1 Friday, 4 February 2005
2 [Open session]
3 --- Upon commencing at 9.00 a.m.
4 [The accused entered court]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can you call the case, please.
6 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Yes. Case number IT-01-47- T, the
7 Prosecutor versus Hadzihasanovic and Amir Kubura.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can we have the appearances for
9 the Prosecution, please.
10 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning, Your
11 Honours, counsel, and everyone in and around the courtroom. For the
12 Prosecution, Matthias Neuner and Daryl Mundis, assisted by Andres Vatter,
13 our case manager.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Mundis. Can we
15 have the appearances for the Defence now.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. President; good
17 morning, Your Honours. On behalf of General Enver Hadzihasanovic, Edina
18 Residovic, lead counsel, and Alexis Demirdjian, legal assistant. Thank
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Can we have the appearances for
21 the other Defence team, please.
22 MR. DIXON: Good morning, Your Honours. On behalf of Mr. Kubura,
23 Mr. Rodney Dixon, assisted by Mr. Nermin Mulalic. Thank you, Your
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] On this 177th day of our
1 hearing, I wish to bid good morning to all those present; the Prosecution,
2 the four lawyers present, the two accused, as well as all the persons
3 within and without the courtroom.
4 I would like that we go into private session, please.
5 [Private session]
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] We are in open session,
14 Mr. President.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Chamber told the parties
16 that this morning we will be rendering a decision in response to a motion
17 for the clarification of points, and the decision has been finalised and
18 will be recorded this morning.
19 We have to render a decision on judicial notice of certain facts
20 that were raised in two other cases. We are still waiting. I don't have
21 the submissions of the Prosecution on this matter, and I hope it will not
22 arrive too late.
23 We are also waiting for the report of the expert who should be
24 testifying on the 16th and 17th of February. We're also waiting for the
25 submissions of the Prosecution. So that is as far as the outstanding
1 motions requiring decisions stand.
2 Mr. Mundis.
3 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. Our understanding was that
4 we had until the 7th to file our response with respect to the judicial
5 notice. We will be filing that certainly no later than Monday, if our
6 understanding is correct in that respect.
7 With respect to the expert report, once again, as we indicated
8 earlier, we are awaiting not only the attachments to that report but also
9 the additional material that the expert cites to, and we are simply unable
10 to expedite that until we get that material from the Defence. Our view is
11 that the attachments, since they are listed, they form part of the expert
12 report and, in fact, the filing of that report is incomplete until such
13 time as those attachments and any documents that he cites to are filed.
14 We will again -- I assure everyone we will do our best, but we
15 simply cannot be in a position to state our views until we have that
16 expert report and its supporting materials and attachments in toto.
17 While I'm on my feet, Mr. President, you will also recall on the
18 10th of January Mr. Bourgon indicated the Defence plans with respect to
19 the military expert, hoping to call him commencing on the 28th of
20 February. We have not seen any filing with respect to that expert report.
21 Our understanding was it would have been filed by now. Perhaps our
22 learned colleagues can give us a little bit of light on that. Again,
23 we'll have a very difficult time complying with their plans in light of
24 the Rule that will give us 30 days to consider that expert report on that
1 And again while I'm on my feet, Mr. Bourgon also raised the issue
2 of a number of perhaps additional witnesses to be called by the Defence or
3 -- and/or the use of Rule 92 bis statements. We did ask for at least
4 copies of any statements the Defence currently have. As Your Honours and
5 of course the Defence are aware, in order to get those 92 bis certificates
6 and perhaps litigation on that, that could take a little bit of time, and
7 we again ask if the Defence does in fact have written statements of any
8 witnesses that they intend to seek 92 bis with respect to, we would ask
9 for copies of those statements as quickly as possible so that we can at
10 least begin formulating whether our position with respect to whether we
11 need to cross-examine or would seek leave to have those witnesses brought
12 in for cross-examination purposes.
13 And I raise those issues because of course the Defence has
14 indicated a proposed timetable for completing the Hadzihasanovic case, and
15 it appears to us that that might not be possible due to these outstanding
16 issues with respect to the expert reports and the 92 bis statements, and
17 we simply raise that at this point for your consideration.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I will give the floor to the
19 Defence in a moment. There are several points raised. Regarding the
20 witness that should come on the 16th and 17th of February, the Prosecution
21 is waiting for the attachments. So there's a problem there.
22 A second problem, which seems of capital importance to me, is the
23 military expert and his report. Clearly it needs to be communicated
24 quickly because you mentioned the 28th of February, and then there's the
25 delay of 30 days and as it is normal to expect that this will be an
1 important report, similar to General Reinhardt's one, so the Prosecution
2 must be in a position to submit its position on those matters.
3 As for this military expert, I should also like to know if -- is
4 he a witness of both Defence teams or of one Defence team? Because the
5 other Defence team is also entitled to have an expert report.
6 Mr. Dixon is speaking, so I don't think he can hear what I'm
7 saying. Mr. Dixon, I was saying that the military expert that is going to
8 be called, will he be the witness of both Defence teams? Because you,
9 too, are entitled to call your own expert witness. So what we would like
10 to know is whether this witness is a joint, a common witness for both
11 parties, or do you plan to have your own witness at some later point in
13 Mr. Dixon, you can answer this question and then give the floor to
14 the other Defence team.
15 MR. DIXON: Thank you, Your Honours. Yes, the witness will be a
16 joint military expert witness for both the accused. It was thought that
17 it was most efficient in terms of saving time and being able to focus on
18 essentially the same issues to have one expert to cover the position of
19 both Mr. Hadzihasanovic and Mr. Kubura. So the report will be a joint one
20 filed, and in essence it will be the first joint witness within the case
21 for Mr. Hadzihasanovic. So we are working with the Defence for
22 Mr. Hadzihasanovic to have the report finalised as soon as possible. But
23 Ms. Residovic could give further details on that.
24 Thank you, Your Honours.
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I'm asking this for procedural
1 reasons, because when you address your questions to the witness, the
2 questions must not be leading. They must be absolutely neutral. That is
3 why I'm asking, because if he were not your witness, you would be able,
4 when your turn comes, to ask him quite leading questions. But as he's
5 also your witness, I thought it necessary to refer to this.
6 I give the floor now to the other Defence to respond to the points
7 raised by Mr. Mundis.
8 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, as we said last
9 time, we did not receive the attachments from our expert regarding the
10 organisation of the authorities. Three days ago, we did receive his
11 attachments in the Bosnian language. They are being translated now, and
12 possibly the translation will be completed by the end of the day. If not,
13 they will be communicated to the Prosecution on Monday morning at the
14 latest. They are tables, as can be seen, and certain overviews of the
15 national structure and other structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the
16 CV of the expert.
17 As for other documents, as I said last time, in order to
18 facilitate the work of the Prosecution, we will prepare a binder of
19 documents which the Professor will be referring to in his expert report.
20 However, in the report we have already disclosed the documents are
21 indicated which had already been disclosed to the Prosecution, be they
22 documents that have been admitted into evidence in this case or documents
23 which are on the Defence list and which the Prosecution has in its
25 However, as I said, regardless of that fact, we will do our best
1 to provide the Prosecution with a binder with a collection of all those
2 exhibits and documents that the Professor refers to in his expert report.
3 The simple reason why we haven't done that so far is that we don't
4 have translations of all those documents. If the Prosecution wants us to
5 provide this binder on Monday, but it would only include those that we
6 have translations of. The others would be in the Bosnian-Herzegovinian
7 version. That is what we can say so far.
8 I wish to tell the Trial Chamber that in accordance with the
9 Defence -- both Defence teams' planning, each of our teams has their own
10 witnesses, especially fact witnesses. However, from the beginning we
11 agreed that expert witnesses who discussed the historical context, the
12 organisation of the authorities or military matters, would be proposed as
13 joint witnesses, and that is what we have done. When we had the
14 historian, as well as in the case of Professor Trnka, our colleagues from
15 the Kubura Defence will treat those witnesses as being their own. So they
16 will not be asking leading questions.
17 As for our request for witnesses under 92 bis, our investigators
18 in Sarajevo have taken statements from persons that will be proposed as 92
19 bis witnesses. That is, only statements would be filed. We currently
20 have only one of those statements. We are expecting another two, possibly
21 three, because one witness was on our list but for reasons of health he is
22 unable to come, but his testimony would be repetitious.
23 We have a problem with the taking of statements from international
24 witnesses, and as we felt it would be better to file all the statements
25 together, we will inform you on Monday whether we will apply this
1 procedure or whether we would file a motion to accept these 92 bis
2 statements from witnesses in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as others,
3 that is, whether we would wait to collect all seven or eight statements
4 under 92 bis, some of which need to be translated.
5 That is as much as I'm able to say at this point in time. In view
6 of the fact that the military expert is a joint witness and that we still
7 haven't received his finding from him, together with Mr. Kubura's team we
8 will address the matter during the weekend, and we will propose to the
9 Trial Chamber a date for calling this witness.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Both the Prosecution
11 and the Defence will have time in the meantime to discuss these problems
12 and to inform us should you encounter difficulties.
13 I think we need to deal with a number of documents now. I shall
14 give the floor now to the Prosecution, asking them whether they wish to
15 tender any documents into evidence. Mr. Mundis.
16 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. The Prosecution would
17 tender the three documents that were shown to the witness yesterday, again
18 with the same note that was used with respect to previous documents; that
19 is, that they go only to refreshing recollection or credibility of the
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Those three documents which were
22 the subject of extensive discussion, I turn to the Defence now. No
23 objection? Fine.
24 Mr. Registrar, three numbers, please.
25 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. These
1 three documents are admitted into evidence as Prosecution exhibits and in
2 accordance with the conditions mentioned by the Prosecution just now,
3 under the following numbers. The first document, with the ERN number
4 04034336, dated the 19th of September, 1993, admitted into evidence as
5 Exhibit P947, and the English version P947/E.
6 The second document, number ERN 04034329, dated the 24th of
7 September, 1993, is admitted into evidence as Exhibit P948, and the
8 English version P948/E.
9 The third document, with the ERN number 04033837, dated the 22nd
10 of November, 1993, is admitted into evidence as P949, with the English
11 version P949/E.
12 That ends the list, Mr. President, thank you.
13 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] 947, 948, 949 are admitted into
14 evidence with the note that they were used to test the credibility or
15 refresh the memory of the witness in accordance with our oral decision, so
16 that there should be no ambiguity regarding these three documents.
17 We now have a witness, and I will ask the usher to bring him into
18 the courtroom.
19 [The witness entered court]
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Good morning, sir. Let me check
21 that you are hearing me in your own language. If that is the case, please
22 tell me that you hear me.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I hear you, Your Honour.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before asking you to read the
25 solemn declaration, will you please tell me your first and last name, date
1 and place of birth.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, my name is Hubo
3 Hajrudin. I was born on the 4th of October 1964, in Visoko in
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Are you employed today? Do you
6 have a position? If so, which?
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I am employed in the federal
8 Ministry of Defence in Sarajevo. Currently I have the post of chief of
9 the verification centre, a centre engaging in armaments control and
10 international obligations linked to arms control.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You are an employee. Are you a
12 military officer?
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. By rank I am a brigadier.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Should I call you sir or
15 general? Which do you prefer?
16 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Brigadier in our country is
17 comparable with the rank of colonel, but you can address me whichever way
18 you prefer.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Colonel, then. In
20 1992, 1993 - this is more than ten years ago - at the time, did you have a
21 position or post? If so, which? If you were in the military, which unit
22 did you belong to?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] If you are referring to the
24 beginning of the war or before the war, I can tell you both, but will you
25 please tell me which you're inquiring about.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] In 1992, what was your
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I have to say that I was an officer
4 in the former JNA. I left it in the course of 1991. That is, I left the
5 former Yugoslav People's Army at the beginning of 1992. As of the 6th of
6 April I was engaged in the Territorial Defence of Zenica. So I was an
7 officer in the intelligence organ, assistant commander for intelligence,
8 and for a while in the staff I was chief of staff. When it was disbanded,
9 I was reassigned to the command of the 3rd Corps, the organ for spatial
10 structures. I was chief of that organ. It was part of the command of the
11 3rd Corps. After that, I was appointed --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Have you ever testified in an
13 international or national court of law about the events that took place in
14 your country in 1992 and 1993 or is this the first time?
15 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is the first time, Your Honour,
16 for me to be in any kind of court of law in the function of a witness.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Will you please read the solemn
18 declaration now.
19 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. I solemnly declare that I
20 will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, you may be seated.
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 WITNESS: HAJRUDIN HUBO
24 [Witness answered through interpreter]
25 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Before giving the floor to the
1 Defence, which has planned an hour and a half of questions, but I draw
2 their attention to the fact that we must necessarily complete our work by
3 quarter to two, so make sure that we respect that schedule.
4 You will have to answer questions put to you by the attorneys of
5 one of the accused, that is General Hadzihasanovic. Once those questions
6 are completed, it is possible that the attorneys for General Kubura may
7 have questions for you as well. After that stage, the Prosecution, seated
8 to your right, may also have questions for you within what we know as the
9 cross-examination. And according to the procedure, they are entitled to
10 ask you leading questions; that is, questions which may be suggestive and
11 in favour of their case. However, in the examination-in-chief, the
12 questions have to be neutral.
13 Upon the completion of the cross-examination, the Defence may have
14 additional questions for you linked to the previous questions. During
15 this stage, it is quite possible for the parties to show you documents to
16 elicit your comments. These will be military documents which they thought
17 you may have seen or of which you may have some knowledge. That is why
18 those documents may be shown to you.
19 The three Judges who are in front of you may also ask you
20 questions. According to the procedure, they can ask you anything they
21 wish at any point in time, but we prefer to wait until the end to see
22 whether we need to ask you anything to clarify what you have already said
23 or to fill in any gaps that we may feel exist in the answers that you may
24 have provided, and all of this in the interest of justice.
25 Our procedure is an oral procedure, so we have no written report
1 about what you are going to say, hence the importance of what you tell us.
2 If you don't understand a question put to you, ask for a rephrasing.
3 I wish to draw your attention to two points. First is that you
4 have made the solemn declaration to tell the whole truth, which excludes
5 all false testimony. And the second point is that a witness may refuse to
6 answer a question if he believes that this -- his reply may one day be
7 used against him and to incriminate him, and the witness may say, "I do
8 not wish to answer." This is an exceptional case which we have never come
9 across. The Chamber may insist that the witness answer nevertheless but
10 guaranteeing total immunity to the witness for any subsequent
11 consequences, and this contributes to the whole truth being established.
12 Should there be any problems, please let us know. We will be
13 having two breaks for technical reasons until a quarter to two and also to
14 give you a chance to take a rest, because you will see that answering
15 questions can be quite tiring, hence the need to give you an opportunity
16 to take a breather. It is now half past nine. We will have our first
17 break at 10.30, that is in an hour, and then we will have another break
18 around 12.30.
19 So without further ado, I give the floor to the Defence.
20 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
21 Examined by Ms. Residovic:
22 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Hubo. You've already said that
23 you were an officer in the former JNA. Tell us, please, where you
24 completed your military training, your military schools, and where you did
25 your military service in the JNA before you left the JNA in 1991.
1 A. Thank you, madam. I completed the military secondary school, four
2 years of that in Belgrade. After the military gymnasium in Belgrade, I
3 continued studying at the Military Academy for two years. I completed
4 those two years in Belgrade, one year in Rajlovac and one year in Zadar.
5 Having completed the Military Academy I was deployed to the anti-aircraft
6 defence missile section in Kragujevac, which is where I was until I left
7 the former JNA.
8 Q. And what rank did you have when you left the JNA?
9 A. I left the JNA as lieutenant. That was my rank.
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, since I'm going to
11 use some documents with this witness, I should like to hand these
12 documents to the witness straight away, and we have given copies to the
13 Prosecution already.
14 Also, while the documents are being distributed, there is one
15 particular document which will be on our final list of exhibits, and that
16 is document -- a document that was published in the BH Official Gazette.
17 It is therefore an official document. And we have also disclosed it to
18 the Prosecution, but it is in the B/C/S version. And as far as I
19 understand, the Prosecution says that it does not mind us using the
20 document in examining the witness. I now ask the Trial Chamber to allow
21 us to do that.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] No problem there.
23 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
24 Q. Mr. Hubo, in response to the President of the Trial Chamber, you
25 said that you worked in the District Staff of the Territorial Defence at
1 the beginning as an officer in the intelligence service and later on as a
2 representative of the chief of staff when it was disbanded. Can you
3 remember when the District Staff was, in fact, disbanded, of the
4 Territorial Defence, I mean, of Zenica?
5 A. Well, this is how it was: I can't give you an exact date here and
6 now because it was a process, and you know that when units are formed or
7 disbanded this requires a certain amount of time. But it was, generally
8 speaking, the period between, as far as I can recall, October 1992 up
9 until April 1993.
10 Q. I'm now going to ask you, Mr. Hubo, to take a look at a document
11 which comes after number 1. It is P320. Have you found the document?
12 A. Yes, I have.
13 Q. Is this a document informing the municipal Territorial Defence
14 Staff that the District Staff will cease to exist, and you worked on that
16 A. This document is dated the 16th of April, 1993. It is an order,
17 and then it says "Information to the command of the 3rd Corps," stating
18 that on the basis of the information received, the Zenica District Staff
19 was being abolished. This is the standard type of document that was sent
20 round. It was a final act, and the preparations to bring in this final
21 act had already been conducted. So it is a document that is of an
22 official nature, if I can put it that way.
23 Q. Thank you. You also said, Mr. Hubo, that after the abolishment of
24 the District Staff of the Territorial Defence, you took up another duty
25 and you went to the command of the 3rd Corps as head of spatial structures
1 there. Can you tell us, please, what that organ did. What was its
3 A. I said that it was a process for the formation of a corps with all
4 the units. So the corps command was being established, and the municipal
5 staffs of Territorial Defence and the units that the individual defence
6 staffs had had still not been abolished completely. So this organ, as it
7 was called, was within the 3rd Corps Command staff, and its duty was as
8 follows: It was in charge of coordinating individual activities that the
9 municipal staffs used to do in this transitional phase until their final
10 abolishment. So the abolition, the disbanding did not stop when the
11 District Staff were disbanded, but this function was taken over by the 3rd
12 Corps in its entirety.
13 Q. Mr. Hubo, would you now take a look at the next document, that is
14 to say document number 2, and the number at the top is 1381.
15 A. That is a document from the 3rd Corps Command which I compiled. I
16 can see my initials there. And it concerns the following: It is an
17 explanation to the Municipal Staff of the Territorial Defence, and it says
18 to the attention of the Operative Group, which means that at that time,
19 the operative groups were being formed, and it says: "In connection with
20 your dilemma about the manner of reporting, such-and-such a date, we
21 hereby inform you that there are no changes in your duty of reporting to
22 the organ for territorial based units of the 3rd Corps Command which took
23 over the authority of the OPSO when the Zenica OKSO was dissolved. You
24 are therefore obliged to send weekly intelligence reports according to the
25 methodology which was submitted to you." So this therefore proves or
1 confirms that although in the month of August, what I said a moment ago,
2 that the Municipal Staff still remained but their competencies were taken
3 over by the 3rd Corps Command.
4 So that is a standard document and response that we sent out.
5 Q. Mr. Hubo, you said that the process of abolishing the municipal
6 defence staffs was under way and they were still in existence during that
7 period of time. Can you tell the Trial Chamber, please, up until what
8 time did these staffs exist? How long were they in existence on the
9 territory of the 3rd Corps?
10 A. Well, I can't tell you a date with any certainty, but I can tell
11 you that throughout 1993 they still existed. On a case-by-case basis,
12 they were transformed more rapidly in some areas and in others this
13 process was slower. Once again depending on the front line, the
14 reinforcement by troops and so on.
15 Q. In view of the fact that you worked in affairs linked to the
16 municipal defence staffs, take a look at our next document, which is
17 number 3, and the number of that document is DH1501. You will find that
18 number at the top of the document. And tell us, please, what kind of
19 document this is. Are you familiar with the document? Have you seen it
21 A. Madam, this is a document, one of many, in fact, which are of
22 similar content which the command -- 3rd Corps Command wrote, as it says
23 here, on the 20th of October, 1993 - that's the date of this particular
24 document - and it has to do with organisational changes in the area of
25 responsibility of the 3rd Corps, if I can put it that way. So this is a
1 proposal which was sent out to the staff of the Supreme Command of
3 Q. Tell me, please, Mr. Hubo, is this document the proposal for
4 organisational changes or the establishment and restructuring of certain
5 units? Is this -- are these authorisations and competencies of the
6 commander of some military unit, in fact, vis-a-vis his superior command?
7 That is to say, to table proposals and to send them out to that command.
8 A. Of course this is in keeping with the authorisations of the corps
9 command, and this is standard practice. It is quite usual procedure when
10 it comes to restructuring any unit, establishing a unit, abolishing a
11 unit, or anything of that kind. It is of the units of the 3rd Corps.
12 Q. Now, the corps commander, in order to compile a proposal of this
13 kind with respect to the establishment of a unit, must he have special
14 authorisation to do so or does this duty come from the very functions
15 inherent in the commander?
16 A. I'm not sure I follow your question. Could you make that question
17 clearer, please?
18 Q. The function and duties of a commander pursuant to the law and
19 status of a commander as such, does it include the authority vested in the
20 officer to make proposals to the command with respect to organisational
21 matters? That is to say, can he propose the establishment or
22 restructuring of anybody or the abolishment of anybody in his area of
24 A. Yes, of course. The commander does have this right. He has every
25 right to propose things of this kind, and final authorisation is given by
1 the staff of the Supreme Command. But the commander does have the right
2 to -- and duty, if I may say so, to propose things along this line.
3 Q. Now, the second part of my question, which I don't suppose you
4 understood very well and thank you for bringing that to my attention, I'll
5 make it clearer: In addition to the rules, did the commander have to have
6 any special authorisations or was he able to do -- proceed in this manner,
7 the way he did in this case?
8 A. I said this was standard practice, so he doesn't have to have any
9 special authorisation because the -- a commander's competencies include
10 his right to make proposals of this kind.
11 Q. When you took up your duties in the 3rd Corps, did you in the
12 staff of the 3rd Corps engage in any other duties in addition to carrying
13 about and coordinating the work of the municipal defence staffs, for
15 A. As I have said, we were in the composition of the staff, and in
16 view of the number of members we had or, rather, we had very few people,
17 to make myself clearer, so there was a few people and their capabilities
18 were modest, I had to work as the operative officer because it was the
19 operative organ within the corps staff as well.
20 Q. Mr. Hubo, at one point did you take up some other duties; and, if
21 so, tell us which and when.
22 A. At one point in time, that is to say after approximately -- or,
23 rather, when I had completed this business around the municipal staffs and
24 their establishment and their functioning, I was assigned in the second
25 half of 1993 as assistant commander for organisational and mobilisational
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 matters and personnel matters. That was an organ of the corps command
2 which was within the composition of the command, and the assistant
3 commander was directly under the commander of the corps himself, the corps
4 commander himself.
5 Q. Can you tell us, please, Mr. Hubo, what kind of work the organ for
6 organisational, mobilisational and personnel matters did, as you called
8 A. The duties I had at the time, or, rather, this body, if I can put
9 it that way, because as I say there were few people in it, so this organ
10 too suffered from a lack of personnel. But anyway, its duties were the
11 following: To form the unit, to re-establish or restructure the units, to
12 disband the units, and the organisational orders for the structure of the
13 command to see that there was a full complement of men and materiel, to
14 resolve the status of individuals, see to status matters and other affairs
15 which any staff has to deal with, and these are all difficult matters to
16 resolve and require a great deal of time and attention.
17 Q. Mr. Hubo, tell me, please, what rules and regulations governed the
18 functioning of your organ and its competencies and you yourself?
19 A. What I did at the beginning in this newly established situation
20 was the following: The law on defence, that was the main document or,
21 rather, its provision on the criteria and normative acts for the
22 deployment of citizens and materiel in the armed forces and other needs of
23 defence. This was published in the Official Gazette 1922 [as interpreted]
24 of the then Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. And then my other framework
25 or, rather, our framework under which we functioned was orders by the
1 Supreme Command issued by way of instructions and so on. So those are the
2 documents. The degree on criteria and normatives, that was an internal
3 document and so were the others, and they were documents that we had taken
4 over from the former JNA; that is to say, documents that had not been
5 published until then but were taken over, rules on the mobilisation of the
6 armed forces which we had been using hitherto.
7 Q. Would you take a look at our next document now, number 10. It is
8 the document in the B/C/S version. Would you read the preamble and the
9 title of the document and tell me whether that is the document that you
10 referred to just now. Was that the document you meant?
11 A. Yes, this is a decree having the force of law on the criteria and
12 normative dispositions on the disposition of citizens and resources in the
13 armed forces and other needs of defence. So this was our basic document.
14 It was on the basis of this document that we were able to function.
15 Q. Just a moment, please.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] On page 20, line 21, there has
17 been a mistake of when the document was published. The witness said in
18 the Official Gazette 19/92, and the date is 1992.
19 Q. It says 1922. So that is a slip. I don't assume you would use
20 1922 as your basic document.
21 A. I apologise, but that is the document that we used, yes.
22 Q. Thank you. In view of the fact that you worked in the area of
23 mobilisation for people and materiel, I should like to ask you now to
24 explain to Their Honours, to the Trial Chamber, the manner in which,
25 pursuant to this decree, you undertook mobilisation of individuals into
1 the BH army. How were they recruited?
2 A. It was the duty of the commands at the level of brigades and
3 independent units was the following: On the basis of the order and
4 regulations prescribed, to propose the troops necessary for the individual
5 units. And this plan for the mobilisation of men and materiel contained
6 the number of soldiers required, and these were distributed into what we
7 call the VES, the military speciality of each individual according to
8 their files and as registered with the national defence secretary. So
9 these were the replenishment plans. And so this proposal for the
10 replenishment plans was sent on to the Secretariats for National Defence.
11 And the competent Secretariats for National Defence, having reviewed the
12 situation and the -- how far the units were replenished, how many troops
13 it needed, and looking at the available men outside the armed forces given
14 a time of imminent war and should war break out, they would approve a
15 final replenishment plan, and then they would send this plan to the
16 individual departments of defence, and they were duty-bound and had the
17 authority to act upon that plan and call up the military conscripts and
18 send them to a particular military unit. So that was the procedure. It
19 was common practice, and it was a very clear-cut practice.
20 Q. Mr. Hubo, on several occasions in answering my questions earlier
21 on, you said the competent organ of the Ministry of Defence, and then you
22 said that once the plan had been approved through its own line, it would
23 send it to the different departments and units.
24 Tell me, please, the Ministry of Defence itself and its competent
25 organs or, rather, its departments to which the replenishment plan was
1 sent down, were they organs within the composition of the BH army, and did
2 the -- was the army superior to those organs, the organs which approved
3 the replenishment plans?
4 A. The BH army had a civilian commander, that is to say the president
5 of the -- Presidency of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina,
6 Bosnia-Herzegovina had its government, within the frameworks of the
7 government the Ministry of Defence functioned just like every other
8 ministry, if I can say so, given the conditions that prevailed. So the
9 army was not superior to the ministry nor what -- did it ever assume that
10 role. It was -- or, rather, the Ministry of Defence and its sections in
11 the field in the different territories as they were organised as civilian
12 authority in the districts and municipalities, they were in charge and
13 they performed the functions of mobilisation. So the army had a secondary
14 role there, just like any army, I would say.
15 Q. Mr. Hubo, you said that every military unit, that is to say a
16 brigade and so on, independent unit, was duty-bound to propose a
17 replenishment plan for the master plan. Tell me, how was this plan
19 A. I've already said, I think, in response to one of your questions
20 that this was done exclusively on the basis of the different formations
21 that were set up. You had corps right up to independent battalions. So
22 on the basis of the individual units. In war, for materiel resources, no
23 formation or establishment was prescribed, but it was for manpower. So
24 this was done on the basis of establishment documents, if I can put it
25 that way.
1 Q. Let me ask you this now, please: Who determined the establishment
2 books or documents for individual military units? And the wartime
3 composition of that unit, was it identical to what it was in peacetime?
4 A. All the formations or units and all the documents and books that
5 existed, and there were different types depending on the different types
6 of units, was prescribed and organised by the Ministry of Defence. And I
7 think that during one period in the war the Presidency of the Republic of
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina, in fact, issued authorisation to the staff of the
9 Supreme Command for it to be able to authorise the establishments
10 themselves as a -- working as a Ministry of Defence organ.
11 Q. I asked you something else. Perhaps you've already answered it,
12 but the establishment, providing for a certain number of men per unit, is
13 there a difference during wartime and peacetime? Would the structure,
14 number of the men be different in a unit in wartime than it would in
16 A. The only difference was that in wartime conditions, it was
17 prescribed that the replenishment of men should be 110 per cent compared
18 to the planned formation, so there would be a leeway of 10 per cent. That
19 is to say they would plan 10 per cent more men because of the casualties
20 during the war and during the battles and so on. So 110 per cent in
22 Q. In response to the previous questions, you said that once the plan
23 had been approved for the replenishment of troops, that then the
24 departments of Defence would send out -- would call up the individuals,
25 the men, the troops themselves. Could you tell me, Mr. Hubo, what a
1 military unit did if the recruit did not -- or conscript did not respond
2 to the call-up by the authorities?
3 A. I've already said that the Ministry of Defence or defence
4 departments had the job of calling up conscripts and to send them to the
5 units. So right up until the time that a conscript has not reported to
6 the unit, it was the Ministry of Defence that was in charge. The law
7 prescribed what subsequent measures were to be taken by the competent
8 authorities should conscripts fail to turn up, fail to report to the
9 authorities to take up their duties within a unit.
10 Q. Mr. Hubo, tell me, please, in wartime was there another way of
11 going about securing a full complement of soldiers for military units and
12 not only by the call-up on the part of the civilian defence organ? And if
13 there was another way, another way of doing this, did a military unit have
14 any obligations in that regard after men were recruited into the unit?
15 A. You mean did a military unit have the possibility of engaging men
16 themselves? Pursuant to the law, the military unit the area of combat, if
17 the competent organ under the minister of defence was not able to mobilise
18 troops, in extraordinary circumstances it was able to engage a certain --
19 with conscripts themselves. But it -- the military unit had the duty in
20 the shortest space of time of tallying the numbers in the unit with the
21 Ministry of Defence. That means that the Ministry of Defence, once again,
22 had to have a complete list of men and place its stamp on the document
23 authorising the number of men recruited.
24 Q. In wartime, in addition to the military conscripts, were you able
25 to take in individuals who were not military conscripts?
1 A. In wartime in Bosnia-Herzegovina, we had volunteers as well. And
2 pursuant to the law, all military conscripts -- these were men from the
3 ages of 16 to 65, I believe. Now, the other categories, other age groups
4 were not -- did not have to comply. But we did have some women, for
5 example. In fact, we had 5.000 women fighters as volunteers at one point
6 in time. Of course, nobody turned them back. It was their right to
7 defend their country. So we took them in. And then we had some people
8 who were over the age of 65 who came to us to join up. And then we had
9 other categories of people, that is to say people who were not nationals
10 of Bosnia-Herzegovina at the time. They were usually people from the
11 former Yugoslavia, from ex-Yugoslavia who happened to find themselves in
12 Bosnia-Herzegovina. They could also join up. And some of them came to us
13 and joined up in the units.
14 Q. If a military unit took in volunteers of this kind, did it have
15 any duties vis-a-vis the defence ministry or was it its exclusive
17 A. Once again the procedure would be clear cut. The unit, if it did
18 take people in of this kind, volunteers or whatever, they would have to
19 have these people registered with the defence ministry. They would have
20 to have a list of persons and send the list to the Ministry of Defence
21 with these individual categories and special or separate files would be
22 opened up for these people, people who had joined the unit in some other
24 Q. My colleagues have been -- have told me that on page 25, line 15,
25 it has not been recorded that the witness said that the military unit
1 could mobilise men if the organ of the Ministry of Defence was not capable
2 of doing so. So since the witness said this, I can repeat the question.
3 Or can you just make a note for the record of what I've just said?
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, that's fine.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] I'm sorry, I didn't hear the
6 interpretation in my own language, and I have the headphones on. Thank
7 you, Mr. President.
8 Q. Tell me, now, Mr. Hubo, what was the policy of the 3rd Corps,
9 which you joined after the district headquarters and staff was disbanded?
10 Tell me, what was the policy of the 3rd Corps with respect to
11 mobilisation? What did the commander and his command request from
12 military units to fill in their units?
13 A. Our policy stemmed from the law, the orders of the Supreme Command
14 Staff, and in the first place we requested that the units and subordinate
15 commands should carry out their obligations accordingly, which meant
16 abiding by the decree, abiding by the decree, abiding by orders and the
17 structure that had been laid down for each unit. So the policy was that
18 everyone do his job properly.
19 The competence for mobilisation was with the hands of the defence
20 ministry, and we requested that it should be so. The organisation and
21 structuring of units was within the competence of the army, and we
22 requested that it should be so.
23 Q. Tell me, Mr. Hubo, regardless of this very clear-cut policy of the
24 3rd Corps Command, what kind of problems did the army encounter when it
25 came to mobilisation from the beginning of the war until the end of 1993?
1 If you can tell us briefly what those problems were.
2 A. It is difficult to list all those problems briefly, because
3 mobilisation is both a political and economic and social issue. It
4 entails a number of measures and procedures in order to mobilise people
5 for defence.
6 However, in that period of time when Bosnia and Herzegovina was
7 recognised as a state, a certain number of people left with the former
8 JNA. They were military conscripts too. Then all the civilian bodies had
9 still not been constituted. Then there was a high influx of refugees.
10 There were areas of wartime operations. Then there was the lack of
11 functioning of other segments of society, hesitation among people about
12 various matters. Then rather a confusing system. In other words, the
13 system was slowly breaking down. And under those conditions, it was very
14 hard to carry out the mobilisation as would have been done in the former
16 Q. Evidence has been shown in court already that already in June
17 1992, the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina proclaimed a state of war
18 and general mobilisation. Tell me, what were the reasons for the
19 proclamation of a state of war and general mobilisation that this did not
20 result in the mobilisation of each and every conscript? Or in other
21 words, how did all this evolve according to your personal experience with
22 respect to the 3rd Corps?
23 A. When talking about defence, this is a complex issue implying the
24 commitment of all entities in society. In the process of defence, if we
25 focus on combat - that is defence in the narrow sense of the word, combat
1 on the front - does not mean that only soldiers take part. There's the
2 economy of a country, the general life. A certain number of conscripts
3 are engaged within a certain age group, and they are assigned to army
4 units. A certain number of conscripts are assigned to the MUP, the
5 Ministry of the Interior. A number of conscripts are assigned to the
6 judiciary, another number to the educational system, to the economy, to
7 the hospitals and so on. So in all areas of life, according to the law
8 they are all conscripts but life has to continue. And if the war had
9 lasted five days, all could be called up and after that go back to their
10 jobs, but that was not the case.
11 So the law regulates the wartime assignment of each and every
12 conscript, which includes engagement in the army, in the MUP, and at
14 Q. Mr. Hubo, a moment ago you said that the system fell apart. Did
15 this have any kind of impact on the ability to mobilise people? Did the
16 competent bodies have records of military conscripts, files? If not,
17 where were they, and what kind of problems did you encounter in that area
18 in 1992 and 1993?
19 A. I said that this was a highly complex issue, the issue of
20 mobilisation, and it is very difficult to explain even if I were to take
21 hours. But there were many difficulties that stood in the way of
22 efficient mobilisation. Certain legal and legitimate departments of
23 defence were abolished in certain municipalities.
24 What does that mean? It means that certain segments of the SDS
25 took with them files. Then we had thefts of certain files. And every
1 military conscript had his own file in the Ministry of Defence containing
2 all data about him, his speciality, and everything else. Those files were
4 Then in all the municipalities, these bodies had not been
5 constituted. Then we had refugees coming. People were no longer in their
6 own communes, nor had they been registered in the ones they had come to.
7 So we had many difficulties which hindered the normal smooth running of
8 the mobilisation process.
9 I don't know if I have been clear.
10 Q. The district defence staff that you were working in in 1992 and
11 the beginning of 1993 and later in the 3rd Corps up until the end of 1993,
12 did they have the materiel requirements to be able to mobilise and admit
13 all people according to formation? Did you have the necessary weapons and
14 other necessary equipment to be able to mobilise all the recruits?
15 A. I said that the former Yugoslavia had detailed mobilisation plans.
16 However, the newly developed situation was such that the former Yugoslav
17 People's Army withdrew more or less all the weapons of the Territorial
18 Defence with it so that the Territorial Defence was left without most
19 weapons. So it was not possible nor necessary to mobilise everyone, which
20 means that we mobilised according to the possibilities we had; that is, if
21 we could match the weapons with the recruits.
22 Q. Mr. Hubo, were you aware that because of the impossibility to
23 carry out the mobilisations, some of which you have described, were you
24 confronted with the occurrences when people self-organised themselves or
25 acted individually in small groups totally outside the command and control
1 of organised legitimate authorities, or were there no such problems in the
2 area of the 3rd Corps at that time?
3 A. At the beginning of the war in Slovenia, later in Croatia, and of
4 course in Bosnia-Herzegovina, there are people of different ethnicities,
5 and there were links with all those newly formed countries. A certain
6 number of people realised that a threat was imminent, and a certain number
7 of people self-organised themselves on some territorial or political bases
8 for defence. And these were groups, groups of men who were not
9 accountable to anyone. They just defended their local communities, their
10 villages, and so on. They were just there. And they probably had a
11 certain number of light weapons, hunting weapons, and the like.
12 Q. In view of the situation with weapons that you have referred to,
13 in the process of mobilisation were weapons taken from people? Were they
14 confiscated, or did those weapons remain private property, those that you
15 just referred to?
16 A. If you're referring to weapons that individuals may have purchased
17 or acquired in various ways, those weapons, with the subsequent formation
18 of the army, those weapons became part of state property. But as for
19 personal weapons, a person who purchased a rifle or a pistol, he wouldn't
20 give it to anyone else, if we're talking about the initial stages, the
21 beginnings of defence.
22 Q. As those personal weapons, as you say, were the source of the
23 arming of the army, tell me, how many people in 1992 and 1993, how many
24 were -- had to rely on that single weapon that was mobilised with an
1 A. Well, this depended, but sometimes there would be up to five men
2 to one rifle.
3 Q. Mr. Hubo, I would now like to ask you about the mobilisation of
4 the 3rd Corps, which was carried out in accordance with the orders and the
5 criteria you mentioned. Was that mobilisation something that was carried
6 out in one go or did it take place over a longer period of time?
7 A. Mobilisation is a process that many people do not understand,
8 especially those who were not involved in it. I have to underline once
9 again that over a certain period of time, you had various cases. So
10 mobilisation was a process that went on from the beginning until the end
11 of the war.
12 Some people who joined from the beginning were mobilised and then
13 demobilised. But then there were cases when one individual may have been
14 mobilised four or five times and demobilised or, rather, assigned to other
15 posts, such as doctors and engineers. So they would be assigned to
16 positions where they were most needed in the assessment of the civilian
18 Q. Let us now go back to the concrete tasks you had when you took
19 charge of the body for organisational matters. As we were talking about
20 this process, what was the situation that you found in the 3rd Corps organ
21 when you joined it?
22 A. When I took up this duty, I found there a man, and there should
23 have been many more. But this was quite understandable, because there was
24 a high degree of fluctuation of personnel. We had units that were not up
25 to strength. They were about 70 per cent complete, which was not
1 sufficient for a unit to be properly established.
2 We had a large influx of people and ineffective cooperation with
3 the civilian authorities. Records were not very complete, and so on. The
4 situation was quite chaotic, in fact.
5 Q. When you joined this body, was the 3rd Corps Commander, to the
6 best of your knowledge, satisfied with the mobilisation and its results?
7 A. The commander would be the one to answer that question best.
8 Clearly the commander did take steps, at least as far as I know, to
9 improve the situation or to put things in order in the way I've already
10 described. Among other things, my predecessor -- now why he was replaced,
11 I assume it was precisely because the commander was not satisfied. He
12 wanted more. Though I find it rather embarrassing to say that for my
13 predecessor, but this was quite customary, to replace people with those
14 who were better qualified in the assessment of the commander.
15 Q. I would now like to ask you to look at document under tab 6,
16 please. P192. So it's an exhibit in this case. And it is a report of
17 the 3rd Corps Commander. And will you please look now at a page with the
18 ERN number 1851606.
19 Have you found the page? At the top the page number is 01851606.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Please read out this text for me to be able to ask you questions.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, but it would be better to
23 indicate the number of the page in the English version, because 01 et
24 cetera, is the B/C/S. So please give us the page number for the English
1 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] It is just before the sub-heading
2 "Combat morale."
3 MR. MUNDIS: It's page 15. Page 15 at the bottom.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Page 15.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you.
6 Q. So would you please read out, which is very brief in the Bosnian.
7 These are paragraphs that also appear in English. Have you read it?
8 Mr. Hubo, can you tell me whether this is a concise description of
9 the problems you referred to and which the commander is highlighting in
10 his -- in this report?
11 A. This reflects the actual state of affairs with regard to these
12 points, and each sentence here implies taking a large number of measures
13 for dealing with them.
14 Q. You said at the beginning when speaking of the responsibilities of
15 the body that you headed, and you said that it assigned and reassigned
16 people, tell me, did you have in the records of your organ which units
17 existed in the corps structure? Or, rather, could you tell me which were
18 the data that you had available to you in your organ.
19 A. When I arrived, I didn't find my predecessor there, but I found
20 some documents, and one of the most important for me was the report of
21 combat units regarding their strength. And these are referred to, that
22 is, to what extent each unit was fully replenished, and this was very
23 important for our organ to plan our activities.
24 Q. For this very reason, I would like to ask you to look at the
25 previous two pages before the part I asked you to read out.
1 In English, those would be pages 14 and 15 -- and 13, I'm sorry.
2 And 13. And in our language, page numbers 0185603 and 604 and 605.
3 Will you please tell me, on page 603, would you begin with where
4 it says, "The 3rd Corps is composed of five operative groups," and look at
5 those operation groups, units, and other bodies, and tell me whether this
6 report reflects the state of affairs with respect to the units that had
7 been established in the 3rd Corps that you were aware of as an operative
8 and later as the head of this department.
9 A. The 3rd Corps consists of five operations groups and they are
10 listed here: Four independent brigades, which are again listed; three
11 independent battalions, and these are listed; a light artillery and rocket
12 battalion; a logistics base; an electronic reconnaissance and
13 counter-electronic operations company; and a training centre. Also within
14 the 3rd Corps 15 municipal defence staffs had been formed. These are
15 listed, with 23 anti-sabotage detachments and eight independent companies.
16 This, for me, was the organic composition of the command and units
17 of the 3rd Corps, which we further developed. I can also say that it is
18 quite clear that many units and -- existed which made it difficult to
19 operate with such a large number of units, and the problem of control and
20 command was difficult.
21 Q. Now, look at the next page. They're referring to manpower levels.
22 You've said it was very important to have these figures. These figures
23 that you see here, did they reflect the manpower levels in units when you
24 took over your position in 1993?
25 A. This was the situation I found at the time. The situation, as it
1 is described here, is based on reports received from subordinate units.
2 Q. Mr. Hubo, on the title page of this document, you see that the
3 commander drafted this report in August 1993. It is a report prepared for
4 a meeting held in Zenica with the commander of the army.
5 Tell me, would the corps commander in his report list all the
6 units that he has as part of the organic structure, that is all the units
7 that he knows are within his organic composition, whether they're linked
8 to operations groups or independent units and battalions? Is it customary
9 for a commander presenting a review of his corps to include all data about
10 all units existing within his corps?
11 A. This report was not compiled exclusively by the commander but the
12 whole command respecting all elements, and I see no reason why anything
13 should be left out. In fact, it is compulsory to include everything,
15 Q. As part of the organisational structure of the 3rd Corps, could
16 there be an independent detachment linked to the 3rd Corps which the
17 commander would not mention in this report?
18 A. That would not be normal. It would have to be mentioned either
19 here or in the Ministry of Defence. It would have to exist somewhere.
20 Q. Tell me, Mr. Hubo, since you said that there were problems with
21 respect to recruits failing to respond to the call-up, but it became your
22 problem only if -- when they failed to join. Then you also mentioned the
23 problem of the fluctuation of manpower. What were the measures taken by
24 the 3rd Corps Command against those abandoning units?
25 A. The prescribed measures were as follows: After a certain period
1 of time, we would verify why soldiers did not turn up. If some had
2 legitimate reasons to be absent, then these would be registered. I must
3 say these were not soldiers who were living in barracks. They would be at
4 some 20 kilometres distance from headquarters, because from front lines
5 they would go home. And if it was not possible to establish a reason,
6 then requests to bring him in would be issued to the military police
7 battalion. And after searching for him, he would -- the police would have
8 to take him in. And if they failed to find those conscripts, then
9 measures were taken, as envisaged by law, to scratch them from the record.
10 So after all disciplinary measures were exhausted, they were scratched.
11 Q. This was according to the law, but --
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] We are going to adjourn now, and
13 we will resume at five to eleven.
14 --- Recess taken at 10.30 a.m.
15 --- On resuming at 10.58 a.m.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] The Defence has the floor. Of
17 course once the accused are seated. They are arriving now.
18 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
19 Q. Mr. Hubo, just before the break, you were speaking about the law
20 and regulations and what they stipulated with respect to the military unit
21 should anybody -- any of the soldiers decide to leave the unit of their
22 own accord.
23 Tell me, please, as a member of the command of the 3rd Corps, do
24 you happen to know whether these measures of going out to look for these
25 people and bringing -- taking them into custody, whether the 3rd Corps did
1 engage in this process when anybody decided to leave of their own free
3 A. Yes, certainly. This was done as far as they were able to. I
4 remember during a period of time later on when we were establishing the
5 units, we did have a review of how many people had left and what was done
6 about it, and as far as I remember, there were about 3.000 requests for
7 searches to be conducted to find the people. The military police
8 battalion was given a list of about 3.000, which means that there were a
9 lot of them and reflects the very difficult situation that prevailed on
10 the ground.
11 Q. You said that the process of mobilisation and replenishment of
12 units had many problems to contend with, but I'm asking you this now,
13 Mr. Hubo: If the commander, Commander Hadzihasanovic was corps commander
14 from November 1992 to the 1st of November 1993, was that the period of
15 time -- was it sufficient time to establish an army, to the best of your
16 knowledge, in view of the fact that you're engaged in matters of that
18 A. Well, the process of establishing an army lasts far longer in
19 peacetime under normal conditions. It's a lengthy process. So if there
20 was no war going on and you had the proper system functioning, a minimum
21 of six months would be required to establish a corps or command. The
22 former JNA established the Kragujevac Corps, for example over a long
23 period of time. So this process of establishment for the BH army and the
24 corps lasted, as far as I know, to the end of the war. And even to the
25 present day, we are still in the process of restructuring and establishing
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 the armed forces of Bosnia-Herzegovina, of the federation. So my answer
2 to you is this: Taking into account those strict dates, you could not
3 have done that. It is a lengthy process, an ongoing one, in fact.
4 Q. Thank you. Let's go back, Mr. Hubo, to the portion of the report
5 -- in fact, what you read out to the Trial Chamber, the units which in
6 August 1993 were within the composition of the 3rd Corps. You read this
7 out to us. We have it in writing. But now a leading question: The
8 Mujahedin was not among those units, was it? I don't think you mentioned
9 Mujahedin. So let me ask a question.
10 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] May I be allowed to ask that type
11 of leading question, Mr. President, with the Court's permission?
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Well, since was already asked,
13 has already been asked, he can answer it. Strictly speaking, you are not
14 supposed to ask questions like that.
15 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Mr. Hubo, I did ask a leading question. Anyway, in this text
17 reviewing the units, did you see mention of the Mujahedin detachment
19 A. On this piece of paper there is no mention of the El Mujahedin
20 attachment and many other units which were formed later on, at a
21 subsequent stage, a much later stage.
22 Q. Tell me, please, can you tell me whether any other state organs of
23 the superior command insisted upon the fact that the policy of
24 mobilisation and establishment of units be conducted in conformity and
25 pursuant to the law?
1 A. Of course. We had, if I can say so, different lines of
2 functioning. One was the army chain. That is to say the staff of the
3 Supreme Command through its corps and subordinate units, that was one
4 chain of control and command. The other chain or line down was the BH
5 Ministry of Defence at the top. Then the district Secretariats for
6 National Defence, right down to the lower defence levels. So we did
7 recognise and we asked for strict recognition of these chains and the
8 duties incumbent upon each of the links in the chain.
9 Q. Would you take a look document number 8. 1407 is its number.
10 This is a document of the Presidency of the Republic of
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina. Take a look at point 1, line -- lines 1, 2, and 3.
12 Do they reflect the policy of the Supreme Command which you endeavoured,
13 as you said a moment ago, to put into practice as far as was possible?
14 A. I see here that the Presidency of the Republic of
15 Bosnia-Herzegovina, on the 21st of August, 1993, wrote an order. I've
16 never seen this order before. However, it does reflect the situation and
17 the need for the undertaking of measures to ensure the unimpeded
18 mobilisation of conscripts in the manner and according to the procedure
19 which was prescribed. And this order, I assume, refers to the civilian
20 organs of authority because, as I've already stated, we had a different
21 situation there. There was a lack of organisation. We didn't find our
22 way very well. So each of the individual instances were asked to do their
23 job as best as they could.
24 Q. After you arrived to head this organ of the 3rd Corps in the
25 autumn of 1993, did you, viewing the problems in hand, undertake measures
1 to cooperate with the civilian organs, especially the Ministry of Defence,
2 in order to and in the interests of both the army and the defence of the
3 country, to coordinate and dovetail and promote that procedure?
4 A. We had a clear-cut stand on that score. Our level of command in
5 the corps and with the respect to the civilian corps was the district
6 secretariats, and in exceptional cases municipal secretariats. We had
7 situations in which we had, for example, the Banja Luka district with the
8 conscripts from Banja Luka. We had established that on the territory of
9 the 3rd Corps. Then we had another district, the Travnik district, at one
10 point. The Zenica district was another, and the Sarajevo district. So
11 that was that.
12 Now, our additional efforts went along the arms -- along the lines
13 of contacting and coordinating all these instances, which is what we did.
14 The whole time we helped them in terms of personnel, in terms of technical
15 resources and tried to comply with what they asked for to enable them to
16 function in -- in accordance with the law and the provisions.
17 Q. A moment ago when I asked the leading question I did, I mentioned
18 the El Mujahedin detachment. I'm asking you this now: When you took up
19 duties in this organ, did you encounter any El Mujahedin -- any documents
20 for an El Mujahedin detachment saying that it was within the composition
21 of the 3rd Corps at all?
22 A. No. I never came across the necessary documentation for that,
23 neither was that unit mentioned in any of the reports or any document
25 Q. Look at the following document now, please. It is number 9, and
1 it is an order on the establishment of the El Mujahedin detachment. The
2 number of the document is P439. And in view of what you were telling us
3 earlier on about the detachment's formation or any other military unit,
4 that this presupposes formation from the staff of the Supreme Command,
5 would you take a look at the first paragraph in the area of responsibility
6 of the 3rd Corps to form an El Mujahedin detachment pursuant to a proposal
7 of the formations that you are duty-bound to send in to the staff for
9 Did you ever, in keeping with the law or practice on the ground,
10 make proposals for establishments that were supposed to be sent up to the
11 superior command for approval?
12 A. I've already said that the corps command did not establish
13 formations. It did not establish formations. So this portion of the
14 order, this paragraph, is in fact an order which was a little different
15 from the usual type of order. I can explain this to you or comment, but
16 this was out of the ordinary. It wasn't the corps command who was
17 duty-bound to send in a formation to the staff.
18 Q. When you took up your duties in the area of mobilisation, did you
19 find a book of formations or establishments in place when you arrived
20 according to which each of the units was to be formed in -- established,
21 including this detachment?
22 A. Well, I did come across some of the formation or establishment
23 books and documents, if I can call them that, which did apply to various
24 units, detachments, brigades, and so on, but I'm not quite clear on what
25 you mean. What's your question?
1 Q. This book of formation -- for the formation of the Mujahedin
2 detachment, did you come across that?
3 A. No. No. The orders usually said the high command, Supreme
4 Command orders you to establish, according to the establishment book, et
5 cetera, et cetera. In this case there was none of that.
6 Q. Did you find an order from the commander as to what this
7 detachment was supposed to look like, an order for the formation of such a
8 detachment handed down to the corps commander?
9 A. It was the duty of the command corps, once they received an order
10 to that effect, in this case from the Supreme Command staff, that the
11 corps command should write its own order, issue its own order, which de
12 facto was the order to be implemented, and that order contains far more
13 details and elements relating to the establishment or abolishment of any
15 As far as I know, I never saw an order of that kind, neither did I
16 come across it when I took up my duties.
17 Q. And did you find an information about the establishment of that
18 order, that detachment, with a list of its command, the seat or
19 headquarters of the power -- command, the method of replenishment and
20 other important elements which would testify to the fact that that
21 detachment was actually in existence within the structure of the 3rd
23 A. No.
24 Q. So what did that mean to you in practical terms? Practically
25 speaking, what did that mean? Did the Mujahedin detachment in 1993 exist
1 then? What would you say?
2 A. In this specific case it was not in existence. It did not exist.
3 And as far as I was concerned, that detachment did not exist pursuant to
4 all the elements and documentation available to us.
5 Q. Tell me now, please, since you said that you stayed on performing
6 these -- this same function, these same duties later on, tell me this: In
7 1993, did you know, were you aware of how many foreigners or Bosnian
8 nationals there were in that detachment, if it had existed, either foreign
9 national or Bosnian nationals?
10 A. I said that I had no idea about the existence of the detachment at
11 all, so I can't tell you how many men there were in it, whether they were
12 Bosnian nationals or foreign nationals.
13 Q. And finally, Mr. Hubo, tell me this: At any time during your
14 further work in the 3rd Corps, was there any establishment of this El
15 Mujahedin unit; and if so, tell us when that might have come into being
16 and what you know about that in general terms. What can you tell us?
17 A. At a set stage when the corps was being established, that is to
18 say 1994 and 1995 principally, I cannot tell you exactly what period of
19 time, but there were contacts of this type. That is to say, somebody came
20 in as a representative and said they had been sent, et cetera. This was
21 an attempt, therefore, as I say, at some kind of establishment or to
22 receive documents as to the number and so on.
23 I have to stress that for a unit to be established, you must know
24 in advance what you wish to have; how many men, how many men you have
25 available. There are a lot of elements.
1 Now, later on in the subsequent phase, there were some contacts in
2 the sense of providing some sort of -- some lists, lists of some kind
3 which were not valid lists or exact lists or anything like that.
4 Q. Thank you, Mr. Hubo.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, that completes my
6 examination-in-chief of this witness.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I should like to
8 thank the Defence team.
9 Mr. Dixon has the floor.
10 MR. DIXON: Only the one question.
11 Cross-examined by Mr. Dixon:
12 Q. Sir, you were shown Prosecution Exhibit 192 which contained within
13 it a list of the various units within the 3rd Corps and their manpower
14 levels. Can you please confirm that the procedure that you described for
15 the way in which units within the Bosnian army are replenished applied in
16 the same way to each of the brigades and units mentioned in that
17 document. Is that right?
18 A. If I understood you correctly, the procedure was the same for all
19 units. That means that after an order was received by the corps command,
20 or from the corps command, a proposal for the replenishment plan was
21 drafted, which was then sent out for authorisation to the competent
22 Secretariats of Defence, and once they had authorised these, adopted these
23 as a final plan for replenishment, the plan was sent down to the
24 municipalities, and they then called up the men and sent the conscripts to
25 a particular military unit.
1 Q. Yes. Thank you, sir. I have no further questions.
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Dixon.
3 I'm going to give the floor now to the Prosecution for the
4 cross-examination. Go ahead, please.
5 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. Before we commence the
6 cross-examination, I would respectfully ask that the witness be escorted
7 out of the courtroom for a few moments so that I can address the Trial
8 Chamber, please.
9 [The witness stands down]
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, you have the floor.
11 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. We informed the Defence
12 earlier this week, Mr. President, about another new document that we might
13 be wanting to show either this witness or the witness who testified
14 yesterday. This is a document that appears to be authored by the current
15 witness. The document is dated 7 May 1995. However, on the face of the
16 document, it purports to have information about the presence of foreigners
17 in the 3rd Corps as early as the summer of 1992.
18 In light of the witness's answers -- the document also on its face
19 refers to the El Mujahedin.
20 In light of the witness's answers, this document certainly, in our
21 opinion, would be one which could go to the witness's credibility. I
22 raise this issue now so as to hopefully expedite proceedings in the event
23 I'm allowed to do this.
24 This document, Mr. President, came from the Bosnian intelligence
25 and security agency, which is the new name of one of the agencies in
1 Bosnia. It's known as OSA. In the last week of October 2004, with a main
2 focus on another, different investigation, approximately 6.000 pages of
3 material was made available to the Office of the Prosecutor in electronic
4 format. The electronic format on which these documents were provided to
5 the Office of the Prosecutor is not a system that is compatible with the
6 current systems in operation by this Tribunal. The ITSS, that is the
7 computer services here, are making efforts so that these documents can be
8 completely and fully disclosed to the Defence to the extent that there's
9 Rule 68 material. Again these documents in this collection all relate to
10 1995, so there would only be limited relevance. We are currently
11 undertaking Rule 68 reviews of these materials but we're unable at this
12 time to do so electronically because the system is not -- the format that
13 was used by the Bosnian government is not one that's compatible with the
14 electronic search tools we have here, which means we are in the process of
15 going through the roughly 6.000 pages of material individually. And I
16 simply alert the Chamber to that fact.
17 Again, this specific document was disclosed, I believe late last
18 week or certainly early this week. The Defence were notified in advance
19 that we would be using it with either yesterday's witness or today's
21 I might also add, however, Mr. President, and it might be
22 necessary to take a brief recess for this purpose, there is another
23 document which our position would be, in light of what the witness has
24 testified, particularly about the El Mujahedin detachment and the fact
25 that it was not created in accordance with the -- or pursuant to the
1 structure that he's described, we have another document which is not with
2 us in the courtroom because the witness's answer was not one that we could
3 predict based on the 65 ter summary in terms of denial that the El Mujahid
4 detachment even existed. We would like to retrieve this new document,
5 provide copies to the Defence and perhaps, depending on answers the
6 witness might give during the cross-examination, we might, with the
7 Chamber's leave, put that document to the witness. This is a document
8 from December 1995 relating to the, in effect, disestablishment of the El
9 Mujahedin detachment. There are two documents, my colleague informs me.
10 There are two documents, one of them from the Supreme Command Staff to the
11 commander of the 3rd Corps at the end of December 1995 to disestablish the
12 El Mujadin detachment with very specific instructions as to how that
13 disestablishment was to take place.
14 Again I don't know because we haven't asked the witness but
15 certainly at least in May of 1995, according to this document that I have
16 before me now, this witness was a member of the 3rd Corps, and the
17 document that I would like to show him, again, has been disclosed to the
18 Defence but we do have two additional documents relating to the
19 disestablishment of the El Mujahid detachment in December 1995 that we
20 might like to show to the witness, but again, we don't have those
21 documents in the courtroom for the simple reason that the 65 ter summary
22 did not provide us with notice that this witness was going to testify
23 about the El Mujahid detachment and the fact that it wasn't created in the
24 time period set forth in the indictment.
25 So those would be our submissions, Mr. President, on these
1 potential new documents. And again, this would be the only area that we
2 will be cross-examining the witness on, so I don't anticipate the
3 cross-examination to take too long, but if we're granted leave, we may
4 need to take a brief recess in order to retrieve these documents and
5 provide them to the Defence, these additional two documents in addition to
6 the one that's already been notified and disclosed.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I'll give the floor
8 to the Defence. However, before I do so, let me summarise the position of
9 the Prosecution so that the Judges keep abreast of the problem.
10 The Prosecution tells us that in October 2004, within the
11 framework of their investigations, they found 6.000 documents coming from
12 the security services of Bosnia-Herzegovina, entitled OSA. Among those
13 documents, which are in electronic form but one that is incompatible with
14 the Tribunal's system, the Prosecution was not able, pursuant to Rule 68,
15 to disclose all these 6.000 documents to the Defence due to technical
17 Nevertheless, the Prosecution tells us that now, at 11.25, they
18 have a document which they have communicated to the Defence and which they
19 would like to show to the witness as part of a credibility test and a
20 refreshing of his memory. Since the witness said in answer to one
21 question that this unit, as far as he knew, never existed within the 3rd
22 Corps, and the Prosecution wishes to confront him with the documents they
23 have pursuant to our previous decision in which we said that the new
24 document could be shown to a witness only to test his credibility or to
25 refresh his memory.
1 However, the Prosecution also wishes to show another document
2 which supports its case and which they did not have time to prepare, for
3 technical reasons, and they're requesting a short break to find it and
4 show it to the Defence. So that is the position of the Prosecution.
5 I should like to hear the opinion of the Defence now.
6 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, in accordance with
7 your decision and the fact that the Prosecution has given us a document
8 which appears to come from this witness, we do not object that that
9 document be used, but for the purposes clearly indicated in your decision;
10 that is, to test the credibility of the witness or to refresh his memory.
11 As far as the other documents are concerned, we object to them
12 being shown to the witness because the Defence has not received any such
13 documents and because the Prosecution, in its arguments, does -- has not
14 said that they could be used for the same purposes as indicated by the
15 decision of the Chamber. Accordingly -- according to what we heard, these
16 documents are the result of additional investigations by the Prosecution.
17 And finally, the Prosecution was not caught by surprise by the
18 questions we put to this witness, because in the summary it is clearly
19 said that his testimony would also relate to a later period when this unit
20 of foreigners was formed and when they were placed under the army's
21 control. And it is also stated that he would testify about the process of
22 mobilisation, the problems, ID documents, and the other issues that the
23 witness has testified about. Therefore, our summary does indicate what
24 the witness testified about.
25 Thank you.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Dixon.
2 MR. DIXON: Thank you, Your Honours. We have no objection either
3 to the document that has been disclosed to us being shown to the witness,
4 but we would ask that the Prosecution should clarify whether it is for the
5 purposes of credibility or memory refreshing. In our view, those are very
6 different concepts, and in terms of how Your Honours then review the
7 evidence that is given thereafter, it's important whether it was shown to
8 test the truth of what the witness was saying or whether it's shown simply
9 to refresh his memory.
10 Your Honour, in addition to that, there is another point that I do
11 wish to raise given what my learned friend has said about 6.000 documents
12 being discovered in October 2004 within the security services. This issue
13 might arise again potentially if the Prosecution seeks to reopen its case
14 or seeks to bring evidence in rebuttal, and I simply wish to say at this
15 point that, in the Defence's submission, this is a large body of
16 documentation which in our view should not be permitted to be introduced
17 at such a late stage in the trial, in a way retrying many of the issues
18 that have arisen already. And these are not documents, as we've
19 discovered, that didn't exist at the time the investigation into this case
20 commenced, 'way before 2001. There was a lengthy period of investigation,
21 and in our view, the security services would have been one of the first
22 places that the Prosecutor's office should have gone to, given the nature
23 of this case, to seek evidence against the accused.
24 So this material has been discovered very late in the day, and in
25 our view that is an important point to bear in mind. It might be one that
1 is raised later if there is a rebuttal argument put forward by the
3 Your Honour, lastly in relation to the additional documents that
4 we've heard about now, we haven't seen them. We would want an opportunity
5 to do that, but I agree with my learned colleague Ms. Residovic that the
6 Prosecution had ample notice that this witness would talk about matters
7 related to the El Mujahid unit. In fact, that's why they had disclosed to
8 us the first document, which we are not objecting to.
9 Thank you, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I shall give the floor to
11 Mr. Mundis again, but there's a small point to be clarified in what the
12 Defence is saying.
13 Our decision authorises the Prosecution to produce a document to
14 refresh memory or to test credibility. The refreshment means because the
15 witness may have forgotten some things, but credibility is something quite
16 different. Credibility is when a witness in good faith, or maybe in bad
17 faith, asserts something. So one should make a clear distinction when a
18 request is made to produce such a document whether it is being done to --
19 as a reminder or within the framework of testing the credibility of the
21 Having said that, the Chamber would also like to know, but we will
22 deliberate about this amongst ourselves, this second document, is it
23 really necessary in relation to the first document? Because if the first
24 document achieves the desired goal, is it necessary to have a second
25 document? As we are totally ignorant about those documents, this second
1 document, is it not perhaps superfluous? If it is, it's not necessary,
2 especially if it's being used to test credibility or refresh memory.
3 Mr. Mundis.
4 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. And I did want to -- I'll
5 address that concern in just a moment, but I did want to either clarify or
6 correct what I said before in the event it was mistaken.
7 This collection contains 6.000 pages, not 6.000 documents. There
8 might be a slight difference between the two. I believe I said pages, but
9 if not, it's 6.000 pages of material.
10 With respect to the -- to the point as to the difference between
11 credibility and refreshing, again the Prosecution would submit that Your
12 Honour has it exactly right. We can't say whether the document will be
13 shown to challenge his credibility or refresh his recollection until the
14 witness has the document. Once he has the document, he very well may say,
15 "Oh, yes. I was mistaken. I do remember that now that I've seen this
16 document," and then it's not necessarily an issue of credibility. So we
17 really need to be able to put the document to him before we can make any
18 kind of argument at a later point, once all the evidence is in, as to his
19 credibility or not.
20 With respect to the point raised by my learned colleague Mr. Dixon
21 about when the material was obtained, at this point in time,
22 Mr. President, I would reserve our comments on that, pending any type of
23 motion, perhaps, to either reopen or to put on evidence in rebuttal. The
24 fact that material existed in 2000 or 2001 does not necessarily mean that
25 the person or agencies or governments who controlled that information
1 would let us get to it, and I just leave it at that for now.
2 Let me also say, Mr. President, that among one of the reasons why
3 some of this material has not been disclosed, this entire collection, is
4 again it relates to another investigation focusing on 1995, number one;
5 number two, because of the large quantity of material, the Office of the
6 Prosecution has not reviewed it all because it is in both the Bosnian
7 language and there are within this collection a large number of documents
8 in Arabic for which the Prosecution is seeking to have these documents
9 translated as well. So there is a huge amount of material, it's not in a
10 language that we're able to process -- or parts of it is not in a language
11 that we are able to quickly process. We are taking all the necessary
12 steps to identify potential rule 68 material for this case. And I will
13 leave it all at that point in time, Mr. President.
14 The final point with respect to two additional documents: You're
15 absolutely right that we very well may not need to show the witness those
16 documents, depending on his response to the first document. I simply
17 raised it now so that we can deal with all of these issues in one go
18 rather than having the cross-examination broken up repeatedly by
19 objections, thus delaying it.
20 Thank you.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. I think that in view
22 of the time, the best thing to do would be for the witness to come back,
23 to be questioned about the first document, because the Prosecution says
24 that it is quite possible that they will not the second document. If that
25 is so, after this first document, we can stop and have a break, allow the
1 Prosecution to disclose those other documents if they need them.
2 Mr. Usher, will you go and fetch the witness, please.
3 [The witness takes the stand]
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis, you have the floor.
5 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
6 Cross-examined by Mr. Mundis:
7 Q. Good morning, Brigadier Hubo. My name is Daryl Mundis, and along
8 with my colleagues here today, we represent the Prosecution in this case.
9 We have some questions for you, but before I do that, sir, let me just
10 inform you that it's not our intention in any way to confuse you, and in
11 the event you don't understand any of my questions, just ask me and I'll
12 clarify or rephrase the question for you.
13 Sir, I would like to focus on the subject that you were discussing
14 towards the end of the direct examination by my learned colleague Madam
15 Residovic; that is the El Mujahedin detachment. I would like you to --
16 you told us, sir, that -- and this is at page 41, line 25, carrying on to
17 page 42, line 2, in the English translation in response to a question
18 about the El Mujahedin detachment, the answer was translated as: "I never
19 came across the necessary documentation for that, neither was that unit
20 mentioned in any of the reports or any document whatsoever."
21 My question to you, sir, is: Did the El Mujahedin detachment --
22 was it ever created or was that unit never formed?
23 A. I have already said, and I speak from memory: During 1994 and
24 1995, up until the end of the war, there were attempts for that unit to be
25 formed. I don't know if that answers your question.
1 Q. Sir, I take it, then, that because you say there were attempts
2 rather than the unit was formed, it's your testimony that those attempts
3 were not successful.
4 A. That depends. At the end of the war, at a certain point in time
5 we had certain lists, lists of complete units including foreigners and
6 locals, Bosnians. But this was a stage just prior to the end of the war.
7 Why am I saying this? Because it was a very difficult situation.
8 The foreigners were not mobilised in the way I've explained, but attempts
9 were made to set them up like any other unit. That means that we should
10 know the composition, the situation, all the data from the records, and
11 those data should be forwarded to the competent defence departments
12 responsible for records. I'm just talking about records, nothing else. I
13 hope you won't take it that I'm referring to anything else.
14 Q. And, sir, again, I understand the testimony you've given us about
15 these attempts at compiling lists, but my question, sir, is was the El
16 Mujahedin or El Mujahid detachment ever actually created?
17 A. It was never created like a normal unit. As I was saying, at a
18 certain point in time there were attempts, and eventually some sort of a
19 record was established. As far as the listing of men and their names,
20 which were no secret, at the end of the war, these lists were forwarded to
21 defence departments in accordance with the procedure prescribed for all
23 Q. And these lists, as you've told us at line 7 on page 56, this list
24 of complete units, including foreigners, these foreigners had been part of
25 the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina prior to this time at the end of the
1 war; isn't that right?
2 A. It is hard for me to answer that question, whether somebody was
3 part or not. I didn't have insight as I did in the case of normal units
4 to see for myself. So I can only tell you about the things that I myself
6 Q. Sir, in May of 1995, can you tell us what position you held within
7 the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
8 A. At the time, if I'm not mistaken, I was assistant commander for
9 organisational, mobilisation and personnel affairs. I think that was its
10 name. It was part of the corps command.
11 Q. So in effect, sir, you were doing the same job in May of 1995 that
12 you had been doing during 1993.
13 A. More or less, with some minor differences in the range of duties
14 that we had in 1995 and in 1993.
15 Q. And, sir, these lists that were compiled in 1995, were you in fact
16 responsible for producing these lists?
17 A. I was not responsible for compiling any kind of lists. The
18 responsibility of the corps command was to keep individual records for
19 members of the corps command and staff units. Lists were compiled and
20 forwarded by units of a certain level. Those who were not within the
21 command, to make myself quite clear, that body - I wasn't alone; there
22 were ten men in that department - we were not responsible nor was it our
23 duty to count people and to take data from those people and to make a
24 record of their names. This was the regular procedure.
25 Q. But you certainly, from subordinate units of the 3rd Corps,
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 received this information and compiled this information and forwarded this
2 information up the chain of command, did you not?
3 A. In a stage when the corps was better organised and in the desire
4 to carry out a more complete check-up, we had lists -- or, rather, we
5 required various information from units - among other things, lists of
6 personnel - for various reasons, such as packages, logistics, finances and
7 so on. I say again that those lists, in 1995, were given to us, and we
8 had a kind of database for other units, and we wanted to improve our
9 efficiency by producing in computerised form information about the units
10 and their personnel for the needs of the command.
11 Q. And with respect to the foreigners, where you knew it you also put
12 the country of origin of these people, is that right, on these lists?
13 A. I did not have the opportunity to check or see. I wish to
14 underline that once again. We started to receive some sort of lists. Why
15 am I saying this? Because there were a number of such lists. Each time
16 they differed from the previous time, which was an indication that they
17 were rather poor, and that's why I'm saying that there was an effort to
18 improve the situation. But the possibilities were very limited, at least
19 as far as my body, which should have had a record, is concerned.
20 Q. Now, sir, I understand that your role as the assistant commander
21 was not one where you would personally be verifying such information, but
22 you certainly relied upon the subordinate units in referring or reporting
23 this information to you, and you compiled this information and sent it up
24 the chain of command, did you not?
25 A. So we did have information from the units, that they gave to us,
1 and those were the data available to us.
2 Q. And among the data that the various units reported to you was the
3 date of entry of these foreigners into the army of Bosnia and Herzegovina;
4 is that correct?
5 A. For most units, I say again the database was far more detailed,
6 and among other elements this one should be included, the date, place,
7 date of birth and all personal information, and among other things also
8 when that individual joined the army.
9 Q. And, sir, did you compile such a list for the El Mujahedin
11 A. Could you please be more specific? Why am I saying that? I did
12 not compile anything. For El Mujahid and for other units we did provide
13 data that were given to us. I didn't do anything on my own. Then I would
14 have introduced certain elements myself. This was simply copying what we
15 received from subordinate units.
16 Q. I understand, sir, that you didn't compile the lists, but did you
17 report or did you put your name on a document going up the chain of
18 command concerning the El Mujahedin detachment and its members, including
19 foreigners, and among the foreigners individuals who had been in the ABiH
20 3rd Corps from 1992?
21 A. Of course I did, as in the case of other units, whoever made such
22 a request from us. Our intention and wish was to finalise those lists,
23 and these were attempts in relation to the defence department with which
24 no contacts had been established to compare the data we had. So this was
25 an additional effort on the part of the corps command in this particular
2 So as for other units, let me mention the situation at the time.
3 We had dead among our casualties, and in 1993 and 1994, we didn't even
4 know who was in the corps command. And family members would inquire about
5 someone, and then we would send a dispatch to all units to report back to
6 us. However, in this way, it was easier for us to communicate. We were
7 more operational. So this is just an illustration of our efforts to find
8 out what the actual numerical situation was and to have exact records.
9 Q. Among the lists or the list that was compiled for the El Mujahedin
10 detachment, how many of those people whose names were on that list were
12 A. I answer from memory. Complete lists -- can I continue?
13 Q. Yes, please.
14 A. I pointed out that those lists varied from 100 men of that
15 extraction, that is people who were not from the territory of
16 Bosnia-Herzegovina or from ex-Yugoslavia, it varied from 100 up to 200
17 something at the end of the war. All those lists with such data, the data
18 being those that were provided to us, were then compiled according to
19 procedure and then sent back to the Ministry of Defence. So that list
20 exists in the present Ministry of Defence department in Zenica, and then
21 people can address certain problems on the basis of those lists. However,
22 the exact records, in my view, was something that we were never to -- able
23 to fully verify.
24 Q. Sir, based on the best recollection that you have, at the time you
25 joined the 3rd Corps in June of 1993, how many foreigners of Middle East
1 or African descent were in units of the 3rd Corps, the subordinate units
2 of the 3rd Corps? How many Middle East and African foreigners were in the
3 ABiH 3rd Corps when you arrived in June 1993?
4 A. I joined the command of the 3rd Corps before June, and I wasn't
5 working on that. It wasn't within my terms of reference at all. So as
6 far as municipal staffs are concerned, I didn't come across a single such
7 member. As for others, I said once I took up my duties in the corps when
8 we first started to receive some sort of lists. Of course I am speaking
9 to the best of my recollection about events that took place more than ten
10 years ago.
11 Q. And, sir, to the best of your recollection, when you joined the
12 3rd Corps, how many Middle East and African foreigners were in the ABiH
13 3rd Corps?
14 A. When I joined the command of 3rd Corps, I was not aware of any
15 one, any single one. The work I did didn't show me that. If you're
16 asking me whether I saw people on the ground, I did see them as members of
17 various humanitarian organisations, but I cannot answer that question
18 whether he was a member of the army or not because I simply don't know
20 Q. Sir, you told us that when you arrived at the 3rd Corps, this was
21 not part of your duties. You weren't working on the issue. It wasn't
22 within your terms of reference. Was there someone within the personnel
23 office of the 3rd Corps who was responsible for these foreigners or
24 compiling information on foreigners that might have been in the 3rd Corps?
25 A. As far as I know, the main body in charge of foreigners was the
1 MUP. We in the 3rd Corps had a security organ which I assume should have
2 had some insight. I specifically did not, was not involved in that
3 segment. I did not interfere in their activities, but I supported them as
4 much as I could.
5 Q. Well, let me -- when I'm talking now, sir, about these foreigners,
6 I'm talking about foreigners who were in units of the 3rd Corps, in its
7 subordinate units. Was there someone within the personnel office of the
8 3rd Corps who was responsible for obtaining information such as personnel
9 information on the foreigners?
10 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Defence.
11 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, the witness has
12 already answered several questions from my learned friend that when he
13 joined the 3rd Corps he was not aware of a single foreigner in the 3rd
14 Corps. All the following questions are not based on the answers given by
15 the witness so far.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Prosecution.
17 MR. MUNDIS: Well, Mr. President, we're -- the witness said it
18 wasn't within his terms of reference. My only question is if there was
19 someone -- he was the assistant commander for personnel, organisational
20 matters, if there was someone in the office who was responsible for
21 compiling the information. That's the only question.
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes, quite so. Please continue.
23 MR. MUNDIS:
24 Q. Sir, within the personnel office of the 3rd Corps, was there a
25 specific individual who was responsible for obtaining information about
1 foreigners that were in units of the 3rd Corps? And when I say
2 "information," I'm talking about date of birth, place of birth, country of
3 nationality, passport details, et cetera. Was there someone within the
4 3rd Corps, from the personnel point of view, who was responsible for
5 obtaining this information from the subordinate units of the 3rd Corps?
6 A. I think one time your question was in the organ of the body of
7 which I was the chief and another time the 3rd Corps. My answer is that
8 in my organ, no one was specially assigned to keeping a record of
9 foreigners. However, in the 3rd Corps command I assume it should have
10 been the duty of the military security service.
11 Q. And, sir, were there -- again, let me go back and stress this
12 point: Were there foreigners from the Middle East and Africa in units of
13 the 3rd Corps in 1992 and 1993?
14 A. As far as I know, there weren't.
15 MR. MUNDIS: Mr. President, I would ask that the new document at
16 this point be shown to the witness. We do have copies. Again, because of
17 the electronic formatting issue, these documents do not as yet have ERN
18 numbers on them. This is a document dated 7 May 1995. We are also
19 awaiting the English translation of the document, but I will lead the
20 witness through the columns and the text of the document. And perhaps if
21 the usher could, once he's done, if the document perhaps could be put on
22 the ELMO for the benefit of the language booths.
23 Q. Now, Witness, can I ask you to take a look at the last page of
24 this document. Sir, is that -- is this a document that bears your name as
25 being the person who submitted the document?
1 A. Yes. It says here my name on this document without a signature,
2 but it's not contestable. The EH are probably the initials of a young man
3 who had the database or kept records and sent it out.
4 Q. Sir, can you now look at the first page of this document, at the
5 top, and can you tell us, sir, if this is one of the lists that you've
6 been telling us about.
7 A. This is a document dated the 7th of May, 1995. It is -- the list
8 is being sent to the department of the military security department. It
9 says: "At your request, we attach to the document a list of members of
10 the El Mujahedin detachment, persons of foreign nationality." So this is
11 one of the lists, one of many that we sent on to the SVB or department of
12 military security for some reason which I can't tell you now. I don't
14 Q. Okay. So all the persons who are listed on this document, there
15 are 252 names, these are all foreigners; is that correct?
16 A. I haven't had a look at them all, but I assume that they are
17 foreigners, yes, people of foreign origin.
18 Q. Okay. Well, sir, I'm basing this on what you just read to us,
19 that it says at your top: "At your request, we attach to the document a
20 list of the members of the El Mujahedin detachment, persons of foreign
21 nationality." Is that what the document says?
22 A. You read out what it says on the document, yes.
23 Q. Let me ask you now, sir, if you could look at the column, the
24 headings on the columns, and if you could tell us what those different
25 columns, the headings of those columns represent.
1 A. It says here the number, surname, name, date of birth, place and
2 municipality of birth, "in the army since," and "in the records since," or
3 "registered as of."
4 Q. Now, sir, have you seen this document before today?
5 A. Yes, I have seen this document.
6 Q. And, sir, this is a document that you sent to the military
7 security service, is that right, in 1995?
8 A. Probably. Obviously it is a document.
9 Q. You just told us a few moments ago that you were not aware of any
10 foreigners being in the army of Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992 and 1993. Is
11 that what you told us?
12 A. I couldn't have known, functionally speaking.
13 Q. I understand that, sir. But you certainly have reported to the
14 military security service that such persons were in units of the ABiH in
15 1992 and 1993. That's what your document indicates; is that right?
16 A. In this document, you have a list of people, the list that we
17 received from the unit, which means -- I'm saying again that this is a
18 copied document with information, data which was sent in to us from that
20 Q. Well, sir, my question wasn't exactly whether you personally
21 checked any of these records. My question was whether you were aware --
22 and that awareness could come from a variety of sources, including the
23 subordinate units that reported to you. You were absolutely aware, based
24 on this document, that there were a number of foreigners who were in the
25 ABiH from the middle of 1992 onwards.
1 A. No, I was not aware of that, sir. I cannot confirm that or the
2 data here. According to me, I wouldn't say they were correct. This is
3 one of the documents which was probably -- it was probably an attempt to
4 ascertain the state of affairs. I don't know what this name means, Ebu
5 this or that, for me to be able to provide a comprehensive information to
6 you, either then or now.
7 Q. And, sir -- but this is a document that you told us -- I asked you
8 if you sent it to military security in 1995, and you said probably, and so
9 I'm a bit confused as to -- you told us that you probably sent this
10 document up to military security, and the document on its face indicates a
11 number of foreigners who were in the ABiH from at least August 1992, and
12 now you're telling us that you weren't aware of the information in a
13 document that you probably sent.
14 A. I'm speaking on the basis of the units, the units that we had at
15 our disposal, normal units and their reports, whereas this document, this
16 is a report of this particular unit, and what they say, that they were
17 there as of that date, I'm not sure it was valid for me either then or
19 Q. Well, if you look at the last two columns, again the first column
20 says "in the army from," and can you remind me what the last column says?
21 A. The last column is "registered as of" or "in the records since."
22 So that means that this should have been in the records of the unit, under
23 normal circumstances, yes.
24 Q. Okay. Let me just ask you, then, for example, number 4 on the
25 list: Abdela Al Faruk; date of birth 2 March, 1969; place of birth Libya;
1 in the ABiH since 5 August, 1992; as reflected in the records of the unit,
2 1 May 1993. You're telling us, sir, that you were not aware that you
3 yourself were probably reporting this information to the military
5 A. Let me tell you, the data listed here is one thing, but I have my
6 reasons to doubt these data. I think they are incomplete and incorrect.
7 Q. Let me ask you this, sir: Why did you report information up the
8 chain of command to the military security if you doubted the accuracy or
9 completeness of this information?
10 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction. The interpreter I
11 believe said I have reason to doubt. I have reason to doubt.
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know why they asked me for
13 this, whether I asked them to check it out because of my doubts or because
14 of the lack of data and information. I cannot answer with any precision
15 at the moment.
16 MR. MUNDIS:
17 Q. Well, I don't see anywhere in the document, sir - correct me if
18 I'm wrong - but I don't see anywhere in the document where you informed
19 the military security that you personally have doubts about the accuracy
20 or completeness of this information. Did you notify them of that?
21 A. Probably I did, but we did not have reporting -- we had reporting
22 with the commanders, and there were probably discussions about the
23 problems that arose, and probably in this part, too, in this part of the
24 work that I did too.
25 Q. But it's certainly not reflected in the document. You didn't tell
1 military security, "I'm forwarding you some information on the El
2 Mujahedin detachment and its foreign nationals, but I doubt whether this
3 information is accurate or correct." You don't say that in the document.
4 A. That doesn't exist in the document, no, but I am reproducing for
5 you roughly the aspirations and what was done.
6 Q. Do you recall on how many occasions you went back to the
7 subordinate units and expressed disbelief to them as to the accuracy of
8 the information? Did you ever go back to the assistant commanders for the
9 brigades, the assistant commanders for personnel and say, "I don't believe
10 this information you're sending me"?
11 A. Well, not that we did it once. We had regular meetings, if I can
12 say so, of the professional organs. We had control and supervision in the
13 units, which were based on correct data and tallying the correct data with
14 the brigades and units. And we did this on several occasions by what we
15 called a control, of one file with another, comparing file with file. For
16 each conscript, for example, they had a file in one department and a file
17 in the brigade and then all these files would be taken and compared file
18 by file, all the information and data with the actual situation in the
19 units on the ground.
20 Q. And what exactly at these meetings did you tell the subordinate
21 units about the accuracy of this information or the completeness of this
22 type of information? You told them that you doubted this information they
23 were reporting to you?
24 A. Well, every control implies verifying the data presented to the
25 units, the report and what we called assistance, back-up.
1 Q. I'm not sure if we're understanding each other here, sir, but let
2 me try this one more time. The document you have before you is based on
3 information that you got from the personnel offices of the subordinate
4 units of the 3rd Corps; is that right?
5 A. That means that I did not receive the information but it was sent
6 by the unit command and the corps command, to make matters clear.
7 Q. Absolutely. The unit -- the subordinate units sent this
8 information to the 3rd Corps, and you compiled the information and
9 forwarded it to military security; is that right?
10 A. Well, I didn't send it on to the military security. I didn't
11 forward the list of all the units to the military security. I forwarded
12 it when necessary. At one point in time, we had what we called
13 fictitiously compiled lists - and I can explain that to you - and then the
14 service would check this out through its own chain, whether someone had
15 been recorded and registered or not whereas they weren't in fact in the
16 army. So it was a sort of abuse that went on. And this was a sort of way
17 of helping out, whether we -- the data had been compiled as was requested.
18 Q. I'm simply asking you, sir, if the information contained in the
19 document before you was obtained from the personnel departments of the
20 subordinate units.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Now, you've told us that this information that's contained in the
23 document, you have some doubts about the accuracy or completeness of this
24 information. Is that what you've told us?
25 A. Yes, that's what I told you. They are not complete, and I doubt
1 them. I doubted them then and I doubt that they are correct information
3 Q. And my question, then, sir, is these doubts that you say you had
4 both -- you have doubts today and you had doubts then, my question is:
5 Did you communicate those doubts back to the personnel offices who
6 provided you with the information?
7 A. There was no Personnel Department of these. They were usually
8 individuals -- an individual, and these individuals changed, and they
9 would send out what they deemed fit.
10 Q. Do you have any recollection, sir, of -- again, there are 252
11 names on this document. Do you have any idea which subordinate units of
12 the 3rd Corps these persons were in in 1992 and 1993, the ones who are
13 listed as being in the army in 1992 and 1993? Do you have any
14 recollection what units they were in?
15 A. I have no such information. There would have to have been some
16 data if there were such persons in such units.
17 Q. Well, this list that, as you've told us, contains the names of
18 foreigners who were in the El Mujahedin detachment, when was this unit,
19 the El Mujahedin detachment, formally disbanded?
20 A. Well, I wasn't present. At the time I was in Zenica, and the
21 official deportation of those foreigners or the majority of them was after
22 the Dayton agreement. They were deported in organised fashion. I think
23 that they were deported from Bosnia through Croatia and further on, I
24 don't know where to. And of course a portion of them stayed on respecting
25 the citizenship of whatever the citizenship was, but I can't give you an
1 exact date just off my head.
2 Q. The -- but I'm referring now, sir, to the formal disbanding of the
3 El Mujahedin detachment. That occurred in accordance with the Dayton
4 agreement; did it not?
5 A. I can't say for sure. I really can't be certain. To the best of
6 my recollection, well, I don't know. I think you have lists given to the
7 Ministry of Defence departments in Zenica, so the date exists there, the
8 exact date when they finished registering them or that unit, how long they
9 were there for, until when.
10 Q. And, sir, as part of the disbanding or disbandment of that unit,
11 what steps were taken?
12 A. As far as my part is concerned, if I can put it that way, my
13 duties, my part of the job, commissions were set up pursuant to orders
14 from our Supreme Command in each unit. There was a commission in each
15 unit, and it was composed of, I think, four members, a four-member
16 commission which compiled a list and then concluded that list and handed
17 it over to the competent authorities in the Ministry of Defence. That's
18 what I can say pursuant to my terms of reference and the job I was doing
19 -- or, rather, my organ was doing.
20 Q. Sir, do you know what happened to the records or documents of the
21 El Mujahedin detachment?
22 A. Which documents do you mean?
23 Q. Any -- any documents of that unit; orders, personnel records.
24 A. Well, let me tell you, if you mean foreigners, I don't know nor
25 did I ever have occasion to see any of their documents. Now, what was the
1 duty -- now, if this was done I can't tell you, I didn't check it out, is
2 the defence department must have had an additional file for persons of
3 that kind and then probably conclude that kind of list, but I never had
4 occasion to see any file like that or anything else regarding that like in
5 the other corps units.
6 Q. Did you ever see any -- do you recall ever seeing any orders or
7 documents requesting the 3rd Corps to burn or destroy records, stamps,
8 seals, or any other type of material or equipment relating to the El
9 Mujahedin detachment?
10 A. Well, I don't remember the details, so on the basis of my memory,
11 there were -- all the units that were disbanded and had a stamp were
12 duty-bound to return that, and then that was destroyed by the commission,
13 that is to say with minutes kept and so on.
14 As far as the other documents concerned, no, quite the contrary.
15 We insisted, in fact. That is to say, the service I was in, we were fully
16 conscious of what would follow; that is, the realisation of various rights
17 and other things, and so we did our best to send the lists or, rather, to
18 have this -- these records kept and established about all that.
19 Q. Sir, during 1995, did you ever see any documents relating to the
20 El Mujahedin detachment that were in Arabic?
21 A. It is difficult for me now to answer that question. I don't
22 remember. There were orders, there were other documents of this nature,
23 but I really don't remember. We don't know Arabic. And so let me repeat
24 once again, as for this part I didn't know what this meant, this Ebu.
25 What does Ebu mean? And somebody can't be called -- in a list you can't
1 have somebody with Ebu there because it's not a first or last name. And
2 there's a lot else that for me is quite incomprehensible, gibberish.
3 MR. MUNDIS: Your Honour, I note the time. This might be the
4 appropriate time for the next technical break.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Yes. It's 12.25. We're going
6 to take a technical break.
7 Mr. Mundis, with respect to the second document, the Judges might
8 wish to confer.
9 MR. MUNDIS: That's one of the issues that I'll be dealing with at
10 the break with the Defence, Mr. President.
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. As I was saying,
12 it's 12.25. We reconvene at around ten minutes to one.
13 --- Recess taken at 12.25 p.m.
14 --- On resuming at 12.57 p.m.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Mundis.
16 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President.
17 Q. Brigadier Hubo, thank you for answering our questions.
18 MR. MUNDIS: The Prosecution has no further questions for the
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I give the floor now to the
21 Defence for additional questions.
22 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
23 Re-examined by Ms. Residovic:
24 Q. Mr. Hubo, I will ask you a few questions linked to the questions
25 and documents shown to you by the Prosecutor during the cross-examination.
1 Do you have the document in front of you, Mr. Hubo?
2 A. Yes, I do -- no, I don't.
3 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Could the document be provided to
4 the witness.
5 Q. In view of the fact that you were the -- in the organisational,
6 mobilisational and personnel department even in 1995, when, as you said,
7 you had certain lists about the partial structure of the Mujahedin unit,
8 can you tell me first who comprised that unit? Were they only foreigners,
9 only locals, or both?
10 A. According to the lists we were provided by that unit, there were
11 foreigners of various origin, Eastern origin, and there were also local
13 Q. Will you please look at this document now. A moment ago you said
14 that all subordinate units would submit to the corps command lists which
15 the corps command requested from them, is that right, regarding the
16 composition of units?
17 A. We didn't need all those lists from all the units, but in 1995, we
18 had some computerised possibilities to print out the lists, because the
19 corps at the time had more than 35.000 men. So it was not possible to
20 check each and every file and list.
21 Q. Who did you get this list from which you forwarded on the 7th of
22 May, 1995?
23 A. I assume that the information on the list was obtained from that
24 unit. It may have included local people, but the young man working on
25 this probably separated the foreigners from the locals, as they were
1 probably the object of interest.
2 Q. You said from that unit. Can you tell us, which unit did you get
3 this information from?
4 A. From the El Mujahedin unit.
5 Q. Will you look at the title of this document, please. What is the
6 subject of this document?
7 A. It says "List," a list of personnel.
8 Q. To whom are you forwarding it?
9 A. It says "To the military security department of the 3rd Corps."
10 Q. My learned friend asked you and suggested that you had forwarded
11 it up the chain of command to the military security. Was this forwarded
12 to a 3rd Corps department or to superior commands?
13 A. This is probably addressed to the department of the military
14 security service. There were other lists made, and whoever asked us for a
15 list of records, we would provide them such lists. This applied to
16 logistics and finances. But summary reports without any lists would go to
17 superior commands.
18 Q. In the first sentence that you have already read out and which my
19 learned friend read out to you also, there's indication why you are
20 forwarding this list. Was it on your own initiative or is it not clear
21 from this that such a list was requested from you?
22 A. It is clear that it is being provided at the request of the
23 military security service. I am commenting on the document. Of course
24 such information was available to anyone who needed it.
25 Q. Anyone looking at this list can easily count, which I did, and see
1 that in this column with the heading "In the army since," there is just
2 over a hundred people who were allegedly in the ABiH in 1992 or 1993.
3 Since you took over duties in the department for organisational and
4 personnel affairs in the autumn of 1993, in that body did you come across
5 information about a single foreigner in the units of the BH army in the
6 autumn of 1993?
7 A. As far as I can recollect, I had no survey of that kind.
8 Q. Before that, after the district Territorial Defence Staff was
9 abolished, you moved to the command of the 3rd Corps, and you were in
10 charge of certain activities linked to municipal Territorial Defence
12 Tell me, during that period of time did you ever receive from any
13 single Territorial Defence Municipal Staff any written information or by
14 going to any municipal territorial staff or its anti-sabotage detachment,
15 did you come across a single foreigner from Afro-Asian countries? Did you
16 ever find out that in the territorial staffs and their units there were
17 any foreigners?
18 A. I specifically did not.
19 Q. You also said, Mr. Hubo, that performing your duties regarding
20 territorial structures, that is municipal staffs, before you took up the
21 duties linked to organisation and mobilisation, you also worked in the
22 staff as an operative. During your activities as an operatives officer,
23 did you ever, in 1993, find that in -- there were foreigners from
24 Afro-Asian countries in any of the units of the 3rd Corps?
25 A. I specifically was not one who was supposed to look into that, but
12 Blank page inserted to ensure pagination corresponds between the French and
13 English transcripts.
1 I didn't come across any such information.
2 Q. Let us now go back a little to the method of work that you
3 described in answer to questions from my learned colleague. You were
4 asked whether you verified, in a sense, the work of your bodies in
5 subordinate units, in brigades and operative groups, et cetera, and as far
6 as I remember, you said of course we did, we had regular meetings, et
7 cetera. Is my understanding of your answer correct?
8 A. Yes. That was one of the ways of checking the structure. I must
9 say that at those meetings, the participants were not Bosniaks alone.
10 There were many Serbs and Croats engaged in this kind of work in the
11 units, and they can confirm that.
12 Q. If I understood your answer correctly, you said that in the El
13 Mujahedin detachment, then or later in 1994, 1995, there was no such
15 A. I don't know at all what they had. I told you that they would
16 send an individual, and these individuals changed. I didn't know what his
17 position was or who he was except what he himself said.
18 Q. This individual, and it wasn't always the same one, would he
19 attend regular meetings that you had with regular units of the ABiH when
20 discussing problems related to your activities?
21 A. That individual was -- I remember one of them. He was not an
22 Arab. We wanted to make a record, and a local person would come who was
23 from that unit. So I can't tell you that he was quite in the same
24 capacity as the others. So I have photographs. I would have to remind
25 myself, but I am not sure. This was more passive participation.
1 Q. As the chief of a department or any one of your staff members, and
2 there was some ten of them, could any one of them ever go to the El
3 Mujahedin, the unit, and check out the situation in that unit?
4 A. Neither I nor any one of my subordinates could go to that unit and
5 check it out. We simply had no access.
6 Q. To go back to this list for a moment, you said that you received
7 it from the El Mujahedin detachment. And all the information contained in
8 that list was provided by whom?
9 A. I said that this was a copy of the information we received from
10 the representative of that unit and nothing more than that.
11 Q. Mr. Hubo, this fourth column, under the heading "In the army
12 since," did you receive this column from the El Mujahedin as well or did
13 you get these dates from any other unit of the BH army?
14 A. I wish to underline once again that this is a simple copy of data
15 received. We had no possibilities or means of changing anything or adding
16 or subtracting anything.
17 Q. To make it quite clear, who did you get that data from?
18 A. From that unit.
19 Q. Mr. Hubo, did you ever -- from the time you took up your duties in
20 autumn 1993, did you ever receive from another unit, a brigade, a
21 detachment, a Municipal Staff, or operations group, did you ever receive a
22 list of names of their unit indicating that they had among their personnel
23 foreign fighters?
24 A. I do not remember that happening.
25 Q. In answer to my learned friend, you said that then and now you are
1 doubting the truthfulness of the information contained here. In view of
2 the fact that this document was requested from you by the military
3 security organ and you said that they possibly could verify certain data,
4 the fact that the security organ is asking you for information about
5 foreigners in the El Mujahedin, does that confirm your doubts or does it
6 indicate something else?
7 A. They asked me for this for their own needs. Now, what those needs
8 were was not something I inquired into, nor was it my duty. But I repeat
9 again that I assume they wanted this information for their own needs, but
10 also, in order to structure things properly, we asked for accurate and
11 relevant data to have complete records of everything, as required by
13 Q. In view of the fact that you received the list from El Mujahedin,
14 tell me, did El Mujahedin provide you with attachments from which you
15 might see whether these persons were in the army at all; and if so, in
16 which unit?
17 A. In that period of time, this was the maximum we could obtain from
18 them. No supporting information could we receive nor did we receive
19 indicating what you have just referred to.
20 Q. My learned friend told you, since you expressed doubt as to the
21 truthfulness of the dates regarding since when they were in the army, he
22 told you that you did not express those doubts in this document, and you
23 confirmed that. My question to you is: Is there your statement in this
24 document that these data are correct and verified?
25 A. I don't know that there is such a statement by me anywhere,
1 because I am now expressing doubts about many of the facts listed in this
2 document and in lists provided by other units.
3 Q. If we now look at these columns that have been filled in and given
4 to you as the maximum they could do, the first column is the ordinal
5 number, the second column gives first and last -- last and first names of
6 the persons who were allegedly members of the El Mujahedin.
7 On the 7th of May, 1995, when this document was compiled, were you
8 convinced and did you know that these persons listed were all in the El
9 Mujahedin detachment; and secondly, were they the real first and last
10 names of these people?
11 A. I'm never -- I was never sure about who those people were nor what
12 they were nor since when they were there. So for me, these data were
13 always irrelevant. And my doubts proved true after the war, and I can
14 give you some illustrations which can be verified.
15 When the final list compiled by the unit and given to the Defence
16 Department and a name that was given when they were to obtain certain
17 entitlements regarding citizenship and marriages, et cetera, for the
18 people who remained, they came back to the municipal authority and said,
19 "I am not the person on that list, but that is how I was registered,"
20 which only shows that all these data were inaccurate and irrelevant. I
21 said, for instance, Ebu this and Ebu that, as a lay Bosnian, doesn't mean
22 anything to me. But surely a hundred people cannot be called Ebu. We are
23 laymen, but by any analysis would show that this cannot reflect the true
24 state of affairs.
25 Q. Mr. Hubo, the third column gives the date of birth. On the 7th of
1 May, 1995, did you have any knowledge or conviction or the possibility to
2 verify whether the people with these names were indeed born on the dates
3 indicated under column "Date of birth"?
4 A. I had no possibility of verifying a single piece of information.
5 If -- I say that I couldn't verify any of these data or columns, nor was
6 it possible to do that. These were data received, copied, and as such,
7 forwarded on.
8 Q. But you did know or you were able to verify column 4. Somewhere
9 you have the name of the town, sometimes the name of the country
10 indicating where the people were coming from.
11 A. I underline once again that for many there is no indication of
12 their place of birth or even country. In some cases some countries are
13 mentioned, and what I just said applies to this as well.
14 Q. In view of the fact that you have commented on the first column in
15 answer to my questions, is that the reason why, in answer to my learned
16 friend, you said that you are not at all aware that the column headed "In
17 the army since" could be true? Did you have any possibility of verifying
18 that column?
19 A. I said once that different lists were submitted at different
20 times. And if all those lists were to be compared, you would find
21 differences. This column, "In the army since," was one that we were not
22 able to verify.
23 Q. You also told my learned friend that after the Dayton Accords, the
24 request was made to disband this unit, that most of the members were
25 deported. Tell me, not in the army but in the political sphere, were
1 there certain attempts and requirements on the part of these persons and
2 people close to them to allow them to stay in the country?
3 A. I can't give you an expert opinion, but I can tell you on the
4 basis of what I heard from people working in the administration. There
5 were quite a number of people who on the basis of this, marriages and some
6 other legal grounds, tried to retain some sort of status and remain in the
7 country, and these lists probably are an indication of that.
8 Q. Mr. Hubo, in the course of your duties, were you aware that
9 citizenship could be acquired by establishing the fact that someone was a
10 member of the army before May 1993?
11 A. I never gave any thought to the matter in those days nor was it
12 within my sphere of interest.
13 Q. But working within the Defence Ministry, did you learn of that?
14 A. Yes. Talking to colleagues working in some other departments in
15 the administration, in those cases, too, they complained that they were
16 encountering the same difficulties, that the final list provided at the
17 end of the war, as I explained, again the same problems arose, that the
18 man may not be the one from the list, but he may claim that he was, or
19 someone else, and then there was a whole procedure to establish the truth.
20 Q. And my final question, Mr. Hubo: After you had this list provided
21 by the El Mujahedin and after all the questions put to you in connection
22 with that document, can you tell me whether your knowledge, not your
23 opinion any more, shows that foreigners or, rather, Mujahedin were not
24 part of the 3rd Corps in 1993, and is that opinion unchanged?
25 A. As far as foreigners are concerned, my opinion remains unchanged
1 on the basis of my own personal experience, my recollection, and so on.
2 Finally, I think that these people abused the institution of the army.
3 The way in which this document was compiled shows that they did not
4 respect the system or our own values as they were prescribed.
5 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. I have
6 no further questions.
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Dixon.
8 MR. DIXON: Your Honour, I have no further questions on behalf of
9 Mr. Kubura.
10 Questioned by the Court:
11 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Colonel, as far as
12 I'm concerned, I have several questions to ask you. Would you take up the
13 document again, please. You should have it in front of you.
14 And may we have the document placed on the overhead projector,
15 please, Mr. Usher, with your assistance.
16 Now, looking at the document, could you tell me what it says at
17 the top to the left? There are some figures and the date, and afterwards
18 -- above that it says 05/4-1028. What does that number represent?
19 A. That number denotes the number which was given to the department
20 in the protocol book, book of protocols.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And your service, what number
22 did it have in the book of protocols?
23 A. My service was 05. That was its number.
24 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. You say your service
25 had 05 as its number. Now, what about the 4, /4? What does the 4 stand
1 for? 05/4.
2 A. I can't tell you now. It means that it was recorded in the
3 protocols book, a certain subject, lists, requests. They were given
4 numbers according to the groups.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Different
6 categories. Right.
7 Now, to the best of your recollection, category 1, what was that?
8 Categories 1, 2, 3 and 4, what category was 4?
9 A. Your Honour, I really couldn't say with any certainty whether this
10 denoted a category of documents or not. I'm not quite sure. I'm sorry, I
11 can't be certain.
12 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. You can't tell me.
13 Now, what about the 1028 figure? What's that? What does that tell you?
14 Does it tell you anything? In category 4, was the 1.028th document, or
15 what? What is 1028 number? What does it signify?
16 A. I assume it ought to be what you've just said. That is to say, at
17 the beginning of the year a book of protocols is opened up, and the first
18 numbers are assigned according to the groups or categories. So this is --
19 the first number is the category number and this is the number given to
20 the document or list.
21 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Now will you turn to
22 the last page of the document and look at the last page, please, just the
23 last page. Since we don't have the English translation of the document,
24 we're going to rely on what you tell us. We have EH/EH in the left
25 column. What is this EH/EH, capitals?
1 A. At the time, this first EH was placed before the dash, and that
2 was usually the document -- the person who compiled the document. And
3 after the dash, or forward slash, were the initials of the individual who
4 typed out the document. I think that in this case, it was Emir Hurem. So
5 he compiled the document and typed it out. It would be the same man, I
7 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] All right. So that's the person
8 who compiled the document typed it up.
9 Now, underneath, in your language, it sales "Dostavljeno." What
10 is the translation of that? What does that mean?
11 A. Well, we write who the document is sent out to, delivered to, and
12 it says "Title," "Naslovu," and then the "a/a" on behalf of the organ or
13 commander. It's not signed, but that doesn't matter. Sometimes they are
14 signed and not signed, but this expresses what I have said.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] So you say that a/a, a/a is the
16 person who acts for the commander. The archives, does that mean archives?
17 Normally in military terms, the addressees, you have a list of the persons
18 to whom the document is delivered to, and the a/a, you say that that is
19 the person who reacts on the part of the commander. Why is that in the
20 list of addressees?
21 A. I don't know if I'm understanding you properly. The left-hand
22 column, it says "Dostavljeno," "delivered to," and then it says "title"
23 "Naslovu." "Naslovu" means the title on the first page of the document.
24 Here it says the SVB -- "Odjeljenje SVB," or "Department SVB." And then
25 the archives. "A/a" means archives, that a copy is sent to the archives.
1 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] That's what I thought. Thank
2 you. Now we have it. So a/a is archives.
3 Now, let's look at the left hand -- the right-hand side. What
4 does it say there? And I'm reading PK ZA OM I KP? What does all that
6 A. It is the function, the post in the command of the 3rd Corps
7 linked to this protocol number 05 at the top on the first page. On the
8 first page, that document in the upper left-hand corner, the 05.
9 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Now, can it happen
10 that your Emir Hurem, the EH might have written your name down but might
11 not have shown you this document, or do you remember having seen the
12 document? Because there is not signature. So you are not the
13 intellectual author of the document. So my question to you is this, to
14 make things quite clear: Could the document have gone -- passed you by
15 without you having seen it, actually seen it yourself?
16 A. Hypothetically, everything is possible, Your Honour. I had 50 or
17 60 documents that I would have to look at on a daily basis and sign and
18 distribute and so on. I see no reason, therefore, with this one. I
19 assume that this is the database that we had and which was sent to us as
20 it was, and then it was sent on. So I have no reason to doubt that
21 somebody wanted to plant this on me or --
22 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. Now, would you say,
23 looking at the text, that this was typewritten on a typewriter or on a
24 computer? What can you say looking at the form of type, the letters, the
1 A. I assume that this was compiled on a computer. We actually just
2 had one typewriter that we wrote some other documents on, typed them out
3 on that one typewriter.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] You say this is a computer.
5 Right. Now, that computer, we're talking about 1995. It's probably
6 disappeared in the meantime, but let's go on to another subject. Let's
7 move on.
8 When you yourself were a member of the 3rd Corps, how were you
9 paid? Did you receive a salary at the end of the month or not or no
10 salary, or how did this function? How were you paid? I ask you this
11 because the Defence showed you P192 where there was a paragraph on
12 salaries and problems of payment. So how were you paid at the time? Were
13 you paid in dinars, in Deutschmarks? Were you paid through an account or
14 in cash or how -- how did you get your salary?
15 A. Your Honour, I don't know when we actually started receiving a
16 sort of salary in cash. I think at the time I had ten marks, ten
17 Deutschmarks. The soldiers had 20 Deutschmarks. Now, from the 6th of
18 April, I think it was, until Dayton was signed, the Dayton agreement was
19 signed in Paris, and the Paris agreement, we were issued certificates, and
20 for every month spent in the army, you would have 400 Deutschmarks paid
21 out to you in the form of a certificate. That is to say 400 marks on
22 paper, not in cash.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] But when you received ten marks
24 or 20 marks, was that at the end of the month, beginning of the month,
25 middle of the month? When?
1 A. I can't remember exactly but lists were compiled for that, too,
2 for the money, remuneration we received. There were lists.
3 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And who actually supplied the
4 money? Who in the 3rd Corps -- or, rather, who in the 3rd Corps gave you
5 the money or paid the soldiers of the 3rd Corps?
6 A. The money was supplied, as far as I know, by the government via
7 the General Staff at the time and the 3rd Corps.
8 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well, yes. But was there
9 somebody in the 3rd Corps, a military officer, who distributed the money
10 to you? Was somebody in charge of distributing the actual money to you?
11 A. In the 3rd Corps command there was an organ or department for
12 material and financial matters, and in each brigade there was a man like
13 that, too, to deal with financial matters and see to things of that kind.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And if the person handing -- the
15 person handing out the money, would they do that on the basis of a list
16 they had?
17 A. That person did have a list supplied by the command. The command
18 compiled the list. The command of the unit, that is.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] And is that what happened in all
20 the units? Is that the way they were paid in all the units?
21 A. At the time, as far as I know, that was what the custom was. That
22 was how we were paid.
23 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Now, after --
24 following my questions, would the parties like to ask any additional
25 questions? Mr. Mundis, you first.
1 MR. MUNDIS: Thank you, Mr. President. I just have one question.
2 Further cross-examination by Mr. Mundis:
3 Q. Sir, do you still have the document? No. The Presiding Judge
4 asked you a question about -- I'm looking at the back of the document
5 right above where your name appears, the initials PK and then the word ZA
6 OM I KP that actually stands for assistant commander for -- can you tell
7 us what that stands for?
8 A. For organisational, mobilisational, and cadres affairs.
9 Q. Personnel.
10 A. Or personnel affairs, yes, cadres.
11 Q. That phrase is actually an abbreviation for the position that you
12 held in 1995? Thank you, sir.
13 A. Yes.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] I give the floor to the Defence
15 for any final questions they may have.
16 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] We have no questions, Mr.
17 President, thank you.
18 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. Dixon.
19 MR. DIXON: No questions. Thank you, Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Colonel, on behalf of the
21 Chamber, I would like to thank you for having come to The Hague and
22 testified and answered the questions from the Defence and also from the
23 Prosecution, as well as questions from me, too. I asked you to clarify
24 certain points, so I thank you for that.
25 On behalf of the Chamber, I wish to express our best wishes for a
1 safe return back home, and I hope you have every success in your military
2 career. The usher will now escort you out of the courtroom. Thank you.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you too.
4 [The witness withdrew]
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Now, as regards the document or
6 the documents, because the Defence provided us with a binder. First the
8 MS. RESIDOVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. President, we would like to
9 tender into evidence as Defence documents the following: Number 2 on our
10 list, which is 1381; then number 8, 1407; and document number 10, to be
11 marked for identification because we just have the document in the Bosnian
12 Herzegovinian version, and it is the decree on the criteria and
13 normatives, et cetera.
14 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. Mr. Mundis, what
15 about the two documents, 1407 and the other one? What is your position?
16 MR. MUNDIS: No objections, Mr. President.
17 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Registrar, may we have the
18 three numbers, please.
19 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. So we
20 have two documents admitted into evidence. They are DH1381, with the
21 English version being 1381/E.
22 Then DH1407, and the English version DH1407/E.
23 The third document is a document marked for identification. That
24 number will be DH2015 ID. The date is the 26th of October, 1992, and it
25 is titled in English, provisional title [In English] [Previous translation
1 continues] ... Normative on a Disposition of Citizens and Resources in the
2 Armed Forces and Other Needs of Defence.
3 [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President.
4 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. Registrar.
5 Now, the Prosecution. Any documents there?
6 MR. MUNDIS: Yes, Mr. President. We would respectfully request
7 that the document which we showed to the witness bearing the date 7 May
8 1995 be admitted into evidence with the notation as per the earlier
9 documents, that it goes to credibility and/or refreshing recollection. We
10 will provide an English translation for the document as quickly as
12 I am aware that normally we've been marking documents until we
13 have the translation. That's fine. If we simply want it marked for
14 identification with that note and then once we provide the translation it
15 could then be --
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] For identification. Right.
17 I turn to the Defence. A number marked for identification with
18 the usual markings. No objections there? No.
19 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Mr. Dixon.
20 MR. DIXON: No objections, only to say as a matter of principle
21 that there's been a lot of testimony given about this document and that it
22 can only be used for credibility or refreshing memory, not as part of the
23 Prosecution case. But I would return to the point that I made earlier
24 that it would be helpful, I think, for Your Honours if the Prosecution
25 could say on what basis do they introduce it; credibility or refreshing
1 memory? It's of course for Your Honours to decide in reviewing the --
2 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well.
3 MR. DIXON: -- but the Prosecution wasn't absolutely clear on
4 that. Thank you, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. But the Prosecution
6 agreed on that point completely.
7 Now, Mr. Registrar, may we have a number for -- marked for
8 identification, because we need the English translation, and to mark it
9 credibility test or refreshment of memory pursuant to the decision we took
10 a moment ago.
11 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mr. President. Yes.
12 You've said it all. This document, therefore, is marked for
13 identification, and the number with the proviso as mentioned, to refresh
14 memory or to test the credibility, P950 ID.
15 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Very well. We're going into
16 private session for a few moments now, please.
17 [Private session]
11 Page 15660 redacted. Private session.
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] We are in open session,
15 Mr. President.
16 JUDGE ANTONETTI: [Interpretation] Thank you. If there are no
17 matters outstanding, we adjourn the meeting and reconvene next week on
18 Monday at quarter past two. I wish you a very good weekend and hope to
19 see you back here on Monday at 2.15.
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
21 to be reconvened on Monday, the 7th day of
22 February, 2005, at 2.15 p.m.