decide to
19 continue firing on the 5th of August?
20 A. The attack continued. It is the ordinary combat activity, that
21 artillery, as the form of combat support, be there at the disposal of
22 infantry and other units.
23 Q. To your knowledge, was the army of the RSK or its leadership
24 still in the town of Knin
25 A. According to the information available to me from the
1 intelligence department, and based on electronic surveillance, we had
2 information that they were still active in their coordination with the
3 forces deployed along the front line, the first line of defence.
4 Q. I understand you had information that they were still active.
5 What I'm attempting to discover is where, if you know, they were
6 physically located, the RSK leadership.
7 A. I think that on the 5th, in the morning, they were still in the
8 Slavko Rodic barracks and in the HQ of the Main Staff.
9 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I'd like permission to show a
10 non-65 ter document to the witness. This is one of the documents which
11 had originally been submitted with the HV artillery bar table motion and
12 at that is 65 ter 6130.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
14 MR. KEHOE: Frankly, again, I don't know with what we're talking
15 about. We are entitled to disclosure before this. We didn't get this
16 disclosure that they put in there. It's not on the 65 ter list, and I
17 don't know what methodology is being employed by the Prosecutor. We
18 didn't get notice for this.
19 JUDGE ORIE: If you first ask, Mr. Russo, when he received its,
20 when he disclosed it, and what the reason is that it is not on the 65 ter
22 MR. RUSSO: The document was received by us on the
23 12th of December of 2007, was disclosed to the Defence on the 28th of
24 August, I believe, of -- I am sorry, it was received by us on 28th of
25 August 2007. It was disclosed to the Defence on 12 December of 2007. We
1 gave notice to the Defence that we intended to submit the document in the
2 HV artillery bar table document motion. We sought to have it added to
3 the 65 ter list. The Court denied that motion without prejudice and
4 instructed us to bring in these documents with proper contextualisation
5 with a witness on the stand. We did put it on the exhibit list for this
6 witness, so I'm not certain where the argument that we did not give
7 notice is arising from.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
9 MR. KEHOE: The difference, of course, is between disclosure and
10 whether or not they're going to use it. If it is a 65 ter document.
11 There are literally I think that I needs to be clarified. There are
12 literally thousand and thousand and thousands of documents that are
13 disclosed, but as far as putting it on the 65 ter list and use and notice
14 to the other parties, that is a completely different story.
15 I take Mr. Russo at his word that it was, in fact, disclosed but
16 again we have a situation where it is not on the 65 ter list and we were
17 not properly informed that it was going to used.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo says more. Mr. Russo says that he -- they
19 tried to add it to the 65 ter list, that this was denied without
20 prejudice and it is on the list of exhibits they wanted to use with this
21 witness. That would not be true for thousands and thousands of documents
22 would, it.
23 MR. KEHOE: I was just -- I was looking -- using the terminology
24 of disclosure when you disclose --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What I'm -- what I'm drawing your attention to
1 is that I asked more than just about disclosure. I asked a few other
2 matters as well. You have answered to the lack of disclosure -- to the
3 -- to the possibility that it was among thousand witness thousands of
4 disclosed documents whereas Mr. Russo said more.
5 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President. It was part of a series of
6 documents that they wanted to put in their bar table -- bar table motion,
7 that's right. That is, in fact, the case. I take Mr. Russo at his word
8 for that.
9 JUDGE ORIE: And --
10 MR. KEHOE: And looking at my list here, it was, in fact, one of
11 the documents that was a non-65 ter list that in one version of their
12 exhibit list -- I believe it's the last one they intended to try to use.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, the Chamber's ruling is that you're
15 allowed to show it to the witness, which is not a decision yet on
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 Mr. Registrar, if we could please have 65 ter 6130.
19 JUDGE ORIE: I add to that, Mr. Kehoe that if the Defence would
20 need more time because of certain -- certainly flaws in announcing the
21 use in whatever way, that the Chamber invites you to inform the Chamber
22 about it so that we can consider that as well.
23 MR. KEHOE: I appreciate that, Judge.
24 MR. RUSSO: If we could go to the bottom of the first page in
1 Q. And I will begin reading at the last sentence on page 1 in
2 English. I believe that this entire portion is on page 2 of the B/C/S,
3 the portion that I'm going to be reading.
4 Now, Mr. Rajcic, this is an analysis by the commander of the
5 4th Guards Brigade, and he indicates:
6 "By the start of Oluja 95, Knin was, in fact, in a hopeless
7 situation, and condemned to wait for the final blow ..."
8 MR. RUSSO: And if we could move to the next page in the English
10 Q. He continues:
11 "Turning to Operation Oluja 95 itself, it needs to be said that
12 the enemy's front defence was the slopes -- the front defence line was
13 the slopes of the Knin Pljesevica mountain, breached by bringing in of
14 the 4th Guards Brigade, and the liberation of Knin was thus at hand.
15 "The use of an encircling manoeuvre and the capture of the
16 dominant features in the vicinity of the town of Knin meant that street
17 fighting was avoided, because the so-called RSK army and the population
18 evacuated on the night of day one."
19 Now, Mr. Rajcic, do you agree with the assessment of commander of
20 the 4th Guards Brigade?
21 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, is this the reference -- is there a
22 reference date on there? I'm sorry. Is that the 14th of August, is that
23 the document we're talking about?
24 MR. RUSSO: I think we will have to turn to the first page to see
25 the date of it.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, the 14th of August. Yeah.
2 MR. KEHOE: Thank you.
3 MR. RUSSO:
4 Q. Mr. Rajcic, do you agree with the commander's assessment in that
6 A. I can't agree with this. I've never seen this analysis before.
7 This is the analysis of the commander of the 4th Guards Brigade.
8 Q. Can you tell us why you don't agree with it?
9 A. Can the question be more previous, please. What exactly you
10 refer to. I have never seen the analysis before.
11 The 4th Guards Brigade launched attacks on the second day of
12 Operation Storm, not on the first day. I do know for a fact that it was
13 on Pljesevica, that it was engaged in fighting in the village of Golubic
14 [Realtime transcript read in error, "Golugica"], which is on the
15 outskirts of the town of Knin
16 As far as I remember, it was on the 5th of August, throughout the
17 day and in the early evening. That's something that I can talk about
18 now. As for this entire document, that's all I can tell you at this
19 point, ad hoc.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
21 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, just with respect to page 12, line
22 9, I believe the witness identified a different village which I don't
23 think will be disputed by the Prosecution.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 Mr. Rajcic, you said, "I know for a fact that it was on
1 Pljesevica that it was engaged in fighting in the village of," and what
2 did you then say.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Village of Golubic
4 of the town of Knin
5 JUDGE ORIE: We were just seeking to have the right name on the
6 record because it was transcribed by another name.
7 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
8 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
9 Q. Mr. Rajcic, what I'm seeking to determine is whether or not you
10 agree with the commander's assessment that street fighting was avoided in
11 Knin because the so-called RSK army had fled on the night of day one.
12 A. No.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would offer into evidence
15 65 ter 6130.
16 MR. KEHOE: Same objection as previously stated, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The document will be marked for
19 Mr. Registrar.
20 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document shall be given
21 Exhibit P2346, marked for identification.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
23 Mr. Russo, there are quite a number of documents attached to this
24 one. It's a 11-page document all together. Do we need all the other
25 documents which ...
1 MR. RUSSO: No, Mr. President. We only need to the portion of
2 the signature.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That's the first two pages, therefore. Could
4 you then please take care that the document, in the way you want to
5 tender it, will be uploaded, and give notice to Mr. Registrar once you
6 have uploaded under the same number, the two-page document.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
9 I would now seek permission to show to the witness another
10 document which is procedurally in the same posture as the previously
11 document. It was on the HV bar table document motion, also on the
12 exhibit list, but is not on the 65 ter list, and this is 65 ter 6142.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, I take it that the same objections would
14 apply here.
15 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Same ruling applies as well. You're allowed
17 to put it to the witness, Mr. Russo, which is not a decision on
19 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
20 Mr. Registrar, if we could please have 65 ter 6142.
21 Q. Mr. Rajcic, you can see this is Croatian intelligence report
22 dated 4 August 1995
23 and first I'd like to ask you something with respect to --
24 MR. RUSSO: If we could move down in the English version a bit,
25 to the bottom of the page.
1 Q. Now there are numbers which appear above each of the
2 paragraphs and I wanted to ask but those. Do you see -- well, let's just
3 take the first paragraph that begins: "A member who is reporting from
4 the village of Tenje
5 Above that are numbers 069520408952019A.
6 Do you see that?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Now there are similar entries for each paragraph in this
9 document. I wanted to confirm with you what those numbers stand for.
10 There is the first numbers in the series, that is 06952 appears to be
11 some form of serial number. But the numbers that follow, are the same
12 for each entry and that is 040895. And I'd like to know whether that
13 indicates the date of the communication, the 4th of August, 1995
14 the numbers that follow; for example, 2019A, refers to 2019 hours, during
15 the day; is that correct?
16 A. I don't know anything about this.
17 MR. RUSSO: If we could move to the second page in the English.
18 Q. And in the B/C/S, Mr. Rajcic, I'm interested in the third
19 paragraph from the bottom, and in the English version, I believe -- well,
20 the entry below where it says GS SVK and that indicates:
21 "The Knin leadership abandoned the city and went in the direction
22 of Drvar, through Srb. They turned left when they left the place, then
23 30 kilometres later, right."
24 Do you recall seeing this intelligence report, Mr. Rajcic?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Do you know whether General Gotovina was receiving intelligence
2 reports on the 4th of August?
3 A. No.
4 Q. No, you don't know if he was receiving reports; or, no, he didn't
5 receive reports?
6 A. I don't know if he was receiving them. We were not on the same
8 Q. Thank you.
9 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would offer 65 ter 6142.
10 MR. KEHOE: Same objections, Judge.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, would you please assign a number so
12 that the document be marked for identification.
13 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit P2347, marked for
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
16 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, how many RSK army troops, combat troop, did you
19 believe were in the town of Knin
20 A. I wouldn't be able to tell you that precisely.
21 Q. Can you give us an estimation?
22 A. An estimation can be very relative. The army of the Republic of
23 Serbian Krajina had mobilised all men, aged between 18 and 65, and this
24 is a situation that prevailed through to the end of the war. I believe
25 that everything that was able-bodied and able to carry a weapon was at
1 their disposal. What sort of numbers those were, I wouldn't like to
2 speculate on that.
3 Q. I understand that, and I do understand there was a mobilisation
4 of conscripts or everyone for the RSK army. However, that's a different
5 matter from the deployment. Do you know -- and if you don't, that's
6 fine. I just want to know if you have idea of the combat troops were
7 deployed inside the city?
8 A. I don't know about the number for the town proper. But they were
10 Q. And how about on the first day of the attack, the 4th of August?
11 Do you have any estimation of how many were in the town on that day?
12 A. If I were to make an analysis based on the information available
13 to me, it was the Dinara combat group, which had the strength of 1.000 to
14 perhaps 1.500 troops. There were several HQs in Knin with all the
15 attendant troops, establishment-wise and logistics-wise from the level of
16 the Main
17 the mixed artillery regiment, the support artillery regiment, the command
18 of the light- and high-aircraft regiment, with the necessary protection
19 personnel, in order to secure all the important facilities in Knin and
20 insignificant for the military, and such facilities that were of
21 importance for the SVK in Knin can be identified.
22 In fact, I had a document from their assistant for anti-aircraft
23 defence, where he organised and deployed anti-aircraft defence units.
24 There was the police of Mile Martic, in the monastery of St. Ante in
25 Knin. Some of their units were stationed Knin or Mindzusari earring
1 wearers or something of the sort. In the Senjak barracks, they had the
2 command of the already mentioned artillery regiment complete with the
3 logistics troops; and in the Slavko Rodic barracks, they had their
4 operational reserve forces for possible interventions along the lines of
5 defence that were threatened the most. They were there if need be.
6 And I do recall there was an insignificant unit, insignificant in
7 terms of what was of interest to us, in the new school in Knin. If we
8 were to take all of this into consideration, according to their
9 establishment and their strength, and make a head count of all of them;
10 and, of course, we would have to see to what extent they were manned,
11 whether they were fully manned, only then would I be able to give you an
13 Excuse me, in Golubic --
14 Q. Let me stop you there, Mr. --
15 A. There was a camp for --
16 Q. I was asking specifically about the town of Knin. I don't want
17 to expand it beyond that.
18 Now have you named a number of HQs and a number of different
19 kinds of units. Can you tell us where we can find this information in HV
20 documentation. What documents can we look at to see that you had
21 information specific about the numbers of troops in any of these places
22 or that there were troops present in these places on the 4th of August?
23 Where can we find that?
24 A. I have no idea where you'd be able to find that. Logically
25 speaking, there was intelligence and security work carried out. They
1 dealt with such information, as well as some other services. They were
2 looking into where their troops were.
3 I believe one could find all that in the archives of the
4 Ministry of Defence. At least it should be there.
5 Q. Thank you. And what was your information about the number of
6 civilians inside of the town of Knin
7 A. The information we had was official. As I have mentioned in the
8 past few days, the information was that already in June, civilians began
9 leaving Knin, when the Croatian forces reached the dominant features of
10 Mount Dinara
11 the people on the other side - that is to say, Serbs - who -- whom I knew
12 before the war because they were from the area that I hailed from, they
13 were saying that people began moving out as early as that time.
14 According to the information I had, going by the census of 1990,
15 the town or settlement of Knin, as an administrative unit, had some
16 12.300 inhabitants, out of which some 1600 Croats; basically all of them
17 had been expelled by various means and in various ways.
18 There were some 800 inhabitants of other ethnic backgrounds. If
19 I try to do my math, at the beginning of the conflict, it means that
20 there must have been some 10.000 inhabitants. If we take into account
21 all of those who were between the age of 18 and 60, who were mobilised,
22 all able-bodied men, and if we take into account that prior to
23 Operation Storm, a number of people were expelled or left of their own
24 accord for various reasons, then the figure would be such as the one I
1 According to the information that I had prior to Operation Storm,
2 in the area of the settlement of Knin which, covers the area of six
3 square kilometres, there may have been between 2 and 3.000 civilians.
4 According to the 1990 census, the settlement of Knin had some 3600
6 Based on all that, I conclude that there was a small number of
7 civilians in that six square kilometres area.
8 Q. Did you have any information that civilians from the areas of
9 Grahovo and Glamoc and Strmica were going to the area of Knin, prior to
10 Operation Storm?
11 A. Yes, some of them -- or at least not all of them. I don't know
12 how many exactly. Some left towards Drvar.
13 Q. Thank you. Now, where was General Gotovina on the 5th of August,
14 when the artillery attack resumed?
15 A. On the 5th of August, or at least as regards the 5th of August, I
16 can tell you that I saw General Gotovina early in the morning, because,
17 on the 4th of August, during the night, or perhaps on the 5th of
18 August in the morning, we spent together in a nearby house. We slept
19 there for a couple of hours.
20 The next day, just prior to the beginning of combat on the 5th of
21 August, I was at my duty station in the operations centre. As of that
22 point of time, until early evening I had no contact with
23 General Gotovina, save for one occasion when he called me into his office
24 early in the evening.
25 Q. Do you know whether General Gotovina went to Knin after Croatian
1 troops entered the town on the 5th of August?
2 A. I don't think he did.
3 Q. Do you know if General Gotovina was aware of what the troops were
4 doing in Knin after they entered the town?
5 A. I think he knew. I had information that the assistant commander
6 for security, Mr. Pavic, went there. He told me that he went there on
7 orders of General Gotovina. He had been at the operations centre. He
8 was supposed to go to Knin to attend to some of his tasks.
9 I have information that General Ademi went to Knin that day as
10 well. I don't know to do what, but as he was leaving the operations
11 centre, he said that he was going to Knin.
12 Q. Can you tell us, if you know, what Croatian troops were doing
13 after they entered the town of Knin
14 A. You mean the 5th of August?
15 Q. Yes.
16 A. At that time, I didn't think about it after I had received
17 information that the settlement of Knin was no longer of any artillery
18 interest. If I try to think about what the soldiers were doing,
19 according to the tasks, they were supposed to conduct a manoeuvre around
20 Knin; and, at that time, that was enough information for me.
21 Q. Did you have any information that Croatian soldiers started
22 drinking and looting in the town on the 5th of August?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Do you know whether General Gotovina received any information to
25 that effect?
1 A. No.
2 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I'd like to show the witness a
3 document which is not on the 65 ter list. It is an attachment to his
4 report, which is now P2339. It is 65 ter 7069.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That's the provisional 65 ter number, I take it.
6 MR. RUSSO: That's correct, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, may I take it that the same objection
8 applies --
9 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
10 JUDGE ORIE: -- to all attachments to the reports because we have
11 different categories now by now, I think, those who were attachments.
12 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Leave is granted to add it to the 65 ter list.
14 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Mr. Registrar, if could I have please have 65 ter 7069.
16 Q. Mr. Rajcic, you attached this as attachment number 3 to the first
17 reconstruction that you did. It is the 7th Guards Brigade operations
19 MR. RUSSO: If we could move to B/C/S page 2, English page 3.
20 You can see there at the entry for 1100 hours, it indicates that
21 the unit entered Knin.
22 MR. RUSSO: And if we move to the next page, please, in the
23 English, and also the next page in B/C/S.
24 Q. We can see at the entry for 1155 hours it indicates that word was
25 sent that the military police be sent to Knin and that the military
1 police were sent.
2 Now, do you know why word was sent that the military police
3 should go to Knin?
4 A. For me, this is something that does not come as a surprise. It's
5 standard operative work that the military police follows up in sequence
6 after the troops. I don't know what the background of this situation was
8 MR. RUSSO: If we could move to the next page in the English but
9 stay on the same page in B/C/S just move a little bit down in the B/C/S
10 version, to the entry for 2007 hours --
11 Q. It indicates that Brigadier Ademi, who I believe you indicated
12 was on his way to Knin, issues an order to secure HTV Croatian television
13 Knin from plunder or devastation.
14 Now do you know why Brigadier Ademi needed to issue an order to
15 protect Croatian television from plunder or devastation?
16 A. No.
17 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would move for the admission of 65
18 ter 7069.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, could you mark it for identification.
20 Mr. Kehoe, same objections apply, I take it.
21 MR. KEHOE: [Microphone not activated]
22 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document shall be given
23 Exhibit P2348, marked for identification.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
25 Again, Mr. Kehoe, here also applies that if the non-appearances
1 on the 65 ter list would require further time for preparation, the
2 Chamber would like to know.
3 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
5 MR. RUSSO:
6 Q. Mr. Rajcic, can you tell us if General Gotovina held any meetings
7 with the senior staff members of the Split Military District during or
8 after Operation Storm?
9 A. If you have in mind the command of the Croatian forces, within
10 the Military District of Split
11 meetings were held on a regular basis in terms of briefings in the
13 Q. Now when you say "regular basis," can you tell us how often. Was
14 it every day, every other day, once a week?
15 A. There was a rule in place at the time, unless ordered otherwise,
16 stating that each evening, in the evening hours, there was to be a
17 briefing session with the commander, attended by the commanders and
18 chiefs from the Military District command. When I say "chiefs," I mean
19 the chiefs of branches, as well as professional services.
20 Q. And were representatives of the military police present at these
22 A. As far as I recall, it was seldom. They were under no obligation
23 to attend such briefings.
24 Q. And were representatives of the information and security service,
25 that is SIS, ever at attendance at these meetings?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And were there officers of the information and security service
3 amongst HV combat units during the operation?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And did they provide information, both to their own headquarters
6 as well as to General Gotovina, regarding the situation on the ground?
7 A. Yes.
8 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would like to show the witness a
9 document. It is not on the 65 ter list, and it is not an attachment to
10 any of his reports. It is 65 ter 7122.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, you certainly remember that I asked some
12 questions last time about the documents you wanted to show. If you would
13 spontaneously give that information, then the Chamber would not have to
14 ask for it.
15 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Mr. President. The document was seized by the
16 Prosecution on 14 July 2008
17 September, 2008. The original was disclosed on 19th September, and the
18 translation was disclosed only recently, on the 10th of February of 2009.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Any explanation for the period between the 19th of
20 September and 10th of February?
21 MR. RUSSO: No, Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: What kind of document is it?
23 MR. RUSSO: It's a report from one of the information and
24 security service agents who were placed among a HV combat unit.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, leave is granted to show it to the
2 witness, which is not a decision on admission.
3 Mr. Kehoe, especially in view of the fact that the translation
4 was disclosed only recently, if there's any more time needed, whereas the
5 original -- and I see it was only disclosed and not announced as an
6 exhibit to be used in September. If you would need additional time, you
7 may inform the Chamber and ask for a relevant remedy.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
9 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President. If I could have
10 65 ter 7122.
11 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, you can see this is a report, a summary report
12 by a SIS officer who was placed in the Operational Group Sibenik, and I
13 would like to focus on item 5, which appears on English page 4, B/C/S
14 page 3.
15 Looking at the second-to-last sentence in item 5 it states:
16 "Once the operation was finished, a decrease of discipline was
17 noted amongst quite a number of HV members which led to" --
18 A. Excuse me.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. RUSSO: Yes.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] For a short while I wasn't able to
22 see the whole page. If you zoom in, then I have portions of the text
23 missing. Now that's fine.
24 MR. RUSSO: Thank you.
25 Q. I will begin again:
1 "Once the operation was finished a decrease of discipline was
2 noted amongst quite a number of HV members which led to alcohol
3 consumption and looting of houses in liberated places.
4 "When the operation was finalised, the HV members slightly lost
5 their composure due to the exhaustion and exhilaration with the success."
6 MR. RUSSO: If we could move now to item number 8, which appears
7 at English page 5, and B/C/S page 4.
8 Q. And there it indicates:
9 "The conduct of HV members while entering inhabited settlements
10 was correct. However, once the settlements were occupied (particularly
11 places inhabited)" --
12 A. Excuse me.
13 Q. Do you need item 8 focussed on any more, or is this enough for
14 you to see?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. I will begin again:
17 "The conduct of the HV members while entering inhabited
18 settlements was correct. However, once the settlements were occupied
19 (particularly places inhabited by Serbs), the commanders lost a control
20 over their soldiers which resulted in a number of torched houses and
21 cases of robbery, particularly in the area of Djevrska, Kistanje, and
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, I see that we have two items 8, isn't it?
24 That is a bit confusing. You were reading from the second item 8 and not
25 from the first one. Is that -- because the -- both are now presented to
1 the witness.
2 MR. RUSSO: Yes, I see that in B/C/S there's two item 8's
3 although it looks like in the English there is item 8 and item 9. I was
4 reading from the --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I can't see that because then I would have to
6 look at a previous page, if there's 8 and 9 then you would expect 9 to be
7 the second section 8 in the original, but that is not the case because
8 what you were reading is the second paragraph 8, which certainly does not
9 correspond with item 9 in English.
10 MR. RUSSO: Yes, from the B/C/S original, Mr. President, I am
11 looking at the second item 8.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Nevertheless, the second item 8 in B/C/S is the
15 first item 8 in the English. So then we would have to look back and
16 see -- 7 corresponds with the -- the 7 in the original corresponds with
17 the English translation, and it looks as if the first item 8 in the
18 original is not part of the translation, and that we continue. So,
19 therefore, we have an incomplete -- apparently incomplete translation, if
20 my analysis is right.
21 MR. RUSSO: I think, actually, Mr. President, if you look at the
22 item 9 in the English version it appears to correspond to the first item
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That looks -- because there's a reference to
25 the Operational Group Sibenik.
1 MR. MISETIC: It's not, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, the only thing I established until now that
3 there was a reference to Operation Group Sibenik but then, of course, the
4 next thing we have to do to look at the original and see --
5 Could we ...
6 MR. RUSSO: I could --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, if you read the first lines in the
8 original, paragraph 8 you see that the -- the first lines of the first
9 item 8, then you see that although the Operational Group Sibenik is
10 referred to that all the other things we find in the translation does not
11 appear in the original. I see no General Staff; I see no reference to
12 the -- in the original I see no reference to the 306 Detachment to the
13 LOB Sibenik.
14 So your explanation quick but not reliable.
15 MR. RUSSO: If we could perhaps, Mr. President, for a quick-fix
16 we will, of course, have a revised translation uploaded, but for
17 completeness we could ask the witness to simply read the first item 8 in
18 the original B/C/S, have a translation on the record.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Do you need it.
20 MR. RUSSO: I don't know what it actually says, Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then please try to find out what it says before
22 we spend time on witnesses to read portions of a document where you are
23 apparently curious to know what is in there, yes.
24 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, I can just tell you briefly, and I
25 will make a representation to Mr. Russo, that it deals with the seizure
1 of ARSK documents; and the fact that they're analysing these documents
2 which have been recovered in the area. I don't think it is relevant to
3 the examination of this witness. But I wanted to put that on the record.
4 MR. RUSSO: I'm grateful.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, you will have to satisfy yourself with
6 that for the time being.
7 Thank you Mr. Misetic.
8 Please proceed.
9 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President, and my thanks to counsel.
10 If we could move in the B/C/S version to the next page.
11 Q. And continuing on at the top it indicates:
12 "We did not note any case of a war crime committed by an HV
14 "In spite military and police operated check-points and the order
15 on its function, it has been noted that a large quantities of technical
16 equipment were taken from the liberated settlements."
17 Now, Mr. Rajcic, to your knowledge was General Gotovina aware of
18 the kind of conduct that is being reported by this SIS officer?
19 A. Before I answer your question, can I please have page 1 to see
20 the date.
21 Q. Yes, of course.
22 MR. RUSSO: Page 1 --
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If possible.
24 MR. RUSSO:
25 Q. Yes, I believe the date is 11th of August, but let's check at the
1 beginning of the document?
2 A. Mr. Russo, I saw this document for the first time when I was
3 working for the government of the Republic of Croatia
4 the reference number S-44, which means that I set it apart from all the
5 other documents that I had at my disposal. This is the period after the
6 end of Operation Storm.
7 In this particular area -- or, rather, I was present personally
8 in that area between the 5th and the 6th of August.
9 Q. Did you see Croatian soldiers consuming alcohol, looting houses,
10 and torching houses in that area?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do you disagree that this was actually happening?
13 A. When it comes to the dates, I can't state anything with any
14 certainty, after the 7th or 8th of August.
15 Q. Now you didn't answer my question about whether or not you were
16 aware of -- whether or not General Gotovina either received this report
17 or received the information contained in this report during his
19 A. I didn't know that he could have received it on the 11th, at the
21 Q. You indicated earlier that officers of -- or representatives of
22 the information and security service were present during the briefings
23 for General Gotovina; is that right?
24 A. Not representatives. A representative.
25 Q. And do you know whether that representative passed along
1 information such as this to General Gotovina at those meetings?
2 A. For the 11th of August, I can say that he did not pass it on, not
3 to General Gotovina but to me, because I was in charge of the briefings
4 between the 8th and the 11th of August at the IZM, Sajkovici.
5 Q. Briefings, which occurred on the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th, was
6 General Gotovina present for those briefings?
7 A. He was on the 5th of August. I don't know about the 6th, because
8 I was in the Skradin-Kistanje-Padjene area.
9 For the 8th of August, I don't think he was. I was in charge of
10 that regular evening briefing.
11 I think that he dropped by for a brief moment on the 9th at some
12 point during the briefing.
13 After that particular briefing, he issued me a task. Since the
14 Knin was to become the garrison of the Military District, I was supposed
15 to remain at the Sajkovici IZM and see to it that the forward command
16 post was disbanded and technically dismantled.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
18 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, if we could check the word that the
19 witness used at page 31, line 24, the sixth word there.
20 JUDGE ORIE: The abbreviation, which P is an abbreviation.
21 MR. MISETIC: No, the line above that abbreviation, there's a
22 word directly above that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 Mr. Rajcic -- there's a difference in line numbers on the one
25 screen compared to the other.
1 You said, "since Knin was become to the" -- what then? To become
2 what of the Military District?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] That a command post be set up in
4 Knin, because under the establishment it was the forward command post at
5 the time since the command post was in Split.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please, Mr. Russo.
7 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
8 Q. Now, you indicated earlier that in the evening of the
9 5th of August, General Gotovina called you to his office and tasked you
10 with something.
11 Can you tell us what that was about?
12 A. In his office, General Gotovina had an operational working map
13 onto which he plotted the way combat unfolded across the area of the
14 Split Military District. Along the axis of the Sibenik Operations Group
15 that is to say, Bribirski-Mostinje-Skradin axis, Djevrska-Kistanje axis
16 the pace of attack was not satisfactory. In other words --
17 Your Honour, can we move no closed session, if possible.
18 JUDGE ORIE: We'll hear from you in private session. That is
19 there is no communication. Otherwise we have to get all the curtains
20 down. I don't think that would be necessary, would it? Just the words
21 spoken to be --
22 Yes, we move into private session.
23 [Private session]
24 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're in private session.
25 JUDGE ORIE: What you now say will not be related to the outside
2 Please proceed, Mr. Rajcic.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Specifically the 15th Home Guard
4 Regiment did not make significant advances in the attack. At around 1800
5 hours on the 5th of August, General Gotovina summoned me to his office.
6 He even made a joke by saying, These -- that lot of yours did not even
7 liberate your own home at the time, and he said it as if appearing to be
8 issuing me with an order. He told me, Take whatever you need and carry
9 out a manoeuvre with all the assets you need in that area. The order is
10 as follows: To reach the area of Padjene as soon as possible by skirting
11 the inhabited settlements, by steering away from them. The task has to
12 be accomplished before night-fall.
13 The 4th Guards Brigade had already gone passed the Krka and is in
14 the area of Tangina Glava, the village of Oceslovo
15 is not doing anything. I asked that we move into closed session out of
16 deference towards my comrades-in-arms. They should have some
17 gratification for taking part in the fighting which led to the liberation
18 of the Republic of Croatia
19 JUDGE ORIE: Could I inquire with the parties whether the reason
20 given by the witness to ask to move into private session would be a
21 sufficient one under the Rules.
22 MR. KEHOE: We have no objection, Judge.
23 JUDGE ORIE: That was not my question.
24 MR. KEHOE: I understand that. I would have to take a look at
25 the Rules specifically. Can I do that at the break, but at this juncture
1 there is no objection.
2 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, if I may add something. If it is
3 going to be an issue for the Chamber I think there should be an inquiry
4 as well about a Rule 75, if I can phrase it that way for him, just in the
5 abundance of caution.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
7 Mr. Russo.
8 MR. RUSSO: Our position, Mr. President, is that this is not a
9 proper basis for remaining in private session.
10 JUDGE ORIE: For being --
11 MR. RUSSO: For being in private session, yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 Mr. Rajcic, the Chamber will further consider whether the reason
14 you gave for turning into private session is, from point of view of law
15 of procedure, a solid reason. Of course, we didn't know what you were
16 about to say. We'll consider that.
17 Is there anything you would like to add, why in relation to the
18 reason why you wanted to go into private session?
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. When I came to the HQ at
20 night, I came across -- or, rather, I found the officers at the command
21 post, at the HQ, sleeping. They were not in full combat readiness.
22 That's why I asked for it. I simply want to be -- to treat them
23 correctly. That's why I asked that we move into private session.
24 I don't think it's necessary for these details to reach the
25 public. I know that journalists, for various reasons known to them, are
1 always waiting there to get hold of piquant pieces of news.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do I did understand. You did not want to
3 expose your former colleagues to any criticism where they have no
4 opportunity to avail themselves to give any response what you're -- well,
5 let's say blame them for, more or less.
6 I asked you, because the Chamber would not, without proper
7 reasons, and not by surprise, would make public where you initially asked
8 it not to be made public. Nevertheless, the Chamber will consider the
9 matter and for this reason wanted to know exactly the reasons why you
10 wanted to go into private session.
11 We move in open session again.
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
15 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would move for the admission of
16 65 ter 7122.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The document should be MFI'd.
18 Mr. Kehoe.
19 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President, similar objections, yes.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Similar objections.
21 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar, could you assign a number.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honours. This document shall be given
24 Exhibit P2349, marked for identification. Thank you.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
1 MR. RUSSO: Looking at the clock, Mr. President, it appears time
2 for a break. I don't know ... I have a bit more of my examination left.
3 I told the Chamber I would only have one session, but I do have about
4 30 minutes more.
5 JUDGE ORIE: We'll consider during the break.
6 I would, however, have one question to you, Mr. Rajcic, before we
7 have a break.
8 In this report that was read to you, we read that - this was the
9 intelligence report, this item 8 - we read that the conduct of the HV
10 members while entering inhabited settlements was correct but that once
11 the settlements were occupied, particularly places inhabited by Serbs,
12 that the commanders lost control -- or it says a control which is not
13 entirely clear to me, over their soldiers which resulted in a number of
14 torched houses and cases of robbery, and then some specific places are
16 The next line then reads:
17 "We did not note any case of war crime committed by an HV
19 Could you explain to us how the first portion of this item 8 and
20 the line I just read, how to reconcile them?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, between the 5th and
22 6th of August, and on the 6th of August while I was there, there was no
23 torching or looting going on. There was a degree of relaxation among the
24 troops. The information about Knin having been liberated was already
25 widely known and had already been reported through the media.
1 While I was there, and --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- along the ways where I
4 travelled --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let me stop you there. You, several time, relied in
6 your answers on intelligence information. At this moment, I'm asking you
7 to focus on what is written in this intelligence report and to explain to
8 us, not on the basis of your own information, how to reconcile these
9 several parts of item 8 because I understood from your answers that you
10 have some experience in -- in interpreting intelligence information.
11 So I'm asking you to focus -- if you need it on your screen, it
12 is still there, although the second line is on the next page.
13 But what is described there at the conclusion that, "We did not
14 note any case of a war crime committed by an HV member."
15 That is what I'd like to hear your comment on.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The only explanation I can give is
17 that this text does not only encompass the 11th of August but several
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I -- I was not mainly focussing on how many
20 days but on how to -- on the one hand side, to say commanders lost
21 control over their soldiers; result: number of torched houses; cases of
22 robbery. And then:
23 "We did not note any case of a war crime committed."
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I cannot explain such
25 contextual matters unless I go into very lengthy elaborations. That is
1 my subjective view.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if that gives us an explanation, then I would
3 like to hear it.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The period leading to the forces
5 reaching Padjene did not have -- have any events. The civilian authority
6 was established. The period between the 8th and the 11th of August might
7 have been marked by some dishonest deeds having been committed, if any
8 indeed. Who the culprits were, I can't tell you. I can't pinpoint them.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
10 We will have a break, Mr. Rajcic, and we resume at five minutes
11 past 11.00.
12 [The witness stands down]
13 --- Recess taken at 10.41 a.m.
14 --- On resuming at 11.08 a.m.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo you have another 20 minutes.
16 Mr. Usher, could you please escort the witness into the
18 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President, Your Honours.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 MR. RUSSO:
21 Q. Mr. Rajcic, over the weekend, did you have any contact with any
22 member or former member of the Croatian armed forces?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Over the weekend, did you have any contact with any member of the
25 Croatian government?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Did you have any contact with anyone with respect to the
3 testimony that you've given here or that you will be giving, and I don't
4 mean just speaking to them. I mean either by e-mail or any other form of
6 A. No.
7 Q. Thank you. Now, going back to the briefings that
8 General Gotovina had, can you tell us whether or not there were any
9 representatives of the political affairs department at any of these
11 A. In Knin? And during what time?
12 Q. Beginning on the 4th of August and from that date forward,
13 through August and/or September.
14 A. I wasn't in Knin on any briefings. On the 11th of August, I
15 disbanded a command post at Sajkovici, or perhaps it was on the 12th, the
16 forward command post, that is. And that is when I started working at the
17 forward command post in Knin.
18 Q. I think you might be missing the focus of my question,
19 Mr. Rajcic.
20 I'm not limiting the location of where these meetings may have
21 occurred. I just want to know if General Gotovina had briefings,
22 wherever they may have occurred, between the 4th and August, and
23 afterwards, if he had meetings at which members of the political affairs
24 department were present.
25 A. They were standard daily briefings, and it was a normal thing to
1 have the Deputy Commander in charge of political affairs to attend such
2 meetings or briefings, as you call them.
3 Q. Thank you. Now, you mentioned that you were heading meetings
4 between -- I believe you said the 8th and 11th of August; is that
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Can you tell us why General Gotovina was not heading up those
9 A. He told me he needed to be elsewhere, not in the area, and that I
10 should take over the information evening meetings.
11 Q. Do you have any information on where he was during that period of
13 A. No.
14 Q. Do you know whether General Gotovina went on his honeymoon any
15 time between the 8th and the 15th of August?
16 A. I heard that later, that piece of information. However, while I
17 was in charge of the briefings, I did not have that information.
18 Q. And who was in charge of the responsibilities of the command of
19 the Split
20 A. For the forward command post that had been established in Knin, I
21 think it was supposed to be General Ademi or General Rakic who were in
22 charge. In terms of subordination, they were the next senior officers
23 following General Gotovina. I remained in Sajkovici.
24 Q. And for this period of General Gotovina's absence, do you know or
25 have any information as to whether or not he continued to be informed of
1 events occurring within the Split Military District during that time?
2 A. I don't know. When he dropped by once, I did share some
3 information with him, as regards the area that I was in.
4 Q. And to your knowledge, was there any discussion with
5 General Gotovina or amongst any of his senior officers that he should not
6 leave the area at that time?
7 A. No, I don't know about that. I only implemented the orders I
9 Q. Mr. Rajcic, were you present at a meeting on the 6th of August, a
10 meeting with General Gotovina which took place in the Knin fortress?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Have you ever seen the video of that meeting?
13 A. I did.
14 Q. When was the first time you saw that video?
15 A. When it was broadcast on the Croatian national television. It's
16 channel 1.
17 Q. And you're aware of some of the matters that General Gotovina
18 is -- or was complaining about during that meeting; in particular, the
19 behaviour of the troops in the town; correct?
20 A. I understood the gist of General Gotovina's criticism levelled at
21 his subordinate officers. Mr. Russo, I even have my own DVD copy of that
22 meeting. I have it at home. Or a CD.
23 Q. And you're aware, then, that he refers to the conduct of his
24 troops as he likens them to barbarians; is that right?
25 A. Yes, I heard that.
1 Q. And do you know what he based that assessment on?
2 A. He probably based it on the improper behaviour or conduct he had
3 heard of.
4 Q. And do you know what, if anything, General Gotovina did about
5 that improper conduct?
6 A. As far as I know, and I have already partially answered that
7 question when you asked me what sort of a person General Gotovina was, he
8 was a strict person. He undertook a series -- or issued a series of
9 orders. He also initiated a number of disciplinary proceedings, in
10 keeping with the rules of service of the armed forces, and he had the
11 provisions of those rules at his disposal. He had the authority to
12 initiate a disciplinary procedure and issue disciplinary measures.
13 Q. Now, as an officer of the Croatian armed forces, if you see or
14 saw a HV member either looting a house, setting it on fire, or committing
15 any kind of a crime, what exactly is it that you do about it, at that
16 moment you observe it happening?
17 A. Perhaps we shouldn't talk in the conditional or about hypothesis.
18 I actually did something. On the 6th of August in Kistanje, I saw a
19 single soldier attempting to take something from a house. I ordered him
20 to leave it. I took him out of the combat establishment and sent him
21 back to his home command post.
22 Q. Now if -- I understand that that is what you actually did on an
23 occasion. But if there are a large number of soldiers engaging in this
24 type of conduct and they are refusing orders to stop doing it, how do you
25 handle that as an officer?
1 A. In the armed forces, or, rather, in the MOD, we have our own
2 bodies in charge of that, to impose measures.
3 Should I clarify perhaps?
4 Q. Well, let me just ask you --
5 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I believe there was a word that was
6 not interpreted.
7 JUDGE ORIE: What line.
8 MR. MISETIC: This is page 43, line 10, he used an adjective to
9 describe the first word there, which was not interpreted.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic you said:
11 "In the armed forces, or, rather in the MOD, we have our own
12 bodies in charge of that, to impose measures."
13 This is not apparently a complete translation of what you said.
14 Could you add what was now left out?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when talking about the
16 Ministry of Defence, I meant to say that at the level of the ministry,
17 there was the military police as per establishment. Inside the armed
18 forces, there are standard operative procedures when commanders can use
19 the - so to speak - healthy part of their troops, to use them in order to
20 prevent the recalcitrant or unsoldierly portion of his troops in order
21 for those to cease with such behaviour, if we are talking about such
22 periods as when there is combat.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
24 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
25 Q. Mr. Rajcic, we saw earlier in the operations diary of the
1 7th Guards Brigade that the military police was sent to Knin about an
2 hour after the 7th Guards Brigade itself entered the town. You indicated
3 that this was quite normal procedure during these combat operations.
4 Now, if General Gotovina disapproves of what those troops are
5 doing on the 6th of August in the town and the military police are in the
6 town, can he tell those military police to arrest the people committing
8 A. He can use their line of command for it to be done.
9 Q. When you say "their line of command," I want to be clear about
10 this. If there are military police in the town with him, and soldiers
11 are also in that town committing those crime, can he tell those military
12 police officers himself to arrest the individuals committing those
14 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I'm going to object to the form of the
15 question: Can he tell. I think he needs to be more specific in terms of
16 exactly what is he asking him.
17 MR. RUSSO: I think the question is quite clear, Mr. President.
18 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I believe --
19 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
20 MR. MISETIC: We have had --
21 JUDGE ORIE: One second, please.
22 The witness may answer the question.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Formally speaking, he can try to do
24 that, but he had no command authority over the military police.
25 MR. RUSSO:
1 Q. If he had no command authority over the military police, then how
2 could he try to do that, formally speaking? I'm not sure I understand
3 what you mean by formally speaking he can try to do that. How exactly
4 would he do it?
5 A. When I refer to the formal part, it means that a general, in an
6 armed force, can tell a soldier who is not under his command in terms of
7 establishment to do something, but this does not entail the concept of
8 executive command. In this case, it will be General Gotovina.
9 If we are talking about the military police as needed, in his
10 combat area, he can submit a request to the military police
11 administration, or to the unit which, operationally speaking, is in the
12 general area of combat, if so regulated.
13 Q. Yes, I do believe I understand the situation which you're
14 speaking in the second part. However, I wanted to focus on the first
15 part of your question [sic] and be clear about it. I mean, correct me if
16 I'm wrong, but if General Gotovina witnesses his own troops looting and
17 burning houses is he not going to place a phone call to Zagreb or send a
18 letter to Zagreb
19 him to do something about it; is that right?
20 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, excuse me.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- yes. First of all, I notice that we have now
22 two Gotovina Defence counsel intervening in the -- not only in matters of
23 formulation but also on the substance of the way in which questions are
24 phrased. That's unusual.
25 Mr. Kehoe.
1 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: You were -- the frequency point of view, you seem to
3 be the one who deals with the witness.
4 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President, it's the form. It's the form of
5 the question. If he wants to ask a straight question, it's fine and he
6 is obviously giving a scenario that has no applicability here. If he is
7 going ask a particular question consistent what he is asking.
8 [Overlapping speakers] ...
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
10 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I'd like to join in the objection.
11 It is more of a closing argument than it is of a question. Thank you.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Your question is saying what Mr. Gotovina
13 would not do in order to find out what the witness knows he should have
14 done is not the way in which this should it be put to the witness.
15 Mr. Russo, please proceed.
16 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, if I could just apologise. The
17 reason that I rose is, as the Court will know from a year of us in the
18 courtroom, Mr. Kehoe has one set of issues that he deals. I deal with
19 the other, and Mr. Russo had now crossed into my area.
20 JUDGE ORIE: That's what I thought, as a matter of fact, and,
21 therefore, I think it was rather moderate in just saying that I observed,
22 nothing else so that I now that I'm aware of these kind of procedural
24 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
25 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I find by the way -- I find a bit of an imprecision
2 in what one observed in a command position. That could mean a lot of
3 things. Personally see something to happen, to observing that this is
4 reported to you, I don't know what you had on your mind or did you
5 include in your question that where you asked how Mr. Gotovina would --
6 would respond that he would have personally observed everything or
7 whether it came to his knowledge?
8 MR. RUSSO: I was making reference to the fact that he had
9 knowledge of it occurring in a particular place.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Why not ask Mr. Rajcic directly.
11 Mr. Rajcic, if Mr. Gotovina would have had a -- I call him
12 Mr. Gotovina because not out of any disrespect for the rank he had, but
13 he appears here as an individual. If Mr. Gotovina would have had
14 knowledge of a -- not a sporadic but a frequent occurrence of behaviour
15 which was unacceptable, in terms of engaging the military police in any
16 investigation, what would he have to do? Just request to the chief of
17 military police, is that --
18 Mr. Russo, what you wanted to know, isn't it.
19 MR. RUSSO: That is actually a part of what I wanted know,
20 Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. Then we have the first part. And then you
22 ask the second part later.
23 What, in your view, what action should he have taken?
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] He could ask of the military police
25 battalion commander to initiate a procedure based on the provisions of
1 the rules of discipline. Then they could submit a report, and in
2 consultation with the legal department, a disciplinary measure or other
3 measure can be imposed, as is envisaged by the Law on Defence Forces.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, second part.
5 MR. RUSSO: Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Or still on the same part.
7 MR. RUSSO:
8 Q. In reference to the situation on the 6th of August for which you
9 have indicated you've seen the video where General Gotovina is
10 referencing the behaviour of the troops in the town on that date, in that
11 situation where he is present at the location where these crimes are
12 being committed, and if members of the military police are also present
13 along with him, at that particular location, what happens in that
14 situation? How should he act in that situation?
15 MR. KEHOE: If I may, are we talking as a result of this meeting
16 or during this meeting? I am a little bit confused, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Location, is that a reference to where they were all
18 together televised.
19 MR. RUSSO: Well, I mean in Knin. The meeting is occurring in
20 Knin, and if I'm not mistaken General Gotovina is making reference to the
21 conduct of his troops occurring in Knin at that time.
22 MR. KEHOE: And I think we should just go to the tape of exactly
23 what General Gotovina tells the military police. It is in evidence as to
24 what he says. It doesn't need have an opinion from someone who wasn't
25 even there.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
2 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I think, given the witness's position,
3 he is in a position to tell us what an HV officer would do or should do
4 in a similar situation.
5 JUDGE ORIE: So the question then is whether he did what he
6 should have done.
7 MR. RUSSO: First, I think we need to establish what he should
8 have done.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, whether you start on the one side or on the
10 other is ...
11 What you followed the -- the exchange of thoughts. On the 6th,
12 military police, Mr. Gotovina, both being present in Knin, what do you
13 consider he should have done, if he had knowledge of non-sporadic
14 disorderly behaviour of the kind we discussed earlier.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] What he should have done is within
16 the framework of the powers that were vested in him as commander, he was
17 to have pronounced punitive measures or measures for misdemeanour through
18 the military police if any such actions were committed, and he was to
19 demand that soldiers of different levels were put in to custody. And
20 then in according with rules through his legal service, he should have
21 and did, in fact, pronounce many measures for breaches of discipline,
22 including, for instance demobilisation, putting away from units demoting
23 and let me not enumerate all the numerous instances of breaches of
24 discipline of which there were over a thousand for the duration of this
25 period. If this is a satisfactory answer. Because I did say at the
1 beginning that these were to have been the procedures, and the question
2 was asked in the conditional mode to the effect of what would have
3 happened if something else had happened.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, I'm looking at the clock.
5 MR. RUSSO: I have no further questions Mr. President.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Russo.
7 Mr. Kehoe, you will be the first to cross-examine Mr. Rajcic.
8 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President. My apologies, I didn't formally move
9 across the bar table, the documents. I know the Court wants me to submit
10 a new spreadsheet to do that. I will do that, however, I just want it to
11 be clear that that spreadsheet is formal or will be formal motion to
12 admit those documents across the bar table.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. One it is finalised and once the Defence has
14 had a look at it, we'll further consider the matter.
15 Mr. Rajcic, you will now be cross-examined by Mr. Kehoe, who is
16 counsel for Mr. Gotovina.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President we will proceed with
19 cross-examination. I note that Your Honour said if we needed additional
20 time to review documents that counsel has given late notice, the OTP has
21 given late notice, obviously that is difficult to do under certain time
22 constraints. Nevertheless, we will attempt to do so as best we can but,
23 of course, we reserve that position given the time constraints that we
24 have before us.
25 If I may, Mr. President, with the assistance of the usher, if I
1 could give a hard copy of the witness's statement to him in his own
3 JUDGE ORIE: Please do so.
4 MR. KEHOE: May I proceed Mr. President.
5 Cross-examination by Mr. Kehoe:
6 Q. Mr. Rajcic, good morning, sir.
7 Mr. Rajcic, you recall meeting myself and other members of the
8 Gotovina Defence team in Split
9 February, 2009; do you recall that?
10 A. Good morning to you too. I do recall that.
11 Q. And, Mr. Rajcic, do you recall signing a statement on the 13th of
12 February, 2009?
13 A. I do.
14 MR. KEHOE: Mr. Usher, if we could bring up on the screen
16 Q. Mr. Rajcic, what we're going to bring up on the screen is a copy
17 of your statement in Croatian that was signed -- that you will take a
18 look at. It should be -- it is a duplicate of what you have before you
19 as well as the English version.
20 Mr. Rajcic, you are free to look at the screen on the document
21 that is before you, but quite simply, did you have a chance to review
22 this statement before you began to testify before this Chamber last week?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And when you -- in reviewing this statement, does this statement
25 accurately reflect what you told to members of the Gotovina Defence team
1 during the aforementioned dates in February?
2 A. Yes, except for a typo in item 6.
3 Q. Okay. Can you tell us about that, typo in item 6? I don't know
4 if it's important or not. Can you tell about that typo?
5 MR. KEHOE: Can we go to page 2 of this document, Mr. Usher. It
6 should be item 6.
7 Q. Going to item 6, Mr. Rajcic, could you please tell us what that
8 typo is.
9 A. It's a wrong word. Is says -- it says the commander areas, but
10 what it should actually read is the Military District Split.
11 Q. So that would be in the -- it does in fact say the Split Military
12 District in English, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE ORIE: I see that.
14 MR. KEHOE:
15 Q. We can just fix the Croatian consistent with what you just noted
16 for us.
17 Moving on to the next question. Was the statement that you
18 provided to the General Gotovina Defence team true and accurate, to the
19 best of your knowledge?
20 A. I apologise.
21 Q. Was the statement that you provided and that's contained in that
22 statement, was it true and accurate, to the best of your knowledge?
23 A. Allow me to review it in total, because I signed every single
24 sheet. I mean, this copy that have I before me on the desk.
25 Q. Just take a quick look through it and just make sure.
1 A. Yes, it is okay.
2 Q. And, sir, if you -- if today I asked you the same questions
3 concerning the same matters that are set forth in your statement, would
4 your answers be the same as those that are contained in the statement
5 that you gave to the Gotovina Defence team the week before last? Would
6 they be the same answers?
7 A. In substance, yes. But to quote word for word, that is something
8 I'm unable to do.
9 Q. I understand. None of us can do that, sir.
10 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, at this time, we'd like to offer into
11 evidence 1D00-0767.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Any objections, Mr. Russo.
13 MR. RUSSO: No, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
15 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit D1425. Thank you.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Exhibit D1425 is admitted into evidence. Under
17 Rule 92 ter.
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
20 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I would like to ask you a couple of question or
21 several questions that are directed to questions that were asked by
22 Mr. Russo over the past several days, and some of them by way of
23 clarification, and that's where I'm going to begin. And I'd like to ask
24 you some questions about the planning for Operation Storm that you
25 discussed with Mr. Russo.
1 And if I can take you to -- this is on page --
2 MR. KEHOE: Counsel, on page 16262, line 7 and line 9 you noted
3 that the last -- you were asked on line 6:
4 "Q. Can you tell us when planning activity for this operation
6 And Mr. Russo was talking about Operation Storm.
7 The answer was:
8 "The last planning activity for Operation Storm started on
9 July the 31st, 1995, as soon as General Gotovina and I flew back from
10 Brioni to Rujani."
11 There was some request for further clarification, and you noted
12 several lines down from line 13 through to line 18:
13 "Part of the front line from Dinara to Velebit, that was the zone
14 of responsibility of the Split Military District, and after the
15 separation of forces under the Zagreb Agreement, that's when the first
16 planning activity for a possible attack operation began. That's why I'm
17 saying that the day indicated was the last day of activity for Operation
19 Can we get a bit of clarification on this, Mr. Rajcic, because
20 we're talking about a Zagreb Agreement, I believe is approximately 29th
21 of March, 1994; are you talking about agreement or are you talking about
22 the Vance Plan where the UN came in to monitor occupied territories which
23 was the end of 1991 and 1992.
24 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
1 MR. RUSSO: I understand that Mr. Kehoe is seeking clarification,
2 however, if you read a bit further down in the citation he was asked for
3 clarification about that particular event --
4 MR. KEHOE: This is cross, sir.
5 MR. RUSSO: I understand that, Mr. President, and the
6 clarification in the answer he gives a bit later on is indicated at page
7 16262 --
8 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me, [Overlapping
9 speakers] ...
10 MR. RUSSO: Please don't cut me off.
11 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... please.
12 Mr. Rajcic, could you take your earphones off for a while. Yes.
13 Now, what exactly is your problem Mr. Russo? Is it
14 misrepresenting the answer of the witness, is it -- what exactly is your
16 MR. RUSSO: I believe it is misrepresenting or an attempt to
17 misrepresent the answer of the witness. I asked for a clarification
18 about that particular issue. The witness gave a particular answer. He
19 is now being asked to clarify and being directed to a different portion
20 in time, where, if you read the clarification that I engaged in --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Let's just then check exactly. First, I'll check
22 the question now put to ...
23 Mr. Kehoe, what happened is Mr. Russo asked questions about
24 planning activities, starting with the 31st of July, and you referred to
25 lines 13 to 18, and you referred to the Zagreb Agreement in 1994, and if
1 I look at the questions put by Mr. Russo on page 16262, your questions
2 could create some confusion, Mr. Kehoe, as to whether we are talking
3 about the same.
4 So would you --
5 MR. KEHOE: That's what I was going to clarify, Judge.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Already in the questions, please, as --
7 because if the answers were what happened in 1995, and if you want to
8 take him back to -- to another moment, then it should at least be clear
9 that you are talking about something different.
10 MR. KEHOE: And that's exactly where I was going. I was going
11 back to that time-frame prior to the 31st of July. I mean we're at least
12 going back to 1994 the Zagreb Agreement goes back, as he mentions, in
13 1994. There is also the separation of forces --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Nevertheless, of course, you put it in the context
15 of the answers in relation to 1995, and there's as such no problem if
16 there is any specific reason. But there is a risk of creating confusion.
17 Mr. Rajcic, could you put on your earphones again.
18 Please try to formulate your question that every possible
19 confusion is excluded, Mr. Kehoe.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President.
21 Q. Mr. Rajcic during course of questioning with Mr. Russo you were
22 talking about the planning for Operation Storm beginning on the 31st of
23 July, 1995. Now this was the final planning for Operation Storm, wasn't
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Now there were plans being developed by the HV well prior to
2 that, and I'm talking about military plans, that would use the HV to
3 re-take the Krajina, including Knin, from the Republika Srpska Krajina,
4 wasn't there?
5 A. Yes, there were.
6 Q. Okay. Now let's talk about when those plans began.
7 When -- and put aside the word of Operation Storm because we know
8 from the documents that the term "Operation Storm" didn't come into
9 existence, I believe, until Directive 4 of the Main Staff on
10 29 June 1995
11 But let's just talk about the planning by the HV for the
12 re-taking of the Krajina. When did those plans commence? When did they
14 A. To my knowledge, the first planning started after the
15 Z-4 Agreement.
16 Q. And approximately when was that, sir?
17 A. If my memory serves me well, in terms of the time, that was in
18 1994. The spring of 1994, I believe.
19 Q. Now, are you referring to the Z-4 Plan, or are you referring to
20 the Zagreb Agreement; do you recall?
21 A. I am placing this in the context of the Zagreb Agreement, the
22 decision on the separation of forces, the cessation of combat activities,
23 when the army - shall I say - was in a different situation.
24 Q. Now, if we can clarify that yet further.
25 Are you talking about when these plans began at a time when the
1 UN came in and established the Zone of Separation between the Republic of
2 Croatia and the Republika Srpska Krajina? Are you talking about that
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And the UN moved in, the agreement, the subsequent mobilisation
6 went from 1991 to 1992; didn't it?
7 A. That was the first demobilisation. I was then in the area of
8 Dubrovnik. I am talking about the period of 1994.
9 Q. Okay. Well, let's talk about -- let's go to 1994.
10 Approximately when in 1994 did these plans begin to be developed
11 by the HV for the liberation of the Krajina? When did that happen in
13 A. At that time, started what we referred to as staff training,
14 courses for the actual situation. That meant preparing the commands and
15 the units in their respective zones of responsibility to undertake
16 preparatory activities for the moment if it should occur, if the need
17 should arise, that is, to militarily resolve the question of the occupied
19 Q. Now, when you say that the preparations began, what, in fact, did
20 the HV start to do in 1994 to prepare for the re-taking of the Krajina?
21 A. In the segment that I was in charge with -- of, the artillery of
22 the Military District of Split, the first steps were training troops,
23 non-commissioned officers, officers, and units.
24 Q. Now, in this training of troops and non-commissioned officers and
25 officers, did you also engage in war games and try to plot out exactly
1 how the attack would unfold?
2 A. According to standard operating procedure, in such activities,
3 the different variants are simulated of a possible action, judging the
4 disposition or estimating -- assisting the -- the disposition of the
5 enemy and his reactions to the different variants of action.
6 Q. Let us turn to this planning as it involves the possible use of
8 When you are planning going back to 1994, were you planning
9 targets that you could conceivably attack and were you establishing what
10 the X, Y, Z, coordinates were for those targets?
11 A. Yes. Always. When have you a scenario -- a variant when
12 artillery is concerned, you always work on the basis of available
13 intelligence and inventory or the so-called list of targets as a whole,
14 and then you may -- when you have made a choice of your final variant,
15 the filter variant, as it were, then you define the most important
16 targets for that variant.
17 Q. Now let's stay with the targets. When you began your planning,
18 sir, certain targets were targets that you had the X-Y-Z coordinates from
19 for a significant period of time such as the headquarters of the Army of
20 the Republika Srpska Krajina or the northern barracks or items such as
21 that value; did you not?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. So would you -- would agree with me there were certain targets
24 such as hard targets like the headquarters that you had those grid
25 coordinates for those types of targets and other targets for a
1 significant period of time?
2 A. Yes, from the very beginning.
3 Q. Now, we will go from the -- just for a moment the theoretical to
4 the practical.
5 In the planning stages, you -- in the army, continuously update
6 your plans, based upon what changes in the battlefield, don't you?
7 A. Yes, we do. In fact, 24 hours a day, around the clock, as it
9 Q. So for instance if we take into conversation what happened in the
10 Livno valley with Jump 1, Jump 2, and Summer 1994 that would -- excuse
11 me, Summer 1995, apologies, that would cause you to make some updates to
12 the plans that you already had; isn't that right?
13 A. Yes, this is standard procedure.
14 Q. Now, going down to the actual practical realities on the
15 battlefield, and let's talk about how things unfold in 1995. The reality
16 was that the confrontation lines remain relatively static except for the
17 area around the Dinara after Jump 1, Jump 2, and Summer 1995; isn't that
19 A. After Jumps 1 and 2, we embarked on Operation Summer 1995.
20 Q. And my question is the rest of the -- the line, the line covered,
21 for instance, by OG Sibenik or the line covered by OG Zadar those lines
22 remained relatively the same for a significant period of time through
23 1994 and 1995, up until Operation Storm, didn't they?
24 A. Yes. And some from 1992.
25 Q. Now let's go back to the answer that you gave to the -- to
1 Mr. Russo about the planning, the final planning, on the 31st of July of
2 1995 for Operation Storm.
3 That final planning that you were doing was primarily updating
4 information that you had for a significant time prior to that, wasn't it?
5 A. Yes, it was.
6 Q. Now, let us go to and talk directly about -- what we now know as
7 Operation Storm, and if we can put up on the screen - and this is the
8 directive from the HV Main Staff of 26 June 1995. I think I referred
9 to -- it as 29 June. My apologies, it's the 26th. You don't have it,
10 sir? I'm going to have to put it up on the screen.
11 MR. KEHOE: It's D956.
12 Q. It will come up on the screen in Croatian, Mr. Rajcic.
13 Now, this is the directive that we had talked about previously
14 from the Main Staff, Mr. Rajcic, and what I would like to focus us on you
15 can -- more then welcome to take a look at this, but I want to talk about
16 the artillery issues, as that is your area here. But just let me know if
17 you want to examine this any further.
18 Okay, sir?
19 Now you see in the upper right-hand corner, before we move any
20 further, it does have the commentary Oluja, Storm, you see that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. The documents will follow thereafter with that. Let us turn to
23 page 6 of the English and page 5 of the -- the B/C/S, and I am looking at
24 for some guidance for the Chamber and counsel, bullet point 7 on that.
25 Now, if you could take a look for me at bullet point 7, talking
1 about the artillery and rocket support and going down to the second
3 "The Main Staff directed that the support should focus on
4 neutralising the Republika Srpska army Main Staff and the 7th Corps
5 command post in Knin, the brigade [sic] command post, concentrations of
6 enemy manpower, armour, and artillery in the area of Knin and Benkovac,
7 including ammunition and fuel depots."
8 So it would be accurate to say, Mr. Rajcic, that as early as the
9 26th of June, 1995, that the Main Staff was issuing an order to
10 General Gotovina that was to go down to you that you were to focus your
11 efforts on an artillery attack with those particular targets in mind,
12 i.e., the Main Staff, command posts, or concentrations of troops; isn't
13 that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And you -- in order to accomplish your task, you were being told
16 by the Main Staff that you were to, as part of your artillery attack, to
17 use artillery and rocket support systems to accomplish your goals; isn't
18 that right as well?
19 A. Yes. Those that we had at our disposal.
20 Q. Now let's move down from, again, the larger to the more specific.
21 MR. KEHOE: And let us first take a look at P1125, which is the
22 Kozjak order of General Gotovina. And if we can go three pages in, after
23 the first two cover pages.
24 Q. I know you recognise this, Mr. Rajcic. You have talked about
25 this during the course of your reports. This is General Gotovina's order
1 on 1 August.
2 MR. KEHOE: If we can turn our attention to page 14 in the
3 English, and 13 in the Croatian. And if we can highlight that -- three
4 quarters of the way down. Just blow it up a little bit. We're under the
5 artillery support section of paragraph 7.
6 Q. Now, you can see that paragraph where it says:
7 "Tasks of the artillery and rocket groups," and General Gotovina
8 writes about using it against the powerful strikes against the enemy
9 front line, three lines down, command posts, communications, et cetera;
10 and it notes by putting the towns of Drvar, Knin, Benkovac Obrovac and
11 Gracac under artillery fire.
12 Before we get to this, it is a fact, Mr. Rajcic, that prior to
13 this order, artillery units in the HV were not permitted to attack these
14 urban areas, Knin, Benkovac, Obrovac, and Gracac, which were within the
15 UN protected areas. They weren't permitted to attack those towns without
16 authorisation from the higher command, were they?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And this order for the first time changes that, doesn't it?
19 A. Yes. That's when we were in a situation to do that.
20 MR. KEHOE: Can I have just one moment, Your Honour.
21 [Defence counsel confer]
22 MR. KEHOE:
23 Q. Now, on that score, if we can just -- we're going to come back to
24 this in a minute.
25 But on that score, if we can just go back to the directive that
1 we just talked about, D956; and if we could turn to page 5 in the
2 English, page 4 in the B/C/S, if we look at the tasks of the
3 Split Military District, and if we go three quarters of the way down
4 under 3, it notes there that at part of the tasks to the Split Military
5 District were artillery and rockets on Knin and Benkovac; do you see
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. With those items in mind we take this -- that's in June. We do
9 know that there has been some development in the battlefield from June
10 through Operation Storm - Jump 1, Jump 2, Summer 95 - let us go back to
11 the P1125, and go back to that page 14 on P1125 in the English and 13 in
12 the Croatian.
13 MR. KEHOE: Just blow up that bottom section again.
14 Q. Now, so we have in June the 26th of 1995 the Main Staff telling
15 General Gotovina to make plans to put Knin and Benkovac under artillery
16 and rocket fire. And then as we move into Operation Storm we have the
17 Kozjak order which is a bit more sophisticated and adds Obrovac, Drvar,
18 and Gracac to the order; but this is now coming down the chain of command
19 to give the green light for you to implement your plans of predesignated
20 targets to do what you have to do with the artillery; isn't that right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Now, let us talk about this particular language that's in this
23 document, and we're going to get to your order for artillery in a second.
24 But this is it General Gotovina's order. We're going to get to your
25 attachment in a moment. But just this, you, in fact, drafted this
1 portion of General Gotovina's order, didn't you?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And approximately when did you do that, sir?
4 A. The second version was supposed to be on the 2nd of August.
5 There was a -- the first version and then certain amendments were made to
6 it, and then the second one was supposed to be put into force.
7 MR. KEHOE: If I might just interject. I think Mr. Misetic has a
8 record mistake.
9 MR. MISETIC: I'm sorry -- it's not a record mistake. My client
10 doesn't have the right B/C/S page on the screen, and he would like to
11 follow, so if we could ...
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
13 MR. KEHOE: We're talking about -- it should be -- the item on
14 the screen is --
15 JUDGE ORIE: English started 7th, 7 artillery support whereas we
16 start in the B/C/S halfway that paragraph.
17 MR. MISETIC: Yes, Your Honour we do have the right -- actually
18 dealing with the right page although bullet point 7 starts on the
19 previous page. Thank you.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes please proceed.
21 MR. KEHOE:
22 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, this particular order is an order that I applies
23 to the corps level artilleries TR and TRS 1 through 5, doesn't it?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Now, when you wrote this in the fashion that you wrote it, you
1 then yourself drafted a specific artillery order which was an attachment
2 to this, didn't you?
3 MR. RUSSO: I'm sorry, I just need some clarification. The
4 witness's answer with respect to drafting of this he mentioned the first
5 version and then a second version, but I don't know if there is any
6 clarification whether or not what we're looking at, what version that is.
7 MR. KEHOE: This is P1125 it's the item that you have --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But apparently, Mr. Russo, if he refers to the
9 witness talking about different versions, let's try to find out whether
10 P112 is what version, so that we ...
11 MR. KEHOE:
12 Q. Mr. Rajcic, do you know what version this is, the first or the
14 A. I think I saw on page 1 that the cover page said August 1. And
15 then all of a sudden, next time around, it was August 2. I know that on
16 the 2nd of August we had the final version of the order for the attack
17 Operation Kozjak. I may have been mistaken though. Perhaps we can go
18 back to see whether the date is the 1st or the 2nd of August.
19 Q. We can clarify that.
20 MR. KEHOE: If we can go to the first page of this document, and
21 I'm talking about the first cover page.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 2nd of August. Okay.
23 MR. KEHOE:
24 Q. As we go through the attachments, the first attachment is
25 General Gotovina's order of --
1 A. Excuse me. Okay.
2 Q. So what we have is General Gotovina's order of the 1st. And then
3 one of the attachments for the 2nd is -- let's turn to D970, which is
4 your order, which is dated the 2nd.
5 We're going put that on the screen, D970.
6 Mr. Rajcic, this is your order of 2 August 1995. And if we can
7 go three pages in on the English, we're talking about paragraph 3: "TRS
8 tasks ..."
9 And we see at the bottom there again you list the towns of Drvar,
10 Knin, Benkovac, Obrovac, and Gracac as the towns to be shelled; do you
11 see that, sir?
12 A. You mean the last sentence of item 3?
13 Q. That's correct.
14 A. Yes, that's what it reads.
15 Q. Now, before we get into some of these items on here, I just want
16 to go through the -- the chain of this.
17 This order is going down to the corps artillery level,
18 OG Sibenik, OG Zadar or it's going down to and to the TS/TRS levels; is
19 that right?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Now, the -- if we look at a different order.
22 MR. KEHOE: And if I could look at 65 ter 4528.
23 Q. This is an order for offensive operations of the 112th Brigade in
25 MR. KEHOE: And if we can go to the individual tasks for the
1 112th, let us turn to page 5 in the English under bullet 6, and page 4 in
2 the B/C/S.
3 Now, if we look at this is, we see this is artillery support and
4 if we could turn the page in the English and scroll down in the B/C/S, I
5 want to see if it is on this page. It's on there.
6 This has tasks for the 112th Brigade which notes that:
7 "During the artillery missile preparation of the attack
8 neutralise and eliminate enemy firing points and manpower, prevent
9 concentration build up, and counter-attack of enemy forces for the
10 purpose of deploying reserve forces."
11 Now again, sir, going from the macro to the -- down to the lower
12 levels as this filters down, your order is then disseminated out and
13 other units get a different type of order, which is much more focussed,
14 don't they?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And we have -- an order here that says nothing about shelling
17 Knin, Drvar, Benkovac, or Obrovac; but we have here is an order by an
18 artillery group to -- to fire on a tactical level in support of troops
19 that happen to be fighting at the ARSK; isn't that right?
20 MR. RUSSO: Your Honour, I'm going to --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
22 MR. RUSSO: I think that question, first of all, is argument
23 where it says we see nothing about shelling of Knin, Drvar, Benkovac, or
24 Obrovac, I don't know what that -- other than argument, I'm not sure what
25 that adds to the question.
1 JUDGE ORIE: That is to make a distinction between we see what we
2 see in another document and what we see here; and I think that is
3 perfectly reasonable to do. Apart from that you said first -- first of
4 all, argument and then second of all.
5 MR. RUSSO: I don't think I have a second of all, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
7 MR. KEHOE:
8 Q. Did you understand the question, Mr. Rajcic?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Can you answer it for me, with regard to this particular task,
11 being orders issues on a tactical level?
12 A. This was the commander's decision to use the artillery from the
13 organic establishment part of his unit, in order to modulate it as
14 stipulated here in order to perform certain tasks for him at the tactical
15 level. He simply went down to the lowest level.
16 Q. Now, let us go back to the order that you issued, and --
17 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, at this time, we'd like to offer into
18 evidence 65 ter 4528.
19 MR. RUSSO: No objection, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
21 THE REGISTRAR: This document shall be given Exhibit D1426.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Is admitted into evidence.
23 MR. KEHOE: Thank you, Your Honour, I'm sorry to interrupt there.
24 I just got ahead of myself.
25 Q. Now, if we can go back to the order of General Gotovina of P1125
1 again, page 14, and 13 in the Croatian, which has the language of putting
2 these towns under artillery fire.
3 Mr. Rajcic, we are again talking about the sentence in the bottom
4 of number 7, about putting the towns of Drvar, Knin, Benkovac, and
5 Obrovac, and Gracac under artillery fire; do you see that, sir?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. I put this -- this issue to you, Mr. Rajcic. It is the position
8 of the Prosecution that that particular phraseology was an order to
9 indiscriminately fire on these towns. That is the position of the
10 Prosecutor. What do you have to say about that, and tell us what you
11 believe the intent of this order was.
12 A. This formulation is actually to impression upon those of lower
13 rank, subordinates, that is, that in these settlements and towns there
14 were important military units, facilities, and commands; and that with
15 the top level the upper level of the Main Staff, the task had been
16 executed of defining in this specific form when writing the order in this
17 particular bullet point for the corps level.
18 Q. Let me take this question one step further.
19 Was the intent of this line in the order to fire at pre-planned
20 military objectives; or was it just to fire indiscriminately throughout
21 the town. What was it?
22 A. I never heard nor ever issued an order to the effect -- to
23 execute indiscriminate fire.
24 Q. The other part of my question was so was the intent of this order
25 to fire on pre-planned military objectives that you had -- that you had
1 discussed and planned prior to Operation Storm?
2 A. I'm sorry, I apologise. It was always implied, understood, as
3 far as I was concerned, in other words, it was mandatory for me that
4 exclusively an only target, a target with specific coordinates. I always
5 maintain that is so, that it is understood, that that is why I do not
6 always explain it at length.
7 Q. Let me show you a document that was --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe before we go to the next document, I'd
9 like to take the break now because we need a bit more time for the lunch
10 break today as usually between morning an afternoon session. And I'm
11 looking to everyone in the courtroom. My schedule would be that we'll
12 have a break now until ten minutes to 1.00, that we then have a very
13 short last morning session of approximately half an hour, that we then
14 have one-hour lunch break, so that we resume at a quarter past -- 20
15 minutes past 2.00.
16 We have a break, and we resume at ten minutes to 1.00.
17 --- Recess taken at 12.30 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 12.55 p.m.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, please proceed.
20 MR. KEHOE: Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
21 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I'd just like to begin where we left off with your
22 last statement and on page 70, line 7, you said:
23 "It was always implied understood as far as I was concerned that,
24 in other words, it was mandatory for me that exclusively a target with
25 specific coordinates."
1 Let me -- what you were talking about there is that you believe
2 that every particular target would have specific coordinates upon which
3 to fire upon than was discussed prior to Operation Storm; is that right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Let me show you a brief example of this. Turn your attention to
6 65 ter 401, which I believe had been a part of the initial exhibit list,
7 but I'm mistaken, it's not there anymore.
8 MR. KEHOE: 65 ter 401.
9 Q. What I have before you, sir, is regular report for the 4th of
10 August at 0600 hours. You can look at it on your screen by Colonel Vukic
11 from OG Sibenik.
12 MR. KEHOE: And if we go to the second paragraph, and this is a
13 report to the Zadar forward command post.
14 Q. It notes that artillery support to the attack began at 0500
15 hours, "Artillery is still firing at the previously selected targets."
16 Now that is consistent with your orders on the use of artillery,
17 that it would be directed at these previously selected targets; isn't
18 that right?
19 A. Yes. Previously selected target.
20 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, at this time, we'd like to offer into
21 evidence 65 ter 401.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
23 MR. RUSSO: No objection.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Registrar.
25 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit D1427.
1 JUDGE ORIE: D1427 is admitted into evidence.
2 MR. KEHOE:
3 Q. Continuing on, Mr. Rajcic, and I'd like to put to you several
4 positions that have been advanced by the OTP.
5 And the OTP has advanced at various points in this trial the
6 concept or the idea that the intent of the artillery attack by the HV was
7 to shell towns that had no military targets; is that so?
8 A. No.
9 Q. They've also noted that the -- and I'm saying that the Office of
10 the Prosecutor has advanced this theory: That the intent of the shelling
11 by the HV in Operation Storm was not to defeat the Army of the Republika
12 Srpska Krajina but to force civilians to flee the Krajina; is that so?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Was that ever the intention or was that ever the design of the
15 artillery attack?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Let us switch subjects to some degree, and I would like to talk
18 with you a little bit about the planning that you engaged in prior to
19 Operation Storm. And I'm talking about the artillery planning, if I was
20 not clear enough.
21 Before I begin that, as a follow-up, was there ever any intent to
22 use artillery to force the civilian population to flee?
23 A. Where I was, that was not the case.
24 Q. Sir, if you can -- thank you for the answer. If you can direct
25 your attention to your statement, if I may, and that is D1425, for the
1 record. I want to refer you to several paragraphs in your statement and
2 then ask you a question. I'm not going to quote and read it line by
3 line. It's before the Trial Chamber.
4 But before we do that if I can just follow up on your last answer
5 where you noted that when I asked you was that ever the intent -- was
6 there any intent to use artillery to force the civilian population to
8 And you said: "Where I was, that was not the case."
9 Do you know of any instance during Operation Storm or any other
10 location where that was the intent? Do you know any other part of the HV
11 operation where they did use artillery to get the civilian population to
13 A. I'm not aware of that. However, I categorically assert that I'm
14 not aware of that, only where I was present.
15 Q. I understand, sir.
16 In paragraph 10 of your statement, you note - I will just
17 paraphrase. You note that artillery was specifically discussed at
18 planning meetings for Operation Storm.
19 If we turn your attention a little bit down to paragraph 15 and
20 16. You note in paragraph 15 that the most important focus of the
21 artillery was to be the main ARSK headquarters, the communications
22 centre, 7 Krajina Corps headquarters in the northern barracks.
23 Do you see that, sir?
24 A. Yes. Paragraph 15.
25 Q. Yes. And in paragraph 16, you note and that's the last sentence,
1 that these targets were going to be fired on with T130s and 122 MRLs?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... at this point.
4 Now with your understanding that the 122 MRLs were going to fire
5 on these targets, the specific X-Y-Z coordinates for these objectives
6 were known both to the 4th Guards Brigade and the 7th Guards Brigade,
7 weren't they?
8 A. Yes. The coordinates were always known.
9 MR. KEHOE: If we can turn to paragraph 59 in your statement.
10 Q. Paragraph 59 discusses a meeting that you had on the 3rd of
11 August, the day before Operation Storm, where you met with TS-3 and the
12 7th Guards Brigade, and you also had a meeting with the chiefs of
13 artillery of the 7th and 4th Guards Brigade, with the purpose of
14 coordinating artillery support along -- support on the main axis.
15 Do you see that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Now, at this time, sir, you understood, did you not, that the
18 northern barracks were going to be the target of MRL fire, didn't you?
19 A. MRL
20 Q. Multiple-barrel rocket launchers. The 122 MBRLs.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And you knew that the 7th, and possibly the 4th, on orders of the
23 7th were going to fire on the northern barracks in the early morning
24 hours of the 5th as well as firing on -- at a tactical depth various
25 places where ARSK soldiers were located on the front line; is that right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Let me -- let me digress just one second about the use of MRLs
3 and artillery. Not only at the strategic and operational level in depth
4 but also along the front line area at the more of the tactical depth,
5 when you began to fire on the 4th and throughout the 4th, where was most
6 of the fire directed by the HV artillery? Was it directed at the front
7 line area or was it directed at -- in depth in places like the northern
8 barracks or the headquarters? Can you give us an idea of the firing and
9 how it went?
10 A. The focus of the use of all the artillery, which was two
11 artillery battalions of the 4th and 7th Guards Brigades, with the support
12 of TS-3, Artillery Group 3, if we leave aside the long-range artillery,
13 130-millimetre cannon, namely two 130-millimetre cannons deployed in the
14 area of Grahovo. The 155-millimetre Howitzers, three of them are from
15 the -- from the 20th Artillery Battalion, and two 203-millimetre
16 Howitzers from the 20th Howitzer Artillery Battalion, was planned -- or,
17 rather, it was planned that all of them should focus as far as possible
18 the fire from the forward defence line of the enemy into their tactical
19 depth. The rest of the artillery firing from the same direction, and
20 these are the two 130-millimetre cannons I mentioned, and 122-millimetre
21 B-21 launchers, were planned to open artillery fire into the operational
22 depth, where strategic targets were to be found as well.
23 In other words, roughly speaking, two-thirds of all the artillery
24 pieces were used, or perhaps one-fourth, only for the operational depth,
25 and firing upon strategic targets, whereas everything else was in the
1 function -- in the service of routing the first defence line, the first
2 line of deployment of the enemy along the Dinara.
3 Q. So there was some mixup on the numbers there.
4 So let me get this. Twenty-five percent, you said, is of what
5 you had was fired at the operational depth going after strategic and
6 operational targets; and 75 percent was fired towards the front line area
7 where the confrontation line was; is that accurate?
8 A. Yes. When the artillery attack was being prepared, this is
9 something that was planned, which does not mean that this was indeed the
10 balance of forces in combat.
11 As you can see from the document -- documents, the thrust of the
12 artillery attack of the Croatian army was aimed against the forward line
13 of defence of the enemy and their tactical depth, where their artillery
14 pieces were deployed, as well as the tactical targets which were the
15 command posts of the brigades.
16 Q. Mr. Rajcic, before we go any further I want to ask you a couple
17 of questions about the munitions that were used because it has come up
18 during the course of this trial.
19 Now, the MRLs that were available to the HV, did they have a
20 cluster munition to them or were they a standard contact munition?
21 A. Not only multiple rocket launchers but 130-millimetre cannons and
22 Howitzers used contact action projectiles. In other words, there were no
23 cluster munitions.
24 Q. Let me address another issue on these munitions.
25 MR. KEHOE: If I could turn your attention to, if I may, 65 ter
1 704 -- 7084 -- excuse me, 7083; my apologies.
2 Q. This is a document that is -- actually the date is illegible but
3 it's a daily operations report. But I would like to get a explanation
4 from you on is in the ammunition section in the middle of the first page.
5 Do you see in the ammunition status there, sir? In the
6 ammunition status there it says TF p/p. Do you see that?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And what does that TF p/p, stand for, sir. And when you do that,
9 can you explain the next one which I think should be TF s/p?
10 A. Not s-e-p, rather, s/p. Or rather not sip but s/p.
11 TF stands for the type of projectile, the type of projectile
12 which was form as a combination of a contact action and fuse projectile
13 for various operative practical and other reasons to make it efficient to
14 fire upon a target. That's how it's been called; p/p means that it is --
15 it contains a solid charge.
16 In other words, the projectile, 122-millimetre D-30 is the
17 Howitzer involved, has as part of its combat set the possibility for a
18 certain amount of the ammunition contained in the set from the casing of
19 the projectile where the charge is contained, to be -- to have some of
20 the gun powder set aside, in order to fire upon targets that are within
21 shorter range. Something that would otherwise have been impossible by
22 merely using p/p charge.
23 Q. I don't think that came across -- I don't think that came across
24 in the translation.
25 If Mr. Misetic can clear this up.
1 MR. MISETIC: Yeah, p/p there was a different interpretation.
2 It's at page 77, line 21, if I could just say it again and see if ... it
3 will make more --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we might have some difficulties in guiding the
5 witness in this very technical matter.
6 Mr. Russo, I take it that the assistance of Mr. Misetic is
7 appreciated by you as well.
8 MR. MISETIC: The phrase p/p I believe the witness indicated
9 means "puno punjenje."
10 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note, it could be interpreted as
11 full charge.
12 MR. KEHOE:
13 Q. So would it be fair to say, Mr. Rajcic, that the p/p means full
14 charge and the s/p stands for half charge?
15 A. Correct. Reduced charge.
16 Q. And those designations bear on the range of that particular
17 weapon, does it not?
18 A. Correct.
19 Q. So in -- if in any of these documents p/p is translated as
20 anti-personnel shells, that would be incorrect; is that right?
21 A. Of course.
22 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, at this time subject to changes in the
23 translation, we will offer into evidence 65 ter 7083. The translation
24 that I'm talking about is on the top line where it notes the p/p is a
25 anti-personnel shell.
1 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, there is no objection. I note the
2 document is attachment 17 to P2339, MFI
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Russo.
4 Mr. Registrar.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this document shall be given
6 Exhibit D1428.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And a corrected translation will then be
9 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Your Honour, we notice we will upload and change
10 that. We have it --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and you communicate with the Registrar on
12 uploading a new English translation.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. KEHOE: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Q. Now --
16 JUDGE ORIE: I say please proceed. I think I said that we would
17 try to finish at 20 minutes past 1.00 and have a very short last session.
18 Could you give us an indication as what time you would still need after
19 our lunch break, Mr. Kehoe?
20 MR. KEHOE: Half an hour, at the outset, 45 minutes,
21 Mr. President.
22 JUDGE ORIE: We'll consider this request.
23 We'll have a break, and we resume at 20 minutes past 2.00.
24 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.20 p.m.
25 --- On resuming at 2.24 p.m.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, you may proceed.
2 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President. Thank you.
3 Q. Mr. Rajcic, we had previously, prior to the break, been talking a
4 little bit about MRLs and their use on predesignated targets, and I'd
5 like to touch on a subject with you that was brought up on direct
6 examination, and that is the Ivancica map, the coded map that was on
8 If we could bring that up on the screen, Mr. Usher?
9 Now, if we could just leave it in that context, then. You were
10 asked some questions on this map with regard to the use of the
11 122 multi-barrelled rocket-launchers, but I would like to just ask you
12 some general questions about these coded maps to begin with.
13 Now, this coded map is not a map that's exclusively used in the
14 artillery setting, is it?
15 A. Yes, you're right. No, it isn't.
16 Q. Can you explain to the Trial Chamber what these coded maps are
17 generally used for?
18 A. These are maps that are used as auxiliary resources attached to
19 the planning documentation in the armed forces. They were primarily used
20 for the infantry.
21 Q. Now, let's take that one step further. You're using it primarily
22 for infantry, but it's used for coded communications in the infantry,
23 isn't it?
24 A. Yes, that is one of the documents, the function of which is
25 inter alia communication amongst all the protagonists of combat
2 Q. Now, when you're using these coded maps, I mean, these circles
3 are reference points, aren't they? I mean, they aren't specific targets,
4 are they?
5 A. No. Reference points, yes, but this can be circled with the
6 disposition of, for instance, the firing position -- positions of the
8 Q. I understand. Now, this type of map, I mean, this map is put
9 together before operational planning, planning for a particular
10 operation; isn't that so?
11 A. Yes, this type of a map is always in use, also at the time when
12 the units are in the preparation stage.
13 Q. So, I mean, the map is -- this map is put together. You have
14 these codes put in there for the infantry to use, and thereafter then you
15 begin your particular operation and planning and decide on your
16 particular artillery targets, et cetera; is that how it goes?
17 A. It is on the basis of these maps that the targets are defined for
18 artillery, those targets which are located within the circle or in its
19 immediate vicinity; of the circle, that is.
20 Q. We're going to talk about those individual targets, because that
21 takes me to something you said during the course of your testimony with
22 Mr. Russo. But before we get to that: When was this coded map created;
23 do you know?
24 A. If this is Ivancica, this was used by the 7th Guards Brigade and
25 it was created for Operation Oluja, Storm.
1 Q. Now, let us go back to your statement about targets within
2 circles. And if I could go back to something that you said on Friday,
3 and that's -- this is on page 16410. You've noted that on line 20:
4 "These maps were made, as far as I know, with the final
5 modifications in 1996 and 1998. The former JNA did not plot its
6 installations into military maps."
7 So when we go down to the area around 16, if we could just, you
8 know, drift down into 16, which is in the lower half of this to the left
9 of that solid line, okay, in that area that's around "16," sir -- can
10 you -- let me --
11 A. SS-16.
12 Q. It's further down. Yes, it's further down. Keep going. It's
13 further up, yeah. Can you go back up? Sorry, it's down. Where is it?
14 I'm sorry.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Are you looking for "Knin"?
16 MR. KEHOE: Okay it's on the circle on the right. Just go to the
17 area that's on the right around Knin. It's in that circle around Knin.
18 There we go. And we see "S-16" there in the middle. If we can just blow
19 that up a little bit.
20 Now, that's fine.
21 Q. You noted for us that the northern barracks is not plotted on
22 this coded map, is it?
23 A. No.
24 Q. And this goes back to what you said, that the basis of this is
25 this is an old JNA map and they didn't put those old facilities on there;
1 is that --
2 MR. RUSSO: Objection, Your Honour. I think it's unclear --
3 well, first of all, the witness said "If this is the Ivancica map" --
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, I think the best way of doing it is to
5 refer to pages and to lines, rather than to whisper in the ear of the
6 witness what is important for you.
7 MR. RUSSO: Yes. At page 3, line 1, the witness indicates --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Page 3?
9 MR. RUSSO: I have here in front of me, page 3, line 1.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm with you. Page 3, line 1.
11 MR. RUSSO: And this is where the witness indicated when the map
12 was created or what it was created for, and then Mr. Kehoe brought him
13 back to something he had said on Friday. So I think there is -- needs
14 some clarification of which one it is, if this is the map he's referring
15 to at page 3, line 1, or if this is another kind of map created at a
16 different time-period.
17 MR. KEHOE: That's fair, Mr. President. I'll clarify it.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please do so.
19 MR. KEHOE:
20 Q. I think we need to be a little clearer on what we're talking
21 about. The underlying map is a JNA map; isn't that right? Let's put the
22 circles aside. The underlying map is a JNA map; right?
23 A. JNA? Can I have an explanation, please?
24 Q. The Yugoslav National Army.
25 A. Yes, the underlying map is the JNA map, yes, the topographic map
1 of the JNA.
2 Q. And that's the map that was made back in 1996, or 1998, or,
3 excuse me, even well prior to that, I'm sorry, and it was made prior to
4 Operation Storm, right, the JNA map?
5 A. I think that I have correctly replied to the question.
6 Can I have a Croatian translation, please?
7 The last amendments to these maps, the JNA maps, were in 1978.
8 Q. Okay. Now, from that particular map, the 7th Guards Brigade put
9 circles on this map for the purposes of Operation Storm; right?
10 A. That's right.
11 Q. I'm sorry that took so long to get there, but -- and in these
12 underlying JNA maps, you noted for us previously, on page 16410, that
13 they didn't include military installations; correct?
14 A. I said that military facilities were not marked on it.
15 Q. And you noted for us that, for instance, when you look at the map
16 that's on the screen, the Ivancica map, that map does not have the
17 northern barracks designated, does it?
18 A. Yes. Can I digress somewhat?
19 Q. Of course.
20 A. I have one such original map in my brief-case.
21 Q. Well, let's just deal with this one. This particular map doesn't
22 have the northern barracks on it, does it, the Slavko Rodic Barracks?
23 A. Yes, I didn't say this -- this original one, without the circles,
24 without the military installations, military facilities, drawn in.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Without going through what the witness
1 has in his suitcase, he was talking about a geographical map. If it's
2 purely geographical, then of course you would find roads, railways,
3 et cetera, but that's it. If it's more than geographical, then of course
4 we could look at the map he apparently has in his suitcase, so he has a
5 good impression of what was the basis on which one worked.
6 MR. KEHOE: Well, I think that -- I'm not sure exactly I know
7 what you're referring to. I'm just looking at the exhibit that was
8 presented during direct examination, which was this particular map.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but apparently conclusions -- or at least it
10 apparently has some relevance, what was indicated on the maps on which
11 these maps were based. If it's purely geographical, then I wouldn't
12 expect anything else than perhaps buildings or -- but not specific
13 indications, other than, I would say, features as you see them from the
14 air, without any explanation; so therefore, since you're asking what was
15 on the original maps and what was not, it seems to have some relevance.
16 MR. KEHOE: Well, actually, with this particular map, I'm asking
17 is the northern barracks designated now going to the other military
18 facilities. It's got no military features --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed. I keep in the back of my mind
20 whether it would assist me and perhaps my colleagues to see the map on
21 the basis of which this one was produced.
22 Please proceed.
23 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
24 Q. Mr. Rajcic, this map doesn't have a facility marked for, for
25 instance, the southern barracks or the Senjak barracks either; is that
2 A. It doesn't.
3 Q. And this map would have no information on military features or
4 military buildings that are located in this -- in the Knin area, would
6 A. The barracks, not only the Main Staff, which should be recognised
7 in this area because it is marked, just like all other facilities are.
8 Q. But clearly the northern barracks and the Senjak Barracks are
10 A. No.
11 Q. Now, if you were to -- using an artillery map, an artillery map
12 with X-Y-Z coordinators would, of course, be different from this coded
13 map, wouldn't it?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. I mean, you would have tabular textualar -- there would be a
16 tabular textualar list with those coordinates on it, would there not?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And that particular coordinate that was fired upon by the
19 brigades, that is the type of information you covered with the 4th and
20 7th Guards Brigade prior to the firing on the northern barracks, didn't
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Now -- I'm sorry. Now, when you looked at this map, you looked
24 at the map at S-16 and you noted, based on the diary, that the target was
25 the northern barracks because you knew that target was to the right of
1 S-16; isn't that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And you knew, from your own personal knowledge, that that was the
4 particular area where the multi-barrelled rocket-launchers were fired
5 into; isn't that so?
6 A. That is so.
7 Q. And, of course, that, without going into this again, was based on
8 what you said previously, the discussion of the X-Y-Z coordinates with
9 the 4th and 7th Guards Brigade; right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Now, let me put to you what the Prosecutor's allegation
12 concerning S-16 is. The Prosecutor's allegation is that the HV
13 intentionally fired into a residential area that is designated here as
14 S-16. That is the position of the Prosecution that's before this
15 Chamber, and my question to you, Mr. Rajcic, is: Is that true? Did, in
16 fact, the HV fire into a residential area with multi-barrelled
17 rocket-launchers either on the 4th or the 5th of August, 1995?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Explain to me the basis of your position. Explain to the
20 Chamber, excuse me.
21 A. If the precise coordinates that we have, X, Y and Z, were placed
22 on the map, we would have a clearer picture of where the center of the
23 target was.
24 Q. And that was the northern barracks, wasn't it?
25 A. That's right.
1 MR. KEHOE: If I can just have one moment here.
2 Let me turn our attention briefly to one last document in this
3 area before we move off into the final brief area.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe. Before we leave this, and the map is now
5 on our screen: Mr. Rajcic, could you tell us where apparently it was
6 intended to fire to the right of 16, what did 16 depict? I mean, why was
7 there a circle there? What was the purpose of plotting 16 on this map?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When infantry units, for their own
9 purposes and needs, mark significant features or facilities in the course
10 of combat, then they have a different approach, and when on this base the
11 target is shown, then S-16 would be the reference point indicating where
12 the artillery target, in fact, is. So when something is to the right of
13 S-16, when it is stated barracks to the right of S-16, then we have the
14 location of the barracks in this space as being between S-16, S-13, and
15 S-17, and S-21.
16 JUDGE ORIE: But what now is S-16 plotted for on this map? I
17 mean, what is it? Why if you put a circle around a certain matter that
18 is because you want to indicate something? Now, it apparently is not the
19 northern barracks as a target for artillery, it's something else. Could
20 you tell us what it is?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It marks the place where infantry
22 units would, at a certain point during combat, find themselves.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Are you talking about your own troops or about
24 troops from -- enemy troops?
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Both. My own troops, too, my own
1 units, too, when an inhabited place is entered into.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But then again, I mean, it's not the whole of
3 the town, which is in one big circle, but there are all circles
4 apparently not put at random on this map. And you earlier said that the
5 map indicated all kind of facilities. Now, my question is: What does
6 S-16 stand for, other than it covers an area? I mean, what's the
7 relevance of that area?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Well, according to my own
9 orientation, S-16 would also cover the police station.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, S-16 covers the police station. That's --
11 well, that's -- so, therefore, can I take it that all these marked
12 circles, circles numbered by -- all these circles that are numbered, they
13 all stand for something, some relevant feature, whatever that may be?
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No. The orientation point can be a
15 river crossing, an intersection, an elevation, a railway crossing, and so
17 JUDGE ORIE: I did not exclude so the relevance, then, is that's
18 where there's a railway crossing, but so there's always something
19 relevant to be found for which that circle is plotted on this map? It's
20 not at random, it's --
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] They're not random, but the density
22 is such that the infantry units must show -- must indicate where they are
23 deployed in order to avoid any misunderstandings in communication at the
24 level of infantry units and for the purpose of seeking support from other
25 branches, in this case possibly also the artillery.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
2 Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
3 MR. KEHOE:
4 Q. If I could just go one step further, let's use the hypothetical.
5 We are infantry that's in the area, and we have Motorolas that we're
6 talking on, and you, Mr. Rajcic, ask me, Where are you? And I say, I'm
7 in S-6. You then go to this map, and you would see that where I am along
8 the Krka River
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And then you might --
11 JUDGE ORIE: For such purposes, what would grid references not
12 do? Because here, if they are -- if you just have to tell someone where
13 you are, then it comes a bit as a surprise that we have not all adjacent
14 circles. And earlier, I think you said that these depict facilities.
15 Whatever that facility would be, unless you earlier said crossroads or
16 whatever? I mean, these circles, are they exclusively for locating
17 persons who are moving?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Primarily, yes.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Kehoe.
20 MR. KEHOE:
21 Q. The Presiding Judge asked about grid references. Now, grid
22 reference is something that is not coded, is it? I mean, the grid
23 reference is -- the X-Y-Z grid reference are grid reference that
24 everybody knows about, the RSK side, the HV side, the VRS side, they all
25 know what X-Y-Z grid references are; right? This coded map -- you have
1 to say yes or no, sir. I mean, I know you're shaking your head yes,
2 but --
3 JUDGE ORIE: Your point is clear, Mr. Kehoe, to the extent you
4 wanted to draw the attention of the Chamber to the fact that a coded map
5 would need a key to understand communications, that's perfectly clear.
6 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President, and so it's clear, it's, for
7 instance, Mr. President, you and I were talking -- if I can have the
8 witness take his headphones off. I don't know if --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Could you take your headphones off for a while,
10 Mr. Rajcic.
12 MR. KEHOE: If you and I are talking with a coded map, you have a
13 copy of the coded map, I have a copy of the coded map, you ask me, Where
14 are you. I give you my location of S-6 or S-16, or anywhere else on
15 there, you and I both know where we are --
16 JUDGE ORIE: I was just explaining that that was understood; so,
17 therefore, to ask the witness to take his earphones off and to explain to
18 me what I showed already to have understood is -- take some time.
19 Please proceed.
20 MR. KEHOE: The takeoff point was just your issue on grid
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, could you put on your earphones again.
23 MR. KEHOE:
24 Q. Mr. Rajcic, I asked you previously whether or not there was an
25 attempt, as presented by the Prosecutor, to fire into residential areas
1 with multi-barrelled rocket-launchers, and you said, "No." Let me direct
2 your attention to D389, which is an intelligence report from the ARSK
3 from the morning of the 4th of August, 1995.
4 If you could take a quick look at this, sir, I'm not certain
5 if -- can you read this, sir? If not, I will read the English, the
6 pertinent English paragraph. I ask that question because I know it's in
7 Serbian Cyrillic.
8 A. Yes, I can read Cyrillic, but it will take me a while longer
9 because it's more difficult for me to perceive the letters. Well, I can
10 see "Knin, Drvar, Benkovac, Obrovac, Gracac." What passage are you
11 referring me to?
12 Q. I'm referring you to the fourth paragraph down, where it says
14 "Knin was attacked from Livanjsko Polje from several directions,
15 from time this information was drafted, between 200 and 300 rounds of
16 different calibres impacted on the town. The first strike was carried
17 out on the building of the SVK General Staff, which suffered great
18 material damage with the fleet of vehicles almost completely destroyed.
19 Later the fire was transferred on the military barracks, the 1300
20 "kapalara," [phoen] the TVIK factory, the railway intersection,
21 residential buildings in the area beneath the Knin fortress ..."
22 Are you with me, sir?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. Mr. Rajcic, that is consistent with how this -- the attack went,
25 isn't it, in the sense of the artillery prep first fired on the General
1 Staff and other locales, and it was thereafter, for instance, shortly
2 thereafter, that the order was given to redirect that fire on the TVIK
3 factory; isn't that so?
4 A. Mr. Kehoe, yes, the order is 130, and the barracks and the
5 Main Staff were targeted at the same. Could you please explain to me
6 where it says between 200 and 300 impacts? Impacts of what? I didn't
7 understand that. It says here "projectiles," and I understood you to
8 have said something else.
9 Q. There may be a translation issue. My English copy says "200 and
10 300 rounds of different calibres." That just happens to be the English
12 A. Yes, it says here the first impact or the first strikes was on
13 the Army of Republika Srpska, where severe damage was caused, and the
14 fleet of vehicles was almost completely wiped out.
15 Q. And my question on this score, Mr. Rajcic, is: This particular
16 intelligence report is consistent with how you structured the artillery
17 prep in attacking first the headquarters, for instance, and the
18 communications centre, and thereafter, for instance, the TVIK factory;
19 it's consistent with that, isn't it?
20 A. Yes, it is in line with the prioritisation of targets.
21 Q. Let us change to one last topic, sir, and it has to do with the
22 issue of General Gotovina as the operational commander or
23 General Gotovina as an operational commander in Operation Storm, and for
24 reference purposes I'm talking about page 16454 at line 13 down to
25 line 17. And you were asked, during the course of direct examination by
1 Mr. Russo whether General Gotovina was the operational commander during
2 Operation Storm, and you asked for some clarity, but let me just take
3 this one step further.
4 General Gotovina was the operational commander for the joint
5 HV/HVO forces that had moved up through the Livno Valley
6 Jump 2, Summer of 1995, as well as Operation Storm, wasn't he?
7 JUDGE ORIE: There seems to be --
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't get an interpretation of
9 the last part. There was some interruptions in the interpretation, so I
10 didn't get the full interpretation.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Could you repeat the whole of the question,
12 Mr. Kehoe.
13 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
14 Q. General Gotovina was the operational commander of all Croatian
15 forces during Jump 1, Jump 2, and Summer 95, as well as Operation Storm,
16 wasn't he?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And after Operation Storm and the Croatian forces, and I say "the
19 Croatian forces," I mean HV and HVO, not just HV - HV and HVO - after
20 they began to move into Bosnia
21 Movement, General Gotovina continued as the operational commander for all
22 Croatian forces both HV and HVO, didn't he?
23 A. Yes, for all Croatian forces, I received interpretation "southern
24 movement," and it was "southern axis," not for the full -- entire force
25 of the HVO, but only for elements of the HVO, some units of the HVO that
1 had joined into the Croatian Army, and together they formed Croatian
3 Q. And those elements that joined the Croatian forces were there for
4 all the activities through Operation Storm and then obviously the
5 activities in Operation Mistral and Operation Southern Movement; correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Let me show you a document that we'll review via Sanction, and if
8 we could just put this on the screen via Sanction.
9 We, in fact, have a hard copy, if the witness wants to look at a
10 hard copy.
11 Have you taken a look at that, Mr. Rajcic?
12 A. Just a moment, please.
13 Q. Yes, sir.
14 A. Yes, I've read it.
15 Q. This is a general question concerning this document that is a
16 protocol from 25 November 1995
17 Novi Travnik, 25 September 1995; and it notes the Croatian forces, and
18 these Croatian forces -- that these officers that we have listed here
19 encompass not only HV forces but HV officers as well, don't they -- HVO
20 officers, excuse me?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. For instance, Major General Filip Filipovic, because he was HVO
23 at this time, wasn't he?
24 A. Miljenko Filipovic, that's what it should say. As far as I know,
25 I think that he was there.
1 Q. Now, in this particular context, I mean, when General Gotovina is
2 the commander of all Croatian forces, both HV and HVO, what does that
4 A. That means that the general makes a decision to create a team
5 from both components that would escort him to this meeting.
6 Q. I get -- what I'm talking about, as we move through the entire
7 fighting that was going on, and he was the commander of Croatian forces,
8 both HV and HVO, as he signs it for the Croatian forces, if you see on
9 the second page, when he's signing it for the Croatian forces, what does
10 that mean?
11 A. That means that he was the most responsible person here, the
12 commander, the supreme commander for this thing.
13 MR. KEHOE: Your Honour, at this time we do not have a dock ID
14 number for this, I don't believe. If we could MFI it at this point while
15 we get a dock ID, we'd be -- appreciate that and offer it into evidence.
16 MR. RUSSO: Objection.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Then we reserve an MFI number for this document.
18 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, this will become Exhibit D1429,
19 marked for identification.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar, and that's the 25th of
21 September document, a protocol of the meeting between representatives of
22 the Croatian forces and the Army of the Republic of Bosnia
24 Please proceed.
25 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, I have no further questions at this
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Kehoe.
3 Mr. Rajcic, you'll now be cross-examined by Mr. Mikulicic, who's
4 counsel for Mr. Markac.
5 Please proceed, Mr. Mikulicic.
6 MR. MIKULICIC: I thank you, Your Honour.
7 Cross-examination by Mr. Mikulicic:
8 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Rajcic.
9 A. Good afternoon to you, too.
10 Q. We will be speaking the same language, and in cases such as this,
11 I have to ask you to take into account the interpreters. That means that
12 you have to wait a while after I finish my question so that the
13 interpreters are given an opportunity to interpret everything for the
15 Mr. Rajcic, in the course of your testimony, we heard about your
16 function, we heard about the tasks that you carried out, we heard a
17 number of explanations that you provided to us, and it will greatly
18 assist the Trial Chamber, I'm sure. We may be repeating ourselves and
19 going through some of the ground that has already been covered, but the
20 context is going to be somewhat different.
21 Mr. Rajcic, Operation Storm was carried out in the UN Sector
22 South, and this area was, in fact, an area where two operational zones
23 were in existence, Gospic and Split
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. The Military District of Gospic, which was under the command of
1 General Norac, and the Split Military District, which was under the
2 command of General Gotovina, had a certain territory which was defined
3 before Operation Storm was launched; is that correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And both Military District Commanders had, as their immediate
6 superior, the Chief of General Staff, General Cervenko; is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Given this organisational structure, I think that you've already
9 told us this, but let us repeat it, it was impossible for one commander
10 issues orders to units of the other military district. For instance, was
11 it possible for General Norac, who commanded the Gospic Military
12 District, to issue orders to units that were within the Split Military
14 A. No, it was not possible.
15 Q. Hypothetically speaking, if there was a need for this kind of
16 command to be exercised, it could only be done through the chief of the
17 General Staff; is that right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In this area between the two military districts, there were the
20 special police units of the Ministry of the Interior under the command of
21 General Markac; they were operating there?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Mr. Rajcic, do you know that the special units of the police were
24 subordinated to the Main Staff, to the chief of the Main Staff, pursuant
25 to the recommendations or the suggestions of the Commander-in-Chief of
1 the Armed Forces, President Tudjman, and with the approval of both
2 ministries, the Defence Ministry and the Ministry of the Interior; were
3 you aware of this?
4 A. No, I never saw anything of the kind in writing anywhere.
5 Q. But as regards the exercise of command, I think that you said in
6 your previous testimony that just as the Commander General Gotovina could
7 not exercise command over units in the Gospic Military District, he could
8 not exercise command over the special police units; is that right?
9 MR. RUSSO: Sorry, I'd like to just clarify something.
10 The witness was asked about the converse situation, whether Norac
11 could command individuals in the Split Military District. It's now put
12 to him the converse of that, which is General Gotovina commanding people
13 in the Gospic Military District. I don't know if that particular part
14 was ever put to him. In other words, only one half of that two possible
15 scenarios was actually put to him.
16 MR. MIKULICIC: We can clarify --
17 JUDGE ORIE: I must admit it's not entirely clear, what you're
18 aiming at, Mr. Russo, but if Mr. Mikulicic says he can clarify, he
19 apparently understands, and then you have an opportunity to intervene at
20 a later stage if need be.
21 Please proceed.
22 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Mr. Rajcic, perhaps I went too quickly. When I asked you whether
24 General Norac could exercise command over units in the Split Military
25 District, you said that he couldn't, but the converse was also true;
1 General Gotovina could not exercise command over the Gospic Military
2 District units?
3 A. Yes, unless there were proper orders issued by the Main Staff.
4 Q. Now, as regards the special police units that were under the
5 command of General Markac, and we said that he was subordinated to the
6 chief of the Main Staff, it's the same situation, in fact?
7 A. If the directive stipulated this in that manner.
8 Q. Mr. Rajcic, did you personally see any orders whereby
9 General Gotovina would order anything to the special police units, for
11 A. As far as I can recall, no.
12 Q. When we spoke earlier in the examination-in-chief -- or, rather,
13 when you, Mr. Rajcic, spoke about a specific military term,
14 "resubordination," correct me if I'm wrong, if I interpret --
15 misinterpret your words, you said that this can only be done in combat
16 where the Commander-in-Chief or the Supreme Commander may issue an order
17 placing a unit under the command of another military formation? Did I
18 interpret your words correctly?
19 A. Yes, resubordination is an action of this sort.
20 Q. Mr. Rajcic, does that mean that when the Supreme Commander orders
21 a unit to be resubordinated, that the unit can be resubordinated only
22 within the units that are under the command of that commander that we're
23 talking about here?
24 A. In principle, no.
25 Q. For instance -- let us go back to this topic. For instance,
1 General Gotovina, could he issue an order resubordinating, for instance,
2 the 2nd Battalion of the 9th Guards Brigade to General Norac without the
3 approval of the chief of the Main Staff?
4 A. I don't think so.
5 Q. Thank you for these answers.
6 I shall now like to ask the Registry to bring up Exhibit D543.
7 Mr. Rajcic, we shall shortly see coming up on the screen an order
8 by the commander of the Main Staff, general of the armies, Zvonimir
9 Cervenko of 29 July 1995
10 forces of the Ministry of the Interior, Colonel General Mladen Markac.
11 Let me, first of all, ask you whether you had occasion to see this order.
12 A. Not at that time.
13 Q. Allow me to draw your attention to the part of the order which is
14 contained in item 2 of the second paragraph, where General Cervenko
15 orders this:
16 "In the first stage, with tactical surprise, by committing forces
17 of adequate strength with considerable artillery support from our own
18 forces and reached the Sveti Rok ..."
19 And it goes on to specify the actual points on Mount Velebit
20 you see that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Mr. Rajcic, as the artillery chief of the Military District of
23 Split, were you acquainted with the fact that the special police had also
24 its own artillery at disposal in action?
25 A. Yes, the artillery which was for the level of a battalion.
1 Q. Am I interpreting your answer correctly if I say that
2 colloquially this is short-range artillery?
3 A. Yes, mortar, 82-mm, 60-mm and such.
4 Q. If we take a look at page 2 of this order, item 4, by
5 General Cervenko, we shall see that he says in this order that in the
6 conduct and preparation of combat preparation, work should be constantly
7 coordinated with the Command of the Split Military District, in
8 particular with the Zadar Forward Command Post and the Gospic Forward
9 Command Post?
10 A. Yes, I see that.
11 Q. Mr. Rajcic, how would you explain this word, this phrase that
12 work should be coordinated?
13 A. Coordination implies the flow of information required with the
14 left and right adjacent or neighbouring units in order to achieve a
15 synchronised unfolding of the combat activity.
16 Q. Thank you. Please, Mr. Rajcic, look at this. This was sent,
17 this order, to the commanders of both military districts, Split and
18 Gospic, that is, and now we shall revert to what I said before.
19 You can see that the order was also co-signed, and we managed to
20 decipher the signature through the testimony of a witness, by the deputy
21 Minister of the Interior, Zeljko Tomjenovic [phoen], he -- stating that
22 he agreed to the use of the forces of police stations?
23 A. I cannot see it, but if you say that it has been deciphered as
24 such, then that's it.
25 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Can we have document D1094 now,
2 Q. While we are waiting, I'm going to tell you what you will be
3 seeing on the screen shortly. You will see also an order by
4 General Zvonimir Cervenko which was issued a day later, which is to say
5 on the 30th of July, which order was addressed to the attention of the
6 commander of the Military District of Split. Pay attention to bullet
7 point 4 -- item 4 of this order, which says:
8 "Forces which are active on the slopes of Velebit -- with the
9 forces active on the slopes of Velebit --" or, rather:
10 "Provide the forces engaged on the slopes of Velebit with a
11 special artillery group that will provide them and the MUP forces with
12 artillery support."
13 When General Cervenko here uses the words "those forces," he's
14 obviously referring to HV forces, is he not? And at the same time -- and
15 he uses a conjunction there, "in between the forces of the Ministry of
16 the Interior," so obviously these are two formations of forces. On the
17 one hand, we have the HV forces; and on the other, the MUP forces. Is
18 that right?
19 A. When I read it, yes, it does refer to that, as you're saying, to
20 the Velebit forces, to the forces which are on Mount Velebit
21 MUP forces, the Ministry of the Interior.
22 Q. It is known, Mr. Rajcic, that on the slopes of Velebit, there
23 were, in coordinated action, the HV forces and MUP forces?
24 A. Yes, they were in coordinated, concerted action.
25 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Can we now have document P1125 on
1 the screen, please. We shall now see an order for an attack by
2 General Gotovina of the 2nd of August, 1995, which we have already had
3 occasion to see today, and I should like to ask you to focus on page 11
4 of the Croatian version of this order, which refers to the tasks of the
5 Zadar Operative Group.
6 Q. Do you agree, Mr. Rajcic, that the Operations Group of Zadar was
7 the force of the Split Military District which, amongst others, was also
8 active on the slopes of Velebit?
9 A. Yes, I agree.
10 Q. You see from the text of this order that the support -- I mean
11 artillery support is rendered by Rocket Artillery Support Group 5?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And also you see what the targets of it is, and it is in the
14 paragraph which starts -- under this paragraph which says that the
15 2nd Battalion of the 9th Guards Brigade have the task to rout the enemy
16 with the 1st Combat echelon, break up the enemy along the first line of
17 defence, and as soon as possible, cut the Gracac-Obravac road and take
18 control of the Muskovci area. And the last sentence says that they were
19 to secure the right flank of the Special Police of the Ministry of the
20 Interior. Do you see that?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Yes, please. Can we now have
23 document P1263.
24 Q. Here we observed -- we noticed that the Rocket Artillery Group
25 5's task was to provide support to forces that were offensive action on
1 the slopes of Velebit, with their aim being to cut the Gracac-Obravac
2 communication route. What we see now, Mr. Rajcic, is the order for an
3 offensive operation of the 3rd of August, 1995, order for attack, which
4 was issued Mladen Fuzul, Lieutenant-Colonel Mladen Fuzul, the commander
5 of the Zadar Operations Group.
6 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Can we now see chapter 6 of this
7 order, which in the Croatian text is on page 4, which is the chapter on
8 artillery support.
9 Q. So Lieutenant-Colonel Mladen Fuzul, the commander of the Zadar
10 Operations Group, commands thus: In units which are executing offensive
11 operations, artillery groups should be formed of own artillery resources
12 which are to be grouped to focus on the task of the unit with the aim of
13 effective and precise impact on the enemy. And a bit later, for precise
14 fire on the enemy. And later it says in Operation Group Zadar, an
15 Artillery Group 5 should be set up comprising -- and then it goes on to
16 enumerate all the difference ordinance, five T 130-mm field guns, two
17 H 122-mm Howitzers, and one 122-mm multiple rocket-launcher. So do you
18 agree, Mr. Rajcic, that this order actually operationalises practically
19 the order of the chief of the Main Staff on the forming of operational
20 groups, i.e., the support -- artillery support to be rendered to such
21 artillery groups? Is this conclusion of mine correct, from the military
23 A. No, not completely, not entirely.
24 Q. Would you be so kind as to correct me?
25 A. First of all, the first documents on coordination and the
1 responsibility zones between the coordinated units is something that I
2 have not seen as yet.
3 Secondly, the slopes of Mount Velebit
4 order, this is a facility exclusively for the Military District of Split,
5 meaning that the responsibility zone -- it is in the responsibility zone
6 of the left adjacent unit. When they say provide artillery support to
7 those forces on Mount Velebit
8 I didn't see that then.
9 Thirdly -- sorry, on the 3rd of August at 945 hours, we had a
10 meeting at General Gotovina's office in Zadar, attended by
11 General Markac, and I believe Mr. Sacic was there and the chief of
12 artillery of the special MUP units as well. This model of modulating and
13 organisation of the artillery group, what it should say actually is
14 "artillery rocket group," was drawn up a day before. At that meeting,
15 General Gotovina told me that the order of the chief of Main Staff,
16 General Cervenko, was for me to single out a part -- a segment -- a
17 portion of the artillery resources from the artillery or, rather,
18 Artillery Rocket Group 5 for the requirements of General Markac's units.
19 At that moment, that was quite disruptive of the situation in the
20 area, as far as I was concerned. I understood that oral order then -- of
21 course, we have to take into account the time that has elapsed since. I
22 understood it to mean that those resources were to be attached to the
23 special MUP forces, specifically three 130-mm cannon in the Rovanska
24 disposition area, then Howitzers of 120-mm, D-30, which are resources of
25 the 3rd Guards Brigade of the HVO, and the personnel was to have been
1 from the 112th Brigade of the Croatian Army. And, finally, a launcher, a
2 122-mm BM-21 launcher which, on the 3rd of August, in the evening, was
3 transported -- relocated from the area of Livno-Lusnic [phoen] to the
4 area of Rovanska to provide support to General Markac's units.
5 Excuse me, allow me. When we read it like it is put here, this
6 structure, I physically could not have changed the documents because we
7 had a few hours at our disposal in which to prepare or start the attack,
8 so that it remained as is, the dates being from the 2nd of August, when I
9 did not have an information or an order to the effect of my having to do
11 Q. Thank you, Mr. Rajcic, thank you for this answer. Now I shall
12 like to ask you to take a look at another document which is associated
13 with this, which is P1201. This is an order for attack, and it is the
14 segment dealing with the artillery which was issued by the chief of
15 artillery of Operation Group Zadar, Captain Marijan Firs [phoen], and it
16 is dated the 3rd of August, 1995. And you can see under the very
17 introduction under item 1, under B, that it orders the establishment of
18 Artillery Groups 5 with five 130 cannon, two 122 Howitzers, and three 122
19 Howitzers, and the multiple rocket-launcher, and the 1st Lieutenant
20 Ante Kardum is the commander. If you look in the second page of the
21 document, we shall see in item 3 what the tasks are.
22 So the task is to mount fierce artillery attacks to break up,
23 neutralise, and destroy the enemy combat disposition at tactical and
24 operational levels and to focus artillery attacks on the locations of
1 If we look at item 5, the order states in which way
2 communications are to be organised up to the level of the
3 Artillery Rocket Group, according to the OG Zadar chief of communications
4 plan, and in item 6 the order states that the -- in item 7, sorry, it is
5 stated that chiefs of artillery should elaborate their respective
6 operational groups at their level for the necessary documents for the
8 Is this, Mr. Rajcic, in keeping with your own recollection of the
9 events, given the fact that 15 years have elapsed?
10 A. It is not in line with what I recall of artillery developments.
11 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Can we please look at D1095.
12 It's a document dated the 4th of August. It was drafted by
13 Colonel Mladen Fuzul, the commander of the Zadar Operations Group, and it
14 is entitled "Daily Combat Report." So this is, in fact, what was done in
15 the field; is that correct.
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Could you please look at the large penultimate passage that
18 begins with the words:
19 "The support in Gracac and in the depth for the special units of
20 the MUP were provided by 130-mm guns and 122-mm Howitzers in the
21 1st Sector."
22 The fact that the multiple rocket-launcher and ammunition were
23 late in arriving made the support weaker. At around 1300 hours, there
24 was a disruption at the 130-mm gun, and this was repaired at 1800 hours.
25 Again at around 1642 hours, the Howitzers also -- the Howitzer also broke
1 down, and it was still being repaired. It was a 203-mm Howitzer. The
2 entire day, the artillery was engaged in targets at the front line and
3 the area deep behind the enemy lines.
4 Mr. Rajcic, so this was the situation on the first day of
5 Operation Storm, as regards, of course, OG Zadar. Does this report
6 conform with your recollection of that time? Did the weapons break down?
7 A. Yes. It happened in not only Zadar Operations Group but also in
8 the Sibenik and North Operations Groups.
9 Q. To the best of your recollection, were there situations where
10 ammunition was late in arriving to the positions where the artillery men
11 were engaging their targets?
12 A. Yes, the ammunition for the launcher was late. This launcher was
13 transferred from Rrazunac [phoen] to Seline, and ammunition was late also
14 on the axis of where the 7th Guards Brigade was attacking. Again it was
15 for 122-mm launchers, BM-21 launchers, so the 7th Guards Brigade borrowed
16 some rockets, rockets from the 4th Guards Brigade.
17 Q. The artillery pieces that we're talking about, the 130-mm cannon
18 and Howitzers, that's long-range artillery, that's corps-level artillery?
19 A. Yes, that's partly true, but the 130-mm cannon and 122 Howitzers,
20 that's brigade artillery.
21 Q. The targets that these artillery pieces were engaging were
22 selected in the course of the preparations for the operation on the basis
23 of the intelligence and all the other data that the commanders were taken
24 into account when preparing this operation?
25 A. Yes, overall, but if you're talking about this narrow area, then
1 there is another explanation.
2 Q. I was talking about the corps artillery, the corps-level
4 A. Yes, the corps-level artillery.
5 Q. And the brigade-level artillery, at the lower level, did it also
6 have pre-selected targets that it was supposed to engage?
7 A. Yes. From the 60-mm mortars to the corps-level artillery, that
8 was the case.
9 Q. However, in the course of combat, resistance points were
10 springing up and new targets were cropping up that could not have been
11 predicted. What was the procedure then, in terms of orders for the use
12 of artillery?
13 A. Newly-discovered targets, of course, this is something that
14 happens, and then this is communicated to the unit that is capable, in
15 terms of its equipment and operationally, to engage the new target and
16 neutralise it.
17 Q. So we can say that the elements of the corps-level artillery
18 providing support on the axes where operations groups were being -- were
19 active, that these are the artillery and Rocket Groups 1 through 5 were
20 not under the command of the commanders of the operational groups; is
21 that so?
22 A. Both yes and no.
23 Q. You'll have to explain this?
24 A. Yes, first I said no and then yes, otherwise I would have said
25 yes and then no, because there is an explanation behind all this.
1 Q. Are we talking about the fact that the operational group
2 commanders could not issue direct orders for them to engage targets, but
3 they could request support, and then in line with the situation in the
4 field, the support would be approved by the military district command?
5 Was this how the corps-level artillery operated?
6 A. Yes. I think that I will be able to explain this to you because
7 we speak the same language. This was the -- a centralised/decentralised
8 command, it was a mixture. Let me explain. At the operational level and
9 for strategic targets, the commander superior to the operational group is
10 in charge of them.
11 Now, as for the targets that are within the tactical depth of a
12 unit engaged in combat, the commander of the operational group or of the
13 Home Guards Regiment or Brigade can get a unit and direct fire. This is
14 why I say that this was a centralised/decentralised model.
15 Q. Well, it may seem illogical to ask lay persons, but I'm sure the
16 Trial Chamber will be able to grasp all that.
17 A. If I may, when I talked about resubordination, then it is more
18 difficult for me to explain this. This is, in fact, easier.
19 Q. Thank you for your answer. But, Mr. Rajcic, be that as it may,
20 commanders of the Artillery Rocket groups --
21 MR. MISETIC: Sorry for rising. If we can check the witness's
22 answer at page 31, line 25, please.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic, you have to move to the other one
24 because the system -- one screen -- you said page 31?
25 MR. MISETIC: Yes, line 25.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
2 Mr. Rajcic, you said the commander of the operational group or of
3 the Home Guards Regiment or brigade can get a unit and direct fire, and
4 then our transcript continues with "this is why I say that this was a
5 centralised/decentralised model." Something missing, Mr. Misetic, or is
6 it --
7 MR. MISETIC: I just want to do make sure that's what the
8 witness's answer was. I didn't hear.
9 JUDGE ORIE: What I just read to you, does that reflect the
10 answer you gave, Mr. Rajcic?
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, this model applied, and I
12 tried to explain it in this manner.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
14 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Mr. Rajcic, when we're talking about the commanders of the
16 artillery and rocket groups, even before Operation -- before engaging in
17 combat, they had information about the targets, but they did plot their
18 own maps, work maps, so to speak, and they also had the artillery targets
19 as they operated those groups; is that correct?
20 A. Yes, but those were not just work maps. They had to do plans for
21 their engagements, but the plan is not binding. It is again auxiliary
22 material, as it was in my case, it is auxiliary material that just
23 assists one in one's work.
24 Q. Mr. Rajcic, in the analysis that you did last October, I saw that
25 as you commented on the documents that you were able to find, you stated
1 that you had had some problems with the documents that pertained to the
2 functioning and operation of the TS-5, the Artillery Group 5, for the
3 dates 8th and 9th of August; 6, 7 and 8 August, you say that according to
4 your information, that group was not active on those dates; is this the
5 correct conclusion?
6 A. Just a small correction. I said, I believe - I don't want to go
7 checking now - that on the basis of the documents at my disposal, I could
8 not reconstruct the activities of Artillery Group 5. Let me repeat, sir.
9 I would like to stress, once again, this material is subject to change
10 for reasons that I indicated, because documents come in all the time and
11 this changes the relations, and so that is why this is not relevant for
12 this Tribunal.
13 Q. I understand, Mr. Rajcic. So this material is subject to changes
14 if any missing documents crop up.
15 Mr. Rajcic, thank you very much for your answers.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.
17 The Cermak Defence show no questions.
18 Mr. Russo, any need to re-examine the witness?
19 MR. RUSSO: Just briefly, Your Honour. However, I believe the
20 Chamber needs to make a ruling with respect to one matter before I decide
21 exactly how to proceed, probably best discussed outside the presence of
22 the witness.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Perhaps we allow the witness already to have
24 his break.
25 Mr. Rajcic, could you already follow Madam Usher. We'll have a
1 break of approximately half an hour.
2 [The witness stands down]
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
4 MR. RUSSO: Yes, Mr. President.
5 I have only very brief questions in re-direct. However, the
6 matter of whether or not I am permitted to cross-examine or required to
7 cross-examine the witness on the particular issue of the intent behind
8 Operation Storm, if the Court were to find that that was outside the
9 scope of my direct examination, then I believe I'm required, under
10 Rule 90(H), since I will be in cross-examination, to put to him what we
11 believe the intent of the operation was. However, if the Court feels
12 that that was -- fell within the scope of my direct examination, then I
13 would not be going into those matters in terms of cross-examination. I
14 would simply stick to the re-direct that has come out of what Mr. Kehoe
15 and Mr. Mikulicic referred to.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
17 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, quite clearly, if we're going into
18 that, I do not believe the intent was squarely put to the witness. I
19 attempted to do that during counsel's direct examination, and I asked the
20 Court to order the Chamber -- to order the OTP to do that. I understand
21 why the Court did not. Nevertheless, we did put it to the witness, and
22 it is in the 92 ter statement, D1425. If it's intended to be touched
23 upon, then of course Rule 90(H)(2)(i) comes in and the Prosecution should
24 put in exactly what the -- what the Rule says:
25 "Counsel shall put to the witness the nature of the case of the
1 party for whom that counsel appears which is in contradiction of the
2 evidence given by the witness."
3 That's what's required.
4 JUDGE ORIE: It might not always be easy to determine exactly
5 where your question will relate or will be a response to what was put in
6 the 92 ter statement and was not yet covered by your examination-in-chief
7 because, of course, we find elements in the 92 ter statement which are
8 not -- or are not directly covered in the examination-in-chief, dare,
9 I think -- that's to some extent done in a 92 ter statement, where it's
10 put apparently to the witness what was the Prosecution's case.
11 Now, to the extent that matters in a 92 ter statement are not
12 covered by your examination-in-chief, I think you find yourself in a
13 position more or less as a cross-examining party on that issue.
14 Now, to give a ruling is not easy, because it might differ. So
15 if you want to put questions in a certain area, perhaps you indicate,
16 prior to putting those questions, whether you consider this to be a
17 matter on which you cross-examine or whether it's a matter that requires
18 re-examination on the basis of having introduced the matter in chief,
19 questions put in relation to that by the Defence, and now because it came
20 up in cross as a response rather than as a new element, that you either
21 re-examine or cross-examine the witness on that.
22 Am I clear enough? Most likely not.
23 MR. RUSSO: My apologies, Mr. President.
24 If I were not on cross-examination with respect to the issue of
25 intent, whether the -- I think this actually arises out of paragraph 9 of
1 the 92 ter statement. However, Mr. Kehoe did ask additional questions
2 about it. If I were in the position of cross-examination as to that
3 particular issue, then I think I would be required to put to him what we
4 believe the intent of the operation was. If I'm not required to do that,
5 if the Court doesn't find that that fell outside the scope, then it's not
6 my intention to put it to him.
7 MR. KEHOE: If I may just -- it is two separate provisions under
8 90(H). One is cross-examination that is on the elements brought up in
9 direct. That's in (2)(i); (2)(ii) is a separate obligation that requires
10 the Prosecution to put its case to the witness, not just the intent
11 element, not just the element that was covered during the course of my
12 examination. It requires the cross-examiner to put the nature of the
13 case to the witness, and the Prosecution should not be limited to just
14 the intent element: Put the case to the witness.
15 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I don't have any problem putting the
16 case to the witness. The issue is that 90(H) only applies about
17 cross-examination, and if I'm cross-examining, that's fine. The issue
18 is: Where does cross-examination apply and where does simple re-direct
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and that, of course, depends on the questions
21 that you are putting, and it also depends on our interpretation. But, of
22 course, you could assist the Chamber in forming an opinion on that, on
23 whether what Mr. Kehoe asked the witness was in cross-examination of the
24 examination-in-chief or whether he brought up new matters, whether in
25 examining the witness or whether in a 92 ter statement.
1 Mr. Kehoe has very specifically put to the witness that it was
2 the Prosecution's case that a certain intent was there, which gave me the
3 impression that you were eliciting evidence from the witness not in
4 cross-examination, but rather that you sought to elicit evidence as
5 Rule 90(H) says, and I have to find the exact language, that you were
6 seeking evidence relevant to the case of the cross-examining party not
7 within the subject matter of the examination-in-chief.
8 MR. KEHOE: Judge, I put our -- I put OTP's case to them, not our
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you're right.
11 MR. KEHOE: It's the other way around.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you're right.
13 I'm afraid I'll have to discuss it with my colleagues, and I'll
14 do that. Apart from that, of course, although we have Rules on that, and
15 we try to stick to the Rules, but it might be such a complex matter here
16 that where rules of cross-examination do not strictly apply in this Court
17 anyhow, that we try to take a cautious approach. But I'll first discuss
18 it with my colleagues.
19 We'll have a break, and we'll resume at 20 minutes past 4.00.
20 --- Recess taken at 3.57 p.m.
21 --- On resuming at 4.30 p.m.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, when further examining the witness, and
23 I'm using this neutral term, not "re-examination," not
24 "cross-examination," you're invited that to the extent there may be any
25 doubt in the mind of the witness what the Prosecution's case is, that you
1 inform him about that, not extensively and not the whole of the
2 Prosecution case, but at least to the extent relevant for the questions
3 you want to put to him. So to that extent, you're more or less in a
4 situation where you are cross-examining the witness.
5 At the same time, the Chamber does not encourage you in leading
6 the witness the whole way down to his answer. You understand what I
7 mean, I take it.
8 MR. RUSSO: I do, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Then could the witness be escorted into the
11 Mr. Kehoe, if there's at any point any further, without perhaps
12 lengthy speeches, I think all parties and the Chamber know by now what --
13 where we are, more or less, trying to go between the Scylla and the
14 Charybdis, and --
15 MR. KEHOE: I understand Scylla and Charybdis is always a
16 torturous path. Obviously, we have --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Sometimes you have to go and find your way through
19 MR. KEHOE: And sometimes you hope for calm waters.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes.
21 MR. KEHOE: We do preserve our record, noting our objections and
22 methodology, but I know you understand that, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, to the extent that you might have
24 problems in understanding and if you are considering what position to
25 take, I may remind you that Rule 89(A), last half sentence, is:
1 " ... and shall not be bound by national rules of evidence."
2 So some latitude there is to apply the Rules of Evidence and the
3 spirit of the Statute and of the Rules.
4 My last words, just not to be misunderstood, was "in the spirit
5 of the Statute and the Rules."
6 [The witness takes the stand]
7 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, Mr. Russo will further examine you.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
9 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
10 Mr. Registrar, if we could please have Exhibit D1426.
11 Re-examination by Mr. Russo:
12 Q. Mr. Rajcic, you will recall during your cross-examination by
13 Mr. Kehoe, he showed you this document from the 112th Brigade in
14 OG Zadar, and he pointed out to you the fact that the artillery tasks for
15 this unit did not include shelling the towns of Benkovac, Obrovac, or
16 Gracac. What I wanted to know is, first of all, was the responsibility
17 to fire artillery into the populated towns of Benkovac, Obrovac, and
18 Gracac, was that the responsibility of the 112th Brigade?
19 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me. I object to the form of the question. In
20 saying "the populated areas," there is no evidence of that. If he wants
21 to say shooting into towns or firing into towns based on that order,
22 that's fine, but anywhere populated is not accurate.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if you say "towns," of course, we later could
24 ask whether the witness has any information about -- Mr. Russo.
25 MR. RUSSO: That's fine. Your Honour, the focus of my question
1 is whether or not the 112th Brigade had orders to fire into the towns of
2 Benkovac, Obrovac, or Gracac.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No.
4 MR. RUSSO:
5 Q. And was the -- well, given they didn't have orders to fire into
6 those towns, would you expect the language which you issued -- the order
7 which you issued to the corps artillery, that is, to shell the towns of
8 Drvar, Knin, Obrovac and Benkovac, would you expect that that language
9 would find its way into the orders of the 112th Brigade?
10 A. You mean the corps-level artillery?
11 Q. No, I mean the 112th Brigade. Would you expect your specific
12 order, to shell the towns of Benkovac, Obrovac, and Gracac, would you
13 expect that specific order to find its way into the orders for the
14 112th Brigade?
15 A. No.
16 Q. Thank you. You were also asked about General Gotovina's
17 offensive operation order, and you were asked if you had drafted a
18 portion of that. You mentioned that there was a first version and then a
19 second version of that order; do you recall that?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Thank you. Now, I'd like to show you an order by
22 General Gotovina.
23 Mr. President, this is -- just advising the Court, this is not on
24 the 65 ter list. However, it does arise on re-direct. It is
25 65 ter 7144, and for the Court's information the OTP only received this
1 document on, I believe, the 20th of January of this year.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
3 MR. KEHOE: These are the same objections as previously raised,
4 Mr. President.
5 JUDGE ORIE: The situation is slightly different, to the extent
6 that I do understand that Mr. Russo says that the matter was introduced
7 in cross-examination, that's one; and, second, so therefore to that
8 extent he would be under an obligation to give you the list at the end of
9 the cross-examination. And then he received it only recently, so there
10 are slight differences to the usual situation.
11 Anything to add?
12 MR. KEHOE: Even on that score, he says he got it on the 20th of
13 January --
14 MR. RUSSO: That would be the 29th of January.
15 MR. MISETIC: It says on the record on page 41, line 14, the 20th
16 of January.
17 JUDGE ORIE: No, let's try to keep matters clear.
18 I understood you to say that you received it on the 20th of
19 January, and when Mr. Kehoe asked you when it was disclosed, that you
20 answered the 29th of January. Is that --
21 MR. RUSSO: That is correct, Mr. President.
22 MR. KEHOE: I understand, I understand. But if, in fact, it goes
23 back to our original 92 ter, why in fact -- if counsel had anticipated to
24 use this, why a motion wasn't made to put it on the 92 ter statement.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I understood that it was not raised by the 92 ter,
1 but it was raised in cross-examination.
2 MR. RUSSO: That's my position, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE ORIE: We do not know yet what the document is, so it's a
4 bit of guessing.
5 MR. KEHOE: It is still part of the exhibit list that they had
6 that they provided prior, so --
7 MR. RUSSO: It was on the list of potential exhibits to use.
8 However --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Do you have considered to use it?
10 MR. RUSSO: That's correct, Mr. President.
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE ORIE: You may put the document to the witness, Mr. Russo.
13 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 If I could have, Mr. Registrar, please, I'm sorry,
15 65 ter number 7144.
16 Q. While this is coming up, Mr. Rajcic, I will tell you this is an
17 order by General Gotovina. It is dated the 1st of August.
18 If we could turn to B/C/S page 13, English page 16, this would be
19 section A -- 6A, I'm sorry, of the order, and there is -- this is an
20 order that appears to mirror somewhat the offensive operation order. And
21 I'd like to know, first of all, if you're aware of this order, and if you
22 can explain to us what the distinctions are.
23 Now, looking towards the middle of section 6A, you'll see it
25 "Pursue the enemy in a planned fashion, while keeping the towns
1 of Knin, Kistanje, Benkovac, Gracac, and Drvar under constant artillery
3 First, Mr. Rajcic, can you explain to us what this document is,
4 where it fits in? In the planning of Operation Storm, was this one of
5 the earlier drafts? Can you explain at all the distinction we find here?
6 A. Yes, this is the first version. We can see the difference right
7 away. The artillery group, if we're talking about the same document that
8 we have in front of us, so the TS-2, the command post S, the village of
9 Pokrovnik [phoen], firing position of the 130 guns, firing position of
10 the Howitzer platoon is in the village of Kljuc
11 when the two of us were on the same wavelength, you asked me how come
12 that the Artillery Group 2 was also marked "TS-4" in my explanation, but
13 if you compare the TS-2 in the second version of the 2nd of August, you
14 will see that it is, in fact, TS-4.
15 Q. Thank you for making that clarification, Mr. Rajcic. Now, the
16 language that I read, the pursuing the enemy while keeping towns under
17 constant artillery fire, can you explain why that language was changed
18 from what we read here to what we read in the operative offensive
19 operation order?
20 A. When we are talking about the pursuit of the enemy, what it means
21 is it refers to certain combat activities that, in the course of an
22 engagement, result in the formation of special pursuit groups. And then
23 when a subsequent analysis is done or was done, we concluded that
24 possibly it would not be possible to establish such pursuit groups
25 because it is a specific combat activity that is carried out in the
1 course of carrying out combat operations.
2 Q. Thank you. Now, the language which indicates to keep the towns
3 of Knin, Kistanje, Benkovac, Gracac, and Drvar under constant artillery
4 fire, I understand that the towns themselves, in fact, changed, but does
5 this expression of keeping the towns under constant artillery fire -- in
6 your mind, is this the same interpretation that should be given to the
7 final order, which was putting the towns under artillery fire? Do you
8 see those as the same?
9 A. This is supposed to mean that the targets in those towns were to
10 be under constant artillery fire. It is a legitimate combat activity.
11 In accordance with the Eastern Doctrine, it is called harassing fire and
12 disruptive fire on enemy combat elements.
13 Q. Thank you.
14 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I would offer 65 ter 7144.
15 MR. KEHOE: It's the same objection, Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ORIE: The Chamber allows the document admitted into
17 evidence, which, of course, includes 65 ter problems resolved, and,
18 Mr. Registrar, a number.
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that becomes Exhibit P2350.
20 JUDGE ORIE: It is admitted into evidence.
21 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
22 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, you were also asked by Mr. Kehoe -- well, he put
23 to you that the position of the OTP was that the Croatian forces fired
24 the 122-millimetre multiple-barrel rocket-launcher systems into
25 residential areas of Knin. You indicated that that was not the case; is
1 that correct?
2 A. 122-millimetre?
3 Q. Yes.
4 A. I said, in answer to a question, that they were not targeting
5 civilian facilities, but military targets.
6 Q. Now, you recall the discussion concerning the quarters of
7 Mr. Martic [Realtime transcript read in error, "Markac"]. Do you recall
8 that, during my examination?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And we were discussing where, if you can recall, that was
11 located, and I believe on the target list it is indicated as a
12 residential apartment complex; is that right?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And did you understand that to mean or did that mean that it was
15 in a residential area?
16 A. Well, it is only logical, yes.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, could you assist me in again the
18 number -- the exhibit number on which the description appears?
19 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I believe that is on Exhibits P1271
20 and P1272.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
22 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I'm sorry, I think
23 there's an error in persona in interpretation, page 45, line 18.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes. It's transcribed as "Mr. Markac," where
25 you said "Mr. Martic."
1 MR. RUSSO: That's correct, Mr. President.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That would be clear to everyone.
3 Please proceed.
4 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Q. Now, I do recall, during that discussion, Mr. Rajcic, that you
6 were -- you made it a point to emphasise to me that it was only the
7 130-millimetre cannon that was used to fire at the quarters of
8 Mr. Martic; is that right?
9 A. Yes, as far as I know.
10 Q. And as far as you are concerned, would there have been any
11 problem, from your perspective, with firing the 122-millimetre
12 multi-barrel rocket-launcher system at Mr. Martic's residential complex?
13 A. Yes, because of the rule of distinction, the obvious difference
14 when we're talking about launchers.
15 Q. Can you perhaps explain a little bit more for the Chamber why
16 that is a concern with the rocket-launcher system as opposed to not being
17 a concern with the 130-millimetre cannon?
18 A. When one analyses the use of multiple-barrel rocket-launchers,
19 which has a greater density of projectiles, in terms of their impact on
20 the target point, it covers a broader area with these rockets if you
21 compare it with the 130-millimetre cannon, and the assessment was that
22 the proportionality or the balance between what might happen to the
23 buildings around the target was unacceptable. Therefore, it was
24 unacceptable to fire on such a point, target, with the multiple
1 Q. Thank you. Now --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, the reason I asked for the source is
3 because you did not quote the language used in - what was it - P -- it's
4 still MFI
5 "residential," and in your question you emphasised the word
6 "residential," which is not a correct reflection of what I find in the
7 translation of this document.
8 MR. RUSSO: My apologies, Mr. President. I do realise, now that
9 the Court mentions it, that I had in my mind the regular reports of
10 Captain Bruno Milan from the TS-4 that was firing on that target. I
11 believe in his reports, he refers to it as a residential area. I don't
12 have the exact exhibit number for that. However, I can provide it to the
13 Court in a moment.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At least in the list, it appears under a
15 different name.
16 Please proceed.
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, to be clear --
19 A. Residential area or quarter is much bigger than a residential
20 building. We will agree on that, won't we?
21 Q. I certainly agree on that.
22 Now, Mr. Rajcic, to be clear, the -- as far as you're aware, the
23 122-millimetre rocket systems were used to fire on the
24 Slavko Rodic Barracks as well as the headquarters of the Main Staff in
25 down-town Knin; is that right?
1 A. Yes, and a roundabout intersection in Knin.
2 Q. Thank you. Now, I'd like to turn, if we could, to your 92 ter
3 statement, that is, Exhibit D1425. I'm looking specifically for
4 paragraph 9.
5 Now, in paragraph 9, Mr. Rajcic, you say:
6 "I recall that at this meeting, General Gotovina emphasised that
7 the goal was to obtain a military victory and that the operation was
8 aimed only against enemy soldiers and nothing else ..."
9 Now, that's not entirely true, is it?
10 A. Yes, if you're trying to target Mile Martic, but he's a political
11 leader and the supreme commander of the forces, by virtue of his post,
12 which means that he's a soldier.
13 Q. I understand that. However, what I'm putting to you is the fact
14 that the operation itself was not simply aimed at a military victory over
15 the Army of the Republika Srpska Krajina, but in fact one of the
16 objectives of this campaign, and in particular the artillery campaign,
17 was, in fact, to get the civilians out so that the military would follow
18 them; isn't that right?
19 A. I don't agree.
20 MR. RUSSO: Can we please have Exhibit P461.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, you were present, were you not, at the
22 presidential meeting in Brioni on 31 July 1995?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And at that meeting, your supreme commander, President Tudjman,
25 made clear to yourself, as well as to General Gotovina and others who
1 were in attendance, that he believed the political situation to be so
2 favourable that Croatia
3 victory, but to remove the Serbian population from that area, and also at
4 the same time to pay back the leaders of the RSK for attacks which they
5 had perpetrated against Croatian towns and villages in the past; isn't
6 that right?
7 A. No.
8 MR. RUSSO: If we could please move to B/C/S page 18, and English
9 page 10.
10 Q. Now, what you're looking on your screen here, Mr. Rajcic, is a
11 transcript of the Brioni meeting, and I'd like to go over a few of those
12 portions with you.
13 We can see here President Tudjman says:
14 "Gentlemen, I accept your views in principle. There is something
15 still missing, and that is the fact that in such a situation when we
16 undertake a general offensive in the entire area, even greater panic will
17 break out in Knin than has to date. Accordingly, we should provide for
18 certain forces which will be directly engaged in the direction of Knin.
19 And, particularly, gentlemen, please remember how many Croatian villages
20 and towns have been destroyed, but that's still not the situation in Knin
21 today ... Therefore, we will have to resolve this with UNCRO, this matter
22 as well, and so forth. But their counter-attack from Knin and so forth,
23 it would provide very good justification for this action and accordingly
24 we have the pretext to strike, if we can, with artillery, you can ... for
25 complete demoralisation ... not just this ..."
1 Now, President Tudjman is saying a number of things in this
2 passage. First of all, he's reminding everyone present, is he not, of
3 the destruction wrought on Croatian towns and villages in the RSK, isn't
4 that right?
5 A. First of all, Mr. Russo, this body of text that we see does not
6 correspond, neither in its format, nor in its content, to -- with the
7 meeting I attended on the 31st of July at Brioni. If you wish our
8 communication to continue along these lines, then I would have to read
9 the whole text, but I believe I can say with full responsibility that
10 this piece of text I've read does not correspond, neither in terms of
11 format, nor in terms of content, with the meeting I attended and the way
13 Q. I understand your position with respect to that, Mr. Rajcic. Let
14 me ask you: Do you deny that President Tudjman reminded everyone of the
15 destruction in Croatian villages and towns?
16 A. At that meeting on the 31st of July, as I said, this is something
17 I cannot recall hearing in this context.
18 Q. Do you deny that President Tudjman indicated that a
19 counter-attack from Knin would provide very good justification for an
20 artillery attack?
21 A. I did not hear that on the 31st of July.
22 MR. RUSSO: I'd like to look -- if we go to the next page in
23 B/C/S and a bit further down the page in English, I'd like to look at a
24 part of General Gotovina's response. He indicates:
25 "Mr. President, at this moment we completely control Knin with
1 our hardware. That's not a problem. If there is an order to strike at
2 Knin, we will destroy it in its entirety in a few hours."
3 Do you deny that General Gotovina told the supreme commander that
4 if he were given an order, he could destroy Knin in its entirety in a few
6 A. Yes. On the 31st of July, General Gotovina did not utter these
7 words at Brioni.
8 Q. I want to look a bit further into that paragraph at what else
9 General Gotovina is proposing. He indicates:
10 "The forces heading towards Knin are 400 good infantrymen from
11 the 3rd Battalion, the 126th Regiment, who are all from this area, and
12 they know the area through and through. They have reason to fight here,
13 and at this moment it is difficult to keep them on a leash. There is the
14 1st Croatian 'zdrug,' which has 300 infantrymen, which has proved itself
15 in this area at this moment, and in any case we can count on those
16 infantrymen. There are special units of the Croatian and Herceg-Bosna
17 MUP which have 350 excellent infantrymen, who have shown themselves to be
18 outstanding in the operation. That means we have somewhere around 1.000
19 good infantrymen trained for assault operations, for quick transfers on
20 this difficult terrain; we can easily take Knin, without any problem."
21 Now, Mr. Rajcic, first of all, do you deny that General Gotovina
22 told the supreme commander that he could easily take Knin with these
23 thousand men?
24 A. Yes, as regards the 31st of July.
25 Q. Are you aware of General Gotovina having told anyone, whether on
1 the 31st of July or at another time, that Knin could be easily taken with
2 these or any other men?
3 A. On that day when we were together, we did not part; and during
4 that time he didn't say that to anyone on any occasion.
5 Q. Could you have, in fact, taken the town of Knin with troops and
6 without artillery?
7 A. It is my personal opinion that the answer is no.
8 Q. Let's continue on, if we can. It's at the bottom of the page in
9 English, from where President Tudjman begins: "Generals, officers ..."
10 He states:
11 "Generals, officers, although we must not do anything in an
12 ill-conceived manner, we must proceed from the fact --"
13 A. Excuse me. I don't have that on the screen.
14 Now it's there.
15 MR. RUSSO: My apologies. I will begin again:
16 "Generals, officers, although we must not do anything in an
17 ill-conceived manner, we must proceed from the fact that we have achieved
18 such successes, from Western Slavonia and now in Bosnia, that we have
19 gained the trust of the people, that we have the goodwill of the army --"
20 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me. If we could just change the page on the
22 MR. RUSSO: My apologies. Continuing on:
23 " ... the support of a good part of international public opinion,
24 while the enemy is utterly demoralised. Therefore, we need to be bold.
25 That means not just having things under control, but taking it as quickly
1 as possible, so he gets a taste of it, and we pay him back. Therefore,
2 no risky ventures like suffering losses to achieve success.
3 Nevertheless, I think that the political situation is so favourable that
4 we should focus on entering Knin as soon as possible."
5 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, do you deny that President Tudjman said that at
6 the 31July meeting?
7 A. Yes, I do, in this context and in this sequence of sentences.
8 Q. Nevertheless, Mr. Rajcic, it's true, isn't it, that
9 President Tudjman was indicating to General Gotovina it was not simply
10 enough to take Knin quickly, but that Knin itself had to get a taste of
11 it, you had to pay back the RSK for what they'd done to other Croatian
12 towns and villages; isn't that right?
13 A. No, I did not hear those words.
14 Q. When President Tudjman told General Gotovina that he did not want
15 any risky ventures like suffering losses to achieve success, he was
16 telling him, wasn't he, not to use troops, but rather to use artillery so
17 as not to sacrifice any of the men and, therefore, not to have any troop
18 losses in gaining that town; isn't that right?
19 A. I did not hear that.
20 MR. RUSSO: If we could now go to page 7. This is B/C/S page 12,
21 and then it moves to 13. Looking specifically at the English in the
22 middle of the top paragraph portion, where it begins: "It's all very
23 well that the admiral ...," I believe that's the third sentence in on the
25 Q. Can you find that portion on the B/C/S, Mr. Rajcic?
1 A. The penultimate sentence.
2 Q. Now, it states -- President Tudjman says:
3 "It's all very well that the admiral is now supposed to close off
4 their remaining three exits, but you are not providing them with an exit
5 anywhere. There is no way out to ... ( ... to close it off). To pull
6 out and flee; instead, you are forcing them to fight to the bitter end,
7 which exacts a greater engagement and greater --"
8 THE INTERPRETER: Can we have the next page in B/C/S, please.
9 MR. RUSSO: My apologies.
10 " ... which exacts a greater engagement and greater losses on our
11 side. Therefore, let us also please take this into consideration because
12 it's true, they are absolutely demoralised, and just as they have started
13 moving out of Grahovo and Glamoc, when we put pressure on them, now they
14 are already partly moving out of Knin. Accordingly, let us take into
15 consideration, on a military level, the possibility of leaving them a way
16 out somewhere, so they can pull out part of their forces ..."
17 Now, President Tudjman is not simply indicating leaving the
18 military a way out; he is, in fact, indicating to everyone, wasn't he,
19 that the civilians should be left with a way out as well?
20 A. This manner of communication by President Tudjman with the
21 commanders at the Brioni meeting on the 31st of July is something that
22 did not take place. Both you and I could argue here about what was or
23 was not said. When we're talking about this portion, there are only
24 certain words that I recall as being said on the 31st of July, when I
25 attended the meeting. Everything else did not take place. That's why I
1 said that this transcript, in its form and content, does not tally with
2 what took place on the 31st of July, 1995.
3 Q. Mr. Rajcic, do you deny that President Tudjman indicated that
4 people started leaving Grahovo and Glamoc when pressure was put on them?
5 Do you deny that he said that?
6 A. I deny it regarding that day when I was present.
7 Q. Did President Tudjman ever indicate at any other time, in your
8 presence, that people left Grahovo and Glamoc as a result of pressure
9 being put on them?
10 A. Once, in a given situation in a given context, it was stated that
11 there were civilians leaving Knin without any mention being made of
12 pressure, direction, whether ways out should be left or not, about
13 Admiral Domazet, who was not an officer but an intelligence person,
14 et cetera, et cetera.
15 Q. Now, when President Tudjman indicated -- well, first of all, let
16 me ask you: The term or the phrase "putting pressure on someone," that
17 is a phrase that is meant to convey the use of artillery to influence
18 someone's decision-making; isn't that right? That's how you put pressure
19 on someone?
20 A. Yes, but that is the enemy army.
21 Q. And when President Tudjman indicated "when we put pressure on
22 them, now they are already partly moving out of Knin," now, it wasn't the
23 Army of the RSK that was partly moving out of Knin on the 31st of July,
24 was it; it was the civilians, wasn't it?
25 A. Mr. Russo, do not keep referring me back to civilians and
1 striking at civilians. That is something I did not hear.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, the question was a different one. The
3 question was whether - and perhaps you focus on the last part - that on
4 the 31st of July, whether civilians or non-civilians were leaving Knin.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as for the 31st of
6 July and the meeting at Brioni, I remember it being said that only in the
7 initial remarks by the president, that there was information to the
8 extent that after the Croatian forces broke out at Dinara, the civilians
9 began leaving Knin.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I think as a matter of fact that Mr. Russo
11 was, in fact, referring to what he read from a transcript, whether right
12 or wrong, which refers to ... they already partly moving out of Knin, and
13 the question that was put to you by Mr. Russo was simply whether they
14 partly leaving out of Knin, whether that could relate to the military or
15 whether it was the civilian, if anyone at all, to leave Knin by that
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The way I understood it was that
18 civilians were leaving, not soldiers, that civilians were departing and
19 not soldiers.
20 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. Rajcic.
21 If we could go now to B/C/S page 28, English page 15. I'm
22 looking at the English in the third paragraph towards the middle, where
23 it begins: "But I've said, and we've said it here ..."
24 Q. Can you find that in the B/C/S, Mr. Rajcic? It is the words of
25 the president.
1 A. If I understood properly, it is the third sentence, beginning
2 with: "Given the fact that I said it and that we said it ..."
3 Q. Yes, that's where I'm reading from:
4 "But I've said, and we've said it here, that they should be given
5 a way out here ... Because it is important that those civilians set out,
6 and then the army will follow them, and when the columns set out, they
7 will have a psychological impact on each other."
8 Now, Mr. Rajcic, do you deny that President Tudjman told
9 yourself, General Gotovina, and everyone present that it was important
10 that the civilians set out?
11 A. Yes, I do deny that.
12 Q. If we could follow on to General Gotovina's response, and he
14 "A large number of civilians are already evacuating Knin and
15 heading towards Banja Luka and Belgrade
16 this pressure, probably for some time to come, there won't be so many
17 civilians, just those who have to stay, who have no possibility of
19 Now, Mr. Rajcic, do you deny that General Gotovina told his
20 supreme commander that by continuing the pressure and by "pressure"
21 meaning artillery, that there wouldn't be so many civilians left?
22 A. Yes, I deny that. He never said this on the 31st of July.
23 Q. To your knowledge, did General Gotovina at any other time
24 indicate that by putting pressure on civilians, that they would leave the
1 A. As of the moment I was assigned to General Gotovina to be his
2 first artillery man, I've never heard him say that.
3 Q. I'd like to move to page 43 of the B/C/S, and it will move over
4 to 44, but it's page 23 of the English. I'm looking at the part where
5 Dr. Miroslav Tudjman -- where he begins saying: "Should the information
6 be relayed ..."
7 Dr. Miroslav Tudjman:
8 "Should the information be relayed over the radio as to which
9 routes are open for them to use to pull out?"
10 And the president:
11 "Yes, that should be said, not the fact that the routes are open,
12 but that it has been noticed that civilians are getting out by using such
13 and such a route."
14 Dr. Miroslav Tudjman:
15 "Can we say this at some point at the beginning of the operation?
16 Can we publicise the fact so they know that the civilians are using these
17 routes to withdraw?"
18 The president responds:
19 "Yes, it should be said that they have set out with passenger
20 cars, and so on."
21 Dr. Miroslav Tudjman:
22 "But you will close off certain routes, and tell them which
23 direction to head in, so we have as little to do as possible."
24 Now, Mr. Rajcic, Dr. Miroslav Tudjman and President Tudjman here
25 are discussing a way of informing the Serbian civilian population how to
1 get out of the area so that the Croatian forces have less to do in
2 forcing them out of that area; isn't that right?
3 A. That's what it says here, but I did not hear that on the 31st of
4 July. I understand what is written here, but this is not what was said
5 in this manner. There was no communication of this kind on the 31st of
7 Q. Mr. Rajcic, are you aware that General Gotovina did not object to
8 the admission of this transcript, nor to the audio portion of this
9 31 July meeting?
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
11 MR. KEHOE: If I may. This was presented by the Office of the
12 Prosecutor as something that was received by the Republic of Croatia
13 came with an expert report basically saying, We don't know, given the
14 technology, if this has been altered with or not.
15 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, could we ask the witness to remove
16 his --
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Rajcic, could you please take off your
19 Mr. Russo, how important is the knowledge of whether or not this
20 is contested material for this witness?
21 MR. RUSSO: It may be of some importance, Your Honour, if the
22 witness honestly believes he needs to deny this in order to assist the
23 accused. If he believes that the accused has no problem with it, that
24 may not be an issue.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I don't know whether the accused has no problem with
1 it, but it has not been, from what I understand, a strongly contested
2 issue at this moment, whether this is original material, yes or no.
3 MR. KEHOE: If I may, Your Honour, I took the information that
4 came in good faith from the Office of the Prosecutor with that sheet on
5 that piece of paper has the participants. I will note, and I'm sure that
6 Mr. Russo will agree, that it does not have this witness as a participant
7 in that meeting. Now, do I know what that means? Do I know if that's a
8 speaker or people who attended, I'm not certain. I just know what we got
9 and what I saw, and I can tell you that Marko Rajcic is not on that cover
10 sheet. I stand to be corrected, but I believe that's the case.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, is there any chance that Mr. Rajcic
12 attended another meeting on that same date in the same place? I mean,
13 I'm addressing you, but I'm as much addressing the Defence.
14 MR. KEHOE: I certainly don't know. I think the witness is
15 saying he had gone to a meeting in Brioni, and it was on the 31st.
16 JUDGE ORIE: But is there any indication? I mean, would it make
17 any sense if the Chamber would ask the parties to present any other
18 material or any evidence they would have on the existence of a second
19 meeting where -- that's what I understand from this witness, where the
20 president and Mr. Gotovina and then this witness would have been present,
21 apart from the one of which we have a transcript in front of us?
22 MR. KEHOE: If I recall the witness's testimony earlier, he noted
23 that he was with General Gotovina all day on the 31st. I may be
24 mistaken, but I think that's what he said.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Then we can ask him whether there was any other
1 meeting at which the president was -- but whether there had been -- let's
2 ask the witness to put his earphones on.
3 Mr. Rajcic, take your time for a glass of water. Mr. Rajcic, on
4 the 31st of July, when you were in Brioni, you told us what you remember
5 from the meeting where the president, Mr. Tudjman, was attending and
6 where Mr. Gotovina was attending as well. Now, was there another meeting
7 during that day in which you and Mr. Gotovina and the president were
8 attending, so were there two meetings with the three of you being present
9 or was there one meeting with the three of you being present?
10 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, I think he was -- if I may just
11 interrupt. I think he was saying -- as drawing a difference between two
12 meetings, one where he was present and one he was not. I think you put
13 him at both.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, the interpretation was not
15 correct. If I may.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So my question is -- perhaps I'll repeat it in
17 order to avoid whatever confusion. Did you attend, on that 31st of July
18 in Brioni, one meeting or more meetings where you, Mr. Gotovina and
19 Mr. Tudjman were present?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just one meeting.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Are you aware of Mr. Gotovina attending any other
22 meeting than the one you remember where Mr. Tudjman also was present?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Not on that day.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Russo.
25 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
1 Now, I'd like to now go to page 55 of the B/C/S, page 29 in
2 English. I'm focusing on the words of Minister Gojko Susak at the top,
3 and he states, quotes:
4 "Third, Mr. President, let me just finish. Can we have your
5 agreement, provided that we will face risks if we lose? I think that it
6 would have a psychological effect on them if we, after the first day of
7 the operation at Benkovac and Obrovac, take the risk of throwing leaflets
8 which could cause losses, but we have know in advance that it is
9 something we have risked; but we would call on them in your name,
10 whatever kind of leaflet we make, after the first day of the operation.
11 We would point out the routes which they could use to pull out and
12 formulate them in such a manner to double the confusion such as it is.
13 But we must take a risk then and find the people to do it, and I believe
14 that there are those who would take the risk of doing it."
15 President Tudjman responds:
16 "A leaflet of this sort ... general chaos, the victory of the
17 Croatian Army supported by the international community and so forth.
18 Serbs, you are already withdrawing, and so forth, and we are appealing to
19 you not to withdraw, we guarantee ... this means giving them a way out,
20 while pretending to guarantee civil rights, et cetera."
21 Q. Now, Mr. Rajcic, you're shaking your head no. I'll ask you if
22 you deny that President Tudjman indicated his approval for using a
23 leaflet for the dual purpose of telling the Serbs how to leave the area,
24 while at the same time pretending to guarantee their civil rights.
25 A. I have to explain why I had this body language. Mr. Russo, the
1 interpretation of what you were saying did not correspond to the text
2 that I'm reading in the Croatian language, but that's immaterial. I did
3 not hear words to that effect on that day.
4 Q. Let's continue on a bit in the conversation, a bit further down
5 from where Dr. Miroslav Tudjman begins to say: "If I may say so ...":
6 "If I may say so, it is evident that they tend to listen more to
7 the radio and television instead of reading leaflets. It's better to use
8 radio and television."
9 President Tudjman then responds:
10 "Use radio and television, but leaflets as well."
11 And Gojko Susak adds:
12 "Use leaflets, but drop them among them. Instilling the feeling
13 among them that you have succeeded, that you are above them, that you are
14 dropping leaflets, this will provoke something."
15 Now, Mr. Rajcic, Mr. Susak here is referring provoking an exodus
16 of the civilian population, isn't he?
17 A. I did not hear that.
18 MR. MISETIC: Your Honour, I would also -- we're working on, just
19 for the record, the translation of this document, and that's one of the
20 translations I believe we've challenged, just for the record.
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's on the record.
22 Mr. Russo.
23 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
24 I don't have any further matters to put to the witness, other
25 than in light of the fact that we're on this issue, I would like, at this
1 opportunity, Mr. President, to move in the audiotape of the 31 July
2 meeting. I believe there is no objection from the Defence. That is
3 65 ter 4467.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any objection?
5 MR. KEHOE: Frankly, Judge, I thought the audio was in already,
6 but we certainly have no objection. Our objection had been, and I think
7 that with Mr. Waespi, in talking to Mr. Waespi, it had been with the
8 transcript, as to who had been saying what at various times.
9 MR. RUSSO: If I can just clear that up, Mr. President. There
10 was a shortened clip of the conversation admitted by the Defence as D960,
11 D960. We'd like to tender the full portion, which is 65 ter 4467, and
12 I'd also request, Mr. President, that this be linked and admitted with
13 P461, the transcript, and whatever issues we work out with the
14 transcript, it will simply be together.
15 MR. KEHOE: Again, we don't have any objection to that, in
16 theory. We were just trying to work from the transcript.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, to always listen to a tape is a cumbersome
18 exercise. Therefore, it's important that we have, of course, a
19 well-translated transcript so that there are no further discussions about
20 translation. I'm afraid that as far as who is speaking at what moment,
21 that might be something that cannot too easily be resolved. You could
22 send the experts to find out, but --
23 MR. KEHOE: There was one issue, of course, taking this
24 transcript and this tape in conjunction with Mr. French's analysis of
25 this tape. I believe we can talk about this, but certainly that needs to
1 be explored when looking at this as well.
2 JUDGE ORIE: That's the expert report on the matter?
3 MR. KEHOE: Yes, Mr. President, which we did not object to.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, yes, and where you did not seek to
5 cross-examine the expert.
6 MR. KEHOE: That's correct.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and that is true for all parties.
8 Mr. Registrar.
9 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, P461 at this moment is the transcript
11 only. May I take it that you would like to have attached to the
12 transcript the audio so that it becomes P461, audio and transcript?
13 MR. RUSSO: That is correct, Mr. President.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Then in the absence of any objections, the audio is
15 now admitted into evidence with the transcript together, the transcript
16 being in evidence already under P461.
17 MR. RUSSO: Thank you, Mr. President.
18 As I indicated, my examination is concluded. I didn't know if
19 the Court wanted to take the opportunity to take a look at the map in
20 Mr. Rajcic's brief-case. I didn't intend to go into that. I just wanted
21 to remind the Chamber, if there is any interest in that, we can ask him.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Would it be practical that we just have a glance at
23 it, so most important is that we know what kind of map it is, without
24 going into every detail, and then if it would circulate around the
25 courtroom. Then we could find out whether we would like to have a copy
1 in evidence, yes or no.
2 MR. KEHOE: If we can take a quick break and take a look at it,
3 and we can consult together and look at it, also consult with my client.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. We'd like to have a brief look at your map, as
5 you said you had in your suitcase, so you didn't bring it in vain, but
6 before we do so ...
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: I have a few questions for you.
9 Questioned by the Court:
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, we extensively dealt with the target of
11 the apartment of Mr. - I shouldn't make the same mistake - Mr. Martic.
12 Do you remember how many projectiles were fired at his apartment?
13 A. It appears to me 13 to 16, but I'm not sure. I have to
14 check, in my documents, the reconstruction.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Do you have any recollection whether all 13 or
16 16 hit the apartment which served as residence of Mr. Martic?
17 A. I cannot be specific, but repeated fire confirmed that the
18 harassment and pressure effect had been achieved; in other words, that a
19 sense of insecurity had been instilled in Martic.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Sir, you do not know to what extent any
21 adjacent apartments were hit by any of the projectiles?
22 A. No, I don't have full information on that.
23 JUDGE ORIE: When asked about what you considered when it was
24 decided that it would be fired at this apartment, you mentioned both the
25 principle of distinction and the principle of proportionality. You also
1 told us that chances to hit Mr. Martic, as a person, were rather limited.
2 Could you explain to us how, in terms of proportionality, you considered
3 it to be appropriate to fire with a 130-millimetre on his apartment for
4 13 to 16 times?
5 A. Your Honour, 13 to 16 rounds, not 13 to 16 times. I'm sorry, but
6 this is military terminology. The principle of proportionality or
7 balance is a process whereby possible civilian casualties are balanced
8 with the success or effect that might be achieved in order to exert
9 pressure on Milan Martic to have him possibly sign the capitulation,
10 because he had not accepted that option for the end of the war. When we
11 obtained information that the Army of the Republic of Serbian Krajina
12 an evacuation plan and a plan on how to take care of the civilians, and
13 also in accordance with the International Law of War, the defenders also
14 have a huge responsibility in terms of saving civilian lives in the
15 combat zone, and taking into account the facts that the buildings and
16 facilities located in that area where Mile Martic had his residence were
17 of good quality and that the residents, in accordance with the doctrine
18 of the former JNA and the All People's Defence and social
19 self-protection, as it was called, would do anything to take care of the
20 population in the area.
21 And so the decision was made to do this in this limited way. And
22 also in light of the limited capabilities to engage this moving target,
23 and Mile Martic was a moving target, based on the data obtained with
24 constant surveillance and intelligence effort concentrating on
25 Mile Martic, we felt that we could engage or use our 130-millimetre guns
1 to exert pressure on him and to force him to accept military defeat.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
3 Had Mr. Martic lived in the same apartment for a long time?
4 A. To my knowledge, he was a police officer in Knin, and at that
5 time, with the purpose-built apartments that was in Yugoslavia -- that
6 was in effect in Yugoslavia
7 employees quite close to the police station. Well, relatively close to
8 the police station. And last week, when we talked about Mile Martic and
9 his residence, that's what we said.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but my question was whether he had lived there
11 for a long period of time, to your knowledge.
12 A. Your Honour, I'm sorry. Yes, Your Honour, I don't know how long
13 he used that apartment before and during the war.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. You -- I think you explained the target
15 which was called "hospital" on the list in your 92 ter statement, but I'm
16 just trying to find the exact --
17 MR. KEHOE: Paragraph 22.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Twenty-two, yes, it just comes before 23.
19 You say it's a field near the crossroads outside of the
20 northern barracks, from which you anticipated that the ARSK may attempt
21 to withdraw military equipment or otherwise use the area to its
22 advantage. Now, did they attempt, through that field, to withdraw
23 military equipment or did they in any way use that field to their
25 A. Yes, that intersection, which is close to the Slavko Rodic or
1 Northern Camp Barracks, was an intersection where there was a lot of
2 traffic by their logistics units and the reserve forces that were being
3 deployed to intervene on the Dinara Mountain
4 principles and the doctrine of the use of artillery, such intersections
5 are planned as locations where the enemy is ambushed because it is very
6 easy to determine the X-Y coordinates for those locations.
7 JUDGE ORIE: The X-Y coordinates refer to a field, not to the
8 crossroads themselves, so my question was whether your expectation that
9 they might use the field, whether that turned out to be a reality.
10 A. The information had come in that they had a small artillery unit,
11 a mortar unit, which was located close to the barracks in a school.
12 I think it was a secondary school that at the time it was used for that
13 purpose, and that empty area in front of the school was a possible firing
14 position, which would make it possible for them to fire on Mount Dinara
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer. Finally, in one of the
16 annexes, I think it was the diary of the 4th Guards Brigade, I found
17 targets by an indication by their N number, for example, N-1 or N-28.
18 It's not entirely clear what the reference N stands for.
19 A. Your Honour, it's a comparison with the coded map, the one that
20 we have for the 7th Guards Brigade, Ivancica, where we spoke about S-15,
21 S-54 and so on, and in the same way the 4th Guards Brigade had its own
22 coded map with a different name. And the circles that you wanted to have
23 explained to you, we have to look at the map to see where it is actually
24 located, and then we would see that this is a quadrant N, and then there
25 is a numerical designation next to it.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Two of the targets thus named are -- one is N-1,
2 Cupkovici hamlet. Do you have any recollection of what happened there
3 that one should fire on this hamlet, or what was there?
4 A. Your Honour, if I remember correctly, as I worked on the
5 reconstruction or preparing the documents for the Prosecution, I think -
6 well, we would have to consult the map - that the hamlet of Cupkovici is
7 actually the western part of Knin. The course of combat, when one
8 infantry battalions of the 4th Guards Brigade entered the area, I assume,
9 well, they probably had an infantry engagement, and if that is the case,
10 then if there is strong resistance, then they try to deal with it using
11 their own artillery.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm looking at the clock. I have one or more
13 questions for you. Let me inquire with the Defence.
14 Mr. Kehoe, how much more time would you still need?
15 MR. KEHOE: We need to go back into the Brioni transcript that
16 was brought up in cross-examination our equivalent to redirect, I'd say
17 we probably, to go through that, would need half an hour or so on that
19 JUDGE ORIE: Half an hour. Then not much time will be left today
20 for other matters.
21 Mr. Misetic.
22 MR. MISETIC: I want to be sure that I ask for permission that I
23 lead that examination, if that's all right with the Bench.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, that's no problem, Mr. Misetic.
25 Then would it be possible, if it exists -- first of all, could we
1 look at the map that you brought so that the parties could look at it
2 during the break, Mr. Rajcic, if you could, with the assistance of
3 Madam Usher.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, when we spoke of
5 topographical maps, in relation to the coded map Ivancica, the question
6 was raised of what sort of map that was. Well, when the map was made
7 using the topographical maps of the former JNA, in the lower right-hand
8 corner it reads: "Second edition, printed in 1978." That's what I
9 referred to when I said that the map was made some 12 to 13 years prior
10 to it being turned into the coded map of Ivancica. Now, the markings
11 that you see here, well, I was toying around with it, trying to make a
12 reconstruction for my own purposes. If necessary, I can hand the map
13 over in the form in which it is for whoever's reference.
14 JUDGE ORIE: If you'd give us an opportunity to have a look at it
15 during the break, parties would also have a look at it, and then if there
16 is then any need -- could you give it to Madam Usher so that she can
17 first give it briefly to the Chamber.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Usher, could you please give it to the parties
20 for inspection.
21 We'll have a break, and we'll resume at five minutes --
22 twenty-five minutes past 6.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 6.08 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 6.26 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: I might have one additional question later, but,
1 Mr. Misetic, I'll let you go first, because I had no access to e-court
2 from my Chamber, so that's the reason why I couldn't verify something.
3 If you're ready, proceed.
4 MR. MISETIC: Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Further Cross-examination by Mr. Misetic:
6 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Rajcic. Just a few further follow-up
7 questions I have for you.
8 A. Good afternoon.
9 Q. Earlier on today, you were shown the Main Staff directive from
10 the 26th of June, 1995. The order from the Main Staff to hit the ARSK
11 headquarters and command posts in Knin with artillery and rocket fire was
12 issued more than a month before your trip to Brioni; correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. The order of the Main Staff to hit command posts and
15 communications facilities in Benkovac with artillery and rocket fire was
16 issued one month before the meeting at Brioni on the 31st; correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. After the meeting at Brioni, do you recall adding any potential
19 targets to a target list after the meeting that weren't already on a list
20 of potential targets before the meeting?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Do you know if you or anyone else in the Split Military District,
23 after the Brioni meeting, added any civilian facilities or civilian
24 residences to a target list after the 31st of July?
25 A. No.
1 Q. Now, Mr. Russo asked you a few questions about the meeting at
2 Brioni, and he asked you a question in which it is purported that
3 General Gotovina said:
4 "A large number of civilians are already evacuating Knin and
5 heading towards Banja Luka and Belgrade
6 this pressure probably for some time to come, there won't be so many
8 And then Mr. Russo put it to you that "this pressure" means
9 artillery pressure. My question to you was: On the 31st of July, was
10 there any artillery fire on Knin coming from the HV?
11 A. No.
12 Q. In the days before the 31st of July, was there any artillery fire
13 put on Knin by the HV?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Now, if -- I'm speaking hypothetically now. If General Gotovina
16 said, If we continue this pressure, and in reference to the fact that
17 civilians are already fleeing, what kind of pressure, other than
18 artillery pressure, could Serbs in Knin have felt such that they would
19 want to leave?
20 A. I don't think that there was mention of any pressure for
21 civilians to leave.
22 Q. Right. But do you agree with me that the pressure being felt in
23 Knin was the fact that the HV had now taken dominant positions on the
24 Dinara mountain?
25 A. Mr. Misetic, the Croatian Army on the Dinara and the HVO as the
1 right neighbour, of course, the pressure existed already at the time when
2 we had taken the dominant features of Veliki Bat and the features called
3 "veliki" and "malicil" [phoen] or big and small target on the Dinara, of
4 course, without the use of artillery; let me underline that.
5 Q. You, yourself, in your testimony throughout your several days
6 here have mentioned the fact that you had intelligence that people were
7 leaving Knin. What was your understanding of why people were leaving
8 Knin if, in fact, there was no artillery fire on Knin?
9 A. Among other things, I believe it was down to the propaganda
10 campaign carried out by the Serbs in the area, which resulted, in a way,
11 in intimidations of their own population.
12 Q. Now, do you recall ever telling General Gotovina that the
13 artillery in Knin can fire with great precision? And if so, do you agree
14 with that assessment?
15 A. General Gotovina had already had such information about the
16 precision of artillery that was under his command. He knew that this was
17 my sixth attack or offensive operation in a row.
18 Did I perhaps neglect to answer a part of your question?
19 Q. Well, the second part -- the second sentence of your answer, you
20 say that: "He knew that this was my sixth attack or offensive operation
21 in a row." What do you mean by that, in terms of the ability to fire
22 precisely in Knin?
23 A. What I meant is that he knew that we had trained artillery
24 troops, experienced men, that we had artillery weaponry in proper order,
25 in working order, and that, in a way, we were even able to exceed certain
1 standards of precision in artillery fire.
2 Q. Now, do you recall, in this time-period, a discussion about the
3 fact that the HV did not have a lot of projectiles in its arsenal because
4 of the fact that the operations in Grahovo and Glamoc had just been
6 A. Yes. This sort of caution came frequently from the generals. If
7 you'll recall, Mr. Misetic, the directive from the Main Staff, you'll
8 observe there that the Main Staff assigned six combat sets for the
9 artillery that was supposed to provide support. In his order,
10 General Gotovina allocated four combat sets only because we did not have
11 more to go around.
12 Q. Do you know if, after the 31st of July, the forces of the Split
13 Military District planned to use more artillery than they had planned to
14 use prior to the 31st of July?
15 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, I don't see where this arises out of
16 the examination I did. I didn't go into a discussion of how much
17 artillery was used, or the amount of artillery, or lack of artillery.
18 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, this is taken directly from the
19 transcript that Mr. Russo spent half an hour on, and I can get him the
20 page number. It is pages 21 and 22 in my version of the transcript,
21 where there's a discussion about the need to conserve artillery, just for
22 his reference.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
24 MR. RUSSO: Page 21 --
25 MR. MISETIC: I have an earlier translation, so I'm not sure if
1 it's the exact page, but I'm looking at --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Let's see whether the witness can answer the
3 question, and let's move on.
4 MR. MISETIC:
5 Q. Mr. Rajcic, let me repeat my question to you. Do you recall if
6 the HV or the forces of the Split Military District decided to expend
7 more artillery or planned to expend more artillery after the 31st of July
8 than they had planned to use prior to the 31st of July?
9 A. The assessment, in view of the ammunition in our disposal, was
10 such after the 31st of July that we had less ammunition at our disposal
11 than at the time when we were going through the planning stage of
12 selecting and so on.
13 Q. So the planning for Operation Storm called for more artillery
14 than you were actually able to use in Operation Storm; is that accurate?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Mr. Rajcic, one other question that arises out of Mr. Russo's
17 examination, and he had asked you about this in his earlier direct, which
18 is the fact that you, on the -- you had a meeting with General Gotovina
19 on the evening of the 5th, where he told you to go, I believe, into the
20 area of OG Sibenik, if I'm not mistaken; is that correct ?
21 MR. RUSSO: Again, Mr. President, he's making direct reference to
22 my very first direct examination, clearly not the examination I've just
24 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, this question relates directly to
25 Mr. Russo's questioning that this operation could have been conducted
1 without the use of artillery, and that's why I'm asking him about that.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo, that was one of your questions, isn't it,
3 in re-examination, cross-examination, however -- whatever you call it .
4 MR. RUSSO: I did ask him if, in his opinion, it could have been
5 taken with troops.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Then please proceed, Mr. Misetic.
7 MR. MISETIC:
8 Q. Mr. Rajcic, again let me refresh your recollection. You recall
9 Mr. Russo this morning asking you about a meeting you had with
10 General Gotovina on the evening of the 5th where, and you correct me if
11 I'm wrong, he sent you to go into the area of OG Sibenik; is that
13 A. Yes. On the 5th, in the early evening, that's when we discussed
14 my deployment along the Skradin-Kistanje-Padjene axis.
15 Q. And refresh our recollection as to why it is that
16 General Gotovina decided to send his chief of artillery on that axis.
17 Why did he send you there on the evening of the 5th?
18 A. Why was I the choice, I don't know, that's something the general
19 can tell you, but I know that the pace of attack in that particular area
20 was slower; and the attack had not been unfolding in accordance with the
22 Q. Did you bring any of the artillery pieces from OG North to the
23 axis in OG Sibenik on the evening of the 5th?
24 A. Yes, yes.
25 Q. Why did you bring those artillery pieces with you?
1 A. Because there was no better artillery weaponry to be found in the
2 area that would have been up to the task. The artillery pieces deployed
3 there were of an older date and with little ammunition, and they were far
4 less precise than the artillery pieces I took along.
5 Q. Is it your opinion that one of the reasons that the pace of
6 attack on that axis in OG Sibenik was inefficient, is that because there
7 was insufficient artillery to support the ground offensive?
8 A. That was one of the reasons.
9 Q. Finally, Mr. Rajcic, to put to you the same question that
10 Mr. Russo did: Again, is that an example of the fact that artillery
11 played an important role in the overall support of the ground forces of
12 the Croatian Army in Operation Storm?
13 A. Yes.
14 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, if I could have just one moment,
16 Thank you, Mr. President. I have no further questions.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Misetic.
18 Mr. Mikulicic.
19 MR. MIKULICIC: I have no questions, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I had one question which -- first of all, could
21 I inquire with the parties whether the map is needed? It seems to be a
22 normal geographical map of --
23 MR. KEHOE: There's no need for it, Mr. President.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo?
25 Madam Usher, could you please return this to the witness.
1 There's no need to have it marked for identification either, I take it.
2 Thank you.
3 Questioned by the Court:
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, I have one question for you, and I'm
5 looking at P2343. If that could be -- that's the diary of the
6 4th Guards Brigade, and I'm looking at, in e-court, page 40 out of 48.
7 In the original, I do not know yet which page it is, but -- it should be
8 46 out of 57 in the original.
9 Mr. Rajcic, have you found it?
10 A. Yes, Your Honour, I can see 2050 to 2350. That's the time slots,
11 the place and the date.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. What I'm looking at, as a matter of fact, is
13 at 0030 hours on the 6th of August and that should then -- perhaps I've
14 indicated the wrong page. It would be on the next page. Yes.
15 Now we haven't got the English anymore.
16 I see there Cupkovici hamlet as a target to be fired at by the
17 Artillery Rocket Company, the 6th of August, half an hour past midnight
18 or 0030 in the morning, and N-28, the village of Pribadic
19 any knowledge about what was there in this hamlet on that date to be
20 fired at, or what was there in the village? And if you could tell us
21 where it is, if you know, then of course that would be appreciated as
23 A. Your Honour, at that time, 0030, I was en route from Livno to
24 Sibenik. Now, I don't know whether this is the Artillery Rocket Group of
25 the 4th Guards Brigade or the Artillery Group 3. I can't really decipher
1 this. And, now, as for the position of the R-22, R-37, N-16 and N-1,
2 N-28; and you have the actual locations in brackets, I should do a
3 reconstruction on the map.
4 According to an overview that we have on this map, it's the
5 4th Guards Brigade.
6 JUDGE ORIE: It appears in the diary of the 4th Guards Brigade,
7 so that --
8 A. This is what I would like to say: I have the positions here, the
9 times for the battalions of the 4th Guards Brigade when, in the afternoon
10 of the 5th, the actual locations that they reached at that time. In
11 order to find those locations, I would have to have their coded map or
12 the extension of the left side of the segment of this map in order to be
13 able to locate those villages, in order to be able to reconstruct. But,
14 at any rate, I was en route from Livno to Sibenik at that time.
15 JUDGE ORIE: You have no specific knowledge on what was there in
16 Cupkovici hamlet, either in terms of combat or in terms of facilities,
17 which was needed to be fired at, at that date and that time?
18 A. Your Honour, my assessment will be subjective.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then perhaps if you don't know, then rather refrain
20 from speculations.
21 I take it that those last answers have not triggered any further
23 MR. KEHOE: No, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Rajcic, this concludes your evidence in this
25 court. I'd like to thank you very much for coming to The Hague and for
1 spending considerable time with us, answering the questions of the
2 parties and the questions of the Bench, and I would like to wish you a
3 safe journey home again.
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you for summoning
5 me. I do have a request to make.
6 JUDGE ORIE: If you address me with a request.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. I would like to ask your
8 permission to greet the generals.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Rajcic, this is uncommon to do. At the
10 same time, they have heard that you wished to greet them, which is a kind
11 of a greeting as well. If you would accept that as my explanation, then
12 you are invited to follow Madam Usher.
13 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
14 [The witness withdrew]
15 JUDGE ORIE: About tomorrow, we have reserved time in the
16 morning. But before we decide whether or not to use that time, I'd like
17 to know how much time, Mr. Russo, the videolink witness of tomorrow
18 afternoon would take in chief.
19 MR. RUSSO: Approximately half an hour to 45 minutes,
20 Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Could I hear from the Defence teams, how much time
22 they need with the witness tomorrow.
23 MR. KEHOE: If I may just add to that, I think Mr. Hedaraly told
24 me it was about 20 minutes, but be that as it may. Mr. Hedaraly just
25 bumped into one another in the cafeteria, but be that as it may, taking
1 half an hour to 45 minutes, I'd say, you know, 45 minutes to an hour, say
2 an hour, Judge.
3 MR. CAYLEY: It's unlikely, Your Honour, we'll have any questions
4 for that witness.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic.
6 MR. MIKULICIC: It's the same for the Markac Defence as well,
7 Your Honour.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Which means that in the worst scenario we would have
9 one hour and 45 minutes for the witness. Perhaps to be added to that,
10 perhaps some questions in relation to protective measures. The Chamber
11 does not know yet whether we'll have any questions in that respect or
12 whether we'll determine the matter without putting further questions to
13 the witness.
14 Because there are two other matters which we'd like to deal with
15 tomorrow, one is we have still to finish the MFI list - we did not go
16 through it entirely when we had a housekeeping session - I have no
17 illusion that we could deal with all the newest MFIs, already, Mr. Russo,
18 that may take more time to consider. That's one.
19 There is another issue that is a motion that was filed by the
20 Markac Defence in relation to a witness which is scheduled, I think, for
21 Thursday. The Chamber would like to have some time to further hear
22 from -- first of all, from the Prosecution, what their answer to the
23 motion is, because two weeks would not do very well, Mr. Russo, under the
24 present circumstances. If the parties are confident that we could deal
25 with this, that means on the issue of the witness for Thursday, Witness
1 82, if that would take not more than half an hour altogether, that's 15
2 minutes from each party; and I'm confident that we would not need more
3 time than 45 minutes for an MFI
4 look at all this, we could skip tomorrow morning's reserved time and
5 tomorrow, in the afternoon, first deal with the witness and after that
6 with the procedural matters. But if the parties feel that they are not
7 as confident as I did that we could do it in that time, then of course we
8 have to start in the morning.
9 MR. KEHOE: I'm not certain of the extent of the Markac motion,
10 but from the Gotovina Defence, Judge, it sounds to me that we could do
11 this, reasonably confident that we can, with the caveat of the
12 Markac Defence.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Russo.
14 MR. RUSSO: Mr. President, if I understand you correctly, we'll
15 be given approximately 15 minutes each to make oral submissions on the
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Of course, if you would file a written
18 response tomorrow morning, then, of course -- then we would know -- that
19 might even save time in court.
20 MR. RUSSO: I certainly can't guarantee that at this point,
21 Mr. President, but we'll certain make every effort to do so.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Any other submissions in respect of the
23 scheduling issue?
24 Then I'd like to turn into private session for one minute.
25 [Private session]
11 Pages 16630-16631 redacted. Private session.
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, we're back in open session.
17 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
18 JUDGE ORIE: We adjourn for the day, and we'll resume tomorrow,
19 Tuesday, the 24th of February, 2009, at quarter past 2.00 in this same
20 Courtroom I.
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.05 p.m.
22 to be reconvened on Tuesday, the 24th day of
23 February, 2009, at 2.15 p.m.