1 Tuesday, 24 November 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everyone.
7 Mr. Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours. Good afternoon to
9 everyone in the courtroom. This is case number IT-06-90-T, the
10 Prosecutor versus Ante Gotovina et al.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
12 Good afternoon to you, Mr. Pejkovic, as well. I would like to
13 remind you that you're still bound by the solemn declaration you've given
14 at the beginning of your testimony.
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I followed your
16 instructions and I did not contact anyone.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
18 Mr. Mikulicic, are you ready to proceed?
19 MR. MIKULICIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please.
21 WITNESS: LOVRE PEJKOVIC [Resumed]
22 [Witness answered through interpreter]
23 Examination by Mr. Mikulicic: [Continued]
24 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] I would like to ask the Registry
25 for P420 [as interpreted].
1 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, yesterday we stopped in this document, D420; it's
2 the second report from the year 2000. And we stopped at the
3 paragraph which says that through your work in the ground you established
4 that there were 20.000 unregistered returnees between 1995 and 2000?
5 Do you remember that?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Now I would like to ask you to move to another topic connected to
8 this document, and therefore I would ask the Registry to open page
9 3D001268 in the Croatian version, and page 3D060131 in the English
11 This chapter, Mr. Pejkovic, talks about the project of return
12 from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herzegovina
13 through the stability pact. Could you please tell us a few introductory
14 sentences about the stability pact. What is meant by that?
15 A. When we talk about the stability pact, we have to know that one
16 of the more important tasks before this stability pact was to enable the
17 return of all refugees and displaced persons to their homes. And the
18 government, as a participant in all this process, is connected to that,
19 implemented through the stability pact and in co-operation with the
20 relevant countries - in this case these were Bosnia and Herzegovina
22 possible and easiest possible return of everyone to their homes.
23 Q. What were the factors connected with the stability pact? You
24 mentioned the countries, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Federal Republic
25 of Yugoslavia
1 institutions, who was present there as well?
2 A. Those who were responsible for the activities were UNHCR and OSS
3 Q. It says here that a budget of 55 and a half million US dollars
4 was proposed for the pact, and that the target group of returnees
5 numbered 16.500 persons. They would be the user of that. And these were
6 the persons who had submitted applications for return, whether to the
7 office that you were employed at, through the UNHCR. And if we consider
8 the ethnic composition of the returnees, what was it?
9 A. Primarily, this was the return of Croats, also the return of
10 Serbs, and the return of the Muslim, that is to say, the Bosniaks. All
11 the three groups were returning. The Croats were returning to Bosnia
13 returning to Croatia
14 Q. And please tell us what were the results of this project of
15 return by implementation of the stability pact?
16 A. The programme for the return and the return itself, through the
17 stability pact was just a part of the overall return, and when we're
18 talking about return, it's difficult to distinguish what was return
19 through the stability pact. We did have target groups. However, people
20 returned in other ways as well, not only people that we wanted to return
21 and that we considered as target groups as the stability pact but other
22 people as well. So that when this report was drafted, a significant
23 number of displaced persons and refugees had already returned to their
24 home, both in Croatia
25 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] now I would like to show page
1 3D001290 in the Croatian version, that is to say, page 3D060605 in the
2 English version.
3 Q. Pages we will see on the screen are the summary, talking about
4 the returns to Republic of Croatia
5 previous report from 1995 until this report from the year 2000.
6 Do I draw proper conclusions, Mr. Pejkovic?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. And it says here in the seconds paragraph that since the fall of
9 1995 until the 1st of May, 2000, the total number of those who returned
10 to the Republic of Croatia
11 Where does this data come from, Mr. Pejkovic?
12 A. This is the data on the number of persons who had the status of
13 returnees. They were all registered at the government office, and they
14 received their returnee card. We must know that since 1997 until the
15 moment of this report in the year 2000 a system of monitoring was
16 completely established so that it was not possible to have errors in the
17 data, because each person had his or her identity card, and their
18 movements were monitored as well as their status. So both the status and
19 the place where they were within the Republic of Croatia
20 they returned there.
21 Q. This figure of 244.350 returnees is then broken down into three
22 items. So I would ask you to look at the data on the screen and briefly
23 comment on them and tell us also where do the data come from.
24 A. The figures expressed here were the result of the sums that were
25 made relating to the number of returnees.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Is it true that I see on my screen not the same text
2 in B/C/S and English?
3 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, if it's your screen, as mine it is,
4 then you don't see the English text on the left side of the screen. And
5 the proper page of the English text is, as I said, 3D060605.
6 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, Mr. President. I don't think I have that
7 page in that -- in this document. I have been looking for it.
8 JUDGE ORIE: What's the page in the ...
9 MR. MIKULICIC: That's the right page on the screen, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. There we are now.
11 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
12 MR. MIKULICIC: If I can assist my learned colleague, I could
13 give you my copy, if you wish; although it's the same as -- as shown on
14 the screen.
15 MR. CARRIER: This is -- sorry. This is D420.
16 MR. MIKULICIC: This is D420, right.
17 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
18 JUDGE ORIE: We have it on our screen now.
19 The English translation, which is uploaded, consists of 53 pages.
20 Which number in these 53 is this?
21 MR. CARRIER: Just before Mr. Mikulicic answers ...
22 Mr. President, I -- the document that I have that was printed off within
23 the last two weeks doesn't actually have that range. It has a 3D06 --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
25 MR. CARRIER: I'm just trying to figure out when it was uploaded
1 into the system, when that happened. I know something changed yesterday,
2 but I didn't realize any of the text changed. I thought that was the end
3 of it.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Can we move a bit up the English text so that we can
5 see the number at the bottom of the page, a bit to the right.
6 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, that was uploaded yesterday, and we
7 informed the parties on the record. If you open up e-court, that's a --
8 JUDGE ORIE: It's now the second page which is uploaded. The
9 second out of 18, which is now uploaded.
10 MR. MIKULICIC: [Microphone not activated]
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier.
12 [Prosecution counsel confer]
13 JUDGE ORIE: You have found it?
14 MR. CARRIER: I just -- I need one second, please.
15 JUDGE ORIE: The old 53-page English original appears under
16 number 3D060100; whereas, this 18-page is now 3D060604. And we are
17 looking at 0605. And then the B/C/S original is uploaded under 3D001242
18 and is 64 pages.
19 Just for our information, Mr. Mikulicic, the two English uploaded
20 documents, 53 pages for the 0100 -- no, I'm making a mistake. No. It's
21 right. 53 pages for the 0100 and 18 pages for the 0604, are they both
22 covered by the original 3D001242?
23 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, Your Honour, they are.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So we have translations split up in two parts,
25 Mr. Carrier.
1 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, I don't think I understood that last part.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if you look in e-court, source and
3 attachments, we find three originals which is understandable because, at
4 the time, they were already translated.
5 I'm looking at the document details at this moment.
6 MR. CARRIER: I'm sad and yet happy to report it is the system
7 here. I don't have three; I only two sets of translations. But on the
8 same --
9 JUDGE ORIE: Well, first of all, as uploaded in e-court, we have
10 three originals. And that is caused by the fact that already at the time
11 translations were prepared and distributed as the witness testified
12 yesterday. That's at least how I understand it. Then we have a B/C/S
13 original uploaded under 3D001242, a 64-page document. Last part of the
14 document, mainly tables. Then we have two sets in English, 3D060100, and
15 3D060604. That's, at least, always the first page of the English. And
16 we're now looking at the second page of this sequence found under
18 MR. CARRIER: Yes, I understand that now. If I could just make
19 once comment, Mr. President.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
21 MR. CARRIER: This was something that was just put on the record;
22 it's been updated yesterday by Mr. Kuzmanovic. There was no indication
23 that was going to be used during the cross-examination [sic], which,
24 Prosecution feels, that it would have been more proper to give us notice
25 that, in fact, that part was going to be used. It didn't form, actually,
1 the document as identified on the exhibit list originally because now it
2 has been added to in terms of the translation. So just to put that on
3 the record: I think it would have been proper to actually tell us it was
4 going use, not just in passing that it has been updated.
5 JUDGE ORIE: That's on the record.
6 Please proceed, Mr. Mikulicic.
7 MR. MIKULICIC: Thank you, Your Honour. Although we informed the
8 learned colleagues from the Prosecution office that we are going to use
9 the document D420, which is obviously the part of this document.
10 But any way ...
11 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pejkovic, before the procedural issues that
12 arose, I asked you to comment, for the benefit of the Bench and the
13 parties, the items 1, 2, and 3, which are a breakdown of the total number
14 of 244.350 returnees in the period of five years, those who returned to
15 the Republic of Croatia
16 So could you please be so kind to briefly comment on these
18 A. When we drafted the reports, we always tried to break down the
19 data into logical wholes. So the first group is the number of returnees
20 who were primarily Croats and who returned to the areas liberated by the
21 military and police operations Flash and Storm.
22 The second category included the return to or from the
23 Croatian Danube region on the basis of the Erdut Agreement on the
24 peaceful reintegration of the Croatian Danube region.
25 And the third category related to the return into the
1 Republic of Croatia
3 When we talk about the return of displaced persons to the areas
4 which were liberated during the operations Flash and Storm until the
5 1st of May, 2000, the number was 122.517 returnees --
6 Q. Excuse me, if I understood properly, these returnees were
7 primarily Croats; is that right?
8 A. Yes, that is correct. And can I please have the transcript in
9 front of me so that can I see the speed of my own speech.
10 The second figure was a two-way return from the Croatian Danube
11 region and into the Croatian Danube region where it is stated that, as
12 part of this process, 31.717 returnees returned. They were mostly or
13 almost only Serbs who went to other parts of Croatia and who had been
14 accommodated in the Croatian Danube region. And, at the same time,
15 48.995 returnees returned to the Croatian Danube region; they were mostly
16 Croats and some representatives of other ethnic groups.
17 And then we also showed here the return to Croatia from
19 41.121 returnee. And we broke down this figure into two; namely, 23.147
20 persons returned in an organised manner with the support of our office
21 and UNHCR; whereas the remaining number returned spontaneously, which
22 means that they had been issued Croatian documents and returned to
24 office and were given the returnee status.
25 Q. And the third category of returnees, when you talk about the
1 ethnic composition, who were the members of this group?
2 A. These were almost 100 per cent the returning Serbs.
3 Q. In the next paragraph, Mr. Pejkovic, it says that from a total of
4 about 300.000 Croatian Serbs who left their homes after 1991, their homes
5 in the Republic of Croatia
6 from the Croatian Danube region, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and
7 Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that, according to the current number of
8 requests for return filed to the office for refugees, there was still
9 14.020 persons waiting to return.
10 Where does this data come from, Mr. Pejkovic?
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, perhaps you could ask the witness --
12 this case is primarily about the Krajina, that -- Sector South. Can we
13 see what - when we're talking about returnees - what is the percentage
14 which returned to the Krajina, because I get the feeling that we always
15 get the whole of the -- of the Croatian return programme without any
16 breakdown in Krajina and other regions.
17 Mr. Pejkovic, could you help us out?
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
19 When speaking of the returning Serbs, we must say that
20 95 per cent of them took place in the formally occupied territory, in the
21 territory of the so-called Krajina as you said yourself. There were very
22 few of them who returned to the areas which were free throughout that
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I see that, but focussing -- because I --
25 it -- it seems that we're talking not just about the Krajina region,
1 well, let's say, around Knin, former Sector South, but we're talking
2 about areas at quite a distance from that.
3 Do you have a breakdown from specifically those returning to --
4 to the Krajina, the ...
5 Perhaps I should say Sector South, because that's what we are --
6 the area, say, roughly, around Knin.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, these documents
8 contain tables listing municipalities in which returnees were. But we
9 never drafted such reports in which we would try to calculate the figures
10 of returnees solely to the area of north, south, or west.
11 In item 2, though, we had data on Sector South, at least
12 partially, because that is, for the most part, the Danube region.
13 MR. MIKULICIC: [Previous translation continues] ... I could
14 assist with the next document that I want to show to the witness.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, then we'll hear --
16 MR. MIKULICIC: [Interpretation] I would kindly ask the Registrar
17 for D429.
18 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, you will see a document which has already been
19 admitted. It is the statistics of the returnees and returnee
20 applications, which was put together in late 2006 by the office; that is
21 to say, the administration for IDPs and refugees.
22 I don't think you'll be able to get your bearings quickly on this
23 page, but I wanted to draw your attention to the following, given
24 His Honour's question, to the left column, which states the counties to
25 which those people returned. From the county names, perhaps you can
1 conclude which of those would fall within this -- the former
2 Sector South. That is to say, Knin, Zadar, Sibenik, Split, as well as
4 Please focus on the entry under the number 09 which is the
5 Licko-Sinjska county. Next, the number 13 which is the Zadar county.
6 Then 15, the Sibenik-Knin county. And 17, the Split-Dalmatia county.
7 From the data put together by the office, can you conclude
8 whether these figures would relate to the area of the Former Republic
9 Krajina or Sector South which is important for this case?
10 Perhaps can you offer a comment.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier.
12 MR. CARRIER: Mr. President, other than it being fully leading to
13 direct someone to just ask them to add up numbers, I don't think it adds
14 much just to simply read from documents and have the person confirm
15 that's what it says there.
16 It's not -- it's leading; it's improper.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, it's not uncommon in this courtroom. If
18 statistics were prepared and then to ask for an explanation to that, of
19 course, we wouldn't expect the witness to reproduce the numbers. That,
20 of course, would be practically impossible. But to assist us in
21 understanding, I think, is not inappropriate.
22 Therefore, the witness may answer the question.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Mr. Mikulicic, Your Honour, I
24 authored this table. The data shown here refers to a certain date. We
25 collated it so that we would be able to follow the rate of return at the
1 level of each and every county for statistic purposes and to inform the
3 There is another table containing sub-statistics, in which we can
4 see each and every municipality per county. But in that case, that
5 included actually hundreds of tables. And, as such, it would have been
6 extraordinary to them published. Those who were interested in monitoring
7 the returnee process could peruse them, nevertheless. Overall return was
8 followed at the level of counties, municipalities, or locations, or
9 settlements. Extracting individual pieces of information, one can
10 clearly ascertain the number of returnees to certain areas within
11 Sector South, Sector North, or Sector West.
12 MR. MIKULICIC:
13 Q. [Interpretation] Mr. Pejkovic, if we look at the statistics, we
14 see in the upper part of the table the column "Minority Return," which is
15 further split into three columns from the FRY, from the B and H, and from
16 the Croatian Danubian region. These were the categories you referred to
17 only a minute ago when you discussed the 2000 report. Correct?
18 A. Yes. That is what we could see under categories 1, 2, and 3. In
19 this table, it is simply stated by using different terminology. But it
20 all boils down to the same thing. We have returnees, that is to say,
21 former IDPs in the first column, which refer to mostly Croats. Next we
22 have minority returns from three different directions. And, for
23 practical purposes, these were mostly Serbs. The directions were the
24 FRY, Bosnia-Herzegovina, or the Croatian Danubian region.
25 The next column shows the total of the three sub-columns.
1 The next column is the total number of returnees.
2 What follows is the number of cases or applications which are
3 still pending.
4 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, let us try and clarify one thing, and I would
5 kindly ask for your assistance in that.
6 This Tribunal discusses the area of the former so-called Krajina.
7 Statistically and legally and formally speaking, does such a category
8 exist within the Croatian system?
9 A. No.
10 Q. If you were asked how to define or show data of return to that
11 area alone, how would you be able to do that?
12 A. We could clearly identify the settlements or municipalities which
13 had been occupied. We followed the rate of return there as well. We
14 would have to add up all of them to arrive at a final figure of returnees
15 to that specific area.
16 Q. If we are talking about the overall minority return, then it
17 brings us to the total figure of 123.469 persons on -- or as of the
18 2nd of December, 2006.
19 According to the methodology you used, can you tell us what the
20 ethnicity was of the people included in this figure of minority number of
22 A. When we are discussing the minorities, it is almost 100 per cent
23 Serbs. Okay, well, there may be a few percentages less than that,
24 because there were people in mixed marriages, but for practical purposes,
25 that this was almost solely the return of Croatian citizens of
1 Serb ethnicity.
2 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, you worked in the IDPs and refugees office for a
3 number of years; you cooperated with various international organisations,
4 NGOs, governmental organisations, the Croatian government, et cetera.
5 Has any pressure ever been exercised upon you, which would try to impose
6 different solutions to your otherwise professional obligations?
7 A. I must say to this Court that there was never any pressure
8 exercised, or, rather, the only pressure I felt was the need for us do
9 our job as quickly and as well as possible, so as to enable as many
10 people to -- as many people as possible to return to their homes.
11 Q. My last question, Mr. Pejkovic. Since you headed the office,
12 perhaps you can tell us whether the office policy ever included any kind
13 of discrimination by ethnicity, religion, sex, or any other?
14 A. The role of the office was to enable all those IDPs and refugees
15 who were put under our care to help them in the exercise of their
16 religious and ethnic feelings and practices. We tried to do that for
17 each and every single person. We never discriminated. We did, however,
18 keep data pertaining to all the individual cases of people who provided
19 us with information to be able to see how many Croats, Serbs, Ruthenians,
20 Jews, Czechs, Slovaks, and all other ethnicities returned. That is to
21 say, all the ethnicities who felt the results of the war, having been
22 expelled from their homes.
23 Q. Thank you, Mr. Pejkovic.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Mr. Mikulicic.
25 Mr. Kehoe.
1 MR. KEHOE: Mr. President, we have no questions. Thank you.
2 JUDGE ORIE: You have no questions for the witness.
3 Mr. Kay.
4 MR. KAY: No questions, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE ORIE: No questions.
6 Mr. Carrier, this brings us to you. And, of course, we heard
7 from you yesterday; you explained what problems you were facing. And you
8 said that you would further consider whether you would be ready to
9 crosses examine the witness or not after you had had time to look at
10 certain matters.
11 Could you inform the Chamber.
12 MR. CARRIER: Mr. President, I'm still getting information that
13 D420 has additional parts that still haven't been translated.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Simple question: Is every part of D420 translated as
15 uploaded in e-court?
16 MR. MIKULICIC: Yes, Your Honour, although the parts are
17 separated, as you can see in the e-court. But we -- in the meantime, we
18 ask of the CLSS just to consolidate the translation in one part so that
19 will be more useable, not departed in three different partition.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Apparently the information is not the same.
21 Mr. Carrier, what portions of D420 are missing at this moment, as
22 far as translation is concerned?
23 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
24 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, the entire document has been
25 translated and uploaded. What is the specific issue about D420 that is
1 causing the problem; and if we can answer that, we would be more than
2 happy to help. But we added the additional translation of the document,
3 which was already an exhibit, was translated in full, and uploaded.
4 There is -- of D420. I keep mis-transposing [sic]; I'm sorry. So the
5 issue is: What is the issue about D420 that causes an issue for the
6 Prosecution? And we -- if we can answer that, we will help. Otherwise,
7 we don't really know what the issue is, other than part of it wasn't
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But I was first asking Mr. Carrier what the
10 information exactly was that not every portion of D420 was translated.
11 MR. CARRIER: I was simply just passed a note saying that one of
12 the people on our team has indicated that it is still not complete, and
13 we need to just check it. But the issue is raised; if Mr. Kuzmanovic
14 isn't aware. We raised them yesterday as well that there are still
15 numbers from April 2000 document, and there's numbers from May 2005, and
16 we were given now an additional 18 pages yesterday which was - as I
17 stated already on the record - it was put in without identifying that
18 that was going to be referred. There is more tables; there's numbers.
19 These things all need to be properly looked at in order to cross-examine
20 the witness. Particularly now that he has been asked questions about it
21 during the -- in chief at the end on new portions.
22 But we're not confident that the actual translation that was
23 uploaded originally, the initial 49 pages, is actually a translation of
24 what the B/C/S is. I think it was an English version that was found and
25 was put in as -- as the translation, to stand for the translation, but
1 not a true translation of what the B/C/S document was.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But in order to further explore these
3 problems, Mr. Carrier, you will have to guide us to say, Well, that's
4 what we finds here; that's what we find there; this is not consistent; or
5 this is not a translation. Although it looks like -- I mean, passing
6 messages that matters are incomplete, of course, do not immediately guide
7 us to the solution.
8 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I would add that we've had 24 hours
10 since this issue was raised or more. We've exchanged I don't know how
11 many e-mails with the OTP related to other witness lists and exhibit
12 lists and scheduling. And not one e-mail was sent to us asking us to
13 either clarify this or give us some more information or it's not
14 complete. We would have been more than happy to assist, but we didn't
15 get any information in the interim time-frame that there was a problem.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you were aware of the problems the OTP
17 expressed yesterday.
18 But, Mr. Carrier.
19 MR. CARRIER: It was addressed partly in the filing, Your Honour.
20 But if you turn to page 32, for instance.
21 JUDGE ORIE: 32 from what, exactly?
22 MR. CARRIER: Sorry. For the initial English translation.
23 JUDGE ORIE: The initial English translation. Let me see whether
24 I -- we are talking about D420.
25 MR. CARRIER: Yes, it's 3D--
1 JUDGE ORIE: One second, then I'll get it on my screen.
2 Okay. Which consists of three originals, one in English, two
3 in -- two in English, one in B/C/S.
4 Which page in the B/C/S version you would like us to look at?
5 MR. CARRIER: Sorry. It's 35 in the English. I'm just going
6 look up the B/C/S version. I think it's 3D0 --
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but if you say it's not translated, then we
8 start with what seems to be the most original, that is, the Croatian
9 version first. But if you would first like to look at the English, then
10 we will do that.
11 We have two documents in English. Which one do you think
12 contains a part which does not appear in the original Croatian, or is it
13 the other way around?
14 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, while we're waiting ...
15 JUDGE ORIE: Well -- yes, Mr. Kuzmanovic. Is there --
16 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I can wait, Your Honour.
17 MR. CARRIER: Sorry. Just looking at the first 100 series, and
18 that's, as I said, 3D060135, and if we put the --
19 JUDGE ORIE: 0135, yes.
20 MR. CARRIER: And the corresponding Croatian page, I believe, is
21 3D001291, if we could just load those up. [Overlapping speakers] ...
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, I -- give me at least one or two
23 seconds to get it on my own screen so that I can deal with it.
24 You said it was in the first 100 series. There was -- 35, 135?
25 MR. CARRIER: Yes.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's at page -- the top says second part.
2 Yes, there we are.
3 Okay. Now what page in English would you like us to refer to
4 where you say, Well, here you see that the translation is missing.
5 MR. CARRIER: 3D061 -- or, sorry, 0137.
6 And if you just -- you can start looking through the -- the
7 numbers. You can see the first number at A; in English it's 11.379.
8 Then it's -- on the other -- in Croatian version it's 9597. The next
9 number down, a B English, 8, 185, B in the Croatian is 13550. The entire
10 chart, the numbers aren't right. This is it just one page. And
11 there's -- the problem is, having just found this, we don't know how many
12 more there are.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Just check what you said.
14 You say the numbers are ...
15 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, maybe I could assist.
16 But it will be wise to ask the witness to explain this. But what
17 I can see is, for the first issue, the both texts are original coming
18 from the Croatian government, because they produced the document both in
19 Croatian and English. But the English document is referring to the
20 period up to 1st March, and the Croatian document is referring to the
21 period up to 1st May.
22 So the difference is obvious in the numbers in tables, which has
23 to be connected to the period for which the figures are referred.
24 So we could ask the witness maybe to explain this in a
25 statistical sense of problem.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Well, what I see is that we have a table.
2 Mr. Carrier, you -- from what I now see, you were referring to
3 the text above the table; is that right?
4 MR. CARRIER: Yes, Mr. President, I'm referring to --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, you were referring to A and B, but I find
6 A and B is elsewhere on this page as well in the tables. But you were
7 referring to the As and the Bs on top of the table. And you said the
8 numbers are different.
9 Now, it seems to me, Mr. Mikulicic, that not only the numbers are
10 different but that the text is a bit different here and there as well.
11 Is that --
12 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, if I could just point out one thing.
13 Your Honour asked a question yesterday of Mr. Kuzmanovic which he didn't
14 seem to be able to answer, whether or not an April 2000 document could
15 contain statistics for May 2000. The Prosecution's position is that it
16 couldn't or wouldn't make sense that a document that's dated in April has
17 May 2000 statistics in it. And that last column in the chart indicates
18 the dates of -- from May 1st, 2000
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President.
21 JUDGE ORIE: It's really a puzzle.
22 MR. MISETIC: I think I have figured out.
23 JUDGE ORIE: I think what happened in the text above the table is
24 that A and B were changed --
25 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, I think we're look looking at the
1 wrong page in the B/C/S and that there's been a wrong association of what
2 the B/C/S is in compared to the English.
3 So if we could turn to page 32 in the B/C/S at the bottom you
4 will see that the English translation is accurate, and it is accurately
5 reflected. It's just that Mr. Carrier cited the wrong pages. At least
6 that's what it looks like to me. The bottom of page 32, so it's
7 3D001273, going on to 1274, appears to be a chart that matches the
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, it seems that the numbers you just said
10 were improperly translated actually do appear at the top of the page --
11 at the bottom of the page Mr. Misetic asked us to look at.
12 And if we could move to the next page in the original, then we'll
13 see whether a similar table appears.
14 Could we look at this table.
15 It looks, Mr. Carrier, as if we now found the page where we see
16 the same text and the same numbers.
17 Have you found that?
18 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, I just need one moment.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, would you agree that where you drew our
20 attention to missing portions of a translation, that if would you take
21 these two parts together, that it seems to be a complete translation?
22 MR. CARRIER: That part, yes.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Then please take us to a part which is not
24 translated or not fully translated.
25 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, sorry, there's -- I might need a
1 moment just to check this. I apologise. I know it's -- it's slowing
2 things down.
3 JUDGE ORIE: You certainly were.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, the Chamber suggests that we first have
6 a break of -- until quarter to 4.00. That the Chamber will be provided
7 with hard copies of this document. And it's primarily this document
8 which is bothering you?
9 MR. CARRIER: That, and obviously this -- the database has been
10 used to -- apparently produce numbers, et cetera.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Well, whatever material, if would you please
12 tell exactly what documents you have problems with, page numbers, where
13 it is uploaded in e-court, so that the Chamber will have hard copies, so
14 that we can avoid that we are losing view on the total because we're now
15 depending on Mr. Misetic that -- well, I was inclined to say there is
16 nothing wrong with that; there is something wrong with that. Not because
17 of Mr. Misetic, but because the Chamber itself should be in a position to
18 check these kind of things.
19 So we would like to have hard copies of the three uploaded
20 documents: two in English, one in B/C/S.
21 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I'll let -- go ahead
22 and finish, and I'll address --
23 JUDGE ORIE: And then, if there's other document, please inform
24 the Registrar so that we have hard copies of those available as well. So
25 that we can work on it. Because now I'm manipulating my screen, which
1 goes well, but I am losing oversight.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, with respect to the database,
3 Mr. Waespi informed me yesterday that the database has been located, and
4 it will be given to us in terms of a disclosure. So I know the database
5 is there, in possession of the OTP.
6 The other issue I wanted to raise is: We haven't yet gotten a
7 response as to the contact the OTP had, other than the materials that
8 we -- Mr. Pejkovic provided us with the witness for a previous case, and
9 we requested a disclosure of that information.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Before I give you an opportunity to answer, let's --
11 Mr. Misetic, is back in his seat again.
12 MR. MISETIC: It's an unrelated matter I wanted to raise.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Unrelated. Let's first try to see whether we can
14 resolve the matter which is before us.
15 Mr. Carrier, half an hour, would that do for identifying any
16 further translation issues you may have and also to prepare a -- to
17 consult with Mr. Waespi about -- I don't know if Mr. Waespi is -- no, he
18 is not there. To consult with Mr. Waespi as far as the databases are
19 concerned. And, finally, to formulate a brief response to the earlier
20 contacts you would have had with the witness.
21 MR. CARRIER: Yes, that's fine.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll have a break, and we will resume at ten
23 minutes to 4.00.
24 --- Recess taken at 3.19 p.m.
25 --- On resuming at 3.56 p.m.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, there were three issues.
2 The first, portions of D420 missing in translation.
3 MR. CARRIER: Yes. Thank you, Mr. President.
4 If -- the first point, I know Mr. Misetic found a part of the
5 document before. And just to explain the situation, that was what was
6 added in a translation yesterday without notifying us that -- that that's
7 where parts of the report were coming from. And just to be clear, that
8 was what we objected to. We filed an objection to the statement on
9 Friday. And the report -- the updated translation was put in without
10 telling us, Oh, by the way the -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But since yesterday you knew, and since
12 yesterday we thought that you would seek what -- how you could resolve
13 these matters. But, yes, okay. That's clear.
14 MR. CARRIER: And so if you start looking at -- if you pull up
15 the English version --
16 JUDGE ORIE: English version of --
17 MR. CARRIER: -- of D420 and go to page 3D060109; and that's
18 section 3.3. And in Croatian, 3.3 starts on page 3D001252.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes.
20 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, if you could just -- Mr. Registrar, if you
21 could just align the 3.3 part.
22 And if we begin counting the paragraphs and we just turn the
23 page -- I mean, again, I think the problem is that this isn't a
24 translation, it's just an English version and a Croatian version. But if
25 you count the paragraphs, the first few seem to line up, for the first
1 six, any way, until, I think, it gets down to --
2 If you could turn the page in English and the B/C/S, please.
3 Right. You can see there's no 3.4 there. I think data on return
4 might just be -- I don't know if that's above number 3, which is in
5 Croatian "adresa povratka."
6 And then it goes into 3.4. If you keep going through the
7 section, you can see these don't line up. And so obviously not speaking
8 or reading Croatian, it's hard to tell where these are coming from. So
9 if you keep moving --
10 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, let's take it one by one. 3.3,
11 Mr. Carrier tell us that in the beginning it looks more or less the same;
12 and then, at a certain moment, he says it becomes pretty different.
13 I see, in the original Croatian, I see a paragraph with four
14 bullet points. At least I see no bullet points in the English version,
15 do I? Or is that contained anywhere in the ...
16 MR. MIKULICIC: Your Honour, during the break, I had a contact
17 with Office of the Prosecutor with Mr. JJ du Toit. And obviously in
18 Croatian version of the document which was uploaded into the e-court --
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
20 MR. MIKULICIC: -- by unknown mistake, the pages 8 and 9 of the
21 Croatian version of the document hasn't been uploaded. But the pages
22 8 and 9 in English version of the document has been uploaded.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. MIKULICIC: That is to say, that the -- the both versions
25 were original, English and Croatian. And the English version, which was
1 obviously used by the Office of the Prosecution, has been uploaded in his
3 So what we can do is upload, again, the Croatian version. But,
4 Your Honour, frankly, I don't see what caused the problem for the
5 Prosecution using English version of the document, which is also original
6 as the Croatian version. What would be -- cause the problem in that
7 matter? I really cannot understand.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Well, Mr. Mikulicic, let me first be very candid
9 with you. I mean, giving two different versions; and I do not see what
10 the problem is. The first problem is that it confuses the Prosecution.
11 If you just say, Just read your English and that's good enough for you.
12 That was, of course, not the approach I would easily accept.
13 Mr. Carrier, where we have already some problems here with the
14 document covering different time-frames. And then to say, Well, why
15 would you bother; the two pages are missing in the Croatian [sic];
16 what -- it's none of your business.
17 Well, I'm a bit too strong now, but that's, of course, not fair
18 to Mr. Carrier. Mr. Carrier has to convince himself, especially in the
19 circumstances as we're now in, that he has to compare the documents. We
20 even invited him to do so. We say if portions are not translated, please
21 point where they're missing. So this is a sloppy uploading.
22 But it seems, Mr. Carrier, that the page numbering in the English
23 is -- it seems in full sequence, whereas clearly in the Croatian version
24 we jump from page 7 to page 10. So it is at least ...
25 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
1 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour, I have no problem with that,
2 That -- the fact that there are a couple pages missing. It would have
3 been a simple e-mail saying, Look, it looks like there's two pages
4 missing; can you please find them and upload them; that's the source of
5 our confusion.
6 I mean, we -- it has taken 24 hours or more than that to figure
7 this out? I mean --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic, if you don't speak that other
9 language, and if you have to find your way through it, and then to say
10 that these really minor page numbering at the bottom, that that should
11 immediately be the clue to resolution of the problem, let's -- the work
12 done by the Defence was sloppy, and Mr. Carrier is entitled to make these
13 observations and should now not be blamed for --
14 It would have been better, perhaps, to contact, Mr. Carrier, let
15 me --
16 But to -- that you blame him for that, if the Chamber would do
17 that it would be different. But here, clearly mistakes are made, and
18 this is not the first mistake in this respect. But let's not -- let's
19 stop talking about who is to be blamed for what or who should have done
20 this or that; let's see how we can resolve the matter, because that is
21 what is on my mind.
22 Mr. Carrier, it looks as if you have had a full English version.
23 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, I'm not confident that that's the case
24 given -- this is not a translation; it's just an English version that was
25 created. By who, I don't know. But it isn't that the Croatian version
1 has been translated. It's two independent documents, and that's the
2 issue. I don't -- we've gone through this a number of times. I don't
3 want to rehash it. And I understand Your Honour doesn't want me to
4 rehash it. But not knowing exactly what's said or whether the
5 information is properly translated is a problem, particularly in light of
6 the fact that not only is this witness heavily relying on this document,
7 he is heavily relying on a document that was uploaded as of yesterday --
8 or the English version yesterday without informing us.
9 So in terms of a simple e-mail to the other side, that would have
10 been expected. And it's just that it puts us in a position where now I
11 feel, unfortunately, as though the Prosecution is being partially blamed
12 for something which isn't really our fault.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, I think I gave you already such support
14 that to seek even more seems to be a bit over-asking.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, any other matters in relation to this?
17 MR. CARRIER: No, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Then I think there were two other matters. The
19 first was - let me just try to remember. Your contacts with the witness
21 No, the second one was the databases. I asked you to consult
22 about the database, whether ...
23 MR. CARRIER: Well, as I said before, we actually had disclosed
24 these already to the Defence. We told them that yesterday; they're in
25 their lockers. It has been given to them. I'm hearing noises.
1 The -- I have looked at it, other than to say it's a huge volume
2 of tables. If you open one there is about -- maybe 20 different tables
3 contained in that. I don't know exactly what it means. But if you open
4 one, it will have a sheet with 20.000 entries with various things on it,
5 numbers, I don't know what they mean. I've looked at it. I don't -- I
6 wouldn't know how to extract data from it.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And if you would now how to do it, would do
8 you it?
9 MR. CARRIER: Not as -- not as something that's fun to do, but.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 MR. CARRIER: If it were -- if it were you could determine
12 certain numbers to double-check the numbers being in the statement or
13 being produced in Exhibit D420, for example. I just don't -- I don't
14 know how to do that. Whether can you say, Well, can you say Serbs that
15 left the Krajina as of August 15th, as of August 10th; I don't know if
16 you can do that. If I could do that, I would definitely, obviously, do
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yeah. Third issue we left you with before the break
19 was the contacts with the -- between OTP and this witness.
20 MR. CARRIER: Yes, I looked at the letters that were provided by
21 Mr. Kuzmanovic. There's nothing that we have to disclose pursuant to
22 Rule 66 or Rule 68. I think there were administrative contacts with
23 Mr. Pejkovic when he was the head of -- of the ODPR, but there is
24 certainly -- there's no -- we have no information that he was ever
25 canvassed about being a witness in any case in the Tribunal. I don't
1 know anything about that. We've had conversations with Mr. Osorio,
2 which, initially, I know, there was -- first it was -- he was asked by
3 tele -- or in a letter, then it was by telephone, then, I think, during
4 yesterday's testimony it was that he had a conversation with Mr. Osorio
5 in front of somebody else.
6 Mr. Osorio -- Mr. Osorio said that he doesn't have any
7 recollection of that, and that his practice would have been, if he was
8 going ask someone to be a witness, to put it in writing.
9 The only thing he could think of, Your Honour, was that, in the
10 context of conversations with all sorts of people, when you're obtaining,
11 like, this database was one of the things, I think, that was obtained,
12 the person might ask, it -- Is it possible I'll be a witness? to which he
13 might -- he said he might respond, It's possible.
14 JUDGE ORIE: So to say that your information is that if it had
15 been discussed, then it would have been in such a general way and not
16 focussed concretely on this witness to be called by the Prosecution.
17 MR. CARRIER: Yes, that's right.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
19 Mr. Kuzmanovic.
20 MR. KUZMANOVIC: Your Honour. I just went to get a few things
22 The English version of this particular document, D420, is an
23 official Croatian document which was already in English. So it was a
24 document that did not need to be translated -- that document.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Well, if the English is a translation of the
1 original. If it is not, then it should have been translated.
2 MR. KUZMANOVIC: There are two versions: The government produced
3 a Croatian version, and they produced an English version. We didn't do
4 anything to translate either of these documents, neither did CLSS. They
5 were both uploaded into e-court.
6 Yesterday, I informed, on the record at page 25.005, line 23,
7 that I was informed that the document has been translated, and it's going
8 to be uploaded into e-court. And we did that. So there was no notice
9 issue with respect to the uploading of the additional pages of the
11 Third, D420 has been in evidence for a year and a half and never
12 before today has there been an issue or problem raised by the Prosecution
13 with that document.
14 Fifth [sic], no one has informed us either by mail or orally that
15 there's something waiting for us in our locker with respect to this
16 database. We dont have a mail -- usually we get an e-mail advising us
17 that the whole -- that disclosure is in the -- waiting for us in our
18 locker and a spreadsheet will be e-mailed to us. We don't have that as
19 of right now. So with respect to the database, we don't have it, and we
20 don't known when it's coming.
21 And we can, perhaps, ask the witness how the database works, and
22 see if he's the one who produced it. And the witness can probably also
23 be asked about the issue surrounding his potential testimony as a
24 witness. I think he has been already been asked that, but I just wanted
25 to make the record clear.
1 We apologise that there were two pages missing in the Croatian
2 version. However, the witness does not rely on two pages. Those two
3 pages deal with the Danubian region, which is Sector East. So,
4 therefore, if there were critical issues in those two pages in Croatian,
5 the pages were available in English.
6 Thank you, Your Honour.
7 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. Mr. Kuzmanovic, I see an interesting --
8 I hear an interesting observation.
9 If Mr. Kuzmanovic receives an English text, you say, Why bother
10 about the Croatian. Now, D420, if we would have focussed exclusively on
11 the English, he could not have noticed that the Croatian was exactly the
12 same. So therefore to say, It's for such a long time in evidence; you
13 have never said anything about it. Whereas, if it suits you, ten minutes
14 before, you say, Why bother about the Croatian; read your English, and
15 that's good enough.
16 Well, of course, I'm exaggerating. I'm using language which is
17 not with the -- I would say not with the subtleties and the elegance I
18 should use. But that's -- at least, it's surprising as far as I can be
20 The database, any written trace of disclosure, Mr. Carrier?
21 MR. CARRIER: Yes, thank you, Mr. President.
22 If Mr. Kuzmanovic checks his e-mail, yesterday at 2.13 there's an
23 e-mail that says:
24 "Furthermore, in regards to Witness Pejkovic's testimony this
25 morning, the OTP has located two databases in the system. They will be
1 disclosed on CD and placed in your respective lockers this afternoon."
2 That was from our Case Manager.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That is disclosure at this moment. And two -
4 I have to ask these days - is it 2.00 a.m. or 2.00 p.m., Mr. Carrier?
5 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, it was 2.00 p.m., 1400.
6 JUDGE ORIE: That comes as a relief to me.
7 [Trial Chamber confers]
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kuzmanovic.
9 MR. KUZMANOVIC: I stand corrected, Your Honour, it was -- e-mail
10 was sent at 2.12 p.m.
11 JUDGE ORIE: 2.12 instead of 2.13.
12 MR. KUZMANOVIC: It says 2.12 on my e-mail, so probably when I
13 opened it.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. The Chamber will consider what this minute
15 will have for consequences. But it's very good that precision is here up
16 till the last second.
17 Mr. Carrier, the Chamber invites you to start your
18 cross-examination on the basis of the English version, as you have seen
20 The Chamber also asks from the Markac Defence to verify, because
21 that seems to be potentially a problem, whether the Croatian and the
22 English version - and not only for the two missing pages, but for the
23 whole of the document - whether the content is, if not absolutely
24 literally the same, whether there's any substantial difference. Because,
25 if there is, it would mean that the Croatian would have to be translated
1 into English, and the English would have to be translated into Croatian.
2 Because if we have two original documents, it means that both are in need
3 of translation, unless we can be sufficiently confident that, apart,
4 perhaps, from half a word here and there, but that there's no difference
5 in substance of the two documents.
6 Mr. Carrier, if, at any later stage, it would turn out that the
7 fact that you had seen the English version and that you were unable to
8 sufficiently compare, and if there would be any substantial differences,
9 you'll get a remedy from the Chamber so as to -- whether that would be to
10 recall the witness, or whatever remedy. But we would certainly entertain
11 any request to be compensated for what you may have lost. The Chamber
12 doesn't know whether you lost anything.
13 Please proceed.
14 MR. CARRIER: Thank you, Mr. President.
15 Cross-examination by Mr. Carrier:
16 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, just going to your statement quickly here, you left
17 the government in September 2005; is that right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And today when you looked at D429 --
20 MR. CARRIER: If we can just bring D429 up on the screen.
21 Q. While that's coming up --
22 MR. CARRIER: And if you can just -- if you can blow that up and
23 perhaps look at the top right-hand corner.
24 Q. Now, during your testimony today, Mr. Pejkovic, you said at
25 page 12, line 23: "I authored this document."
1 Now, this document is dated December 2nd, 2006, when you didn't
2 work for the government. There's an official government stamp on it.
3 Can you please explain how it is that you authored this one?
4 A. I stated that I was the author of this document, which I am,
5 because it was drafted according to my instructions, this programme that
6 generates this sort of report. The report was noted as this. And once
7 you bring it up, it gives you the date from the database. So one day you
8 can have one set of data in it and another date you can have another set
9 of data. I didn't say that I generated this report, but I did produce
11 Q. Well, what you actually said was: "I authored this table."
12 But what you mean is, I didn't author this table. But you're
13 familiar with what this is. So if you could be more specific, because
14 saying you've authored it, when you actually haven't produced this, you
15 understand the concern.
16 A. I'm the author of the programme which makes such tables.
17 Q. While we're on this topic, the words in your statement that you
18 gave to the Defence, are those all in your own words?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You haven't collaborated with anybody in producing your evidence
21 that you said there, or anything like that?
22 A. That was the compilation of the all the materials which I
23 produced during my work in the office from 1991 until 2005.
24 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, did you take over your position as the assistant
25 minister for development and reconstruction from Mr. Sterc in 1999?
1 A. In 1999, in June of that year, the office was abolished, and it
2 was joined to this minister, as you said. And I had, from previously,
3 been the assistant minister in that ministry; I did not take the position
4 of Mr. Sterc, but I remained in the post that I had held previously.
5 Q. Did you work with -- you worked with Mr. Sterc, though, right?
6 A. I had been working with Mr. Sterc since 1995.
7 Q. Okay. And just to make this go a little faster. If you can
8 answer my question directly. I just wanted to know if you did, not when
9 or anything like that. So just to make things go a little bit quicker,
10 just -- if you can answer directly.
11 Have you spoken with Mr. Sterc or anybody else about anything to
12 do with his evidence before this Tribunal?
13 A. No.
14 Q. And you've never read this statement that Mr. Sterc gave that was
15 submitted to the Tribunal?
16 A. No.
17 MR. CARRIER: Mr. Registrar, if I could ask that you call onto
18 the screen Exhibit D1607.
19 This is the witness statement from Mr. Sterc. And if we can just
20 stay with the English translations. And if I can put, next to that, on
21 the other screen --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
23 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Mr. President. I'm just looking at the
24 Prosecutor's exhibit list, and it's not -- I don't see D1607 on that
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier.
2 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, if is not on there, I apologise. It
3 was just an oversight.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe, having heard the explanation or at least
5 an answer to your question, what -- you're still on your feet.
6 MR. KEHOE: No, no. I'm just -- actually, I'm scrolling down,
7 Mr. President, to see if I can see it described or misnumbered in some
8 fashion, but I didn't see it. But, I understand.
9 JUDGE ORIE: If you listen to -- yes, Mr. Carrier leaves it open
10 that it has been a mistake.
11 MR. CARRIER: I apologise. It doesn't seem to be on there.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I didn't see any application for the Chamber
13 to stop you, so, therefore, proceed, Mr. Carrier.
14 MR. CARRIER: Thank you, I appreciate it, Mr. President.
15 And if we could have Mr. Pejkovic's statement on the screen,
16 which is D1825. And if we go to page 5 in Mr. Pejkovic's statement,
17 which is -- for people following along in the B/C/S, it's page 5 as well.
18 And in Mr. Sterc's statement, if we could go to paragraph 14 in the
19 English, which is on page 9, which is page 8 in the B/C/S.
20 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, I just want to highlight a part of your statement,
21 which starts at the bottom of paragraph 14, and then goes on to
22 paragraph 15. And I want to compare that to paragraph 14 of Mr. Sterc's
23 statement. And then I will ask you a question.
24 At the bottom of paragraph 14, in respect of the
25 Programme for Return and care of expelled person, refugees, and displaced
1 persons which is, I believe, D428. This is what you said:
2 "The most important document" -- that this was "the most
3 important document of the Working Group."
4 And if we look at paragraph 14 of Mr. Sterc's statement. He
6 "This programme was the most important document of the
7 Working Group."
8 And into part -- paragraph 15 of yours, you mention that:
9 "The Assembly of the Republic of Croatia
10 votes of abstention or votes against."
11 And then a bit further on, you say:
12 "The UN Security Council came out in favour of the programme as
14 And if we compare that to Mr. Sterc, in paragraph 14, he says:
15 "The Croatian parliament accepted the same unanimously with no
16 votes against or undecided."
17 And he goes on to say:
18 "The programme was reviewed positively by practically everybody
19 and even by the UN Security Council."
20 And down a bit further in your paragraph 15, Mr. Pejkovic, you
22 "The repatriation programme covered practically all aspects of
23 the repatriation process actions to be undertaken by all subjects
24 involved in the return, the authority of all institutions, the duties of
25 all parties, the repatriation and reconstruction, financing methods, the
1 time-limits, the priorities, the return of property, the care for all who
2 could not return to other states, et cetera, and the setting up of a
3 commission for its execution."
4 And then, at the end of paragraph 15, you said:
5 "The programme continues being implemented to this day, with
6 minority changes."
7 And if you look at paragraph 14 of Mr. Sterc's statement, he
9 "The programme was implemented until today with some minority
10 changes. The programme defined nearly all segments of return and
11 reconstruction" -- sorry, "of return, the competency of the institutions,
12 obligations on all sides, financing of the return and reconstruction,
13 deadlines, priorities, return of property, accommodation for all those
14 who cannot return to other countries, et cetera, and the establishment of
15 the commission for its implementation."
16 And I'm told that, actually, the -- some of the words or
17 sentences are actually identical in the middle of paragraph 14 to what
18 you have.
19 And, Mr. Pejkovic, I'm just wondering if you're suggesting that
20 the wording in the order of presentation in this part of the statement we
21 just looked at from yours and Mr. Sterc, are you saying that's just a
23 A. It means that we relied on the same documents when we used the
24 option of copy and paste. When I compare the two texts, both statements
25 represent a compilation of the documents we have been discussing today.
1 That is to say, the 1995 report, the 2005 report, and the programme of
2 return itself that was adopted by the Croatian parliament and published
3 as such in the Official Gazette on the 7th of July, 1998.
4 Q. Well, I did ask you if you -- your statements were in your own
5 words, and you said yes. So are you saying now that you were cutting and
6 pasting out of different documents to put together a statement and so
7 you're not actually using your own words. Is that what you're telling us
9 A. I formulated my document, relying on the existing documents. And
10 that is the method I used to provide my statement.
11 Q. Well, I'm not sure I actually understand what that means. Does
12 that mean that your statement is simply just a compilation of different
13 pieces of different documents. It's not really a statement; it's just a
14 cut-and-paste job from a bunch of, I'm presuming, Croatian documents?
15 A. I don't quite understand why you believe it not to be my
16 statement. This is my statement. However, the way I went about it may
17 be a different matter.
18 Q. So did you just -- you typed something up or cut and pasted
19 something and handed it over to the Defence and said, Here's my
20 statement, or were you interviewed?
21 A. I first drafted a more extensive body of text or material that we
22 used subsequently to draft the statement, which I signed in front of one
23 of the attorneys of the Defence team of General Markac.
24 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, yesterday you were asked some questions about the
25 methodology employed to produce some of the numbers that you're relying
1 on in your statement. When you were asked specifically about
2 methodology, I think you said data processing from database.
3 Can you explain the exact name of the statistical programme that
4 you were running to produce the numbers, and also give us a sense of the
5 degree or margin of error calculated for the numbers being produced by
6 your system?
7 A. We used a Unix engine with an installed recital base. Data was
8 entered and then processed by the programme itself.
9 So, since you're asking me about the statistical margin of error,
10 I'll tell you this: If you have a -- your current account in the bank,
11 you are aware that at any given time the programme can produce a piece of
12 information which not necessarily -- which does not necessarily reflect
13 the data in the database. The results shown here are based on the
14 information from the database. Therefore, I believe them to be
15 100 per cent correct. The only error may be in the software itself, in
16 the programme. But, with time, if one corrects such glitches, then a
17 programme of that kind always produces the same result.
18 Q. Now, you're talking about controlling or adjusting for glitches
19 in the programme. I'm asking for other potential pieces of error. So I
20 will be specific: human error; so, data input, degree of incomplete forms
21 filled in, degree of error from duplicated input, degree of error for
22 incomplete key stroke. You -- did you account for all that, and can you
23 give us the specific numbers on how you calculated that degree of error?
24 A. By profession, I'm an IT specialist. I was in charge of data
25 processing for a large bank. In this process, I used the best of my
1 knowledge and abilities to organise data processing along the same lines
2 by the governmental office for IDPs and refugees.
3 For any access to the database, files were kept to see what
4 terminal was used to enter the database, who did it, under what
5 authority, and what field that person checked, updated, edited or deleted
6 within the database.
7 In the process of data entry, of course, there may be data which
8 is either incorrectly recorded in the field or incorrectly entered in the
9 field; and, as such, through the process of data processing, such pieces
10 of information are detected; and, as such, cannot be entered into the
11 database until such time that they are corrected. It is only, as such,
12 that they can be entered into the database.
13 In other words, the database contents are 100 per cent correct
14 and reflect the situation in the documents. The results of the database
15 can be searched according to certain predetermined algorithms, when, for
16 example, we order a selection of all syllables in the names of all
17 returnees who returned to the area of the Sibenik Knin county, until,
18 say, the 1st of May, 2005.
19 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
20 A. -- such result would say be --
21 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... getting -- that part's too
22 complicated. That wasn't part of my --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, you interrupted at a moment when the
24 witness's words had not been finished and not been translated yet.
25 MR. CARRIER: I apologise. I was just trying to stop. It was
1 going into information that wasn't responsive to the question.
2 MR. MIKULICIC: But they are, Your Honour, by all means. I mean,
3 it is our position that one could not ask a questions and not to allow
4 the witness do answer that questions, whatever the answer could be
5 complicated or not.
6 JUDGE ORIE: The question was how the witness calculated the
7 degree of errors.
8 You may finish your answer. At the same time, could you please
9 focus on detection of errors, rather than to describing the whole system.
10 Please proceed.
11 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, in the data presented,
12 there is no error. All errors must be detected and corrected before the
13 data enters the database.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier.
15 MR. CARRIER: Thank you.
16 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, in your statement you indicated that 8.000 Serbs
17 had left during Operation Flash. Could you just confirm that you're
18 talking about the operation that happened, beginning of May 1995?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. You also state that during Operation Storm, 120.000 Serbs left
22 MR. CARRIER: If could I have Exhibit P644 on the screen, please.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps meanwhile, I can ask one additional
24 question to you, Mr. Pejkovic.
25 We're talking about the database. On from what moment you
1 consider that the database, as you just described as being infallible,
2 more or less, was functioning? I mean, from what date you consider that
3 you were working with a database which would detect all errors?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The database which made it
5 impossible for errors to be entered because there is correlation and
6 cross-reference between the pieces of information, because the software
7 would not allow erroneous pieces of information, the database, as such,
8 operated from 1995.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm asking you this because you say, Well,
10 whatever mistake there was, the database would detect that.
11 Now, I do understand that if you try to give some input so as to
12 say that a person is both a man and a woman, then, of course, the system
13 would immediately detect that. But we saw yesterday, we saw figures
14 where you told us that they had to be corrected by one third, I remember,
15 over 100.000, because the situation on the ground did not match with the
16 figures that were -- were in the database at that time.
17 Therefore, when you say that errors would be detected, that would
18 be certain kind of errors that would be detected by the system.
19 Would you agree with that?
20 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. There were
21 errors before 1995. As I have tried to explain yesterday, that was the
22 reason why we created new lists which partially were there because of the
23 errors made back in 1992 and 1993, as well as 1994.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yesterday you said that these errors could not
25 any further occur since 1997 because then you had the system with the
1 individual documents. But do I have to understand your answer now that,
2 already from 1995, no such errors could be made anymore in this system?
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Carrier.
5 MR. CARRIER:
6 Q. Looking at this exhibit, P644, which is a report dated
7 18 October 1995
8 MR. CARRIER: And if we can turn to paragraph 8 and 9 in the
9 English, which should be on page -- starting on page 3 in the English, I
10 think. And turn to the same in B/C/S.
11 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, here the UN is reporting that --
12 MR. MIKULICIC: I'm sorry to interrupt, but the Croatian version
13 on the right hand of the screen is not -- it's not matching with the
14 English one.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Now it is. At least for paragraph 8.
16 I don't know what part you wanted to quote from the original,
17 Mr. Carrier.
18 MR. CARRIER: Thank you.
19 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for counsel.
20 MR. CARRIER:
21 Q. The UN is reporting that 12.000 Serbs left Croatia, as a result
22 of Operation Flash.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, could you always tell us where to find
24 it on a page, because we try to follow you. Where do we say? Which
25 paragraph are we in?
1 MR. CARRIER: I apologise. It's paragraph 8, and it says in the
2 beginning, and I'll just read:
3 "On May 1st, 1995
4 offensive in the area of Western Slavonia known as Sector West."
5 And then turning to the next -- the next page.
6 Q. And, Mr. Pejkovic, you indicated that this is -- what you said
7 was Operation Flash. And if you look at paragraph 9, it gives a number
8 of figures, and it's saying that roughly - if you look at the different
9 figures - that roughly 12.000 Serbs left Croatia as a result of that
11 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Kehoe.
12 MR. KEHOE: Excuse me, Mr. President. If I just be a little bit
13 more precise. It says 10.000 civilians and military personnel in the
14 first line. So I -- I don't know if we're talking about people or --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier said that the UN was reporting that
16 12.000 Serbs left Croatia
17 MR. KEHOE: Yes.
18 JUDGE ORIE: He apparently, although it was -- he didn't make it
19 easy for us to follow him because he was quoting from not the page which
20 was on the screen, but we now finally found that page. He did not make
21 any distinction between civilian or military. He just said Serbs. And
22 that's -- that is still to be seen whether we find that in paragraph 9.
23 MR. KEHOE: That's in beginning of paragraph 9, that's right.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Well, does it say Serbs there? It says over --
25 Mr. Carrier, if would you please introduce these matters in an
1 organised way, that is, step by step, that is, not to say slowly, but to
2 say, Let's look at this report, where the UN describes so and so and so;
3 in paragraph 9 we find the numbers.
4 I do not see anything, but it could be the context of paragraph 8
5 that these are Serbs. It doesn't say so. And then a further 2.000
6 Croatian Serbs decided to leave in the following weeks. That makes
7 approximately 12.000. Serbs. Just that.
8 Yes, please proceed.
9 MR. CARRIER: Thank you.
10 Q. So, just looking at those numbers, if we can now turn to -- and
11 just keep those in mind, Mr. Pejkovic. If we could turn to paragraph 13,
12 which says that in the early hours of 4 August 1995 the Croatian Army
13 launched a major military offensive against the Krajina region in the
14 course of the -- and then turning the page in English. The following
15 days it established control of the whole of Sectors North and South.
16 Approximately 200.000 of the Krajina Serb inhabitants, or 95 per cent of
17 the population of the two sectors, fled into Bosnian Serb-held areas in
18 western Bosnia
20 Now, Mr. Pejkovic, I'm just wondering, given your numbers, can
21 you count for the discrepancy between the numbers in your statement and
22 those that were being reported to the United Nations General Assembly in
23 October 1995, specifically the fact that you're indicating that roughly
24 80.000 fewer Serbs fled in the wake of Operation Storm?
25 MR. MIKULICIC: But -- I'm sorry, Your Honour. But could we have
1 a distinction between the previous figures, which refers to 10.000
2 civilian and military personnel? Which part is military personnel, and
3 which part is civilian personnel?
4 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic. Mr. Mikulicic.
5 MR. MIKULICIC: You cannot compare two figures which are not the
7 JUDGE ORIE: We'll then hear from the witness, or you can deal
8 with the matter in re-examination. The UN report doesn't make that
9 distinction, and this witness is certainly able to -- if there's anything
10 wrong in the question, he will certainly identify that. And if not,
11 let's try to -- not to interrupt the flow of evidence too easily.
12 MR. MIKULICIC: I will try to minimise my interruption,
13 Your Honour. But it's not fair to the witness. You have to --
14 JUDGE ORIE: Well --
15 MR. MIKULICIC: [Overlapping speakers] ... we have do tell
16 witness that the comparison is not the same. So my learned colleague
17 could also talk about the Macedonians who left, I don't know, some other
18 portion of Croatia
19 two things which are not the same? I simply cannot understand this.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Well, you can. But let's --
21 Mr. Carrier, you are now aware that -- and please understand that
22 the Chamber, keeping control over these matters, sees the documents now
23 and has to immediately find out, on the one hand side, Mr. Carrier should
24 be able to go on. At the same time, could you be very precise in your
25 question as what to compare. Give the exact sources and the quotes so
1 that we know what we are comparing, Mr. Carrier.
2 You said you referred to the -- I think it was -- let me check.
3 Let's, again, look at your question.
4 You want the witness to compare the number of 12.000 Serbs
5 leaving what area exactly, Mr. Carrier?
6 MR. CARRIER: No, I just -- I pointed out, first, his two -- he
7 gives two numbers in the statement at paragraph 7.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. So if you -- that's an organised way. Then
9 you take him to paragraph 7, you said. He gives, there, numbers being --
10 MR. CARRIER: [Overlapping speakers] ... sorry, Your Honour, I --
11 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... that by heart.
12 MR. CARRIER: Paragraph 7, I mistakenly presumed that -- and I
13 should have just pointed out to the Chamber, but he says 8.000 Serbs left
14 during Operation Flash. And he also says that 120 --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Let me just have a look.
16 MR. CARRIER: -- during Storm. I apologise. I did say in the
17 beginning of the question that in his statement he said that, but I
18 didn't point to the paragraph.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, so we have now ... he gives an estimate of
20 8.000 Serbs leaving Croatia
21 and 120.000 Serbs leaving Croatia
22 civilians, 30.000 members of Serb forces. It says "paramilitary."
23 Now, what would you like the witness to compare this with?
24 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, my question was, and I can read it again:
25 Can you count for the discrepancy between the numbers in his statement,
1 in relation to those two operations, and, in this report, to the
2 United Nations General Assembly in October 1995. And I asked him to
3 specifically consider the fact that he said that roughly 80.000 fewer
4 Serbs fled in the wake of Operation Storm.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
6 MR. CARRIER: So that is what I was asking him to explain, in
7 terms of these numbers.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. And that was during Operation Storm, after the
9 4th of August?
10 MR. CARRIER: Yes.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
12 MR. CARRIER: And just generally in terms of the numbers that he
13 is giving to the UN that I just quoted to him.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
15 Could you explain why the UN says that -- no, it says that
16 200.000 Krajina Serb -- Serbs, 95 per cent of the two sectors with are --
17 which are, at this moment, Mr. Carrier, were Sectors North and South.
18 MR. CARRIER: Yes, north and south.
19 JUDGE ORIE: North and south fled into Bosnian Serb-held areas in
20 western Bosnia
21 So what you would say is the number is far higher as reported by
22 the UN, for Sectors North and South, as it is in the report of this
23 witness, 120.000 during Operation Storm.
24 MR. CARRIER: Statement of the witness, yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ...
1 MR. CARRIER: The numbers.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Could you explain.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, both are estimates:
4 the estimates of the UN and the estimates of the Croatian government, as
5 to the numbers of population that was present in these areas and how many
6 people left the areas. And that is all I can answer to this question.
7 The numbers never corresponded; we never agreed about them. And history
8 has shown that when, later on, one looks at the data that UNHCR was
9 using, that the figures are closer to the estimates that we made than the
10 ones that the UN made at the moment.
11 Q. Thank you. So, Mr. Pejkovic, you were aware that international
12 observers were coming up with different numbers from what you, as members
13 of the Croatian government, were explaining, in terms of the number of
14 Serbs that had left?
15 A. Look, the figures provided by the UN were their estimates. They
16 never conducted a census of the population nor did they have the data
17 relating to the demographic movements. But somebody just said 200.000
18 and that was the number that was used all the time. But it was not
19 supported by anything.
20 Q. The Croatian government wasn't running a census of the number of
21 Serbs that were fleeing at the time of Operation Storm or in the
22 aftermath of Operation Storm, were they?
23 A. No. And it could not run such a census. But it did list all
24 those who had remained. And it ran a census, and the fact is that 10.000
25 people - the elderly, the frail, the weak - remained in the area and
1 immediately they started providing assistance to this population.
2 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, were you ever aware of the fact that senior
3 Croatian authorities or anybody in the government was lying about the
4 number of Serbs that returned after Operation Storm?
5 A. From what I know, I'm not aware that anyone lied. My office
6 published the data on the return. Now, how somebody may have interpreted
7 the data, I cannot answer about that. But I know what we, as the office,
8 reported to the government and the Croatian public.
9 MR. CARRIER: Mr. Registrar, could we please have Exhibit 2589 on
10 the screen, please.
11 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, what you are going to see on the screen is a
12 transcript dated 25 October 1995
13 President Tudjman. Other people that were present included
14 Minister Susak, Minister Jarnjak, Mr. Kostovic; there was other people.
15 MR. CARRIER: And if we could turn to page 15 in the English and
16 17 in the B/C/S.
17 Q. And at the bottom of the page, where you have Mr. Jarnjak
18 speaking -- and just for context - and my friends, I'm sure, will correct
19 me if I'm misstating this - but the topic of discussion or one of the
20 general topics of discussion here is the return of Serbs to Croatia,
21 which goes from basically page 15 and 16.
22 And this is what Mr. Jarnjak said --
23 MR. MISETIC: I'm sorry. If we could get the right page in the
24 B/C/S, please, so that the witness and the Defence can follow.
25 MR. CARRIER: [Overlapping speakers] ... sorry, I said page 17.
1 Sorry, maybe it's --
2 MR. MISETIC: I can see that it's at the bottom of the page now.
3 MR. CARRIER: If it's -- sorry, I -- it may be that the --
4 Minister Jarnjak shows up at the bottom of 15 and 17. Maybe my friend
5 can direct me. It's the words -- it starts:
6 "I will issue a task tomorrow."
7 MR. MISETIC: Yes, it's the last sentence at the bottom of the
8 page in the B/C/S.
9 MR. CARRIER: Is that, sorry, 15 or 17?
10 MR. MISETIC: 17.
11 MR. CARRIER: Thank you.
12 Q. Minister Jarnjak, he says:
13 "I will issue a task tomorrow to see how many have already been
14 returned, one part has" --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, please proceed.
16 MR. CARRIER:
17 Q. "... one part has been returned, and we have returned some of
18 those humanitarian problems. Therefore, I think there are already a
19 couple of hundred who are exactly that family reunion. We will then
20 publish and say yes to such politics, that method of family reunion but
21 individual cases, no mass return."
22 Then Dr. Kostovic relies:
23 "I have lied that a couple of thousand have already arrived, so
24 this has to be do carefully because it might provoke ..."
25 Then he gets cut off.
1 Now you just said there was interpreting. But it's -- you'll
2 agree with me that it's clear that Mr. Kostovic is talking about lying
3 about the number of Serbs that have returned; it's not just an
4 interpretation of numbers.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
6 MR. MIKULICIC: I hate to interrupt, Your Honour. But what is
7 following from that discussion is --
8 JUDGE ORIE: [Overlapping speakers] ... yes, yes, but Mr. -- no,
9 Mr. Mikulicic.
10 MR. MIKULICIC: I mean --
11 JUDGE ORIE: This question can be put to the witness; the witness
12 can read it; And how to interpret it, next line is also -- let's --
13 MR. MIKULICIC: But it has to do -- [Overlapping speakers] ...
14 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Mikulicic, Mr. -- any objection to this question
15 is -- as far as you --
16 MR. MIKULICIC: It's concern of Bosnia, Your Honour, not on
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. --
19 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President, if -- I was going to tell Mr. Kehoe
20 to make the same objection. If Mr. Carrier wants to suggest the context
21 of this is, as is phrased in the question he put, then I think he needs
22 to establish more foundation as to what number this relates to, which
23 group. What the lie relates to, which group.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Let's read the context.
25 Mr. Carrier, I would have to have the previous page again, and I
1 would like the witness to read the whole of the previous page, so as the
2 context to be established by himself.
3 MR. MISETIC: And the subsequent paragraph I think is also --
4 [Overlapping speakers] ...
5 JUDGE ORIE: And we start with what was before that. And we, in
6 English, also, please.
7 MR. CARRIER: In English, I think if you -- if you start reading,
8 perhaps, from page 13, Minister Jarnjak says:
9 "They all phone every day."
10 Your Honour, the lead-up --
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, I'm asking myself whether we have exactly the
12 same ...
13 Could we -- for me, without having the full oversight. It's
14 extremely difficult to know exactly where the witness should start
16 Mr. Carrier, it's clear that context is, in view of the two
17 Defence teams, is very relevant. Without any further comment, could you
18 tell the witness where he should start reading so as to have the full
19 context of what you're asking questions about.
20 MR. CARRIER: Well, sorry, I believe on -- in English, I'm not
21 really sure what they're referring to. In English there is a lead-up
22 starting with Minister Jarnjak where they say:
23 "They all phone every day."
24 And they talk about --
25 JUDGE ORIE: "They all phone..." Who's "they"?
1 MR. CARRIER: Well, then he mentions a name, and it goes on --
2 JUDGE ORIE: No, no I understand. But if I say "they phone," is
3 there any context which explains who "they" are?
4 And we are at which page out of 36 where the phone -- let's me
5 just check.
6 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, Your Honour, what was that?
7 JUDGE ORIE: "They" phoning, is which page out of the --
8 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, I said before. It's at page 13 of 36.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. CARRIER: And then he mentions somebody who is a member of,
11 apparently, the Sabor, a Serb. They start talking about different lists.
12 JUDGE ORIE: One second.
13 MR. CARRIER: Sorry, Your Honour, just for clarity. One from
14 Ambassador Galbraith. I don't think he was the ambassador to Bosnia
15 the time. That's the context that they were considering, in Bosnia
16 were talking about.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, it looks as if we're talking about - and please
18 correct me when I'm wrong. I take it from Kostovic's remarks, the first
19 one's appearing on page 13 that we're talking about. People in Belgrade
20 who request their return.
21 MR. CARRIER: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's now clear.
23 And then --
24 Is that clear to you, Mr. Pejkovic, that people phoning are
25 apparently those who are in Belgrade
1 Could you, then, please read from page -- and the --
2 Could you guide us as far as the B/C/S is concerned? Because,
3 apparently, it's not, at this moment -- yes, could you assist Mr. --
4 Yes, I see that -- could you please read from the bottom of the
5 page which is now on your screen, where the number of 50 appears?
6 Then could we move to the next page.
7 Mr. Pejkovic, if you have finished reading that page, please tell
8 us so that we move to the next one.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I have read this
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please move to the next one.
12 Have you read that?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ... for the parties
15 next time, they're invited to ask the Chamber to ask the witness to read
16 certain portions for purposes of context rather than to -- becoming
18 Please proceed.
19 MR. CARRIER: Thank you. And what I did say, originally, that
20 was -- basically the discussion was return of Serbs to Croatia
21 Q. And you see my question was, in relation to something you had
22 said in your prior testimony, that maybe the numbers were about
23 interpretation. And I'm saying, having read that, you see that it's not
24 just interpretation. Mr. Kostovic says he has actually been lying about
25 the number of Serbs that have returned.
1 Are you able to say -- do you have any comment on that? Or are
2 you aware of any other Serb officials -- or, sorry, Croatian government
3 officials not being honest about the numbers that actually returned?
4 A. I cannot comment on specific persons and what they expressed or
5 said and whether this person was telling the truth or not. I can only
6 comment on a part which we have read.
7 And I said yesterday that we did receive these requests for
8 return from Ambassador Galbraith, as well as from the office in Belgrade
9 and that, as mentioned here, we resolved them through family reunion, so
10 on humanitarian grounds. And there was no return en masse, because, at
11 that moment, no agreement had been signed. Diplomatic ties had not been
12 re-established with Serbia
13 would be possible.
14 Q. In paragraph 11 of your statement, Mr. Pejkovic, you state that
15 up until May 1996 the ODPR had processed 5.895 repatriation requests of
16 those who had fled during Storm and Flash. And you saw what we just
17 read, and you said that had you lists from Ambassador Galbraith as well
18 as the office in Belgrade
19 MR. CARRIER: And if we could please have Exhibit P1102 on the
20 screen, which is a June 1996 report. And the subject is the refugee
21 census in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
22 Q. And in the second paragraph you see -- or in the first
23 paragraph it's about a report that's attached to this document. And
24 there's a view that the picture that is emerging is the very slow return
25 of refugees to the areas in which they join a majority and the non-return
1 of refugees to areas they will constitute a minority is very worrying.
2 MR. CARRIER: And if we turn the page in both the English and the
4 Q. And under the heading of "Return," in the second paragraph,
5 there's a number of -- numbers of people that want to return - I can go
6 through them here. It says that 32.000 Croatian Serbs registered for
7 return to the Human Rights Helsinki Committee in Belgrade, which is an
8 organisation you mentioned yesterday during your testimony. That
9 registration started in August 1995, which is an ongoing process. That
10 the UNHCR - which is said UNHRC here - 20.000 of these applications were
11 forward to the US Embassy in Zagreb
12 could apply some pressure to the Croatian government.
13 Next then in the next paragraph down it says:
14 "Approximately 22.000 Croatian Serbs sheltered in the Federal
15 Republic of Yugoslavia
16 the Croatian bureau in Belgrade
17 Now, comparing these numbers of people applying to return -
18 you've already mentioned you got lists from Ambassador Galbraith,
19 et cetera - can you explain why a relatively small number of return
20 requests had been processed by your office as of May 1996?
21 JUDGE ORIE: The text says: "Resolved."
22 MR. CARRIER: [Overlapping speakers] ... resolved --
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
24 MR. CARRIER: I apologise for that.
25 Q. Can you explain -- first off, can you explain what "resolve"
1 means, and why, relative to the numbers we just went through in this
2 document, why that is a relatively small number?
3 A. Reading this material, what I stated in my statement is just
4 confirmed; namely, that, on the basis of humanitarian family reunion,
5 reuniting family members, it says here that we resolved the issue of
6 8.000 persons in this document. And in my statement it says that at
7 around this time we received applications from about 30.000 persons, that
8 around 16.000 persons were interested in return, and around 14.000
9 persons had stated certain political conditions. That is to say, concern
10 conditions in connection with their property. Of the 16.000 who
11 expressed their wish to return, not all fell within this category whose
12 situation would be resolved, on the basis of humanitarian family reunion.
13 Q. I think that you basically recited paragraph 9 in answer to that.
14 But can you explain what you mean by "resolve"? And do you have a number
15 of -- for those cases that you resolved, how many of those people
16 actually returned? And to be specific, we're focussing on paragraph 11.
17 A. The word "resolved" means that on the basis of a request, a
18 paper, an approval was issued, an approval for the return to the
19 Republic of Croatia
20 We could not monitor everyone at the time, whether they, indeed,
21 returned; and, therefore, in our data, we often mentioned, as my report
22 also says, that around 20.000 persons was the estimate of those who were
23 not registered and that these were the Serb returnees.
24 Q. If they weren't registered, how would have you any idea of how
25 many there were? Because your office, the ODPR, was only dealing with
1 people who were registered as a displaced person or a refugee.
2 A. In my report, you can see the data: how many applications were
3 filed, how many were resolved, and how many persons did return. I do not
4 have the report in front of me, so I cannot say off the top of my head
5 anything about the data. But you can show them on the screen, and then I
6 can repeat all that to you.
7 MR. MIKULICIC: If I may assist to my learned colleague, this is
8 a document 420, page 3D001248 in Croatian.
9 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, this might be a good time for a break.
10 I'm ready to move on to the next section.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. At the same time, if the witness wants to
12 consult any of his reports in answering your questions, it would assist
13 if you would give him an opportunity to do so. But it could be done
14 after the break as well.
15 We have a break, and we resume at ten minutes to 6.00.
16 --- Recess taken at 5.30 p.m.
17 --- On resuming at 5.52 p.m.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, please proceed.
19 MR. CARRIER: Thank you. Your Honour, I just wanted to raise an
20 issue before we start.
21 I don't think I will be able to finish today, given the slow
22 process. And I apologise. I estimated two sessions. I don't know if
23 I'll even -- by the of today whether I would have used two sessions, but
24 I don't think I will finish.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Try to do your best, Mr. Carrier. And we will see
1 what happens.
2 By the way, I think that -- well, order in the courtroom is, of
3 course, always required. But intellectual order, in the minds of those
4 who are examining and are objecting, certainly would also assist in
5 gaining time. I mean, if you put a question clearly saying, This is
6 where we start, that -- that -- rather than, et cetera, and moving to --
7 and the same is true for some of the objections. Let's try to keep our
8 mind disciplined. I'll try to do the same and hope that I will manage.
9 Please proceed.
10 MR. CARRIER: Thank you.
11 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, I want you to turn your attention to the topic
12 "Serbs intending to return to Croatia." And in paragraph 8 of your
13 statement you said that:
14 "A mass return of Serbs to Croatia depended on Croatia
15 signing an agreement on the return of refugees."
16 And in paragraph 21 you also state that it was obvious that the
17 situation could only be resolved with a simultaneous return of all
18 persons to their homes in the former Yugoslavia.
19 Can you explain why the mass return of Serbs that had been born
20 and raised in Croatia
21 establishing diplomatic relations with Serbia or the simultaneous return
22 of all refugees?
23 A. The issue of return is both an organisational and political
24 matter that needed to be resolved. It was resolved, indeed, by the
25 signing of a normalisation agreement with the FRY. In its Article 7, it
1 is defined that the right to return exists for all those who wished to
2 return to their hearths as well as that all people are guaranteed their
3 property rights, which will be returned to them.
4 What Croatia
5 those who are refugees in Croatia
7 Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
8 By virtue of signing the agreement and by virtue of the
9 implementation of Article 7 for which there was a commission, and I was a
10 member of that commission, also a protocol on organised return was
11 signed, including the FRY representatives, the UNHCR, as the leading UN
12 agency for refugees, as well as the government of the Republic of
15 It was defined by the protocol what the forms would contain and
16 who they could be filed with in Montenegro
17 could also be forward directly to our diplomatic offices which were later
18 opened in the FRY. As of that moment, the mass return of Serbs to
21 Kosovo who had been expelled. That never took place.
22 MR. CARRIER: Now, Mr. Pejkovic, in paragraph 20 of your
23 statement, you said that despite repeated requests --
24 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, could I ask one clarifying question.
25 You said that return from -- repeated requests you referred to,
1 is that government requests or individual questions for return?
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When I say a request or an
3 application, I have in mind individual cases of persons who wanted to
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. So what you say is that Croats who wanted to
6 return to Serbia
7 return to Serbian territory? Is that what you want to say?
8 Then it's not entirely clear to me. If you could, please, try to
9 explain that in one or two lines, if possible.
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, there were Serbs who
11 fled Croatia
12 FRY, arriving in Croatia
13 ways was supposed to be made possible. Very few Croats ever filed an
14 application or requested that they return to the FRY; that is to say,
16 In relation to those persons, to the small number of persons, I
17 cannot say that they were not allowed to return there, but in any case,
18 they were not facilitated in that process the way we facilitated the
19 return of those who wanted to come back to Croatia.
20 JUDGE ORIE: You said -- you said that never took place --
21 THE WITNESS: Yes.
22 JUDGE ORIE: -- despite repeated requests. You were talking
23 about Croats that had fled Serbia
24 very few Croats ever filed an application or requested that they return
25 to the FRY.
1 So in the first part of your answer, but perhaps I misunderstood
2 you, you said despite many requests, that's not what happened. And then
3 later you said that only very few applications or requests were filed.
4 That sounds to me as the one contradicting the other. But perhaps I
5 misunderstood you.
6 Could you please explain.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I will try to explain.
8 It is one thing to express one's desire to return. It is another
9 thing how you will formally make that wish known and sign to it. There
10 were many verbal expressions of the wish to return, than there were real
11 applications for return.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Your last line is, "there were many verbal
13 expressions of the wish to return." And then there were -- it reads,
14 "real applications for return."
15 Let me just try to understand.
16 Now if I wish to return, if I do not make an application, then
17 there's not much chance, I take it, that I will ever return. Were many
18 applications made, or were people just expressing their wish or their
19 dreams to return but never took any steps in that direction?
20 And I'm now talking about Croats wishing to return to the FRY.
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Exactly as you have explained.
22 There were many more verbal expressions of wish to return than
23 there were applications actually filed.
24 JUDGE ORIE: And any reasons known for this discrepancy between
25 what people apparently were wishing and what they were doing?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The primary reason was the feeling
2 of insecurity upon return. People believed that they were not provided
3 sufficient guarantees of a safe return to Vojvodina and Kosovo, because
4 the Croats who had arrived in Croatia
5 the most part.
6 These fears of theirs were later on confirmed by the developments
7 in the field.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Now, did similar fears exist among Serbs who
9 did finally not apply for return to Croatia?
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Carrier.
12 MR. CARRIER:
13 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, in paragraph 20 of your statement you say that
14 despite repeated requests Croatia
15 government of Yugoslavia
16 to return.
17 I just want to know what your basis is for saying that. Who made
18 these demands for lists and when did those demands start? Can you
19 explain all that? And if can you explain your specific knowledge of
21 A. As I have said a moment ago, I was a member of the commission for
22 the implementation of Article 7 of the agreement on normalisation between
23 the FRY and Croatia
24 the government Office for Displaced Persons and Refugees, I had regular
25 contact with the commissioner for refugees of Serbia and Montenegro
1 At one of the meetings, we agreed that we would exchange data so
2 as to avoid any misinterpretations of the data, as well as any use that
3 could be made by either of the sides on the part of the refugees to use
4 them for their own means. That included cases of people who had already
5 returned to Croatia
6 This, in turn, would mean that, in Croatia, they enjoyed the privileges
7 of an IDP whereas in Serbia
9 Republic of Croatia
10 from Serbia
11 Q. Who made the demands for lists of Serbs that wanted to return?
12 When did that start? That was the question. If you could answer that.
13 A. Could you please tell me again what it is exactly that you want
14 me to tell you? When the return process began and when did we start
15 receiving lists?
16 Q. I'm asking you about what you said in your statement, where you
17 said that you never received a list -- or Croatia never received a list
18 of person who had left Croatia
19 kept on insisting to be given one.
20 So, for the third time, who made the demands for a list; and when
21 did those demands for a list start?
22 A. As of the moment when the commission was founded under Article 7,
23 we started asking for the data, information of those who wished to return
24 to Croatia
25 through NGOs, which were visiting the refugees in Serbia and assisted
1 them in the filling out of the forms that were required for them to
3 One must bear in mind that those refugees were all across Serbia
4 even in some smaller, remote locations. They were supposed to be helped
5 and informed them on the possibilities of return to Croatia. This was,
6 for the most part, done by the UNHCR, and those -- those NGOs which
7 cooperated with the UNHCR.
8 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, I have asked the question three times,
9 and I haven't received an answer.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
11 Mr. Pejkovic, the question was, who asked for such a list, and
12 then you explained that you UNHCR was dealing the matter, et cetera,
13 et cetera. But what Mr. Carrier just wants to know is that in that month
14 of that year, a list was -- a request for a list was sent.
15 Now, you referred to conversations within this committee which
16 was a bit confusing, as a matter of fact, some of your answers in this
18 Could you be -- could you give a clear answer: When did the
19 Croatian government clearly ask to the FRY government, Give us a list of
20 Serbs who fled Croatia
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The Croatian government put such
22 requests in 1997, once the commission for the implementation of the
23 agreement on the normalisation of relations between Croatia
24 was established.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Is this recorded in documents?
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, Your Honour. There are
2 minutes of the meetings of the commission.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Any request outside the meeting of that commission?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I personally raised that issue
5 during at least a dozen meetings after 1997, during which I met with the
6 representatives of the refugee commissioner of Serbia and Montenegro
7 least a dozen times.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. But no diplomatic notes, no -- or other formal
9 requests. So it's ...
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, we have that in the
11 minutes of the meetings.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I'm just exploring whether apart from what
13 happened in the minutes of the meeting and what you have said in
14 meetings, whether there was any other communication about the matter.
15 Apparently there is not, if I understand you well.
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot answer that. I don't know
17 whether someone else from the government raised that issue.
18 JUDGE ORIE: You are unaware of any other avenue by which such
19 requests would have been made.
20 Please proceed, Mr. Carrier.
21 MR. CARRIER: Thank you, Mr. President.
22 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, in paragraph 11 of your statement, you mention that
23 the border police were issued approvals for entry in Croatia of certain
24 persons. And I just wanted to clarify with you. The ODPR didn't control
25 who was allowed or was not allowed to cross the borders into Croatia
1 were they?
2 A. No. The office had certain authority received from the Ministry
3 of the Interior to be able, in co-operation with them, to draft lists of
4 those persons whose citizenship data was confirmed and who were able to
5 enter the Republic of Croatia
6 Q. And again, Mr. Pejkovic, I don't have a lot of time. Just, the
7 answer is no. I'd like --
8 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, the word "control" is not unambiguous.
9 Does it mean who is at the border and say, "Stop" or is it a person who
10 sends a list to the border controls and say, "These people are allowed to
11 come in?"
12 I mean, that's -- would you agree that it could have both
13 meanings, and to say that the witness hasn't answered your question in
14 this respect, what he said is that lists were prepared in which the ODPR
15 played a role on those who could enter Croatian territory, which, I
16 understand to be, a question to your answer at least understood in a
17 certain way.
18 MR. CARRIER: That's fine, Mr. President, I take your point.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
20 MR. CARRIER:
21 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, are you aware that senior Croatian authorities,
22 including President Tudjman and the minister of the interior, Minister
23 Jarnjak, had specific discussions about not allowing Serbs to cross the
24 border back into Croatia
25 Are you aware of that those -- or of that conversation?
1 A. I have no information of such discussions.
2 Q. I won't go through it, but for reference is it's P466, 30
3 August 1995 presidential transcript at page 25.
4 Mr. Pejkovic, do you know whether or not Serbs were in fact
5 prevented from crossing the border back into Croatia in the weeks and
6 months following Operation Storm?
7 A. I don't know if anyone was prevented to enter Croatia. Anyone
8 who had Croatian papers could enter Croatia without any problems.
9 Q. Well, in terms of -- I apologise for the -- perhaps somewhat
10 ambiguous question. But in terms of the papers in crossing back into
12 border after receiving proper clearance papers from the ODPR, which you
13 have already explained was in conjunction with the Ministry of the
15 A. I was never told that those people who had our permits or
16 certificates to return, that such people were prevented from returning to
17 the Republic of Croatia
18 MR. CARRIER: Could we please have Exhibit P604 on the screen,
20 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, this is a letter that was sent to President Tudjman
21 on 2 October 1995
22 Rights, Mr. Jose Lasso. And if we could go to page 2 in both B/C/S and
23 in the English, please, top of the page, that first paragraph. It --
24 Mr. Lasso reports to President Tudjman:
25 "Secondly, I have learned that no legal or administrative
1 procedure has yet been established for allowing the return of Serbian
2 refugees to their homes in the former Sectors North and South. I
3 understand that most of them would qualify for Croatian citizenship and
4 that a considerable number have expressed their wish to return but have
5 not been allowed to enter the country due to a lack of travel documents.
6 In some cases, even individuals holding Croatian citizenship documents,
7 or proper clearance papers issued by the ODPR have been turned back."
8 Now, in the context of your evidence, Mr. Pejkovic, about people
9 being allowed to cross the board with citizenship or on the basis of
10 this -- the documents that you would issue in conjunction with the
11 minister of the interior, can you explain a few things. Like, number
12 one, why these people would be turned back at the border; and also, why
13 you, as the head of the ODPR, had no knowledge of this situation?
14 A. It is visible from your question that those who had papers in
15 order, that they were allowed to return. I was not informed about this.
16 I can just suppose that it was not possible to identify them and that
17 that was the reason why they were not allowed to cross the border.
18 When we talk about proof of Croatian citizenship, the proof
19 itself was not sufficient to cross the state border.
20 Q. You don't actually have direct knowledge of this. Are you
21 speculating? Is that -- you're speculating about the possible reasons
22 but you don't actually know why?
23 A. I just said as an answer when you asked me what I thought about
24 this, but I have no direct knowledge of this.
25 MR. MISETIC: Mr. President.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Misetic.
2 MR. MISETIC: Just to bring to the Court's attention, I believe
3 there's a slight but important translation issue with respect to the
4 phrase "Croatian citizenship documents" in the B/C/S translation of this.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. You said in the -- you mean the --
6 MR. MISETIC: In the documents on the screen.
7 JUDGE ORIE: On the document on the screen because those were the
8 words spoken as well.
9 MR. MISETIC: I can read out the B/C/S, how that has been
10 translated, if that makes it easier for the Court.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, perhaps that good -- again, we're not here to
12 verify translations in a final way. But if we can avoid confusion by
13 reading just one or two words, that may assist.
14 And you're now quoting from the B/C/S, the very last portion of
15 the first paragraph on page 2 of the English original.
16 MR. MISETIC: Yes, the last sentence, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ORIE: The last sentence, yes. Please read it slowly. "In
18 some cases ..." that's where it starts. Yes?
19 MR. MISETIC: Yes. [Interpretation] "In several cases even those
20 who had proof of Croatian citizenship were refused or had proper
21 clearance of the Office of the Displaced Persons, Returnees and
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Which means that whether the word "document"
24 is proper translated is questionable.
25 MR. MISETIC: Yes, I think there is a slight legal distinction
1 when I recognised it in the witness's answer between "had citizenship
2 documents" and "proof of Croatian citizenship."
3 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. That is now on the record.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Carrier.
5 MR. CARRIER:
6 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, the Office for Displaced Persons and Refugees dealt
7 with individuals that had been granted specific status under the relevant
8 legislation. And yesterday you went through some of that. You talked
9 about the terms "displaced person" and "refugee". And those are actually
10 defined terms. Is that right? And you also talked about the
11 entitlements that you would get on the basis of those statuses.
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. And you testified yesterday that the ODPR dealt with
14 organised returns and that you dealt with those who had submitted
15 applications and who were able to return on the basis of such
16 applications. You also mentioned that the ODPR maintained records of all
17 registered displaced persons and refugees, and that's that database we've
18 been talking about.
19 And my question is: A Serb that fled Croatia during
20 Operation Storm who is living in another country that had never
21 registered with the ODPR, they wouldn't form part of their database,
22 would they?
23 A. The database included only the persons who were in the
24 Republic of Croatia
25 return, whether from Croatia
1 records relating to persons who were located outside the
2 Republic of Croatia
3 Q. And in terms of the people inside of the Republic of Croatia
4 wouldn't be everybody because, similarly, those Serbs that had returned
5 spontaneously, so people that -- for instance, Serbs that had returned to
7 with the ODPR, even though they were in Croatia, they wouldn't be part of
8 the database either?
9 A. Yes, that is correct.
10 Q. In paragraph 3 of your statement, you indicated that the entire
11 organisation and form of providing care and repatriation was based on the
12 decree on the status of expelled persons and refugees, and you
13 specifically reference a document, which is from 1993, called the
14 Law on the Status of Displaced Persons and Refugees.
15 MR. CARRIER: And, Mr. Registrar, if we could please have
16 65 ter 7510 on the screen, please.
17 Q. What's coming up on the screen, Mr. Pejkovic, is the document
18 which I just referred to, which is from October 1993.
19 Do you recognise that document? At least the beginning?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. CARRIER: And if we could turn to page 2 in the B/C/S,
23 Q. And looking at the second paragraph from the top in English,
24 Mr. Pejkovic, Article 2, the terms "displaced person," meaning internally
25 displaced inside of Croatia
1 A. Yes.
2 MR. CARRIER: Maybe we need to turn the page in English. I
3 apologise. And it's the second paragraph, in English, from the top.
4 Q. And then the next paragraph down, "refugee" is defined, meaning
5 someone who has fled to a foreign country.
6 And yesterday, Mr. Pejkovic, you also talked about the definition
7 of returnee. But that status isn't defined in this document, is it?
8 A. No.
9 Q. And yesterday you said that - when you were talking about the
10 entitlements and support granted to people on the basis of their status
11 as refugee or a displaced person, supplied by the ODPR - you said that
12 ethnicity did not change the entitlements.
13 And if I could ask you to focus on Article 3. If you read
14 Article 3:
15 "Status of displaced person or refugee shall not be granted to a
16 person who has ascertained by the competent bodies of state authorities,
17 has undertaken, or has prepared criminal acts ..."
18 And it lists some criminal sections.
19 And chapter 18 is listed there, which is criminal acts against
20 service and duties and public responsibilities. And at the end of the
21 paragraph 3 you see:
22 "... subversive and terrorist activities against the state
23 sovereignty and territorial integrity of ... Croatia."
24 Now, looking at Article 3 of this decree, Mr. Pejkovic, would you
25 agree that Article 3 would seem to affect those Serbs living inside the
1 occupied territories in a rather significant way, compared to Croats
2 living in the free part of Croatia
3 the free part of Croatia of Croat ethnicity?
4 A. What is your question?
5 Q. My question is that Article 3 -- I'm asking you whether or not
6 you agree that Article 3, in terms of -- in terms -- as a basis for
7 denying the status or the support of the ODPR, that would have a much
8 larger effect on people inside of the occupied territories; namely, the
10 A. Croatia
11 article could not be applied in that territory.
12 Q. Okay. So you weren't doing anything with the people inside of
13 the occupied territory?
14 A. For us, they were in occupied territory, over which the Croatian
15 government had no control whatsoever.
16 Q. And, Mr. Pejkovic, in paragraphs 13 and 14 of your statement, you
17 talk about an agreement entered into by President Tudjman, and you talk
18 about a Working Group that was formed. And is it fair to say that what
19 you're talking about is something that happened in April 1997 and that
20 related to the Danube
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And that's something you worked on with Mr. Sterc; correct?
23 A. Mr. Sterc was the co-chairman of this Working Group, and I was a
24 member of the Working Group.
25 Q. And, Mr. Pejkovic, is it not true that the status of returnee was
1 not replied -- or, sorry, not applied to Serbs in an unlimited sense,
2 meaning that they had nothing to do with the Danube region, until
3 June 1998 when the Programme for Return and Care of Expelled Persons,
4 Refugees and Displaced Persons came into effect, which is D428?
5 A. The status of returnees was recognised to all Serbs who returned
6 from the region of the Danube
7 THE INTERPRETER: And could the witness please repeat the dates,
8 because the interpreter could not catch that.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Pejkovic, the interpreters could not catch the
10 dates you mentioned. Could you, therefore, perhaps, repeat your answer
11 and slowly indicating the dates.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'm talking about 1997, when the
13 agreement on operational procedures relating to the return to and from
14 the Croatian Danube region was signed and adopted. That was when the
15 two-way return began. The Croatian Danube region was monitored by
16 UNTAES, and the peaceful reintegration process began.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, please proceed.
18 MR. CARRIER: Thank you.
19 Q. Thank you, Mr. Sterc [sic].
20 You testified yesterday that --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Pejkovic would be a better way to address the
22 witness, Mr. Carrier. But please proceed.
23 MR. CARRIER: Thank you. I apologise.
24 Q. Mr. Pejkovic, you testified yesterday that -- that when this
25 programme was passed, which is D248, in 1998, that it related
1 particularly to the return of Serbs to Croatia and concerned the right to
2 return to Croatia
3 equal and have equal rights.
4 Did you mean that there would be a mass return of Serbs
5 allowable? When you say "organised manner," is that what you mean?
6 A. Think that when I mentioned that yesterday, I had on mind the
7 Programme for Return which was adopted in 1998. And that I quoted a
8 segment of this programme that says everyone will be equal and have the
9 status of displaced persons, which does not mean that they had not been
10 equalised in that status even before that. They had been equal from the
11 moment when they started returning from the Croatian Danube region in
12 1997. And that was only reconfirmed in the programme for the return from
13 the year 1998.
14 Q. My question is that the programme that was passed in 1998, was
15 that the first document that allowed for everyone to return, not just in
16 the Danube
17 A. No. It was not the first document, because during the
18 cross-examination we already mentioned the agreement on return which we
19 signed with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. We never mentioned here
20 the protocols and agreements that we signed with Bosnia and Herzegovina
21 in particular, with the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which, at
22 that time, already existed. Then we also had agreements with European
23 countries such as Germany
24 on the return of Croatian citizens, which included not only ethnic Croats
25 but also Serbs. And who, in accordance with these international
1 agreements, returned to the Republic of Croatia
2 This is so broad a topic that if we were to list all the
3 agreements and all the documents that the Croatian government reached,
4 then we would certainly have several pages --
5 JUDGE ORIE: [Previous translation continues] ...
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] -- of the titles of these
7 agreements and protocols ...
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Whether that would take three, five, or ten
9 pages is not that relevant at this moment.
10 Mr. Carrier, please proceed.
11 MR. CARRIER: Thank you.
12 Could we have D428 on the screen.
13 Q. We'll focus on this. This is the programme of return. And in
14 the general provision section -- I'll wait for it to come up on the
16 In part 1, it talks about the inalienable right of return of all
17 citizens of Croatia
18 the programme of return and care of -- it says "exiles" there, which I
19 don't know if that's just a translation error. But is it the programme
20 of return and care of expelled persons, or are exiles and expelled
21 persons the same thing? And perhaps you can explain that, Mr. Pejkovic.
22 A. We have a programme of the return and care of displaced person,
23 refugees, and expelled persons. It should be translated as we translated
24 it in Croatia
1 Q. And in terms of the expellees, is this primarily in regard to the
2 Serbs that had fled Croatia
3 A. No. The word "expellee" was used for Serbs who were displaced
4 within Croatia
5 Q. So, what's a displaced person, as a Serb?
6 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Carrier, we dealt with this in -- rather
7 extensively. I asked for definitions, and I think the conclusion was
8 that expelled persons and displaced persons were those who remained
9 within Croatia
10 That's -- unless there's any specific matter you would like to
11 revisit, but I remember that I put some clear questions and I got some
12 clear answers on that, including that expelled persons and displaced
13 person, were, at least, in the definition, used by this witness, the same
15 MR. CARRIER: I'll change to a different topic for a second.
16 Q. Now, Mr. Pejkovic, this -- this programme was aimed at modifying
17 existing laws. And you can see in the second paragraph of Part 2 -- and
18 that the purpose of doing that was so that all categories to which this
19 programme is related to shall be made equal in the status of returnees.
20 And so is the purpose of this programme that was passed in 1998
21 to give equal status to the refugees that had fled Croatia; namely, the
22 Serb that had fled to Krajina during Storm?
23 I should be clear: One of the purposes.
24 A. Yes. The purpose of the programme was to enable return and give
25 equal rights to everyone, which included the Serbs who had left Croatia
1 In order to make them equal in the status of returnees as it is mentioned
2 here, the government promised that it would modify the existing laws if
3 they contained any discrimination that would not make it possible for
4 this position that everyone should be equal and that it should therefore
5 be removed.
6 Q. And in light of that, this programme was aimed specifically at
7 removing recognised obstacles to return -- faced by people. And that
8 included legal and bureaucratic obstacles. Isn't that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. And not only was the programme aimed at removing obstacles, but
11 it was also demanding that the -- the government of Croatia had to
12 actively support the return of people, which included the Serbs that had
13 left the Krajina, right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And, Mr. Pejkovic, would it be fair to say that the purpose of
16 this programme demonstrates that, at least up until June 1998, almost
17 three years after Operation Storm, there were obstacles in place for the
18 return of Serbs and that they had been put in place, or they were, at
19 least -- there was deficient government support for the return of these
20 people to Croatia
21 A. There were certainly some obstacles up until the adoption of this
22 programme for the return.
23 Q. And to be clear, a number of them are -- are mentioned in this
24 programme. On page 3 in the English, page 2 in the B/C/S, number 8,
25 there's discussion about ending the Law on Temporary Taking Over of
1 Property and the Law on Lease of Property.
2 Is it fair to say that was one of the obstacles that was being
3 removed with this programme?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. CARRIER: And if we turn to page 4 in the English and staying
6 on -- if we could go to page 2 in the B/C/S.
7 Q. At number 10, Mr. Pejkovic, it says that the ODPR:
8 "... shall, in co-operation with the UNHCR, register returnees
9 outside of the Republic of Croatia
10 necessary for planning all relevant factors of return pursuant to the
11 UN General Principles on Return."
12 And, Mr. Pejkovic, my question for you is: In June 1998, was
13 that the first time that the ODPR was told to register returnees outside
14 of Croatia
15 return and family reunion. But can you confirm that this was the first
16 time that you were told to register people outside of Croatia?
17 A. Mr. Prosecutor, your question, in connection to the submission or
18 applications in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, I said that since
19 1997, countless times we requested that. And the government repeated
20 that here in this article, and by adopting this, saying that in
21 co-operation with UNHCR, such a list should be attempt -- an attempt
22 should be made to make this list.
23 As a government office, we were only in charge of who was within
25 Republic of Croatia
1 times - we have said until now - that we always received requests from
2 UNHCR, and we then registered these requests for the return. We have
3 been doing that since 1995 practically, immediately after the conclusion
4 of the Operation Storm.
5 Q. Well, Mr. Pejkovic, I just want you to focus on paragraph 10,
6 where it says that the ODP
7 register returnees outside the Republic of Croatia
8 database. And it goes on, and it says:
9 "Necessary for planning all relevant factors," et cetera.
10 But the plain reading of number 10 suggests that that was the
11 first time you were being told to register people outside of Croatia
12 And the word "create" a database indicates or suggests that you're doing
13 that for the first time, creation. So is that what this -- is this the
14 first time the government ordered that the ODPR register people outside
15 of Croatia
16 A. No.
17 Q. So can you explain why this Article 10 is here? What would be
18 the purpose of telling you, You shall do something, and you shall create
20 A. The Programme of Return is a comprehensive package of everything
21 that had been done before that, but now it was all put under the same
22 roof. The whole package was then termed "Return Programme." It
23 comprises not only this part but also a number of other documents which
24 were attached to it.
25 Q. I'm just looking in paragraph 10 to see if there's anything about
1 a -- the package or comprehensive package or Programme for Return.
2 Because my question was very simple: Was this the first time that you
3 were ordered by the Croatian government to register returnees outside of
5 A. To tell you yet again, no.
6 Q. Can you point to something elsewhere or another document where
7 you were ordered to register returnees outside of the Republic of Croatia
8 and create a database, as outlined here?
9 A. There was the document called the Protocol on Organised Return,
10 concluded with the FRY, dating from 1997. I don't know where it is
11 exactly, but it can be found probably in the same Official Gazette where
12 you could find this.
13 MR. CARRIER: Your Honour, I see the time.
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Carrier. We are about to finish for the
16 I earlier interrupted you when you were asking about the word
17 "expellee" and what a "displaced person" was. I said that we dealt with
18 that yesterday, and I think we did, as a matter of fact. At the same
19 time, the matter may be a bit more complex.
20 Yesterday we established that the word - and forgive my
21 pronunciation - "prognanika" was used -- was translated in English both
22 by expelled persons and displaced persons contrary to "izbjeglica," which
23 were refugees. But now in the document we have before us in this
24 programme, we find a third category which is also translated as
25 "displaced person," and which reads - and, again, I apologise for my
1 pronunciation - "raseljene osobe." That appears -- receives the same
2 translation as one of the two translations for "prognanika."
3 So, therefore, if the parties could, at any time - not
4 necessarily now because it's 7.00 - tell us, or perhaps we could ask the
5 witness to tell us what this third category in Croatian, under a
6 different name but in English under the same name, that is, "displaced
7 persons" would be. That would certainly assist the Chamber.
8 You further, Mr. Carrier, you were concerned about the word
9 "exiles." I noticed that the same word, which we find in the title of
10 the programme, we find in paragraph 2 exactly the same word, where,
11 apparently, expelled persons and exiles are two translations for the same
12 word, "prognanika," which means that we now have three translations for
13 that -- for that same term.
14 Could you give us any indication, Mr. Carrier, about how much
15 time would you still need tomorrow?
16 MR. CARRIER: I need one hour, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE ORIE: One hour. Which makes any expectation as to whether
18 we could finish with the next witness by Wednesday totally an illusion.
19 Mr. Pejkovic, I give you the same instructions as I did
20 yesterday, that is, that you should not speak with anyone about your
21 testimony, whether already given or whether still to be given. We'd like
22 to see you back tomorrow morning at 9.00, although in a different
23 courtroom, because we adjourn.
24 And we will resume tomorrow, Wednesday, the 25th of November, in
25 courtroom -- 9.00, Courtroom II.
1 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.02 p.m.
2 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 25th day of
3 November, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.