1 Tuesday, 31st August, 1999
2 [Open session]
3 [The witness entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 10.15 a.m.
5 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Please be
7 Registrar, have the accused brought in,
9 [The accused entered court]
10 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I suggest --
11 well, first, does everybody hear me? I hope that
12 everybody can hear me, the interpreters, everybody else
13 as well. I don't know which interpreter is in which
14 booth here -- oh, the French booth is on the left; yes,
15 all right. I was looking to the right, but I would
16 also like to say good morning to the Prosecution and
17 the Defence and to Witness F, and of course to the
19 Witness F, have you rested up a bit? Do you
20 feel all right?
21 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
22 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Very well.
23 When you speak, please turn your microphone on, and try
24 to speak a little louder, because I think that the
25 interpreters are having some difficulty in hearing
1 you. We can resume now with Mr. Greaves. Please
3 Witness F, please get closer to the
4 microphone. Witness F, the Presiding Judge is speaking
5 to you. Please get closer to the microphone, turn it
6 on, and try to speak a little louder so that the
7 interpreters can hear you better.
8 Mr. Greaves?
9 MR. GREAVES: Thank you.
10 WITNESS: F (Resumed)
11 Cross-examined by Mr. Greaves:
12 [Witness answers through interpreter]
13 Q. Mr. F, can I remind you this morning, please,
14 of what I asked you yesterday, which is this: If you
15 don't understand my question, please don't be shy.
16 Stop me and tell me that you haven't understood it and
17 ask me to either rephrase it or repeat it. Can you do
18 that for me?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Mr. F, yesterday afternoon we concluded by
21 discussing some of the political developments that took
22 place in Brcko in the immediate period before the
23 commencement of fighting, and I'd like just to briefly
24 fill in -- put a bit of flesh onto the bones of that
25 conversation that we had.
1 You told us that three political parties were
2 engaged in discussions, meetings, with a view to the
3 division of the town of Brcko in some way; is that
4 right? Three parties were involved in that discussion?
5 A. It is, yes.
6 Q. And did you become aware of that because of
7 what you heard on the media, on the radio or
8 television, or through word of mouth, or how did you
9 become aware of that?
10 A. Through the media. I heard it on the radio,
11 and there was also local television in Brcko.
12 Q. And so that we may understand the context in
13 which this is taking place, can you tell us, please,
14 what were the three parties that were involved in these
15 negotiations? Were they parties that represented the
16 three principal ethnic groups or what? How was it
18 A. Quite. Those were three parties which
19 represented the most numerous ethnic groups in
20 Bosnia-Herzegovina: Serb, Bosnian Muslim, and Croat
22 Q. And would the Serb party, would that be the
23 SDS, and the Muslim party the SDA? Is that right?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. And so that again this may be clear, by
1 division of the town, do you mean the physical division
2 of the town into areas reserved for or principally
3 reserved for particular ethnic groups?
4 A. Yes. There was talk about the type of
5 physical partitioning of the town. The Serb side was
6 the only one which insisted on the partitioning of the
7 town, and the other two sides thought that such a
8 division would be impossible and that it would preclude
9 any kind of normal life in the town.
10 Q. Of course that may be right, but
11 nevertheless, despite their reluctance, they were
12 engaged in talks about that issue?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And does it come to this, that by the 7th of
15 May, those talks had not reached any sort of
16 resolution? For whatever reason, they had not been
18 A. Yes, quite. With the beginning of the war,
19 and it broke out on the 1st of May, it became
20 impossible by the outbreak of war, because such
21 meetings became impossible, because meanwhile, that is
22 on the 1st of May, the army and paramilitary formations
23 had taken over the whole town and all the important
24 institutions in the town, such as the municipal
25 authority, post office, television, radio, police.
1 They simply brought the army into the town. Without
2 any fighting, they took over control of the town, over
3 a major part of the town.
4 Q. And is it right that those meetings continued
5 at least until May the 5th?
6 A. No, as far as I know, those meetings were
7 never resumed, because it was impossible. I've just
8 explained why.
9 Q. The reason I ask you about that date, Mr. F,
10 is that in the statement which you made to the Office
11 of the Prosecutor, you said, in relation to those
12 meetings, that they continued until May the 5th. Does
13 that refresh your memory?
14 A. Yes, but on the 30th of May, and the 1st of
15 May, that is, until the commencement of fighting, until
16 the fire, the gunfire started, it was agreed, because
17 of the 1st of May holidays, and it was a major popular
18 holiday in Bosnia, it was agreed that a meeting would
19 be resumed on the 5th of May, but the negotiations were
20 never resumed because of the circumstances which arose
21 meanwhile, as I have just said.
22 Q. Can you help me, please, about this: Who
23 were the principal political leaders of the parties?
24 Can you remember them by name?
25 A. Yes. The main political leader of the Party
1 for Democratic Action, Mr. Alija Izetbegovic. The
2 president --
3 Q. Can I stop you there? I meant at a local
4 level, not at a national level. I do apologise. I
5 didn't ask that correctly. At a local level in Brcko.
7 A. Yes. The president of the Party for
8 Democratic Action in Brcko was Mr. Ramic. The
9 president of the Serb Democratic Party was Dr., I
10 think, Beli. That's what everybody called him. I
11 can't remember his real name. The president of the
12 Croat party, that is, of the Croat Democratic
13 Community, that is, the party of the Croat people, I
14 cannot recall his name. It was a long time ago.
15 Q. I want to turn now to the outbreak of
16 fighting in the Brcko area. You were first aware of
17 that on the 1st of May or later than the 1st of May?
18 A. Well, I was at home, when the war broke out,
19 with my family, with my girl friend at the time, now my
21 I have just explained that under normal
22 circumstances, it was always a big holiday in Bosnia
23 and everybody marked it, but because of what happened,
24 because things were blown up and because of the tension
25 that pervaded everything, we usually went for an outing
1 on that day, but that particular day, we stayed at
2 home. We went out into our yard of our house and made
3 a barbecue or something, and sometime between 4.00 and
4 5.00 in the afternoon, gunfire started; first infantry
5 weapons, and after that we could hear shelling. But at
6 that time, we could not really distinguish, because it
7 was something quite new to me.
8 Then we went back into the house, but we did
9 not feel safe because of those shells and the house
10 simply did not offer us sufficient protection, and we
11 spent there a very fearful night. All we could hear
12 was gunfire and some voices. We did not come out. It
13 went on until the 2nd of May in the morning, and we
14 were very frightened. We did not know who was there
16 Across from my house, there was a very tall
17 building, and we could see Serb soldiers firing, so
18 that it was very dangerous to be there. Then we were
19 fortunate enough that an old neighbour of ours who
20 lived -- who was our next-door, she knocked on our door
21 to see if there was anyone there and said that it would
22 be better for us to move to a safer place.
23 We lived about -- well, it was about 100
24 metres away from us, and I went to my friend because he
25 had a flat in a tall -- there's a building, in the
1 basement, and that of course was a very good shelter
2 from combat operations and shells, so that we moved
3 over to that basement, to our friends', and we stayed
4 there until the 7th of May without going out.
5 Then I don't know really what to call the
6 formations. There were all sorts of formations of the
7 Serb forces, and under the threat of weapons, they
8 evacuated us to the barracks. They immediately singled
9 out Serbs who were still there, and all the non-Serbs,
10 that is, the Muslims, Croats, Romany, and all other
11 ethnic groups were evacuated to the barracks Veljko
12 Lukic Kurjak, which was in the centre of the town.
13 Q. I just want to ask you a little about the 1st
14 of May. Just a small amount of detail, please, Mr. F.
15 A couple of days prior to that, you had been
16 given some advice by a friend about what was likely to
17 happen or what he thought was likely to happen; is that
19 A. Yes, that is correct.
20 Q. I don't want to know who he was or anything
21 about him, but I think he was Serbian by background.
22 Is that right?
23 A. Yes, that is correct.
24 Q. Was that essentially advice that it might be
25 a good idea to leave town for the time being because
1 fighting was likely to break out?
2 A. I believe that it would be best if I quoted
3 his words, and then you can draw your own conclusions.
4 We were very close friends, and he simply came by for a
5 few moments, and he just said, "Don't ask me anything,
6 but if you can, anyhow," because I lived with two
7 sisters there, "leave the town," and he did not explain
8 anything. It was a very brief comment, and we all felt
9 that the life in the circumstances were not like
11 We were asking ourselves how were we going to
12 fight, with whom, our own friends, neighbours. We
13 thought that in general there could be some awkward
14 situations, some unpleasant moments, but we thought
15 that everybody would be over very fast and that we
16 would go back to our former way of living. But the
17 subsequent events showed that we were very much
18 mistaken, and this is why we experienced later what we
20 Q. So it comes to this: The advice was, "Get
21 out of town," but no specific reason why you should do
22 that was given, it was just advice to leave?
23 A. Yes, that is correct.
24 Q. Can I ask you next, during the course of the
25 7th of May, is this right, that obviously at some
1 stage, you, as it were, went to ground, but during the
2 course of the day you had been out and about in the
3 town of Brcko itself and had seen some of the activity
4 taking place?
5 A. Excuse me. May I ask you what date you're
6 exactly referring to?
7 Q. I'm sorry. I had realised, as soon as I had
8 said it, that it was not the 7th of May. The 1st of
9 May. I do apologise, Mr. F.
10 A. Yes, I'll try to be concise. My (redacted),
11 (redacted), lived on the bank of the Sava River very
12 close to the bridge which on the 30th of April was
13 blown up in the morning, and these circumstances
14 affected me very much because she was very close to
15 that, about 100 metres away from the explosion.
16 It is a miracle that she survived, but she
17 suffered a great shock, so I had to take her to the
18 hospital. She was treated in a hospital. She received
19 shots. This took a lot of my time, and as I was very
20 concerned for her, I was distracted and I could not see
21 to perhaps evacuate myself and her.
22 Later on, I moved (redacted) to my place,
23 and along with my two sisters, this is where we were
24 when the war broke out.
25 On May 1st, since my (redacted) was taken to
1 the hospital by the police officers, they called me to
2 let me know this, so we first went to bring her
3 belongings from this place near the bridge. We had to
4 pass through the city. My neighbourhood was on the
5 other side of town, so we pretty much had to cross the
6 entire town to pick up her belongings and then bring it
7 back to where I lived. This would explain what
8 happened on the 1st of May.
9 Let's say between 11.00 and 12.00, I had
10 crossed the town and I could see that the entire town
11 had been taken over and controlled by the Serbian army,
12 by their formations, and I don't know how to call them,
13 and you could see -- this happened as I was coming
14 back. When I went to pick up the belongings, you could
15 still pass freely, but on the way back, every 10 to 15
16 minutes there were armed soldiers and we were not
17 allowed to pass. So by the set of circumstances, we
18 found a young man whom my sister knew very well, and so
19 he gave us an armed escort, and in this way we were
20 able to move back to my house.
21 Q. Can I just ask you, please, this: The forces
22 that you saw, those were JNA forces, were they?
23 A. At that time, the majority of soldiers that I
24 could see were wearing uniforms of the former JNA, and
25 you could see the vehicles. Since I served in the JNA,
1 there were the Zastava model R110, so the soldiers were
2 jumping out of these vehicles and taking up positions.
3 I saw them surrounding the post office, the SUP
4 building, and I didn't see them much around the
5 barracks, at least not at that time. So that means
6 that the centre of town was entirely under their
8 Q. You, having been in the former JNA, were you
9 able to identify the particular kind of troops that
10 were there? Were they just conventional, regular
11 infantry troops, or were they special forces of any
12 kind, or what were they?
13 A. The former JNA uniforms were the same, but I
14 can say that they only had just light, small arms;
15 automatic rifles, grenades, some radio communication
16 devices. This is what I was able to notice, in terms
17 of their equipment, when I passed through the town.
18 Q. The reason that I ask you that, Mr. F, is
19 that in the statement that you gave to the Office of
20 the Prosecution, you said that you were able to
21 identify the troops you saw as a special unit because
22 of the somewhat different camouflage uniform they were
23 wearing. Does that refresh your memory?
24 A. Yes, yes, very much so, and thank you. This
25 statement referred to the area around the Ministry of
1 Internal Affairs building which were in the very centre
2 of town, and as I passed by, I noticed men who were of
3 Serbian ethnic background whom I had known very well
4 before the war. They were sort of bodyguards. They
5 were providing security for some important locations
6 and important buildings, and this is what I noticed.
7 MR. GREAVES: Would Your Honour just give me
8 a moment whilst I confer with my fellow counsel,
10 Thank you very much, Your Honour.
11 Q. Mr. F, so that we can be clear about this,
12 the building you describe as the Ministry of Internal
13 Affairs, does that also contain the police station or
14 the principal police station in Brcko?
15 A. Yes, that is where the main police station in
16 Brcko was, but also their administrative service. This
17 is where you could get your personal identification
18 cards and such.
19 Q. I want now to turn, please, to May the 7th
20 and just ask you a little bit about the events of that
22 On that day, is it right that you were, in
23 fact, evacuated from the area in which you were
25 A. Yes. I think that I had described that
1 clearly. We were forcibly evacuated under the threat
2 of weapons. We were evacuated from my neighbourhood
3 and escorted to the Veljko Lukic Kurjak barracks, which
4 was also downtown.
5 Q. Yes. That's the main barracks which is
6 pretty well right in the centre of Brcko?
7 A. Yes, that is correct.
8 Q. During the course of that evacuation, did you
9 see a number of different military units carrying out
10 activities in the area?
11 A. Yes. I could only judge that by their look.
12 They were wearing different uniforms, the former JNA
13 uniforms, camouflage uniforms, some black overalls, and
14 there were some reservists too. They were from Brcko
15 and I knew them. But I inferred from the accent they
16 have, I inferred they were from Bijeljina, because they
17 have a particular accent, like people from any other
18 part of Bosnia.
19 Q. Well, I'll come back to that in a moment.
20 How many people were gathered during the course of the
21 evacuation from your district, not in exact figures but
22 in round terms, Mr. F?
23 A. The column was quite long, and the part that
24 I could see and the part of the column which I was part
25 of, it contained about, oh, 1.000 people, no more than
2 Q. Was there just one column in the town, or
3 when you eventually got to the barracks, is this the
4 case, that there were other areas that were also
5 evacuated that day?
6 A. It was one uninterrupted column which went
7 from that neighbourhood to the barracks, and as we were
8 entering the barracks, I did not notice any other
9 civilians who were being assembled there. Later on, we
10 were separated, so those who were fit for military
11 service, 18 to 60 on one side, and women and children
12 and elderly on the other side. Those who were fit for
13 military service were taken to the former cinema hall
14 in the compound, and the women and children and the
15 elderly were immediately put on buses and were taken to
16 Brezovo Polje and Razljevo. These are the villages
17 downstream from Brcko towards Bijeljina.
18 Q. I want to ask you about your assessment that
19 these people must have come from Bijeljina. First of
20 all, my instructions are that there is no significant
21 difference between the accent of a person from
22 Bijeljina and one who comes from Brcko. What do you
23 say to that, Mr. F?
24 A. Sir, as far as I know, there is. We locals
25 could sense the difference. And also I made that
1 inference because I did not know these people, and I
2 would have known them, because this was not a big
3 town. So I inferred that they were not from Brcko.
4 And again, by their accent -- and this is my own
5 opinion. This is not an assertion, but it is my
6 opinion that that is where they came from.
7 Q. These were, for the most part, JNA troops,
8 were they?
9 A. No. No. Most of them were -- to us, at
10 least, they looked dressed very strangely. Some black
11 overalls, some wore some hats, some had their heads
12 shaven, they had some gloves, then there were some
13 camouflage uniforms. So there were some in the SMB
14 uniforms, the olive-drab uniforms of the former JNA.
15 So they were dressed in very different types of
16 uniforms and clothes.
17 Q. During the course of that day, is it right
18 that you witnessed two men being beaten by the
20 A. Yes. Yes, because I know these people very
21 well. They were my neighbours. (redacted);
22 of him they said that they had found in his apartment a
23 camouflage uniform. And there was another young man
24 who was beaten very badly. He had -- his face was
25 bloody and his teeth were knocked out. (redacted)
1 (redacted), and he was -- I noticed the two of them, and I
2 happened to know their names because I knew them in
4 Q. So the reason for the beating of the first
5 man that you mentioned, that was to do with a military
6 uniform having been found in his possession?
7 A. I don't know if it was found, but they said
8 that they had found it. We did not see it.
9 Q. Was any reason given for the beating of the
10 second man?
11 A. No, I don't know the reason. I just saw him
12 being beaten, and I saw how he looked afterwards, and I
13 just described that.
14 Q. The Serbian residents of Novo Brcko, were
15 they separated before you were taken in a column to the
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. And so when you give us the figure of about a
19 thousand people, does that include or exclude the Serbs
20 who were separated off beforehand?
21 A. My apologies. The interpretation is not
22 reaching me right now.
23 MR. GREAVES: I'm not getting any
24 interpretation either right now.
25 A. Could you repeat it, please?
1 Q. The question was this, Mr. F: When you give
2 us the figure of about a thousand people in the column,
3 does that include or exclude the Serbs who were
4 separated off beforehand?
5 A. No, that does not include --
6 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Greaves,
7 please, I would like to remind you, the provisions of
8 Rules 90(H) and (G), we have to avoid useless waste of
9 time. I would like you not to have the witness repeat
10 what he has already said. I would like you to
11 concentrate on what is necessary. After Witness F, I
12 will no longer accept so much indefinite amount of time
13 be taken for which we have no perspectives. In the
14 future, I'm going to ask how long the
15 examination-in-chief is going to take and then how long
16 the cross-examination will take. So I'm asking you to
17 focus your questions on what was done in respect of the
18 examination-in-chief, as 90(G) says.
19 That is -- and I'm authorised to say this
20 under (H) -- "The Trial Chamber shall exercise control
21 over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and
22 presenting evidence so as to make the interrogation and
23 presentation effective for the ascertainment of the
25 MR. GREAVES: With respect, the issue here is
1 how many people were detained, how many were released,
2 how many were killed. That, in our submission, goes to
3 the central issue of genocide. It is an important
4 question. It is germane to the issues that you have to
5 try, in our respectful submission, and in my
6 submission, it is proper to ask about the numbers of
7 people who are --
8 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I accept the
9 respect that you've expressed for the Tribunal,
10 Mr. Greaves. You don't have to repeat that. That is
11 self-evident. But with all the respect that I owe to
12 the Defence and to the Prosecution, the texts give us a
13 certain number of important provisions which will allow
14 us to avoid a waste of time, and I would like this to
15 be repeated: They are avoiding needless consumption of
16 time. That is Rule 90(G), which I will reread to
17 you: "The Trial Chamber shall exercise control over
18 the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and
19 presenting evidence."
20 So as well as the order, so that the
21 interrogation and presentation effective for the
22 ascertainment of the truth will be effective, as I say,
23 will be effective, and then to avoid needless
24 consumption of time.
25 (H): "Cross-examination shall be limited"
1 -- "limited," I repeat -- "to the subject matter of
2 the direct examination ..." I'm going to make a
3 personal comment about this -- "to the subject matter
4 of the direct examination and matters affecting the
5 credibility of the witness."
6 You have the right to question the
7 credibility of the witness. "The Trial Chamber may, in
8 the exercise of its discretion, permit enquiry into
9 additional matters as if on direct examination."
10 Let me ask you to reread this. I would like
11 to make a comment, however. Adapting the
12 cross-examination to the direct examination is a
13 measure which the Judges in this Tribunal apply with a
14 certain degree of nuance. I will explain what I mean.
15 We must, of course, prevent either of the parties or
16 too much skill on the part of one of the parties which
17 would limit the direct examination to questions only,
18 and then to hide or to conceal 25 others that might be
19 important, and then, for example, to sanction the
20 Defence because it had strayed from the direct
21 examination. We have been faced with this type of
22 manoeuvring, and this is why I say that with nuances
23 and moderation that we are applying this provision.
24 I have not interrupted you up to this point.
25 I didn't when, at great length, you interrogated and
1 cross-examined the witness about the political
2 situation prevailing at that time. Why is that?
3 Because on the one hand, you were referring to the
4 principal statements of the witness; and in the second
5 place, it appeared that it was clear for the proper
6 interpretation of the facts, which is the Judges'
7 ultimate mission. We assumed that you considered that
8 this was important.
9 However, I do not forget that we must respect
10 a certain time limit beyond which we would no longer be
11 able to control what was going on in this courtroom.
12 This is a caution that I am giving to you, and I
13 patiently wait for the next witnesses to be sure that
14 what I've just said is carried out. And I say this
15 together and in concurrence with my colleagues, Judge
16 Rodrigues and Judge Riad. Please proceed.
17 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, please, I would
18 like to address you, please, about this issue, if I
19 may. I am well mindful of the rule that Your Honour
20 has quoted. Can I remind Your Honour that yesterday,
21 at pages 48 and 49, direct examination was conducted by
22 the Prosecution concerning the evacuation of this
23 witness and other people from the place where they
24 resided to the place where -- the barracks in the
25 centre of town.
1 In my respectful submission, first of all,
2 the questions that I am now asking arise out of that
3 direction examination. I am attempting to clarify and
4 put more detail on that.
5 Secondly, as I have indicated, there is a
6 proper relevance to those questions, the issue of how
7 many people are involved in being detained at, in due
8 course, the Luka facility. What we have here at the
9 present time is a number of people being detained at
10 the barracks, then others are taken from there to
11 Luka. I am simply trying to establish numbers.
12 In my submission, the questions which I have
13 asked fall well within the parameters of the Rule, and
14 I respectfully submit that I should be permitted to
15 continue asking those questions.
16 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I was simply
17 cautioning you. You can continue to ask your
18 questions, but I don't want to have to make this
19 caution too frequently. Proceed, but try to move
20 forward quickly.
21 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, if I can just
22 remind you that the final answer he gave was that
23 figure, he said, did not include them.
24 Q. Having been taken, Mr. F, to the barracks,
25 further separations took place at the barracks, and
1 that was of women, persons under the age of 18 years,
2 and persons who were sufficiently elderly to be not of
3 military value?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. What percentage of the total of the people
6 detained at the barracks did that group represent who
7 were separated off?
8 A. It's hard to say, but -- well, it could have
9 been some -- I don't know, 40 per cent of people, of
10 able-bodied men, and the rest were women and children.
11 But that is only what I think. It's really difficult
12 to say.
13 Q. And is it right that they were bused out
14 later that day to a village or a town called Brezovo
16 A. Yes, Brezovo Polje, as far as I know, and
17 some were also taken to Razljevo.
18 Q. Is this right, that you told the Office of
19 the Prosecutor that-- the estimate you gave was one to
20 two thousand people being bused away from Brcko?
21 A. I said that in my judgement, at least one
22 thousand -- well, that between one thousand and two
23 thousand were evacuated from the area where I lived to
24 the barracks. How many women, children, and elderly
25 men were taken out of the barracks, I can hardly say,
1 because I was separated from them and locked in the
2 former cinema hall of the Yugoslav People's Army, in
3 the barracks, that is. We were inside, we were locked
4 in there, and we simply could not establish any
5 contacts. We only knew that they took women and
6 children by buses, that they were saying they would
7 take them to Brezovo Polje, and we also know that they
8 did take some to Razljevo too.
9 Q. The reason I ask you about your estimate,
10 Mr. F, is that that's the estimate -- and I quote from
11 what you told the OTP -- "I estimate they bused about
12 one to two thousand people."
13 Does that refresh your memory?
14 A. No, I did not say -- well, I don't know how
15 many people, how many women, children, and elderly men
16 they took by buses away from the barracks. What I said
17 was that between one or two thousand were evacuated
18 from the area of the town where I lived on the whole,
19 in toto. That was the -- altogether, and I remember
20 that the gentleman from the Prosecution formulated his
21 question in that way, and that was how I answered it.
22 Q. The town or village of Brezovo Polje, is it
23 right that that was, before the war almost completely a
24 Muslim community?
25 A. The majority is Muslim, as far as I know,
2 Q. And did that community, that town, remain
3 outside the area of Serb control throughout the
4 fighting and subsequently?
5 A. No. That part was also controlled by Serb
7 Q. Did you know persons amongst those who were
8 sent to Brezovo Polje and elsewhere?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Have you seen them or heard of them since the
12 A. I've heard about some of them; about others,
13 no. The fate of some is not known, and some were
14 allowed to go between the front lines, through
15 minefields and everything else. And I'm telling you
16 what we were told by people, that is mostly women and
17 children who survived it all. Some were fortunate
18 enough to be taken to the lines of separation, but
19 others were made to go on foot, because they could not
20 come back. And they were also told that if they came
21 back, that they would perish then.
22 I do not really know whether I should now
23 talk about what I had heard and how terrible the fate
24 of other people was. I simply want to be very
25 specific. What I'm saying now is what I heard from
1 people who experienced that. So, concretely, some of
2 these persons managed to cross over into the free
3 territory or, rather, the territory controlled by the
4 BH army, and some did not. And the fate of others is
5 not known, and I suppose it is rather clear what's
6 happened to them. I mean, nobody's heard about them
7 for the past eight years, so it's rather clear what
8 could have happened to them.
9 Q. I would like to ask you now about the night
10 of the 7th of May. Is it right that at some stage
11 during that, before you were evacuated further to Luka,
12 a man came to the barracks, called "Kosta"?
13 A. Yes. Should I explain that?
14 Q. Well, listen to the questions, please, and
15 help me, if you will. Will you describe the man,
16 Kosta, please; what sort of age was he at that time?
17 A. Yes. I'd like to begin by saying that I did
18 not know that man personally, but I learned that later,
19 after he had left, after the situation had come down,
20 some people who had been locked up with me in the
21 cinema hall knew him, and I heard from them that his
22 name was Kosta and that he came from Ugljevik. That is
23 a place near Bijeljina. And that is all that I said
24 and that I know about it.
25 Q. But did you see him on the night of the 7th
1 of May, so that you can give us a description of the
3 A. Yes, yes, yes. We all saw him very well. It
4 is difficult to say what time it was, what time of the
5 day it was, but it was already dark, so it could have
6 been around 9.00 or 10.00 in the evening. Yes, and he
7 was 40ish, I should say. He was 40, he was -- he had a
8 rather dark complexion, very skinny, straight black
9 hair. Average height, I'd say; a metre 80. Yes, yes,
10 thereabouts. He wasn't too tall, but he wasn't short
11 either, so I should say normally. But very dark
12 complexion, unshaven. His eyes were bloodshot, and his
13 hair was black, and he came in the company of two or
14 three men, soldiers; I don't remember how many. I know
15 that there were several soldiers with him.
16 And he was very angry. He said that he was
17 just back from the combat action in the part of the
18 town called Kolobara, and he was very angry indeed. He
19 called us Ustasha, which was rather ridiculous. I
20 mean, it was an offensive name for Croats, and we were,
21 by and large, all Muslims there. And he said that five
22 young Serb lads had been killed, five Falcons, and that
23 for them he would take out 50 of us and put us before a
24 firing squad.
25 And he told -- there was a man with him -- to
1 take out groups of ten people, but we were fortunate
2 enough that the security there was provided by guys who
3 were still wearing former JNA uniforms, and they came
4 back with a tall officer -- I believe he was a major,
5 because I served that army, so I knew the ranks -- and
6 they somehow managed to calm down those men and take
7 them out, and that was the end of that particular
9 Q. Mr. F, first of all, I'm going to ask the
10 Court usher to show what I'm about to ask you to look
11 at firstly to the Prosecutor and then to the learned
12 Judges, and then I'm going to ask you if you can
13 identify the person whose photograph or copy of a
14 photograph you see.
15 MR. GREAVES: That needs to be given a
16 exhibit number before it goes to the witness.
17 THE REGISTRAR: This is Defence Exhibit D4.
18 MR. GREAVES:
19 Q. Mr. F, if I might just ask you to take that
20 piece of paper and look at it, please, and study it for
21 a moment, if you would be so kind.
22 Is that the man, Kosta, whom you've described
23 to us? Does that look like him?
24 A. I don't think so. I'm not sure. I think he
25 was older than this.
1 May I ask something? When was this
2 photograph made? Is it a recent one, or does it date
3 back to 1992, or when?
4 MR. GREAVES: If Your Honours could give me a
5 moment, please.
6 Q. Yes, it's believed that this dates from the
7 early or mid-1980s, this photograph. If you can't
8 identify him, I'm not going to press you, and if you're
9 not sure, you're not sure, Mr. F.
10 A. I shall be very clear: That is not the man.
11 First, to begin with, he was older. He weighed less,
12 his complexion was much darker, as far as I can judge
13 from this. And he had shortly-cut hair, and quite
14 straight. So I don't think this is the person.
15 Besides, as far as I know, "Kosta" is quite a frequent
16 name among the Serbs, so that this is not the man.
17 Q. Perhaps I can just try and suggest a surname
18 to you. Can I suggest to you that the man's name,
19 the "Kosta" that you saw on the night of the 7th of
20 May, was Kosta Kostic?
21 A. [In English] I don't know -- sorry.
22 [Interpretation] I do not know that man. I have never
23 seen him before. And his name, I'm saying only what I
24 heard from other people who said that they knew him.
25 They said his name was Kosta and he came from
1 Ugljevik. That is what I heard from them, and I cannot
2 say anything else about him. I'm sorry.
3 Q. Thank you very much for your assistance,
4 Mr. F.
5 A. It lasted very briefly, really. It did not
6 take more than two or three minutes. When he came in
7 very angry, tried to take out people to shoot them,
8 those other men came and that was the end of it.
9 Q. I want to turn now to your arrival at Luka,
10 please, Mr. F. A total of something like 800 people
11 were taken there with you and arrived at about 2.30 in
12 the afternoon?
13 A. Between 2.30 and 3.00. From what I remember,
14 we left the barracks and we were told that we were
15 going under labour obligations, under labour duty, and
16 that is how we went.
17 Q. Is this right, that you were the first group
18 of detainees to arrive there?
19 A. Yes, I can explain that quite clearly. In
20 the barracks, there came five, six or seven, I could
21 not see more, and there was a column of buses going
22 through the town and I simply happened to be on the
23 first bus. When that bus arrived in Luka, in the first
24 hangar, that is, the arrival to Luka where the petrol
25 pumps are, so as you come from the town, and they put
1 us in that first hangar.
2 Since my bus was the first one, I was among
3 the first to enter the hangar. There was no one else
4 there, and that is why I conclude that we were the
5 first one to enter that hangar, that is, from that
6 first bus. But whether there was somebody in those
7 other hangars, I do not know and have no way of
8 knowing, because we could not communicate with them.
9 Q. If I can again just refresh your memory
10 briefly, Mr. F, so that we can clarify that, you told
11 the District Court at Tuzla, the State Security Bureau
12 sector, that you were the first detainees at Luka, and
13 that's why I asked you to confirm that. Does that
14 refresh your memory?
15 A. Yes. Well, that's what I just repeated.
16 Q. There were some people who were waiting for
17 you upon your arrival at Luka; is that right?
18 A. It is.
19 Q. Had you ever seen any of those people before?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Were they people who were in uniforms or in
22 civilian clothes?
23 A. They wore uniforms, by and large, even
24 though, you know, I mean various vehicles kept coming
25 and going. But there was this group of about five
1 soldiers, five men, wearing rather strange clothes.
2 Some were wearing camouflage uniforms, others were
3 wearing black coveralls, some had gloves and hats.
4 Q. Were you put straight into the hangar upon
5 your arrival?
6 A. Yes. Yes, but they took us into the hangar
7 one by one. They would search us. They took away our
8 effects, if we had anything, and all our personal
9 documents we also had to deposit in a large box at the
10 entrance into the hangar.
11 Q. I wonder if you might have a look, please, at
12 the sketch plan which you drew and which you looked at
13 yesterday, please. I'm sorry, I've forgotten
14 immediately what the exhibit number was.
15 THE REGISTRAR: [Interpretation] It was
16 Prosecution Exhibit 11.
17 MR. GREAVES: Thank you very much.
18 A. Yes. I drew this sketch myself, drawing on
19 my memory.
20 MR. GREAVES:
21 Q. Mr. F, I just want to clarify one thing in
22 particular about the writing that's on that. Is all
23 the writing on there your writing?
24 A. Yes, things in Bosnian, words in Bosnian.
25 But as far as I can see, there are also translations I
1 mean of these words that was written down by a
2 gentleman of the investigating team.
3 Q. I just want to clarify that, because very
4 briefly you spoke in English a moment or two ago, and I
5 wondered whether you had written on in English your own
6 translations of those words. But as far as you can
7 recall, somebody else translated what you had written
8 down and put it on in English?
9 A. No, this was done by investigators. They
10 translated it in the presence of an interpreter. When
11 the document was drawn which fully tallied with my
12 statement, that is when I signed it.
13 Q. I would like you to --
14 A. May I just clarify? I don't know if it's
15 important or not, but my English is not all that good.
16 I did learn it at school and I know it fairly well.
17 But it is not really all that good for me to do it
18 myself, so all that was done in English was done by
19 investigators, with the help of interpreters.
20 Q. I suspect your English is rather better than
21 any Bosnian or Serbian that I might be able to manage,
22 Mr. F, so don't worry about that. I'm not interested
23 in whether you can speak English or not. I just wanted
24 to clarify it. All right?
25 A. Possibly.
1 Q. Please, if the usher would now put the
2 document onto the ELMO, please.
3 If, as yesterday, if you need to point at the
4 plan, use the pointer rather than leaning forward, and
5 if you need to draw your chair up a bit closer, you
6 better do that now.
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. I would just like to explore a little bit the
9 layout of the site. If you would look at what I
10 suspect is the left-hand side of the plan as you look
11 at it, please, Mr. F, we can see, at the extreme left,
12 reference to a gate, and in brackets in English is,
13 "This is the road I entered Luka." You see that on
14 the left-hand side of the plan? If you can point to
15 the plan rather than the television screen.
16 A. It says here [indicating], what I wrote here,
17 it is the road to the PO Luka Brcko. But this is the
18 road that you can use to come from town directly into
19 the port authority where you have the petrol pumps and
20 administrative building, but there is also another
21 route. That is which we took and where I said was the
22 route which I took to get to Luka.
23 When we got to what is called Srpska Varos, a
24 Serb town, it was this particular road that we used,
25 and the buses stopped here in front of this hangar
1 [indicating]. So it is the first from this entrance
2 here, the first to the left from the main gate, this
3 one [indicating]. This entrance here [indicating] was
4 only for heavy trucks and for heavy cargo, and as any
5 other inhabitant of Brcko, we always used this
6 particular route [indicating]. This was the controlled
7 gate [indicating]. This was actually the cashier
8 [indicating]. They used to sell building materials,
9 all sorts of things, because that is what this
10 particular work organisation engaged in, so that I
11 normally used this road.
12 But when we arrived in Luka, we took this
13 particular route [indicating], and that is how we
14 entered and got to this hangar here. So looking from
15 this side is where we came. Then it would be the last
16 one to the right. But if you look at it from the other
17 way around, then of course it is the first to the left.
18 Q. I don't think there's any controversy about
19 which hangar. When we talk about the first hangar, we
20 talk about the one at the right-hand end of the hangars
21 marked on the plan. That's right, isn't it?
22 A. It is.
23 Q. May we take it that from what you've just
24 said, you knew the site from before the war, you had
25 been there or had visited it before the war?
1 A. A couple, a couple of times. I wasn't
2 particularly familiar with the compound, because there
3 was the industrial area and the administrative
4 building, because that was the cashiers, as I've said,
5 and the office where you paid for whatever, and this is
6 where they kept all those goods [indicating], that is,
7 concrete elements, other building materials if you
8 wanted to build a house, and all sorts of goods of that
10 Q. Just so we can get a slightly better picture
11 of the site, could you look, please, at the photograph
12 which I think is Exhibit 12? 9, I'm sorry. It's this
14 So that we can just relate accurately the map
15 to the photograph, Mr. F, if you look at the top
16 right-hand corner, is that the road which leads down to
17 where you entered Luka on this occasion, leads to the
18 heavy trucks entrance, as it were? Do you see where I
19 mean? If you look to the top right-hand corner, the
20 road disappears off the photograph. Can you see that?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Just so you can relate the photograph to the
23 plan, is that the road that leads down towards the gate
24 which is marked on the left-hand side of the plan, in
25 other words, the gate where you've marked, "This is the
1 road where I entered Luka"?
2 A. We came from this side [indicating], that is,
3 from the right-hand corner, and were put in this hangar
4 here [indicating].
5 Q. If I can just now ask you this, please, about
6 the photograph: You see where what we have been
7 calling the first hangar is. To the left-hand side and
8 slightly down, as it were in the context of the
9 photograph, down below it, right next-door to the
10 hangars, there's a large open space and a building at
11 the bottom of what looks like a square. Do you see
12 that? Perhaps if you put your pointer --
13 A. You mean this [indicating]?
14 Q. No. Down to the left, Mr. F. You see where
15 the first hangar is where you were detained? Put your
16 pointer on there.
17 A. [Witness complies]
18 Q. Now move slightly to the left, please, and to
19 an open space which looks like it's concrete or
21 A. [Witness complies]
22 Q. Yes, that open space. Thank you. Do you see
23 that at the small building on the corner?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. I just want you to help me with this. You've
1 marked on your plan, if you would just like to look at
2 your plan now, please --
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. You've marked a gas station, petrol station.
5 Is that petrol station beyond the fence or is it that
6 small building that's on the corner of the square we've
7 just looked at?
8 A. As far as I remember, this is the gate
9 [indicating], and the petrol station is before the
10 entrance. And this was the receptionist [indicating].
11 I mean that is where the security people were who
12 controlled the entrance and things like that. As far
13 as I remember, I put here [indicating] the gate.
14 I might also mention I don't have a
15 photographic memory, you know, so in my sketch which I
16 drew, I marked the most important facilities, as far as
17 I could draw my memory to put things and to clarify how
18 the events unfolded. I do not think I could really
19 draw a very accurate sketch. That's as much as I can
21 Q. No criticism of your artistic skills, Mr. F.
22 I just want you to help us as far as you can.
23 Looking again at the plan, please, you have
24 marked at the very top of it a series of houses on both
25 sides of a road which looks as though it's called
1 Srpska Varos. Is that right?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Is that the road, looking, if you will, at
4 the photograph, marrying it up with the photograph, is
5 that the road that we can see at the bottom right of
6 the photograph leading diagonally across the corner?
7 A. Well, you can't really see, but this must be
8 the road leading to Luka [indicating] because on this
9 side there is nowhere, it's the river.
10 Q. It's not the top of the photograph, Mr. F.
11 Can you look at the bottom of photograph? Do you see,
12 running between the houses, there is a road with a --
13 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] What are you
14 trying to demonstrate here, Mr. Greaves? I'm trying to
15 find out what it is that you're looking for.
16 Obviously, you want to show that there's a
17 contradiction in the drawing that the witness made and
18 the photograph. Let's move clearly, and say exactly
19 what it is you're looking for.
20 I can't agree for us going round and round
21 this way. Otherwise, I'm going to ask the questions.
22 What are you looking for? Are you trying to
23 say there's a contradiction between the drawing and the
24 photograph? If that's the case, say so and ask the
25 question of the witness. After that, we'll have a
1 break. Then I'm going to ask you how much more time
2 you're going to need, and if it's too long, we're going
3 to limit you.
4 Two questions. What are you looking for?
5 What are you trying to show? Are you trying to show a
6 contradiction between the photograph and the drawing?
7 Of course, that's your right, but please go right to
8 the question. Afterwards, tell me how much more time
9 you need for the questions on this, and I'll ask the
10 Registrar to tell us how long the examination in chief
11 lasted. Then after that, we're going to take a break.
12 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, I'm not trying to
13 contradict this witness. I'm trying to be as kind to
14 him as possible. I want to make sure we know exactly
15 the layout of this place. I have some questions to ask
16 him about what could and could not be seen from it. I
17 just want to make sure that I'm not being unfair to him
18 and trying to catch him up or anything like that. I'm
19 not trying to do that. I just want to make sure that
20 he is able to relate the photograph to his plan.
21 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] But the Judges
22 more or less understood this. Excuse me, Mr. Greaves.
23 I ask the witness, how did you come in? What
24 part of the hangar were you in? Obviously, you did not
25 ask -- you didn't put that house in the corner, so tell
1 us again where you came in from. Did you come in
2 through a road which you ordinarily used? Perhaps you
3 came in from the other side. Could you repeat this for
4 the Tribunal, please, Witness F? Please focus and
5 answer the Judges. The Judges are going to ask
6 questions. Try to focus, please, Witness F. Please
8 A. I shall try to be clear and to the point.
9 The road which the buses took to take us to
10 Luka was the road which I never used before, and I
11 already explained that it was used only for industrial
12 purposes, that is, it was only used by heavy trucks
13 bringing in gravel, building materials, and things like
14 that, so that it is difficult for me to be very
15 accurate. I hope you understand that.
16 We took this gate which those heavy trucks
17 used. We did not take the road that we normally used,
18 that is, that the civilian people used to come to
19 Luka. And there is the gate, there is the security and
20 all that, and --
21 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] How did you
22 come in? Show us, with the pointer on the photograph,
23 where you came in.
24 A. Well, I'd have to -- to be quite honest, I
25 can only distinguish I mean if I can see the petrol
1 station before the gate, you know, because there was a
2 gate like this on both sides and it makes it very
3 difficult for me to find my way. I repeat, I had never
4 before seen that road, and even on that particular
5 occasion I did not see it because we were already very
6 afraid and we did not know.
7 You must bear this in mind. I wasn't really
8 looking around. I wasn't admiring the landscape. We
9 were all very frightened and thinking what would happen
10 to us, so that I think that that is true because that's
11 how it was.
12 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Thank you.
13 A. I never saw Luka from the air, so I know the
14 entrance which we used as civilians and which I used on
15 a couple of occasions before and what I knew was there,
16 and that is how I drew it. I think it tallies the
17 river, the railroad tracks, then hangars, the
18 administrative building, the storage space and houses
19 around, and that is what I know and that is what I
20 could see with my own eyes.
21 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Thank you.
22 Mr. Greaves, please ask your question again.
23 MR. GREAVES: I think Your Honour mentioned
24 that you wished to take a break at this stage.
25 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] No. I would
1 like to finish with this point, and then we'll take the
3 MR. GREAVES: I'm sorry. I misunderstood
4 Your Honour, and I apologise.
5 Q. The final question I have to ask you
6 concerning the photograph and the layout of Luka,
7 Mr. F, is the houses. Would you accept this, that the
8 houses which you can see on the bottom right-hand side
9 of the plan are at a level of height raised well above
10 the Luka facility, enabling anybody in those houses to
11 look down from them onto what was going on in the area
12 that we can see depicted in the photograph?
13 A. Frankly, I could not give you a precise
14 answer to this question. As far as my memory serves
15 me, the entrance to Luka is a slight decline so Luka is
16 close to the river, and the houses there are most
17 likely at a slightly higher elevation.
18 As we were between the hangars and the other
19 structures on the other side, it was very close to each
20 other. When you have a structure in front of you, it
21 is very limited to what you can see beyond that.
22 Perhaps you could see something, but I do not recall.
23 I do not remember it.
24 I don't know how else to explain this. I'm
25 telling you as best as I can. I didn't see it.
1 MR. NICE: I had a photograph taken of
2 exactly this point, and the Defence have been invited
3 to come and consider photographs of the area they may
4 find helpful. If they come along, we can probably take
5 a look, but my recollection is the houses are indeed
6 elevated and probably visible.
7 MR. GREAVES: It may be that my learned
8 friend and I can agree to a form of words as to what
9 you can and cannot see from those houses, and that
10 would be helpful and we could perhaps deal with that.
11 Your Honour, that's the end of the questions
12 I have on that point.
13 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] We're going to
14 take a 20-minute break. We will resume at noon.
15 Let me remind you that the direct examination
16 lasted for two hours. You're going to work together
17 with Mr. Londrovic, Mr. Greaves, and so you can tell us
18 how much more time you're going to need in order to
19 finish your cross-examination. Thank you.
20 We will resume at noon.
21 --- Recess taken at 11.40 a.m.
22 --- On resuming at 12.05 p.m.
23 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] We will now
24 resume the hearing. Please be seated. Have the
25 accused brought in.
1 Mr. Greaves?
2 MR. GREAVES: Thank you very much, Your
4 Q. Mr. F, I would like to turn now, please, to a
5 number of specific incidents --
6 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Excuse me,
7 Mr. Greaves. I wanted to know how much time you need
8 to complete your cross-examination and whether you
9 think you will do it by 1.00.
10 MR. GREAVES: No, I don't anticipate
11 concluding by 1.00, but I would anticipate concluding
12 about an hour after the resumption for lunch.
13 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I want to
14 consult with my colleagues.
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Greaves,
17 after checking the time that's been used -- you've used
18 about one hour and 20 minutes for your
19 cross-examination so far -- the Judges would like to
20 say two things to you. First of all, Witness F,
21 according to the Prosecutor, was not the witness whom
22 we can use a simplified method with for the
23 cross-examination and the examination-in-chief. Under
24 those conditions, for this witness, we're going to
25 grant you the time that you are asking for, that is,
1 you will finish by 3.30. But this will be the only
3 In addition, in a more general way, we are
4 asking that you adapt both the time and length of your
5 cross-examination in respect of the
6 examination-in-chief. Of course, the rule will be
7 flexible, for the reasons that I've indicated this
8 morning; but for this one time, and exceptionally, the
9 Trial Chamber grants you the right to go until 3.30,
10 and 1.00 this morning, since you weren't informed
11 before that. But now you know what the rule will be
12 that's going to be applied before this Trial Chamber,
13 and we are not going to waste any further time, so
14 please continue now with your cross-examination of
15 Witness F. Thank you very much.
16 MR. GREAVES:
17 Q. Mr. F, I was asking you a moment or two ago
18 about an incident concerning a man known to you, I
19 think, as Sarajka. Do you recall such an incident?
20 A. Incident? I don't think that I would call it
21 an incident, but you perhaps are -- you're probably
22 referring to when the Serbian soldiers who were in the
23 hangar, they were sitting around a table in the hangar,
24 and at one point they approached us and asked us
25 whether we knew a person whose nickname was Sarajka.
1 Is this what you're referring to, sir?
2 Q. Yes, and does it come to this, that they were
3 looking for him for a particular reason?
4 A. Yes. They asked us whether we knew Sarajka,
5 and we sort of said yes, for the most part, because
6 people from the centre of town, by and large, knew this
7 person by the nickname of Sarajka. I don't know this
8 person's real name, but I know who they were referring
9 to when they said Sarajka.
10 Q. Can I just clarify this: As well as asking
11 about him, were they looking to see whether he was
12 amongst your number in the hangar?
13 A. I believe that they knew that he wasn't
14 there; they just asked us, "Do you know Sarajka?" And
15 the majority said yes, and then they asked, "Do you
16 know that he raped a Serbian young girl," I believe of
17 7, and we said that we didn't know that, that we knew
18 nothing about it.
19 Q. If I suggested to you that the man's proper
20 name was Safet Sahrimanovic, would that refresh your
21 memory in any way and help you as to the identity of
22 this man?
23 A. As I said, I really do not know his real
24 name, but I believe that there was only one person in
25 town who was known under the nickname of Sarajka, so I
1 believe that there can be no confusion about it. I
2 believe that we knew very well what person these
3 soldiers were asking about.
4 Q. And the specific reason that they were
5 looking for him, as you said, was that he had allegedly
6 raped somebody. Was he known as someone who had
7 previously raped people? Was that part of his
9 A. Frankly, I don't know whether he had
10 specifically raped someone before, but he was known in
11 town as a person prone to violence. He would go
12 into -- he would get involved in fights, and he was
13 also a petty thief, and people basically avoided him.
14 Q. I want to turn now, please, to the person
15 from the village of Janja about whom you spoke
16 yesterday. He was picked out from his identification
17 card as being a resident of Janja; is that right?
18 A. Yes, that is correct.
19 Q. And is this correct, that the nature of the
20 hostility towards people from Janja was because it was
21 said that the Muslim community in that village was
22 continuing to fight and engage with Serb forces?
23 A. Yes, but I'd like to amend that. Janja was
24 the only Muslim village around Bijelina, but they did
25 not fight Serbs; they just refused to turn in the
1 weapons, to surrender the weapons which they
2 possessed. And I wouldn't go further into it. I
3 believe that this may have been the reason why he was
4 called out, and after that, he was taken out. And I
5 clarified the rest when asked by the Prosecutor.
6 Q. Was he, amongst other things, accused by them
7 of being in contact with resistance groups in Brko?
8 A. Yes, this is the story we heard from those
9 soldiers, the soldiers who were in the hangar and who
10 were checking the documents. And on the basis of his
11 address, in fact, they accused him; they asked how come
12 he was in Brcko. Then he said that he had a sister and
13 a brother-in-law there, that he came to visit them, so
14 they would spend the May Day holiday together. They
15 did not give any arguments; they just -- on the basis
16 of the fact that he was from Janja, they tried to force
17 him to admit that he had come to Brcko to liaise with
18 the units there who were going to resist in town. Then
19 they beat him, they took him out of the hangar, and
20 then we don't know anything about his fate. I just
21 know that while I was there, he never came back.
22 Q. As well as accusing him of being in contact
23 with resistance groups, is it also correct that they
24 accused him of being a Green Beret? And by "Green
25 Beret," would you understand special forces attached to
1 the Muslim forces?
2 A. I would like to try to explain this. They
3 were mentioning some Green Berets, some thousands of
4 Green Berets, but the truth of the matter was that
5 these Green Berets did not exist at all. There were
6 local inhabitants in certain parts of town which had
7 self-organised, and they had some small amounts of
8 weapons. But they were just looking for an excuse to
9 create this. But I don't think that they had any
10 reasons. It was enough for them that he was from
11 Janja, and this is why he was guilty, and the fact that
12 he was a Muslim.
13 Q. Well, please, can you answer the question:
14 Did they accuse him of being a Green Beret?
15 A. Yes. They were saying that because he was
16 from Janja, that this is certainly why he had come
18 Q. And whether the people questioning him were
19 right or not, the focus of their hostility towards him
20 was the place from which he had come and what they
21 suspected him of doing; that's right, isn't it?
22 A. Yes. This is how they presented it.
23 Q. When you gave evidence yesterday, and indeed
24 you've just repeated it now, you claimed that the
25 soldiers had beaten him in the hangar before taking him
1 out. What I suggest to you is that when you gave your
2 account of this matter to the Office of the Prosecutor,
3 what you said was that he was beaten after he had been
4 taken out.
5 A. As far as I can recall -- in fact, I cannot
6 recall what I said, but he was hit with a rifle butt
7 several times while he was leaving the hangar, and
8 after that we couldn't see what was going on with him,
9 except we could hear screams, which would have been
10 caused by pain, and then some noises. But the only
11 thing that we could make out were these human screams.
12 And let me point out that from the vantage point in the
13 hangar where we were, we could not see where he was
14 taken and what happened to him, but we could hear this,
15 and we could hear it clearly.
16 Q. So to summarise, he was taken out by Serbian
17 soldiers, and whatever took place was outside your
18 vision subsequently, and all you could do was hear what
19 was going on?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And what time was this?
22 A. This could have been sometime between 4.00,
23 4.30, 5.00. We arrived there at around 3.00, so maybe
24 around 5.00, but I don't know that I can establish it
25 with any precision.
1 Q. And according to your evidence yesterday,
2 this was before the arrival at the hangar of the man
3 who subsequently described himself to you as the Serb
4 Adolf; do you accept that?
5 A. Yes. Yes, this happened before. The
6 soldiers who were there before -- I don't know how much
7 the Chamber is aware of the situation, but there was a
8 table in the hangar throughout, and several soldiers
9 sat around it and some stood around, so five or six
10 were always present there.
11 MR. GREAVES: I want to interrupt the
12 witness. Your Honour has chided me about taking too
13 much time. Unfortunately, there is no control of the
14 witness's answers, which is a task for Your Honour,
15 with respect. I'm only here to ask questions. If I
16 badger him about not answering the question, it then
17 becomes an accusation that I am harassing him. It
18 would be helpful if the witness was chided, like I was
19 chided, to answer the question which has been asked
20 instead of entering into a lengthy discourse as to some
21 explanation which frequently is not on the subject at
22 all, and that would assist us equally to get on.
23 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Yes, I agree
24 absolutely with you, Mr. Greaves.
25 I ask Witness F, although I realise that
1 these are painful events that we're speaking about and
2 it's difficult not to go into greater length, but since
3 this is a judicial debate and the fate of an individual
4 is hanging in the balance, I would nonetheless ask you
5 to focus on the questions that you're asked and to try
6 to answer them precisely. If you need to make a
7 comment, you can, of course, but generally try to focus
8 on the specific and precise answer that you have to
9 provide for the answer, because as you heard, both
10 Defence and Prosecution time is relatively limited.
11 Thank you, Witness F.
12 Please continue, Mr. Greaves.
13 MR. GREAVES: I want to turn now to the
14 arrival of the person you had described as calling
15 himself the Serb Adolf.
16 Q. Is it right that a number of people had
17 arrived at the same time as him?
18 A. I'm sorry, I did not quite understand the
19 question. Specifically, what group of people?
20 Q. Well, were you able to see the person who
21 described himself as the Serb Adolf? Were you able to
22 see him arriving on the premises at Luka, onto the site
23 at Luka?
24 A. No, we just heard. We could hear the sounds
25 of several vehicles arriving, and from what I can
1 recall, what we could see from the hangar, there was a
2 Zastava vehicle 101 model. This was a popular vehicle
3 in Bosnia. We could hear the noise of several
4 vehicles, you could hear that some vehicles were coming
5 and going, but it was not clear whether they were
6 coming or going. But then the person who had
7 introduced himself as the Serb Adolf entered with
8 another person.
9 Q. If I can just focus for a moment on that
10 other person, was he, unlike the one who described
11 himself as the Serb Adolf, was that other person in
12 civilian dress?
13 A. Yes. As far as I can recall, this person was
14 in civilian clothes.
15 Q. What sort of age was the person who was in
16 civilian clothes? Was he older than the Serb Adolf?
17 A. No. As far as I can recall, it was a younger
18 person. Would you like me to try to describe him as
19 far as I can recall?
20 Q. You did very well, if I may say so, on the
21 previous occasion. If you can give a description as to
22 height and age and hair and so on, that would be most
23 helpful, please, Mr. F.
24 A. As far as my memory serves me and from what I
25 saw, this is what I can say: This person was rather
1 young, in my estimate somewhere between 18 and 20 years
2 of age, not very -- fairly short, sort of plump, not
3 really fat but roundish. The hair was a bit longer.
4 I think it was sort of light hair. It was the same
5 young man who later on signed off on our passes.
6 Q. Apart from those two people, were you able to
7 see -- you've described a Zastava car, I think. There
8 were other people in the Zastava car who had arrived?
9 A. I cannot really say "Yes" or "No." We could
10 hear some movement outside and some noise, and there
11 were vehicles coming and going from time to time. As I
12 said, from the hangar we really could not see anything
13 outside. Only the door of the hangar was only slightly
15 Q. The reason I ask you, Mr. F, and again this
16 may assist your memory, was that you described to the
17 OTP in your statement that through the door you could
18 see a car full of people. Does that -- do you recall
20 A. Well, I've just said that what one could see
21 was -- in passing, I did say that, but I cannot really
22 claim it with any certainty. I think it was a car, a
23 green car, and I believe it was a Zastava 101 because
24 it was a very popular car with us, and in it there were
25 quite a number of people. How many, I don't know.
1 All I know is that after that, the hangar was
2 entered by a person who introduced himself as Serb
3 Adolf, accompanied by the person whom I have just tried
4 to describe.
5 Q. I would like to turn now, please, to that
6 person who you say described himself as the Serb
7 Adolf. In the same way that you have described others,
8 please, will you give a description of that person?
9 A. I only wish to describe to the Court a very
10 important thing just to explain why my testimony is as
11 it is, and the testimony of other people.
12 It was the 8th of May already, the 8th of May
13 of living in fear --
14 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Excuse me,
15 Witness F. I would ask you to answer Mr. Greaves'
16 question and then make your comment afterwards. Excuse
17 me, but things must be done according to a certain
18 order. After that, you can make your comment. The
19 Judges will allow you to do so. But for the time
20 being, Mr. Greaves asked you to try to describe the
21 Serbian Adolf. Please do that.
22 A. Yes, thank you. He was in the former
23 civilian police uniform, that is, the light blue shirt,
24 light blue or even slightly darker trousers, and he was
25 armed with an automatic gun, a Scorpion, and had a long
1 police baton. He was, as far as I could judge, about
2 180 or 185 tall. Perhaps that is an average height,
3 neither too tall nor too short. Medium build. His
4 hair was fair to brown, fair to chestnut, as far as one
5 could see in the hangar because it was rather dark
7 I think what struck one's eye was his eyes.
8 He had very high cheekbones too, and his eyes were
9 somehow unnaturally expressive, like turbid water or
10 something like that. He seemed to have been using some
11 stimulants or something like that. Whoever met his
12 eye, I think, would avoid looking at him again. I
13 think he instilled a kind of a fear, his look,
14 especially after he would introduce himself. I don't
15 really know how to put it. He simply -- I mean our
16 fear, which was already very great, I think, tripled
17 after the look we received from him. That is perhaps
18 how I could put it best.
19 But I should like to ask the Court to bear in
20 mind, in my case and in the case of all other
21 witnesses, that it was eight days since the beginning
22 of the war, that we were really put in very bad
23 conditions, that we could not sleep practically because
24 of the shelling and gunfire all the time, and that we
25 were really at the end of the tether, both of our
1 physical and mental forces. Particularly since we were
2 brought to Luka, most of us had somehow reconciled with
3 the thought that we would die. Under those
4 circumstances, we all avoided looking anyone straight
5 in the eye, especially a person who introduced himself
6 in this manner, because for such people it was enough
7 for them to draw their attention in whatever way and
8 then be subjected to something that we really would
9 rather avoid.
10 I'm simply trying to explain how we felt at
11 that time.
12 Q. Mr. F, when you made your statement to the
13 OTP, would you accept that this is the description that
14 you gave of the man who described himself as the Serb
15 Adolf? "Short, flat, blonde hair, about 175 centimetres
16 tall, very skinny, prominent cheekbones, wearing a
17 light blue uniform of shirt and pants"? Do you accept
18 that that's the description that you gave of this man?
19 A. Yes, that is how I remembered him, that is
20 how I saw him, except that I think the colour of his
21 hair, I think it was light brown, rather fair to
22 chestnut. But it was rather difficult to say because
23 of the lack of light in the hangar. The hangar was a
24 building with very few windows, and one must bear in
25 mind that one couldn't really see very much, not see --
1 or, rather, not see the colour enough.
2 I should like to add once again that we
3 avoided looking at him, fearing --
4 THE INTERPRETER: Could, please, the witness
5 speak up a little bit? We can barely hear him at
7 MR. GREAVES:
8 Q. Forgive me, Mr. F. Your evidence yesterday
9 was that not only did you see him inside the building
10 but that you witnessed him outside, carrying out a
11 number of murders, and had a significant opportunity
12 outside to view this man. What I suggest to you is
13 that the description which you gave to the Office of
14 the Prosecutor was of a completely different person,
15 wasn't it, a blonde, skinny man, not a fair to chestnut
16 medium build, 180 to 185 man? Do you accept that there
17 is a complete difference between those two descriptions
18 and that you had a proper opportunity to view him?
19 A. I do not accept that I gave a different
20 description. But referring to some standards, I said
21 it was something about 175 tall, and one can check it.
22 As I have said, it was an average height. One cannot
23 really say with any accuracy. I said he was normally
24 built, but he perhaps looked more skinny or something.
25 Perhaps he was wearing a uniform which was a size too
1 large and that is why he looked that way.
2 But I also said that we avoided looking at
3 him, fearing him, because we realised what kind of a
4 person he was, that perhaps it was enough to look at
5 him and then have your fate sealed. I believe that our
6 fear was quite understandable.
7 Q. Mr. F, the person that you say introduced
8 himself as the Serbian Adolf, before that occasion you
9 had never seen him before?
10 A. No, never.
11 Q. Throughout your time as a detainee at Luka,
12 you never learned his name, his true name?
13 A. Yes, true.
14 Q. The way in which you say you're able to
15 associate the name Goran Jelisic with the Serbian Adolf
16 is only because of speaking to others at some later
17 date who also had been detained?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. So that we may just examine a little bit the
20 circumstances of that, how long was it after your
21 release from Luka did you return to the (redacted)?
22 A. About seven days.
23 Q. How long after that were you able to speak
24 with other people who had been detained?
25 A. Immediately after I came for my labour
1 obligation to my former work organisation. If you want
2 me to explain it, I think I can do it in a very few
3 words, how I came to the conclusion that it was one and
4 the same person.
5 Q. Well, so as to be fair to you, you tell us,
6 Mr. F.
7 A. The day when we were released from Luka, we
8 were taken by persons who were then again found at home
9 or with their neighbours and taken back to Luka once
10 again. One of those persons who was taken back to
11 Luka, because he had a very specific occupation, he
12 came to the work organisation, (redacted)
13 (redacted), and we talked and had contact or, rather, I
14 mean two persons, and two persons confirmed that that
15 man who had been doing that and who had the main say in
16 Luka, or that is at least how they saw it, that his
17 name was Goran Jelisic. That is how I explained my
18 conviction that it is one and the same person, because
19 those people, at the moment when he was doing that in
20 Luka, they were there. And then they were taken back
21 to Luka, and that was then that I learned his identity
22 or, rather, his true name. So that is how I explain
23 why I believe that it is one and the same person.
24 Q. Of course, what you learned was what they
25 believed to be his name. Do you accept that?
1 A. Yes, I do. I already mentioned that I knew
2 this person only as the Serb Adolf, or that is how he
3 introduced himself. I never knew his true identity. I
4 think it was quite clear, and I really do not want to
5 say anything that I'm not certain about.
6 Q. Fair enough. I don't want you to. You don't
7 know anything, yourself, of your own knowledge, of the
8 circumstances in which they, your informants, came by
9 the name?
10 A. While they were in Luka, since they were
11 taken back there and they spent again a number of days
12 there during their second stay there, they learned that
13 that person's name was Goran Jelisic. I didn't have
14 the slightest idea as to what his name was, but through
15 talking to these people and thinking about the events
16 and associating them with other events, I realised that
17 that person who had introduced himself as the Serb
18 Adolf, that that person's true name was Goran Jelisic.
19 I am not claiming -- I'm not asserting anything in my
20 own name, but all the things seem to point out that it
21 is one and the same person. I think that all the
22 circumstances are pointing in that direction, and that
23 is what I said.
24 Q. My final question on this point, Mr. F, and
25 so that you have an opportunity to deal with it, you
1 cannot say anything of the circumstances in which those
2 people -- whether the information they were given was
3 correct or not; you simply are relying on what they
4 said to you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you. I would like to ask you now,
7 please, about the documents that were collected.
8 Essentially, documents were collected at Luka which
9 were identification documents of one sort or another;
10 is that right?
11 A. It is.
12 Q. Whilst those documents were being examined,
13 would this be correct, that it was made clear by those
14 examining the documents that they were interested in,
15 for example, members of the SDA or criminals or those
16 who had been engaged in some form of military activity?
17 A. No, that was not the impression I gained,
18 simply because they were very hostile. They showed a
19 very hostile attitude towards all of us. An incredible
20 amount of hate emanated from those men, and we did not
21 know why, especially since they knew -- when the
22 military police had brought us to the barracks, they
23 had been told that we were brought from our homes, that
24 we were refugees, that we had nothing to do with
25 fighting or anything. But from the way they treated
1 all of us, it was not my impression that -- I think
2 they were only looking for some reason, for a cause,
3 for a pretext to do certain things. That is what I
5 Q. If I can just assist you again, Mr. F, is it
6 not right that you were told that the people checking
7 the documents had the complete records of the Ministry
8 of the Interior and complete lists of members of the
10 A. Quite. That is what they told us. They said
11 they had all these personal files taken over from the
12 Ministry of the Interior, and that they also had lists
13 of SDA members.
14 Q. And that they knew who did and who did not
15 have a criminal record?
16 A. Yes. The very fact they had the files, every
17 person had his file with all the characteristics,
18 especially, of course, those who were having some
19 problems with the law, as we usually put it; they had
20 complete documentation in the Ministry of the Interior.
21 Q. Is it not right that they approached
22 individuals inquiring of them whether in fact they were
23 members of the SDA?
24 A. I believe I have to explain this, because it
25 seems it is not quite clear enough. When it was said
1 that some people could be released provided a Serb
2 guaranteed for them, they placed themselves in the
3 position of God, if I can put it that way, that is,
4 that a Serb could guarantee for a Muslim, and that
5 Muslim would be released, but that Serb was
6 guaranteeing for that particular Muslim with his own
7 life. And if this Muslim did anything -- that is, got
8 involved in the war or anything -- that Serb would
9 first pay with his life.
10 I do not want to underestimate honourable
11 members of these people. I think I made it quite clear
12 that there were quite honourable people among them, and
13 I am saying this because I want to tell the truth and I
14 want the truth to be known. And at that particular
15 time, and I wrote it quite clearly in my statement,
16 that members of the military police, and that was quite
17 fortunate as far as I'm concerned, were my neighbours,
18 were my very good friends. And from what I could see,
19 what I could read from their faces, they were also very
20 excited, very surprised --
21 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Continue.
22 MR. GREAVES:
23 Q. Mr. F, you haven't answered the question
24 which I asked. Is it not right that those checking the
25 documents approached individuals and asked them, "Are
1 you members of the SDA?" Isn't that right?
2 A. Well, that is why I started saying what I
3 said. That is not quite true, not those who were
4 looking through documents. It was not they who asked
5 us. But when it was said that a prisoner could be
6 released if guaranteed by a Serb, then those people who
7 wanted to be released, of course, had to hand over
8 their identification documents, to give it over at the
9 desk there. But those people who were guaranteeing for
10 some people, including me, they were the ones who asked
11 us, "Are you members of the SDA?" They did not ask me,
12 presumably because we were friends and neighbours. So
13 I believe that now it is clear why I wanted to say
14 certain things.
15 Q. Mr. F, I'm going to put to you a passage from
16 the account that you gave to the OTP so that you can
17 deal with it properly. What you said was this: "They
18 said they had the complete records from the Ministry of
19 Interior and complete lists of members of the SDA.
20 They said if we come forward now, we would have less
21 problems. As I already mentioned, I knew these
22 policemen very well. When they went to the office and
23 got the passes, those persons were eventually allowed
24 to leave. They would approach the persons they knew
25 quite well and knew didn't have criminal records and
1 asked if they were members of the SDA. This gave me
2 the impression that they did not have a complete list
3 of the SDA members. They, the police, guaranteed our
4 co-operation with their lives."
5 So what you are saying, I suggest, is that
6 there were direct enquiries of individuals as to their
7 personal membership of the SDA, and that's what you
8 were telling the OTP; do you accept that?
9 A. Well, yes.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 A. But you insist on this, and I must say
12 something: They said they had complete SDA lists, but
13 when those people came, they asked us whether we were
14 SDA members. And that is an important distinction.
15 No, the question is whether they did have full
16 documentation or not, because had they had it, they
17 wouldn't have been asking us if we were members of the
18 SDA. I think that is an important distinction.
19 Q. Precisely. What they were doing, Mr. F, was
20 looking for members of the SDA. That's what they were
21 doing, weren't they? No more and no less than that?
22 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] You had the
23 answer to the question. The witness was able to make
24 his comments. Let's try to move forward. Please ask a
25 different question.
1 MR. GREAVES:
2 Q. I would like now to move, please, to the
3 issuing of passes. You've told us, I think, that they
4 were issued by Djordje Ristanic; is that right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Did you know of this person before coming
7 across his name on these passes?
8 A. Let me see. That same person, at the time,
9 was the self-appointed president of the municipality of
10 Brcko. That is how I know him; that is how I know his
11 name. I believe it is quite clear. And these passes,
12 yes, were signed with his name.
13 Q. And did he also become president of --
14 whether self-appointed or not -- president of the
15 crisis staff on the Serbian side?
16 A. I don't know how -- in the war, they used to
17 call former organisations very strange and curious
18 names, so I really do not know what they called that
19 new organisation. But I know that that particular
20 gentleman, throughout the war, held the post which I
21 used to know, and that was the president of the
22 municipality of Brcko, so it was the supreme civilian
23 authority. And his signature figured on those passes.
24 Q. It may be that you know the answer to this
25 question, or it may be that you don't, but help us if
1 you can: In time of war, does the president of a
2 municipality become converted into the president of a
3 crisis staff, so that there's a special procedure which
4 takes place at the beginning of conflict?
5 A. I don't know what is the wartime procedure,
6 but it's possible. For instance, to help you, in my
7 company, the manager was the principal authority, and
8 during the war he was called "wartime manager." Now,
9 what is the difference, I really don't know. I'm
10 simply saying that sometimes they used some names which
11 were not familiar, and I really do not know what are
12 the differences between them.
13 Q. All right.
14 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, I'm about to move
15 on to a different area. I see that it is shortly
16 before 1.00; I wonder if that is a convenient moment
17 for Your Honour.
18 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Yes,
19 absolutely. I think it would be appropriate to take
20 our break now. Let me remind you that we will resume
21 at 2.30.
22 The Court stands adjourned.
23 --- Luncheon recess taken at 1.00 p.m.
1 --- On resuming at 2.38 p.m.
2 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] We will now
3 resume the hearing. Please have the accused brought
5 [The accused entered court]
6 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Greaves?
7 MR. GREAVES:
8 Q. Witness F, during the course of the evening
9 of the 8th of May, you became aware that it was
10 possible to get passes for release from the camp. Can
11 you be any more specific as to the time at which you
12 became aware that passes were being given out?
13 A. About 6.00 in the afternoon.
14 Q. And --
15 A. Maybe a bit before, a bit later. I cannot be
17 Q. Can you help Their Honours as to how many
18 people were given passes at that time?
19 A. In my estimate, about 80. Between 80 and
20 100, somewhere within that range.
21 Q. Were all of those to whom a pass had been
22 issued, were all of you outside the hangar in the
23 manner that you've described underneath the covered or
24 partly-covered entrance?
25 A. No, because it depended on the way in which
1 people were being given these identity cards to go
2 there and get a pass. So at first it was a few people,
3 and then as people were being released, as passes were
4 being filled out, so the number grew. That depended on
5 whom they identified as somebody they could guarantee
6 for them, and then they went over there to say so, and
7 then this person would be then brought out, and then
8 the passes would be filled out. Then I think that at
9 first the number of people who left Luka were between
10 50 and 100, so this number varied at first, and then
11 later on when people were ready to leave Luka, it ended
12 up being between 80 and 100.
13 Q. Can I get this clear? All of those who were
14 issued passes that day, all were released, is that what
15 you're saying, or were some of them held over to the
16 following day?
17 A. I just want to say that the process of
18 release started sometime around 6.00 p.m., and it ended
19 around 8.00, 8.15, when we left Luka. So in that
20 interval, this is the period when all this process took
22 Q. I understand that. What I wanted just to
23 clarify, and if I can get back to it, please, those who
24 were given passes on the 8th of May were all released
25 or were some detained further? Were all released that
1 day and left with you at about 8.25 or so?
2 A. Yes. As far as I know, those who did get
3 passes. The time was between 8.15 to 8.20. The curfew
4 was at 9.00, so we requested that we be released so
5 that we would reach our homes by 9.00, that we reach
6 wherever we needed to go.
7 Q. Whilst you were standing outside the hangar
8 opposite to the administration offices, were you able
9 to see into the offices themselves?
10 A. No. The door was closed and there was some
11 kind of screens over there, so you could not see inside
12 from outside. You could only hear certain noises.
13 Q. Apart from the man you have described as the
14 Serb who called himself the Serb Adolf, was there
15 anyone else with him?
16 A. Yes. Outside by the door, where the table
17 was set and where the passes were being issued, four or
18 five metres away from that table, there was a group of
19 soldiers, and occasionally there were one or two of
20 them, or two or three, sometimes four and five, but
21 there were always a certain number of soldiers present
23 Q. I want to ask you now about the killings that
24 you say that you witnessed whilst you were waiting
25 outside the hangar. When the first one, you say, was
1 committed, how many people were standing outside the
2 hangar at that time?
3 A. In my estimate, it was around 5.00 p.m. --
4 sorry, about 7.00 p.m., and I think at that time there
5 were about 30 people. The procedure of issuing of
6 these passes started around 6.00, but then it lasted
7 for a while because they were looking for the
8 documents, and then they had to come back, and then
9 they were looking for people they wanted to release.
10 Then they had to wait for the passes to be filled out
11 for them.
12 Q. In relation to the first of those incidents,
13 is this right, that the first person who came out of
14 the building, one thing that that person was saying was
15 something along the lines of, "I am not a Green Beret"?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Saying it to the person you've described as
18 calling himself the Serb Adolf?
19 A. Yes. While he was being escorted, he was
20 swearing that he was not -- on his children that he was
21 not a Green Beret, and he begged not to be killed.
22 Q. The person you say who was shot or was
23 killed, was he saying that immediately he came from the
25 A. Yes, immediately upon leaving. And I would
1 like to make a correction. I did not say of this
2 person that he was killed, nor did I say that I saw him
3 being killed. I just saw him leaving the building, and
4 then when they left my field of vision, I heard two
5 muffled shots, and the self-proclaimed Serb Adolf came
6 back by himself. So I just simply describe what I saw
7 and what I heard.
8 Q. I stand corrected, and I apologise for
9 putting the question in a bad way. But the first
10 person about whom you had spoken, and we're talking
11 about the same person.
12 In respect of the third person that you
13 described to Their Honours yesterday, is this right,
14 that that victim was pushed out of the building by two
15 people in civilian clothing? Did you see any people in
16 civilian clothing pushing that person or someone out of
17 the offices?
18 A. Yes, that is correct. As far as I recall,
19 this person was pushed out by two persons dressed in
20 civilian clothes; in leather jackets, in fact.
21 Q. Help us with this. What sort of people were
22 they? Were they a similar age to the man who was
23 calling himself Adolf or older than him? What type of
24 people were they? Did you know them?
25 A. No, they were of younger age. But it was a
1 split second when I could see them, so it was a very
2 superficial glance. I just noticed them wearing
3 leather jackets. It was a bit unusual to see people in
4 civilian clothes, and they were younger men. Other
5 than that, I couldn't tell you anything. It was a
6 brief moment, and I could not give you a better
7 description of these men.
8 Q. I'd like now to ask you about someone who I
9 think you described yesterday as Branko. Can I help
10 you with this? Do you know if his name was actually
11 Enver, also known or nicknamed as Sok, the second
12 person outside the building?
13 A. Answering the Prosecutor's question
14 yesterday, I clearly pointed out that I did not recall
15 and that I could not say the real name. But I know
16 that he introduced himself as Branko, but I am not
17 saying that that was his real name. And I described
18 other things. He was shortish. He was a bit heavy
19 set. But I remember what he said. He had this leather
20 band with a bullet pendant, and I said what he said.
21 But I don't know what his real name was, but I seem to
22 remember it as Branko.
23 Q. Apart from the five people you claim to have
24 seen killed that day -- sorry, let me just deal with
25 this: The five people that you claim to have seen
1 killed that day, were they all Muslims?
2 A. I couldn't tell you that because I could not
3 recognise the people. I may not have known them even
4 before, and -- but perhaps I couldn't recognise them
5 due to the shape that they were in coming out. I just
6 don't know their identity.
7 Q. Were you aware during the course of that day
8 that a man, a Serb called Djoko, from Dubravica
9 village, was killed at the camp?
10 A. No, I don't know that.
11 Q. I'd like now just to turn briefly to another
12 person, somebody called Danijel, who was interrogated.
13 Do you recall that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. And is this right, that Danijel was being
16 interrogated about a pistol that he had in his
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. And was that all that he was being
20 interrogated about?
21 A. Yes. We were not able to hear this, but I
22 assume, regarding Danijel, that somebody had left the
23 door open so that these noises were coming to us louder
24 than usual. He was being accused of a pistol having
25 been found with him, and I think that he admitted to
1 that. Then they asked him how he came into its
2 possession, and he said that he had bought it before
3 the war to protect himself and his family in case
4 something happened.
5 Q. Witness F, I want to return very briefly to
6 something that I asked you about this morning, and it's
7 an additional question: The person you've described as
8 calling himself the Serb Adolf, the first time that you
9 saw that person was at Luka?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And so you had not seen him at the barracks
12 the previous day or during your stay at the barracks?
13 A. No, I did not.
14 Q. Were all the people who were at the barracks
15 kept together in the same place? I think we may have
16 heard some evidence about it being the movie hall.
17 A. As far as I know, yes.
18 Q. Thank you. I want to ask you this about the
19 killings which you say that you witnessed: In the
20 statement which you made to the district court at
21 Tuzla, the state security bureau, you told that organ
22 that you had witnessed three murders: somebody at
23 around 5 p.m., somebody at around 6.00 p.m., and a
24 third person -- I'm sorry, a total of four, I think it
25 is, in fact, now that I recount it, four in all. Can
1 you explain why it is that you told them only about
2 four murders and not five?
3 A. Yes. I gave this statement to the organ of
4 the state security of the BH army in May 1993,
5 immediately upon having been exchanged, and I gave the
6 statement to the public security service. And I reread
7 the statement, and I was surprised myself that certain
8 events and certain numbers were sort of criss-crossed,
9 so to speak; they were not in the right time line, the
10 right sequence. I tried to correct this typed-up
11 record I did not read, but given the circumstances, I
12 did not have the time. They just told me that it was
14 And this interview also only took an hour,
15 hour and a half. These people worked under very tough
16 circumstances. It was wartime. It was -- this report
17 was written in bullet points and then was put together
18 as a narrative and then was given to me to sign. And
19 when I was released, when I was exchanged, I lived very
20 far away; I was living far away. There was no fuel,
21 there were no vehicles, there was no transportation
22 available, there was shelling coming from both sides,
23 so I would have risked my life if I were to set out on
25 So when I finally made it there, I had just
1 barely enough time to come in, to sign it, and then
2 turn around and go back home, for my own safety. So I
3 have to point out that I did not have the time. The
4 conditions were not such that -- I could not really
5 read carefully the statement but just glanced through
6 it. And this is how I can explain these discrepancies
7 or differences that have occurred.
8 Q. You accept that you signed the statement. Do
9 you also accept this, that at the conclusion of the
10 statement, you signed this: "I have nothing further to
11 add. The integral statement" -- by which I think it
12 means the whole statement -- "has been read aloud to
13 me, and I have had part in editing the statement. All
14 that I have said so far I am prepared to confirm in
15 court and to an international organisation, should any
16 be interested, and I shall confirm this with my
18 What you signed to there was having had the
19 statement read aloud to you, and you took part in its
20 editing. So what you've said just now isn't strictly
21 true, is it, Mr. F?
22 A. I've just told the truth and explained why.
23 If somebody has to take the blame, that I'm ready to
24 assume that part of responsibility for not having read
25 it. Yesterday I explained the circumstances under all
1 this happened. Secondly, I told you that I knew
2 personally people who did all that, and I was quite
3 convinced that it would be done fairly and correctly,
4 and I don't know whence the differences that happened
6 And I mentioned the same figure always,
7 except, as far as I can remember, in the Bosnian
8 version, it I think says that I saw five persons shot,
9 which is not true, because I saw two men being killed.
10 I didn't see three men being killed. And I read that.
11 I'm really sorry about this misunderstanding, but it
12 was wartime, and that is how it happened.
13 Q. Mr. F, I want to turn now, please, to the
14 people on the two lists about whom you were asked
15 yesterday. First of all, Stipo Glavocevic.
16 A. Yes?
17 Q. From whom did you hear details about his
19 A. From people who worked with me, in the same
20 company, who knew him as well as I did. And they said
21 about him that they knew the details of what he had
22 gone through. And I should like to mention that I
23 always pointed out very clearly what I had heard or
24 what I had seen personally on which -- what I can swear
25 to. I hope I was clear about that.
1 Q. I'm not complaining. I just want to
2 establish a little more detail so that we can test the
3 reliability of what you heard. You've described him as
4 a lawyer; wasn't he in fact a policeman?
5 A. He was both those things. At the time when I
6 knew him, he worked for Bimeks company as a lawyer.
7 That is quite certain. And I have heard also that he
8 had been a policeman beforehand. That is that before
9 he became a lawyer, he was a policeman too. But I knew
10 him as a lawyer and as a fellow worker.
11 Q. And so just to make it plain, all the detail
12 which you have is derived from having been told by
13 others, and that's an amalgamation of all that has been
14 told to you by different people?
15 A. Yes, I heard about what had happened to him
16 and about his occupation in wartime. I know because we
17 worked together in the same company.
18 Q. And the second man about whom you were asked,
19 called Glimac, Mehmed Glimac, although he was at Luka,
20 you know nothing at all of what happened to him
21 after -- either at Luka, or whether he was released, or
23 A. No, I really don't. I don't know even -- I
24 mean, I haven't even heard anything. I really do not
25 know either what happened to him or where he might be.
1 I know that he was in Luka, but that is all I know.
2 Q. I next want to ask you about two brothers
3 called Kartal, Kasim and Rasim. Are you related to
4 them in any way, whether by blood or by marriage?
5 A. No, but I knew them, like most people in
6 Brcko, because they played football. And besides, my
7 parents were friends of their parents, very close
8 friends, so that we knew one another.
9 Q. Have you seen or met with any of your mutual
10 friends since those days?
11 A. You mean brothers Kartal?
12 Q. Yes. If you have mutual friends with the
13 Kartal brothers, have you met any of the mutual
14 friends; in other words, those who were friends with
15 both you and with the Kartal brothers?
16 A. I didn't say we had any mutual friends. I
17 said I knew them because our parents were close
18 friends, and I know those gentlemen. But during the
19 war and after the war, I never saw them, and I just
20 don't know what happened to them.
21 Q. Did you hear anything about them being killed
22 but not being killed at Luka, perhaps?
23 A. No, I could not say anything, or I simply
24 don't remember because there were so many stories about
25 so many people that I really cannot say.
1 Q. I turn now briefly to -- well, Mr. Kevric you
2 said you do not know, Sead Kevric you know nothing
3 about. The brothers Tursic, they were at Luka with
5 A. I don't remember seeing them there.
6 Q. If you recall and so that it's clear, there
7 were two sets of brothers, Tursic and Terzic that we
8 talked about yesterday, and I want to be entirely fair
9 to you, Mr. F. When you were first asked about Tursic,
10 the name Tursic, you say, "I saw them at Luka." Which
11 of the two? Was it Tursic or Terzic? Forgive my bad
13 A. Tursic, Tursic, yes. Yes, I said that I
14 heard very many stories about brothers Tursic,
15 something that all three brothers had been killed and
16 it was a major family tragedy, and so that must be the
17 same thing or about the same thing that I said
18 yesterday when asked about it.
19 Q. The three brothers being killed, did you,
20 when you heard about them being killed and it being a
21 family tragedy, was there any further information as to
22 where and how they had been killed given to you?
23 A. No, I don't think that I would remember any
24 detail about that, but there was this story about those
25 three brothers being killed. But who, when, how, those
1 circumstances, I don't remember that.
2 Q. Can you recall, so that you can help us, who
3 it was who told you about that?
4 A. No, because moving around the territory in
5 contact with people who were at Luka and then in
6 Batkovic, so contacts with people who survived in the
7 Public Security Station in Brcko and elsewhere where
8 people were killed, somebody always survived, and after
9 they would be exchanged, of course those people would
10 naturally talk about what they had gone through during
11 the detention. This information reached me from those
12 stories, from people who survived those place.
13 Q. I turn now, if I may, please, to Ahmed
14 Hodzic, also known as Papa, someone you've known from
15 the Kolobara district. You said to the Court
16 yesterday, "I know that he too was killed, I know that
17 he was killed." What did you hear about that death?
18 A. As far as I know, Papa was one of -- how
19 shall I put it -- one of the organisers and
20 participants in the resistance which the Kolobara
21 residents put up against the Serb troops, and from what
22 I heard, that was how he was killed, or was he perhaps
23 captured, but it was such a long time ago that I'm
24 really not sure. Whether he died or was killed, I
25 really can't say. But again from what I heard, he
1 participated in the resistance at Kolobara. But
2 whether he was killed in combat or whether he was in
3 detention --
4 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Just a moment,
5 Mr. Greaves. I want to consult with my colleagues.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Greaves,
8 you can remain standing. I have a question for you.
9 With my colleagues, we were wondering.
10 Certain facts were acknowledged because the accused
11 pleaded guilty. I have the indictment in front of me,
12 and this Kartal is not mentioned. However, it seems to
13 us that as regards Ahmed Hodzic, alias Papa, that he is
14 covered under paragraphs 19 of the indictment and
15 counts 11 and 12. The accused pleaded guilty to those
17 I understand that you're trying to prove that
18 genocide was committed, Mr. Nice, but the questions
19 have to be directed in a different manner then. The
20 fact in and of itself seems to me to have been
21 acknowledged by the accused. The fact that around the
22 7th of May, Goran Jelisic took the Muslim detainee
23 Ahmed Hodzic, aka Papa, a leader of the Brezovo SDA, et
24 cetera. What explanations can you give us, Mr. Nice?
25 First I would like to hear what Mr. Nice has
1 to say and then give the floor to Mr. Greaves.
2 Mr. Nice, would you comment on what I've just
3 said, please?
4 MR. NICE: Yes. The position about Papa will
5 be made clear by the next witness, to some degree, and
6 indeed the evidence of the next witness on Papa will
7 provide a helpful link, probably, of a particular kind
8 which I will refer to in the absence of the witness.
9 But Your Honour is quite right. In the
10 agreed factual basis for the guilty plea to be entered
11 by Goran Jelisic, a document I think of September of
12 last year, and unless I've got a document that is in
13 some way not agreed, it's at paragraph 7 of that
14 document that the defendant admitted that he took Ahmed
15 Hodzic, also known as Papa, a leader of the Brcko SDA,
16 outside the police station and shot and killed him, so
17 that that fact is, amongst other facts, a fact for the
18 Chamber to act upon and not a fact that it has to
19 decide about.
20 Accordingly, there does seem to be very
21 little point at the moment in any questions directed at
22 minimising the value, even by second-hand sources, of
23 the evidence that this witness can give.
24 The Chamber will recall that I've invited
25 this witness to deal with the lists, the longer list
1 and the shorter list, not only without complaint but
2 indeed with the agreement of my learned friends simply
3 because of something that they raised, and it seemed a
4 good idea for the witness to have a look at the list in
5 advance and to tell us what he could say about those
6 people. But that doesn't make this line of questioning
7 of any value, in light of the agreed fact that this
8 defendant killed that man.
9 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Greaves?
10 MR. GREAVES: With respect to my learned
11 friend and Your Honour, I'm afraid the point has been
12 missed, and it's this: It's two points. One is a
13 general point and one is a particular point.
14 It's quite right that the defendant has
15 pleaded guilty to that matter, and there are likely to
16 be other evidence about that matter and you will hear
17 about it in due course, but it demonstrates these two
18 things: The general point is this. It demonstrates
19 the dangers inherent in hearsay evidence.
20 Your Honours may be familiar with the
21 expression "Chinese whispers." The danger is that
22 hearsay evidence is inherently unreliable, and this is
23 a classic example of why hearsay evidence can be deeply
25 Secondly, and a particular point, and I don't
1 want to indulge in a speech, as it were, in terms of
2 closing, but this enables the Defence to make the
3 comment in due course that this particular witness is
4 also an unreliable witness who is recording and
5 recounting things to you which are both hearsay and
6 unreliable hearsay. That's the point. It's not
7 suggested that we are trying to go back in any way on
8 any plea of guilty that has been made so far.
9 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Excuse me. I'm
10 not sure whether you're responding to the Prosecutor,
11 but you're not responding to the Judges' concerns, the
12 Judges of this Tribunal.
13 The Judges have called you to illustrate
14 paragraph 14 of the indictment, not the others, only
15 14. That is count 1 on genocide. As wise a legal
16 specialist you are, you also have to respond to the
17 fact that the Prosecutor said that you have to show
18 that the accused had the intention of destroying a
19 substantial and significant part of the Bosnian Muslim
20 people, which is why the Prosecutor has just spoken
21 about a list.
22 But the fact that the witness, in your eyes,
23 is not particularly reliable, which is your opinion and
24 it remains your opinion, does not avoid the question
25 that in order to speed up the proceedings, the Judges
1 would not like to go back to the factual acknowledgement
2 of the events. If you want to go back to the case of
3 Ahmed Hodzic, why not, but you can go back to it only
4 in respect of the connection that might exist between
5 that murder and the genocidal intention or the
6 constituent elements of genocide.
7 For example, I can't tell you how to work,
8 but the fact that he was a Muslim, I could understand
9 that, but you cannot go back on the pretext that today
10 you find the witness to be unreliable, which is, as
11 I've said, your opinion. You cannot go back to
12 paragraph 19, in which it says that Goran Jelisic, as
13 he acknowledged, on the 7th of May, 1992, took the
14 Muslim detainee Ahmed Hodzic, alias Papa, a leader of
15 the Brcko SDA, a Muslim political party, outside the
16 Brcko station, took him to that same place where he had
17 killed a young detainee from Sinteraj earlier that day,
18 and after reaching the area, Goran Jelisic shot and
19 killed Ahmed Hodzic. To this, the accused pleaded
21 In a subsequent hearing, during the
22 sentencing hearings, we will see what the Judges should
23 draw from this, but I don't think it's appropriate to
24 go back to this right now unless your questions are
25 focused on the very specific point of genocide. For
1 the time being, you cannot act any differently.
2 As regards the witness's reliability or lack
3 of reliability, you can call his credibility into
4 question pursuant to Rule 90(H). That's your right and
5 even your duty perhaps, but I must say that this is the
6 first time, and I have to render homage to you, I will
7 look through the indictment quickly, I haven't yet
8 found any crossovers or cross-references between
10 This is what the Judges, and I say "the
11 Judges" because I've consulted with my colleagues on
12 this important fact, believe would be a way of speeding
13 things up and not to go back to asking questions about
14 something to which the accused has already pleaded
15 guilty just because it might suit your needs at that
16 particular time.
17 You may continue, Mr. Greaves.
18 MR. GREAVES: I wonder if you'll constraint
19 just to add this: I'm not suggesting and not trying to
20 go back on any plea of guilty. The only point, and the
21 proper point, in my submission, because it deals with
22 the credibility of the witness, is to demonstrate not,
23 and I've not suggested it, not that Goran Jelisic was
24 uninvolved in that murder but to demonstrate the
25 dangers of hearsay evidence and to enable the Defence,
1 in due course, to comment on the reliability and
2 credibility of this witness. That's the only point. I
3 have not, and I specifically draw your attention to the
4 record, not suggested in any way that Mr. Jelisic is
5 going back or we're going back in any way on those
7 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] As regards
8 hearsay, Mr. Greaves, I invite you, if you haven't
9 already, to consult several decisions that were
10 rendered by this Tribunal, by this Trial Chamber, which
11 I had the honour of presiding, and others as well in
12 respect of hearsay evidence.
13 Please continue.
14 MR. GREAVES:
15 Q. You were asked yesterday about
16 Mr. Sulejmanovic, Josef [sic] Sulejmanovic, and you
17 said he was also killed later. Were you aware that he
18 was found dead on the 30th of May, 1993, some ten
19 months after the events at Luka in May of 1992?
20 A. No. What did you say his name was, Josef
21 Sulejmanovic? I don't know this gentleman, and I did
22 not say anything in relation to that name.
23 Q. Vasif. Yes, Vasif Sulejmanovic, I'm sorry.
24 A. Vasif Sulejmanovic, yes. Yesterday, when
25 asked about that, my answer was very much to the
1 point. I knew that gentleman from Brcko Television,
2 and I said that to my knowledge, he had been killed.
3 But I never mentioned the date, and I wasn't asked
4 about the date. I was asked what I knew about him, and
5 I said that I knew that he had been killed in Brcko.
6 He had even taken a Serb name, and he still was
7 killed. But no dates were mentioned. I was asked
8 about the name of that person and if I knew anything
9 about him, whether he was killed or not. And I always
10 try to explain what I saw myself and what I heard.
11 If you think that this is not a proper source
12 of information, that it's not reliable, if you're
13 questioning my credibility, then don't ask me such
14 questions. I'm really sorry. I'm trying to behave
16 Q. [Inaudible] about your behaviour, Mr. F, and
17 please understand that. I'm just trying to test to see
18 the source of your information and whether they are
19 reliable sources.
20 Can you answer the question? Were you aware
21 or not that this man had been found dead at the end of
22 March of 1993? If the answer is, "No," say, "No."
23 A. I knew the gentleman, and as I was isolated
24 in the company where I worked, I also slept there, so
25 therefore I wasn't moving around the town, I couldn't
1 see anything with my own eyes, and the sources of
2 information were limited, so I heard that this
3 gentleman was killed, and what I said was that I had
4 heard about his death. I never said that I knew it or
5 that I witnessed it, and I never mentioned any dates.
6 Q. Help us about this, if you can. When was it
7 that you heard about his death?
8 A. Well, that was roughly sometime in 1993,
9 sometime in 1993.
10 Q. I want to turn now to Izudin Brodlic.
11 Amongst the things that you heard about him, you heard
12 that he had been killed in his house. Is it right that
13 that was sometime after the 13th of September, 1992,
14 that you heard that?
15 A. As I have said, I knew the gentleman, and I
16 just heard that he had been killed. As for dates and
17 everything else, I really can't remember.
18 Q. As far as the lawyer, Mr. Vatic, is
19 concerned, you heard, as you described to Their
20 Honours, about his fate. Did the things which you
21 heard about him include this, that he had been detained
22 at Batkovic camp and had subsequently been exchanged
23 for Serbian people?
24 A. No, I did not hear that. What I did hear
25 was -- how shall I put it -- that he was detained for a
1 long time, and that he was killed in the end. Most of
2 the stories really came down to that. That gentleman
3 was a well-known lawyer and a very wealthy gentleman.
4 The story went that he had been tortured, and he turned
5 over to them all his money, all his valuables and his
6 Mercedes car. That is all that I heard.
7 MR. GREAVES: Would Your Honours give me a
8 moment so that I can confer with leading counsel,
10 Thank you, Your Honour. I have no further
12 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Thank you,
13 Mr. Greaves. I would like to pay tribute to you for
14 having tried to complete your work within the time that
15 was given to you, and the Tribunal is very sensitive to
17 I see Mr. Nice has gotten up, and I assume
18 that he wants to use a small right of redirect. How
19 much time are you going to need, Mr. Nice?
20 MR. NICE: I've got about six questions, but
21 I'm concerned, before I ask any of them, just to know
22 whether it's being challenged that specifically with
23 this witness, that these killings are to be associated
24 with him. It's not entirely clear to me whether the
25 evidence that it was this man who committed those
1 killings is challenged or not, and it might help the
2 Chamber to know how issues are joined. The Chamber is,
3 of course, in a position to require explanation of the
4 line of questioning, if it decides to do so. I can't
5 do it, but it's a matter for the Chamber.
6 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Greaves?
7 Are you contesting?
8 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, the position is
9 this: The defendant has pleaded guilty to certain
10 murders, and only those murders are accepted. Let me
11 make it plain that unless it can be demonstrated that
12 the person being described as being killed can be
13 demonstrated to be one of those, none is admitted other
14 than those which are demonstrably linkable to those
15 which are on the indictment.
16 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I think you
17 have gotten the answer, Mr. Nice, from Mr. Greaves. I
18 think the summary can be made as follows: This is part
19 of a genocide trial, genocide which has not been
20 acknowledged by Goran Jelisic. Under the counts which
21 are already acknowledged, you must make a connection
22 which shows that these murders have a genocidal
23 connotation. If you want to add others, I think,
24 Mr. Nice, that you will have to prove that.
25 Is that what you're saying, Mr. Greaves?
1 Have I summarised more or less what you are saying?
2 MR. GREAVES: Just give me a moment whilst
3 the translation comes up.
4 No, what I've just said has nothing to do
5 with the issue of mens rea or the issue of genocide;
6 it's simply to do with the existence or not of a
7 killing. The defendant has admitted certain killings.
8 The Prosecution has to prove -- I'm sorry. Let me
9 start again.
10 The defendant has pleaded guilty to certain
11 killings. If it can be demonstrated that the evidence
12 given by a witness can be linked to one of those
13 murders, those murders are plainly accepted. But if it
14 cannot be demonstrated that a murder which is recounted
15 by a witness is one of those on the indictment, each
16 and every one of those is not admitted, and the
17 Prosecution must prove -- unless they can demonstrate
18 that it is one of the ones admitted -- must prove that
19 beyond reasonable doubt.
20 MR. NICE: Your Honour, that assists me, both
21 in the conduct of the examination of this witness and
22 future witnesses, and indeed the witnesses that I shall
23 seek to call.
24 Q. The questions, Mr. F, are very limited,
25 however. One, before the blowing-up of the bridges,
1 how did the ethnic groups get on in Brcko? You may
2 deal very briefly with that in your answer.
3 A. The ethnic structure in the town of Brcko, to
4 be specific, in terms of Serbs, Croats, and Muslims,
5 even the Romany, were -- all these people, to a large
6 extent, got along well, and it was reflected in the
7 workplace, friendships, even mixed marriages, and I
8 believe that it was -- had the will of the local people
9 from Brcko been respected, war would never have come
11 Q. The second question. You were asked whether
12 you were still in the army. Don't say where you are
13 presently living. Tell the Tribunal, do you live in or
14 indeed anywhere near Bosnia now?
15 A. Is it necessary to answer that question? I
16 would prefer not to.
17 Q. If you would prefer not to answer, I will
18 move on.
19 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Protect your
21 MR. NICE:
22 Q. Next question. This has to do with the
23 challenge of proof of identity; I explain that for the
24 benefits of the Chamber. I dealt, when I was asking
25 you questions, very briefly with the particular route
1 that took you from your home to Luka. Others may have
2 taken different routes. Please just tell us, having
3 been rounded up, where did you go first?
4 A. After we were evacuated from our homes?
5 Q. Yes.
6 A. They first took us to the barracks of the
7 former JNA.
8 Q. And you went from the barracks to Luka; did
9 you at any time go either to the Laser Bus Company --
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. When? At what stage did you go to the Laser
12 Bus Company?
13 A. We never went there, but we were told that we
14 were going to go for work duty to the Laser. But they
15 instead took us directly to Luka.
16 Q. Did you ever go and were you ever detained at
17 a mosque, or the mosque, in Brcko?
18 A. No. That was in another section of town, not
19 where I lived.
20 Q. Thank you. You've been asked certain
21 questions about statements that you made. You gave a
22 detailed explanation of why there may have been errors
23 and misunderstandings in the statement that you made to
24 the Bosnian authorities, but it was suggested to you
25 that in that statement, you had not said or spoken of
1 five deaths.
2 Will you have, please -- and I don't seek to
3 make this an exhibit unless Mr. Greaves wishes me to --
4 the original of the Bosnian statement, if the usher
5 would be so good, which I would like you to look at
6 generally and also where my thumb is, or where the
7 usher's thumb is when he brings it across to you.
8 MR. NICE: If you could just show that to the
9 witness, please.
10 Q. And you might like to look also at the last
11 page, which has a signature on it, and confirm whether
12 it is or is not your signature; and the statement that
13 you made, or the statement that you signed, is that
14 indeed the Bosnian statement that you signed?
15 A. Yes, this is my signature. But these sheets
16 are photocopies.
17 Q. Yes, but are they photocopies of, as far as
18 you remember, the original?
19 A. [In English] Yeah.
20 Q. If you look to the paragraph where the
21 usher's thumb was, can you read out just the first
22 sentence of that paragraph which begins with the date
23 in May? Just read out that paragraph, please.
24 THE INTERPRETER: Can the English copy be put
25 on the ELMO, please?
1 MR. NICE: Yes, I'll do my very best.
3 Q. Just one moment, please, Mr. F. The English
4 copy is --
5 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Don't show the
6 signature on the ELMO.
7 MR. NICE: I'm grateful to Your Honour. I
8 think that there is no signature on this page, and it's
9 just the -- two-thirds of the way down.
10 Q. Can you read in the original, please, the
11 same day?
12 A. "That same day, which was 8th of May, 1992,
13 around 5.00 p.m., Goran Jelisic entered the hangar
14 along with two Chetniks. They took out five prisoners
15 from the hangar, among whom I recognised Jasmin
16 Curmurovic, who worked for the Bimeks, and none of them
17 came back."
18 Q. Pause there. You've explained already, both
19 in answer to me and to Mr. Greaves, how there was the
20 error about Jasmin Curmurovic, but that apart, is it
21 clear that in that statement, you did indeed mention
22 five people who were taken out and who never came back?
23 A. Yes, I always mentioned the same number, but
24 certain technical matters occurred, and --
25 Q. I needn't trouble you with that; you've dealt
1 with that fully with Mr. Greaves.
2 MR. NICE: Unless anybody wants these to be
3 exhibited, I'll take the statements back, please.
4 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, before my learned
5 friend does that, the answer is I object to the way in
6 which he's done that. It's quite right that at that
7 point in the statement, it says, "They took five
8 prisoners from the warehouse, amongst whom I recognised
9 Jasmin Curmurovic." What he has not gone on to point
10 out, and it would be fair and proper to do so, is that
11 the death of Jasmin Curmurovic is one of the four only
12 that are mentioned. This witness, in that statement,
13 then goes on to list only three other killings, and
14 those, on any analysis, different from -- people being
15 taken out from the warehouse is different from people
16 being pushed out of the office.
17 So with the greatest respect to my learned
18 friend, that is somewhat misleading, the way in which
19 that has been done. The witness ought to be given the
20 opportunity to deal with the full statement, which
21 actually sets out only three other murders, the way
22 that I've described.
23 MR. NICE: I'm afraid I disagree. The proper
24 way to cross-examine the witness on a prior statement
25 is to ensure that he has a copy of the original with
1 him at the time; that wasn't done. I'm quite happy for
2 the documents to become exhibits, and then they can be
3 the subject of whatever comments Mr. Greaves wishes to
4 make in his closing arguments, but I don't desire to
5 take time to go over the statement at length now. But
6 I'm very happy for them to become exhibits, if that's
7 what he would prefer.
8 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] The Judges have
9 been sufficiently informed. Please continue.
10 MR. NICE:
11 Q. You have been asked questions about your
12 evidence of the man Adolf at the back of the barracks
13 and about how you came to know his name. Was there one
14 or more than one person at the barracks -- at Luka; I
15 beg your pardon -- using the name "Adolf"?
16 A. [No translation]
17 MR. NICE: Your Honour, the witness answered,
18 but I don't think the interpreters caught it.
19 Q. Can you answer again, please?
20 A. Only one person introduced himself as the
21 Serb Adolf.
22 Q. In the evening that you were there, before
23 your release, was there one or more than one person
24 taking people from the office opposite with a gun and
25 either shooting them in your sight or taking them
1 behind a building from which they did not return? Was
2 that done by one person or by more than one persons?
3 A. Only one person.
4 Q. Just answer this question "Yes" or "No." Do
5 you understand me? And please don't go any further
6 than to say either "Yes" or "No."
7 Before I ask the question, do you understand
8 the limitations on your answer?
9 A. Yes, I fully understand.
10 Q. And so to this question, just "Yes" or "No."
11 Would you feel able, at this period of time, to
12 identify the person who gave the name "Adolf" if you
13 were to see him again, or not, or don't you know?
14 I'm sorry, I'm afraid it's my fault. You
15 can't answer that "Yes" or "No." You can only answer
16 "Yes," "No," or "I don't know." But those are the
17 three possibilities.
18 A. I would have to see this person in order to
19 be able to specifically answer your question.
20 MR. NICE: I don't think I can take that
21 further with this witness.
22 Q. Finally, you were asked questions about Papa,
23 and just at the stage of an interruption, you
24 said, "Whether he was killed in combat or whether he
25 was in detention, I didn't know." Is that the
1 position, that you didn't know where he was, from the
2 information coming to you, what happened to him?
3 A. Yes. I clearly stated that I had heard that
4 he was killed, but I cannot recall exactly, because he
5 was known to have offered resistance. Whether he was
6 killed during fighting or after he was captured, that,
7 I cannot recall.
8 Q. I beg your pardon. There is one last
9 question, and it's this. It's again to do with one of
10 the issues raised with you. The next witness to be
11 called is a man with whom you have, of necessity, been
12 sitting in the waiting room or seen him outside. Did
13 you see that man on the night at Luka, or not, or don't
14 you know?
15 A. You mean on the evening of the 8th?
16 Q. Yes.
17 A. I do not recall that. There were a lot of
18 people there. It was packed. We were all very afraid,
19 and it was impossible to remember. There were seven to
20 eight hundred of us there, so it was impossible to
21 recall all persons there.
22 MR. NICE: Those are the only questions I
24 [Trial Chamber confers]
25 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Let me turn to
1 my colleagues to ask whether they have any questions to
2 ask, either of the Prosecution or the Defence or anyone
4 Judge Riad?
5 JUDGE RIAD: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your
7 [In English] Mr. Nice, I have a question. I
8 wonder whether it is addressed to you or to the
9 witness. It concerns Exhibit 13. Exhibit 13 suggests
10 that the criterion on which the killing was based was
11 the fact that the people were prominent. I can call,
12 for instance, you have -- the very first one was the
13 president of the local executive of Kolobara, a very
14 prominent person. Another is a senior member of the
15 executive board. Another is the imam, which is the
16 head of the religious community. Sometimes they say
17 "prominent," without telling why, and this remains to
18 be discovered, and the others were prominent because
19 their function was prominent.
20 From the witness's testimony and the
21 questions of the Defence counsel, I gathered also that
22 sometimes you can wonder if some of these people were
23 engaged in any fighting, or were they called the Green
24 Berets and so on. So would these people also be, some
25 of them, Green Berets, or a president would be a Green
1 Beret too? Were they killed because they were only
2 prominent? Perhaps, even if this exhibit is not
3 completely relevant, I would like to know, what was the
4 basis of this killing? Thank you.
5 MR. NICE: Can I assist Your Honour, first,
6 in this respect: Both these lists will be produced by
7 other witnesses in due course who will explain their
8 origin and what their significance may be. In showing
9 them to this witness and to any other witness, the
10 witnesses will not be informed of what those producing
11 witnesses will say, for that might, of course, affect
12 or infect their evidence, and that would be wrong.
13 They were simply shown the statement, the lists,
14 because of the inquiry made by the Defence, and it's
15 far more helpful for the Chamber and for the Defence to
16 have the witness look at the list in advance, outside,
17 when he's got time, rather than to have to do it under
18 the microscope of court procedure. But therefore the
19 witness doesn't know, one way or another, what these
20 lists mean and whether they purport to be the list of
21 people who have been killed, or people who are missing,
22 or whatever it is.
23 Having said that, I'll ask what I hope is a
24 helpful question of this witness and see if that will
25 assist Your Honour.
1 JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much.
2 MR. NICE:
3 Q. You remember the lists that you've been asked
4 to look at, Mr. F, the longer list and then the shorter
5 list of some 39-odd names; do you remember those two
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. On the shorter list, as His Honour, Judge
9 Riad says, were the names of people of some prominence
10 in the local community, and you recognised some of
11 those names. Can you help us with this: To your
12 knowledge, were any of those people in armed forces,
13 Green Beret or otherwise?
14 A. No, no. Not at all. Otherwise they would
15 not be in their homes and waiting to be picked up.
16 That is not logical at all.
17 Q. Well, forget the logic, and just think, if
18 you will, of the names and the positions they held.
19 And I'll break the question into two parts. Was there
20 anything about their positions, as imam or president
21 and so on, that was inconsistent with their holding
22 military rank? So that's the first part of the
23 question: anything about their position or rank that
24 made it inconsistent for them also to hold military
1 A. I'm sorry, but the question is not clear to
3 Q. My mistake. Would it have been possible for
4 these people -- for example, the imam or the president,
5 and so on, of the community -- would it have been
6 possible for them to have been in military units?
7 MR. GREAVES: Well, with respect, I think he
8 can only speak about those of whom he knows on the
9 list, and I would object to him asking a general
10 question about everybody on the list with this witness
11 who only knows particular people.
12 MR. NICE:
13 Q. Those of whom you knew, was it possible for
14 them to be in armed units?
15 A. I wouldn't know how to answer that question.
16 The very fact that they were in their homes, I think,
17 says that they were not involved in the armed
18 resistance, otherwise they wouldn't be home. And I
19 don't think that I could give you an answer that is
20 more precise than that.
21 MR. NICE: Your Honour, I have done my best.
22 I hope that helps.
23 JUDGE RIAD: Thank you very much, Mr. Nice.
24 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I would like to
25 consult with my colleagues for a moment.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] We've completed
3 the questions, Witness F. The Judges have no further
4 questions. The Tribunal thanks you very much for
5 having come and for having recalled all these tragic
6 events which you lived through, and we hope that in
7 your country, you will find the calm to which you are
8 entitled, and to find inner peace, and to resume your
9 life under the best conditions possible. Thank you
10 very much.
11 Please do not move, because we're going to
12 take a break. I think that the registrar will be in
13 charge of your departure and be sure that all of your
14 protective measures taken for you will be taken care
16 The interpreters should be tired, so I
17 suppose we should take a 30-minute break, and we'll
18 resume at 4.30.
19 I would like to say that starting now, if
20 I've understood you correctly, Mr. Nice, the summary
21 that you're going to use to conduct your examination is
22 one that you've agreed on with the Defence. Is that
24 MR. NICE: First of all, the summaries for
25 the next witness are available in their final revised
1 form in English, French, and B/C/S. They've just
2 arrived, so I might take the liberty of distributing
3 them to you and your colleagues now as you leave.
4 Second, as to whether they are going to be
5 agreed or not, that's a matter entirely for the
6 Defence. It may be that Mr. Greaves won't be agreeing
7 on anything. But the summary still serves, unless the
8 Chamber decides otherwise, a very valuable purpose in
9 that it identifies for the Chamber what matters the
10 witness can cover, and I'll either cover them or not,
11 because the Chamber may say to itself, for example,
12 when it looks at the summary that's about to come for
13 the next witness who I hope will be Witness G, may
14 decide, "Well, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, we've already
15 heard about those. Let's move on to paragraph 4,"
16 knowing that if an issue arises about topics 1 to 3, we
17 can go back to them. So if Mr. Greaves is unable, for
18 whatever reason, to agree, as it were, even that
19 Wednesday follows Tuesday, then we will nevertheless be
20 in a position to make use of these documents, I hope,
21 as handy tools.
22 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, can I say this? I
23 haven't seen these summaries, and I'm not happy that
24 you should have a document presented to you which has
25 not been the subject of scrutiny by counsel before
1 being handed to the Tribunal. I'm sorry that that may
2 cause you inconvenience so that you are taken by
3 surprise in due course. There may be an issue which
4 arises out of these summaries, in any event, which I
5 wish to take after the adjournment.
6 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Yes,
8 All right. Rest assured that if you don't
9 have the summaries, we don't have them either. You
10 know that the Judges simply are trying to move quickly,
11 not for the sake of moving quickly, sometimes one has
12 to be slow, but for the sake of effectiveness and
14 I think that we need a 30-minute break, and I
15 wish Godspeed to Witness F. Please don't move until
16 the Judges have left the Chamber.
17 --- Recess taken at 4.05 p.m.
18 --- On resuming at 4.42 p.m.
19 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] We will now
20 resume the hearing. Have the accused brought in,
21 please. Please be seated.
22 [The accused entered court]
23 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] First of all,
24 I'm going to give the floor to Mr. Nice, but only to
25 introduce the witness to us quickly and to allow the
1 witness to take his oath, since he's standing.
2 Mr. Nice?
3 MR. NICE: This witness did attend on the
4 last occasion but was not, I think, specifically
5 subject to identification by any letter, seeks the same
6 level of protection and for the same reasons, and
7 would, if such protection is granted, become
8 Witness G. There is, I believe, no objection to his
9 being dealt with on that basis, and I ask leave for him
10 to be dealt with accordingly.
11 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] All right. We
12 will grant these protective measures.
13 We're going to call you Witness G. This is a
14 convenient way of protecting your anonymity. First of
15 all, I'm going to ask you to remain standing for a few
16 more moments, as long as it takes to read your oath.
17 That is the statement which the usher is going to give
19 THE WITNESS: I solemnly declare that I will
20 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
22 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Thank you. You
23 may be seated. Please be seated. Thank you for having
24 come at the request of the Prosecutor.
25 Mr. Greaves, did you want to say something?
1 I was speaking to the witness. Let me finish first.
2 MR. GREAVES: [Previous interpretation
3 continues] ... speaking to the witness and I apologise
4 for rising, but there is a matter I would like to raise
5 before he gives evidence, please, if I may.
6 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] You know,
7 witnesses, these are either Defence or Prosecution
8 witnesses, but once they come to this courtroom, they
9 become the Court's witness, and the best way to work is
10 first to greet them, because if we didn't have the
11 witnesses, there would be no possible justice, whether
12 it be national or international, and we would not be
13 able to operate without witnesses. Though I will say
14 this again at another time, I express to the witness
15 all of our gratitude.
16 The protective measures, Witness G, that
17 you've asked for have been granted to you, and they
18 guarantee you'll be able to speak in this courtroom in
19 calm and in serenity. Please feel at ease. If you
20 have any kind of physical or emotional difficulties or
21 psychological difficulties, please don't hesitate to
22 point them out, and if necessary, we will suspend the
23 hearing if that should prove necessary.
24 I will now give the floor to Mr. Greaves, who
25 wanted to make an intervention, but only in respect of
1 the problem of the statement. Go ahead, please.
2 MR. GREAVES: It's a matter that I would like
3 to raise in the absence of the witness. I do not wish
4 the witness to hear this particular piece of legal
5 argument, please.
6 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] But does it
7 have to do with the points that we brought up before
8 the break?
9 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, I'm going to raise
10 matters which I think it would be wrong to give the
11 witness an alert as to what may be in the
12 cross-examination. That would not be fair to the
13 defendant, in my submission. I want to raise matters
14 that will cover those issues, and it's for that reason
15 that I ask that he withdraw.
16 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Nice, could
17 we have your opinion or any comments that you would
18 like to make? Perhaps you haven't any.
19 MR. NICE: I'm concerned about the passage of
20 time with witnesses available, but I'm not going to
21 stand in the way of the witness being invited to
22 withdraw if that's what Mr. Greaves judges.
23 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Witness G,
24 we're going to ask you to leave the courtroom for a few
25 moments. We're going to draw the shades. I think that
1 would be the best thing to do.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Mr. President.
3 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Please don't
4 move yet. We're going to lower the blinds and then be
5 sure that you are properly protected in a room
7 [Open session]
8 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] We'll see one
9 another in a few minutes. I hope it's not going to
10 take too long.
11 [The witness withdrew]
12 MR. GREAVES: Thank you very much, Your
14 Your Honour, the matter that I wish to raise
15 with you is the manner in which examination in chief
16 was conducted yesterday.
17 Your Honour will recall that there was some
18 discussion as to the provision to you of a summary and
19 the means by which or the means to which that summary
20 would be put, and initially, and I think probably
21 through a misconception as to what was intended, I
22 indicated to Your Honour that we did not object to that
24 Your Honour, the position is this, that at
25 that stage I had only very recently been given the
1 summary that was placed before you, and so I hadn't had
2 an opportunity to properly scrutinise it and to see
3 what its effect was. A version in the B/C/S group of
4 languages was not provided to my learned friend until
5 after we had started, in fact.
6 Having considered, first of all, the nature
7 of the summary and, second of all, the nature of the
8 questions or the way in which the questions were asked,
9 the Defence cannot agree that the appropriate way in
10 which to examine, in chief, witnesses is the manner in
11 which the witness who has just given evidence and gone
12 was examined. Let me explain what our objections are.
13 The first is this: The summary with which
14 you were provided of Witness F is a compilation of
15 items from two statements that he made, two statements
16 about which you have heard, one made to the Bosnian
17 authorities, one made to the Office of the Prosecutor.
18 It is upon that document that Your Honour is invited to
19 exercise your powers under Rule 90 for control of
20 questioning. What I say --
21 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Let me
22 interrupt you immediately here. I'm going to stop you,
23 Mr. Greaves. You were able to conduct your
24 cross-examination. Perhaps those are comments that
25 should have been made before the cross-examination of
1 Witness F. Why wait until Witness G comes in to raise
2 this issue again? That is, the problems that you would
3 have had in your cross-examination, that's the part I
4 don't understand. Speak to us about the next method,
5 speak about Witness G, but we can't go back to Witness
7 MR. GREAVES: I'm not wanting to go back to
8 Witness F. I'm simply using it as an example. Will
9 Your Honour please bear with me, because I want to
10 explain this clearly.
11 It was only last night that I was able to go
12 back and have a thorough look at the summary and
13 analyse the way in which it was put together, and that,
14 of course, was after the witness had completed his
15 examination in chief. It is for that reason that I
16 raise it at this stage, because we've now, both myself
17 and my leading counsel who has had the Bosnian version,
18 have been able to think about it and consider it.
19 That summary contains only the choice bits.
20 It presents itself as if the two statements are
21 consistent in every respect, and it effectively
22 produces the choice bits the Prosecution say are the
24 Your Honour has heard today about some of the
25 inconsistencies which in fact exist, we say, as between
1 those two statements. Your Honour is being presented
2 with a summary. It is a summary we say that is
3 misleading because it doesn't, in fact, illuminate to
4 Your Honours the contradictory parts of the statement,
5 so you are being asked to control the questioning of a
6 witness under Rule 90 or under Rule 89 --
7 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Excuse me for
8 interrupting you again, Mr. Greaves. Excuse me for
9 interrupting you. You received the summary last
10 night. I'm sorry, last night there was a
11 cross-examination for ten minutes only. This morning,
12 you should have brought out your objections, and you
13 did not point out the contradictions that were in the
14 statement. That's what worries me, and I shall go back
15 to what you've been doing since this morning. I just
16 don't understand. Excuse me. I don't understand.
17 MR. GREAVES: Sorry, but with respect, I have
18 been pointing out all afternoon to Witness F the
19 contradictions between his statements and, indeed,
20 between the statements and his evidence, so with
21 respect, I have been doing that.
22 By the time examination in chief has come to
23 an end, there is little point in raising these
24 objections, but I want to raise them now because we say
25 that in fact the way in which the procedure is
1 developing is one which is unfair, and I would like
2 Your Honour to hear me on why we say it is unfair.
3 I have described, first of all, that if the
4 document which is provided to you as a summary is
5 misleading, as we say it is, then you are being invited
6 to use it as a tool to control questioning of witnesses
7 under Rule 90, and you are basing your decisions on a
8 document which is not fair to the defendant, in
9 essence, if it is derived from two documents which are
10 in important respects mutually contradictory or
12 Secondly, there is this: These summaries are
13 being provided to us almost immediately before the
14 witness has had an opportunity -- sorry -- is actually
15 called. It gives us very little opportunity to
16 consider whether it's a document that can properly be
17 placed in front of you.
18 I think you have asked for and have received
19 a French draft of the summary in respect of the witness
20 who is about to give evidence. I'm going to pick out
21 an example from that. It states at one point that
22 you're going to hear evidence which is plainly in one
23 of the statements that it's alleged --
24 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I don't have it
25 in front of me here. I don't have it, Mr. Greaves.
1 I think that we're moving far away from the
2 subject. I'll give the floor to the Prosecutor. It
3 seems to me that you want to go back to an agreement
4 that you made, and I think that's your right. But,
5 excuse me, I myself don't have the summary.
6 MR. GREAVES: Sorry, I had understood you had
7 asked for and had been given the summaries in French,
8 and I must have misunderstood that.
9 Can I draw your attention to paragraph 18?
10 Perhaps Your Honours would indicate when you've read
11 that paragraph.
12 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] All right, I've
13 read it, but I'm not really in the habit of answering
14 the parties' questions. But I'll try to be like the
15 witness and train myself to do so.
16 MR. GREAVES: I'm trying to move along
17 quickly so we can use time effectively.
18 The first sentence of that paragraph is
19 correct. There is, in one of the statements, such an
21 As to the second sentence and the third
22 sentence, both my learned friend and I have looked very
23 carefully at both the OTP statement and the statement
24 to the Bosnian authorities. We cannot see any such
25 assertion being made by the witness, and yet it's said
1 to be, if you look at the top of the summary, based
2 on -- the summary is based on the two statements. So
3 that is one example, and there are others, of how this
4 is a misleading and unfair document.
5 Secondly, if a document is to be provided to
6 Your Honour, it should be a document which has been
7 seen and agreed by counsel. And the reason I say that
8 is precisely for the reason that I raise arising out of
9 paragraph 18. We say that those two sentences do not
10 exist in the statement.
11 Thirdly, I at least would like to see the
12 French copies as well, because although my French is
13 not perfect, I have some, as Your Honour may recall,
14 and I would like to see the French version as well so
15 that I can compare it with the English version.
16 Thirdly, examination-in-chief can be by way
17 of a leading question. A leading question is one that
18 suggests the answer to the witness. That's perfectly
19 proper if, and only if, we submit, the Defence agrees
20 that such a question should be asked. In the absence
21 of such agreement, examination-in-chief should be in
22 the ordinary course of events, by the way of asking a
23 nonleading question.
24 There may well be some issues which are
25 wholly uncontroversial, for example, if someone
1 said, "Where is Brcko?", and the answer is perfectly
2 obvious: "Well, it's in the north part of
3 Bosnia-Herzegovina." There's no objection to that sort
4 of thing, but there are plainly -- and we object to a
5 large part of the way in which leading questions are,
6 we suspect, going to be asked.
7 We would respectfully submit that this
8 procedure is flawed, for the reasons that I have set
9 out, and we would invite Your Honour not to permit it.
10 Of course one wants to get on; of course one wants to
11 make the experience of a witness as quick as possible.
12 There is another side to the coin which I would invite
13 Your Honours to remember, which is this: This man is
14 on trial. He faces the most serious charge which can
15 be laid before this Tribunal, and it is a charge which
16 carries, as all offences before this Tribunal do, a
17 potential sentence of life imprisonment. And Your
18 Honour waxed lyrical yesterday about protecting the
19 defendant's rights. I would remind Your Honour that
20 there is the defendant to consider as well, and the
21 risks to him.
22 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Mr. Greaves, I
23 will give the floor to the Prosecutor. I have
24 understood that you are giving some lessons to us how
25 this trial should be conducted. Let me call your
1 attention back to Rule 90(G): "The Trial Chamber shall
2 exercise control over the mode and order of
3 interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as
4 to, (i), make the interrogation and presentation
5 effective for the ascertainment of the truth."
6 Not only, the Judges take liberty to point
7 this out to you, and also to avoid needless consumption
8 of time. I would also take the liberty of reminding
9 you of this: I agree to our discussing the best ways
10 of going beyond this, but I am sorry that you didn't
11 make these comments this morning before you started
12 your cross-examination, now, to go back now to what it
13 would appear you had already accepted.
14 Let me turn to the Prosecutor, and then we
15 will make a decision. But I'd like to point out,
16 Mr. Greaves, I think that you must learn, before the
17 International Criminal Tribunal, not always to have the
18 reflexes of your own internal domestic legal system.
19 All of us, all of us must shed our old clothes, our old
20 national clothes. These are proceedings which are more
21 governed by common law but which are also directed by
22 other types of procedures, and in the end, this is
23 neither common or civil law, but rather these are
24 proceedings which try to reach the truth.
25 Mr. Nice, I give you the floor to answer.
1 Where are you in respect of the discussions that you've
2 had with the defence? Please clarify that for the
4 MR. NICE: So far as where I am is, in
5 relation to the discussions with Mr. Greaves, has been
6 explained by him. He is now objecting to this
7 document, but it may help the Tribunal if I say that of
8 course this document is designed to help everyone, and
9 it is not designed to harm the Defence, and indeed,
10 rather, the contrary.
11 Interestingly enough, since I've been at this
12 institution, trying to cut through procedures that it
13 seemed to me take time and achieve little good, I
14 frequently find that I propose things that meet the ire
15 and irritation of my own colleagues in the OTP because
16 they think I'm being too generous to the Defence. And
17 that's frequently the view that's been held about this
18 category of document, which actually serves a very
19 useful purpose.
20 Of course, the document doesn't become
21 evidence; it's the evidence that is the evidence. The
22 document is simply a guide. And it's not just the
23 synthesis of one or two statements; it is, as I
24 explained yesterday, a synthesis prepared in advance of
25 all that's available and then added to by the witness
1 when he comes here.
2 What, of course, happens in other cases, as
3 I've been shocked to discover, is that witnesses
4 arrive, they announce new things that they are likely
5 to say, perhaps to the Prosecutor the night before, and
6 the Defence are taken by surprise in an entirely
7 old-fashioned way, which was something that came as
8 surprise and a shock to me.
9 What happens here is, broadly speaking,
10 everything that we know the witness is likely to say,
11 culled from whatever material is available, is
12 presented in a helpful form for the Defence and for the
13 Chamber. It's -- I know that some of Your Honours'
14 Chambers, fellow Chambers, other Chambers, actually
15 take the original witness statements themselves and
16 read them.
17 That's a very time-consuming exercise, and
18 this is, it seemed to me, like that, but preferable.
19 It reflects the desire of a Chamber to have summaries,
20 which is reflected in the Rules, although it's not yet
21 known from different Chambers what summaries are
22 required. Some Chambers require longer summaries, some
23 require shorter ones, and it simply seemed to me that
24 since, in order the prepare a witness for us to lead
25 that witness in evidence, we have to go through the
1 exercise of preparing this summary rather than do that
2 which would I expect be acceptable to my North American
3 colleagues, namely, to retain as much as you possible
4 can and hand out as little as is necessary, I
5 say, "Well, this is what we've got as a guide to what
6 this witness is going to say. Let everybody else have
8 And it is ridiculous to suggest that the
9 Defence is in any way inconvenienced or prejudiced. On
10 the contrary, it's in a wonderful position, frequently,
11 of being able to say, "Well, you didn't say this in the
12 summary and now you do," and this witness, I think,
13 will add one thing to what's in the summary, to my
14 knowledge, because it didn't get done in time. But
15 they can say that, or they can say, alternatively, that
16 something is in the summary and he didn't give it in
17 evidence, all of which shows further inconsistencies.
18 I don't mind that. I'm not afraid of my case. I'm not
19 frightened of my witnesses.
20 THE INTERPRETER: Could you slow down,
22 MR. NICE: Yes, of course, my apologies.
23 When I get carried away, there it is. I'll slow down.
24 This simply presents, in a summary form, as a
25 guide, what we forecast the witness can say. And it
1 must meet the requirements of a summary that the
2 Chamber already has in its Rules. It helps the Defence
3 because they can look ahead and know what they are
4 going to object to. It provides every known form of
5 inconsistency, and if they want to show inconsistency
6 and prior inconsistent statements by drawing the
7 Court's attention to witness statements, they are in a
8 position to do so.
9 But I have to say, in my, of course, very
10 limited experience of this Tribunal, and substantially
11 in another Chamber, this is a technique that has proved
12 to be extremely helpful, and it is helpful because,
13 where Defence counsel is not as maybe Mr. Greaves'
14 unfortunate position of having to challenge everything
15 for whatever reason, why, then, counsel can say, "Well,
16 if we just look at Witness G, there's nothing in
17 paragraphs 1 to 4," for example, "that harms Jelisic.
18 There's no reason known to me, counsel, or to Jelisic,
19 to challenge that part of the witness's account.
20 There's no benefit to me in forcing him laboriously to
21 relate things that are noncontentious. We can go
22 straight over to paragraph 5."
23 It may even be, although paragraph 5 relates
24 to Papa, that that wouldn't be contested, and we go
25 straight to paragraph 6. And of course, in
1 well-ordered legal systems -- and I'm no fan of the
2 common-law system and interested in all that I'm
3 learning here -- but in all well-ordered systems,
4 modern systems, where material is noncontroversial and
5 noncontentious, the best thing is to lay it before the
6 Tribunal as quickly as possible and to do so once.
7 This, as a tool, does all of that, but I accept that
8 once it's served its purpose as a tool, what is left is
9 the evidence from the witness box, and that's what the
10 Chamber will be making its mind up on.
11 I've taken a few minutes, but that's my
12 thinking that's developed over the last few months and
13 has led to my taking this course, with or without the
14 approval of all my colleagues, who might prefer me to
15 be more retentive.
16 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Thank you,
17 Mr. Nice. Concretely speaking, how do you plan to move
18 forward? Do you want to do this without the witnesses
19 being here, so that the Judges hear about the agreement
20 that you've had with the Defence, or do you want to
21 recall the questions, turning toward the Defence or
22 turning toward us? What procedure do you intend to
23 adopt? What would you do in front of another Chamber?
24 MR. NICE: Well, if Mr. Greaves was in any
25 position to agree matters, he would probably tell me by
1 expressly saying so before the Court convened, "Well,
2 topic -- paragraphs 1 to 4 are noncontentious, and you
3 can just lead those, or read them, or summarise them,"
4 if that was the case, and he might then say, "At
5 paragraph 5 or paragraph 6, perhaps you'll deal with
6 that on a conventional basis?" I would then deal with
7 it on a conventional basis, asking questions in a
8 nonleading form.
9 It might then be that he would say, when he
10 gets to a later stage of the evidence, that passage --
11 we come, for example, to paragraph 20, or 19, where the
12 matters at hand are reflected by pleas of guilty
13 already tendered, he might say, "You can lead those."
14 And the Chamber, of course, is in the position of being
15 able to supervise, as it has a duty to do, the giving
16 of evidence.
17 One of the problems of some advocates is that
18 they haven't had the opportunity of sitting in the
19 judicial chair; some have. And it's helpful for us to
20 put ourselves in your position. If you're being
21 offered an uncertain menu, an uncertain diet, you don't
22 know when to say, "I don't want the next course. I
23 don't need the next course. I've already had enough of
24 that. We've had that from another witness," or to
25 extend the metaphor, and I hope not
1 overlightheartedly, "Sorry, I don't want that; I had
2 that for lunch." But you see what I mean. You can
3 say, "We can see these next two paragraphs aren't going
4 to help us, so you, Mr. Prosecutor, can move forward."
5 And that's the way this tool has been
6 valuable. If Chambers decided, as I say other Chambers
7 have done, to take all the witness statements and read
8 them, which they can do, and, what's more, to analyse
9 themselves, mentally or on paper, what those statements
10 contain, they'd be in the same position to direct
11 proceedings as they would be having this document.
12 This document does the work for you, and in that way
13 enables you to supervise us and enables me and
14 Mr. Greaves, I would hope, to be able to agree various
15 paragraphs and then move straight to the central
17 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Thank you,
18 Mr. Nice.
19 What do you agree with here, Mr. Greaves?
20 What has been said seems to be reasonable to me. It's
21 responding to some of your comments. This is not
22 leading you into any kind of errors, because during
23 your cross-examination, you could point out the flaws
24 in the summary. You certainly did that with Witness F,
25 and what prevents you from doing that here? What
1 bothers you here?
2 MR. GREAVES: There are a number of things,
3 and I want to answer them because Your Honour's raised
4 them. First of all, if I was thought to be lecturing
5 the Tribunal, I did not intend that, and I certainly
6 didn't intend any discourtesy. If it was discourteous,
7 then I ask you to forgive me, and I apologise.
8 Why didn't I mention it at the beginning of
9 the day? Well, I can well imagine that Your Honour, if
10 I had got up and said, "I have a motion to present to
11 you at this stage," with the witness waiting to
12 complete his evidence, I can imagine that Your Honour
13 might have been somewhat tetchy that I was raising it
14 at that stage.
15 If the fault was mine, then fault it is, but
16 I took the view that the proper time to raise it was
17 immediately before the procedure was resumed, and not
18 interfere with the giving of evidence by Witness F. If
19 I erred in favour of letting Witness F get his evidence
20 over and done with, as against raising this matter in
21 legal argument, then I apologise.
22 Your Honour raised the issue of being wedded
23 to one's own legal system. I'm not in the least bit,
24 like my learned friend, wedded to the common-law
25 system. There are advantages and disadvantages to all
1 our legal systems. The fact of the matter is, the
2 Rules of this Tribunal say that the presentation of
3 evidence should be by examination-in-chief,
4 cross-examination, and re-examination. That is a
5 concept which is, as I understand it, not one which
6 would be familiar to the average civil lawyer, but one
7 which is very familiar --
8 THE INTERPRETER: Could you slow down,
10 MR. GREAVES: I apologise. I have been
11 trying very hard, and I have forgotten.
12 That is a system which is known to the
13 common-law system, and all common lawyers would
14 immediately recognise the contents of that rule. And
15 it was for that reason that I said, "Well, in
16 examination-in-chief, the proper way to do it is not to
17 ask leading questions." So let me explain that. That,
18 in fact, is the system that is here.
19 The problem is this: I have to deal with my
20 client. I have to explain to him, "This is what is
21 proposed." The timing of these things means that it is
22 almost impossible for us, firstly, to read the summary
23 and to see whether it is a fair and proper document
24 that can be placed before the Court. Secondly, the
25 defendant is entitled to know what the contents of that
1 summary are before he hears the evidence being given,
2 and we are entitled to discuss with him those parts
3 which could, because they are uncontroversial or
4 unobjectionable, or which he accepts, could be agreed
5 to. But the way in which it has thus far been done is
6 by the summary being given to us -- in the present
7 instance, I received it, I think, at about 4.10, which
8 gives one almost no opportunity to read it, assimilate
9 it, and then take instructions upon it, with the
10 constraints that exist in this Court.
11 Of course one wants to assist the process as
12 far as possible. And of course Rule 90 exists and is
13 there to control the -- or to enable Your Honour to
14 have a wide ambit of control over the nature of
15 questioning. But Rule 90 cannot be used, with great
16 respect, at the price of the rights of the defendant as
17 well, and I would respectfully remind you of that. The
18 defendant is on trial; he has rights. Rule 90 cannot
19 simply be used as a bludgeon to hurry things along in
20 circumstances where potentially the defendant may be
21 prejudiced. And that has to be borne in mind. That
22 balance has to be borne in mind at all times, in our
24 The final point I would raise with Your
25 Honours is that in his address to you, my learned
1 friend for the Prosecution has not, we submit, properly
2 dealt with or addressed Your Honours on the essential
3 unfairness of presenting you with what purports to be a
4 summary of evidence which picks out the choice bits.
5 There are examples -- I don't want to detain
6 you, but there are examples in this present summary
7 where the summary which is presented to you is the bit
8 which is favourable to the Prosecution and is not the
9 inconsistency, doesn't contain any hint of the
10 inconsistency which exists in one or another of the
11 statements, and you are being asked to use that as a
12 tool and to use it in order to implement Rule 90. And
13 if it is based on that element of unfairness, it is
14 unfair. It's as simple as that. My learned friend
15 hasn't addressed that issue, I submit. The reason he
16 hasn't addressed it is because it is an element of
18 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I would like us
19 to move forward now. On what point do you not agree in
20 the statement, Mr. Greaves?
21 MR. GREAVES: I'm sorry, my client is feeling
22 unwell. Please, could we adjourn? I think he's about
23 to be sick.
24 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Yes, of
1 All right, we'll take care of you properly,
2 Mr. Jelisic. You will be taken care of medically. You
3 can withdraw.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your
6 [The accused left court]
7 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, perhaps my
8 interpreter could go and ask him if we have his
9 permission to continue in his absence, because of
10 course I can't agree to continue unless he has given me
11 his permission.
12 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I don't think
13 that he realised we are going to interrupt the session,
14 but I don't want to prejudice the accused's rights.
15 But we're not speaking about something which directly
16 concerns the accused; it's more methodological. The
17 interpreter can go see him, but we can continue our
18 discussion even if he doesn't agree. We can have the
19 interpreter ask him how he feels, there's no problem
20 doing that, but we can continue.
21 MR. GREAVES: He has been most anxious about
22 this matter and has given quite a lot of thought to it,
23 and it does concern him, the nuts and bolts of it
24 concern him, because if I'm right --
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] As my colleague
2 has just pointed out to me, correctly, Mr. Londrovic,
3 could you go see how your client is doing? I repeat
4 this -- yes, all right, you've understood.
5 All right. We can continue now. You can
6 continue, Mr. Greaves.
7 MR. GREAVES: I think I've said all that I
8 needed to say.
9 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Oh, I thought
10 that you weren't feeling well yourself. I was getting
11 worried. I thought you were not feeling well yourself.
12 MR. GREAVES: If I'm ill, you'll be the first
13 to know.
14 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] I have a
15 question to ask you. What points do you agree with in
16 this statement? There were 22 points that were raised
17 -- well, I'm not really familiar with them, but
18 hypothetically speaking, I see that these were points
19 -- if they weren't directed in a specific way, they
20 obviously were prepared as carefully and as -- with the
21 best intentions. What points do you agree with or want
22 to ask questions about?
23 MR. GREAVES: I don't want to be thought to
24 be obstructive, but I have not been through this
25 document with my client, and I have not received his
1 agreement to agree anything, and until I receive such
2 instructions, I cannot properly or professionally
3 answer Your Honour's question one way or the other, and
4 I would ask that Your Honour don't press me.
5 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Very well. I
6 understand that this should not really change our
7 methodology. It seems that the Prosecutor will recall
8 the questions and be sure that the witness has read the
9 question. He'll answer "Yes" or "No," and then you
10 have all the time necessary for your cross-examination
11 to proceed as you like.
12 Let me simply remind you that I will limit
13 the time of the cross-examination and the direct in
14 respect of the examination in chief in order to
15 maintain this balance that you frequently allude to and
16 about which the Judges must always be sensitive.
17 I suggest that once the accused returns,
18 Mr. Prosecutor, you can take your summary. You will
19 make sure that the witness has read the first question,
20 and if he has, you can summarise it quickly. But we'll
21 start with the idea that Mr. Greaves is not agreeing
22 with anything. At least you agree with this. You
23 don't agree with anything, but at least you agree with
24 that. Well, it's better to start fully understanding
25 one another.
1 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, give me a moment,
3 Your Honour, can I deal with the first point,
4 that the position is that in the absence of
5 instructions from my client, I'm not in a position to
6 agree to anything, and that's correct.
7 The second thing is although he's given
8 permission for me to continue in his absence, he is
9 plainly unwell. I know that in the past, he has
10 suffered from problems with his stomach, and he has
11 apparently developed a rather unpleasant rash on his
12 stomach and I'm somewhat concerned about him and
13 whether or not his permission has been given, as it
14 were, with proper thought.
15 If I may, I'll just remind Your Honours that
16 of course he's entitled to be tried in his presence.
17 If he gives a waiver, of course, that is a proper
18 waiver, but it should be one that's a waiver given
19 that's properly thought out and not at a moment of
20 distress. That's what I'm concerned about.
21 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Well, we
22 agree. You may be seated.
23 I would like to know whether the Prosecutor
24 would agree, and after that I'll consult my colleagues,
25 would agree, Mr. Nice, because to a great extent
1 speeding up the proceedings depends on you.
2 Apparently, we're not going to take the
3 Defence into account at the moment because it can
4 conduct its cross-examination as it wishes to do and it
5 will have the opportunity to do so. I want this to be
6 indicated in the transcript, there is no question at
7 all of limiting you in respect of the rights of the
8 Defence that you represent.
9 Now I'll turn to the Prosecutor. Can you be
10 sure that in front of us, that once the witness is
11 here, that he has fully understood the contents and
12 meaning of the statement, and tell us about point 1,
13 "Do you remember whether the bridges over the River
14 Sava were destroyed on the 30th of April, 1992? Did
15 you arrange to have your family stay with relatives in
16 Moaca while you were home helping to organise
17 [indiscernible], and do you confirm this in front of
18 the Judges?" And he's going to answer, "Yes," or at
19 least I hope he's going to answer, "Yes," and then he
20 will bring in some more details, and then move on to
21 the second point. When it's time for the
22 cross-examination, I hope that under those conditions,
23 in any case, things will go more smoothly.
24 It is, of course, understood that I will give
25 time for the cross-examination, and that time will be
1 exactly the same as for the examination in chief.
2 But as I always do, I want to consult with my
3 colleagues, but first we'll give the floor to Mr. Nice
4 and ask him whether he intends to proceed in that
5 manner or whether Mr. Greaves' comments have led you to
6 change your position.
7 MR. NICE: No, if Mr. Greaves says that he is
8 not prepared to agree to anything, then it makes it
9 much more difficult for me. But what I would probably
10 do and what I, indeed, I think, did yesterday, and I
11 think quite properly, is in relation -- if we look at
12 this example, paragraphs 1 to 4, I will probably take
13 those matters very shortly and either summarise them to
14 the witness in the way that Your Honour suggested or
15 summarise parts of them and get his confirmation, but
16 get him to speak himself of anything that's important.
17 For example, in his case, the fact, paragraph
18 3, that he was kept in a mosque, which is different
19 from the place where the others were kept, is something
20 I would probably get him to tell you himself.
21 Once you turn to page 2 and paragraph 6,
22 where Jelisic appears, I would, I fear, feel obliged to
23 deal with the evidence in the traditional way, again
24 dealing with it paragraph by paragraph so as not to
25 harm the Defence, if they perceive themselves to be
2 I see I don't have the attention of my
3 Defence colleagues.
4 Having dealt with those potentially
5 contentious matters in a traditional way, when we come
6 to matters like 19, 20, and 21, where the defendant has
7 already pleaded guilty in respect of these matters
8 alleged against him, I would probably seek to revert to
9 a more truncated form of questioning.
10 But perhaps we'll see how we go. If that's
11 acceptable to the Chamber, we'll see how we go
12 tomorrow, and I think my evidence in chief, my direct
13 evidence as it's sometimes called, of this witness, it
14 will last less than an hour, probably 40 minutes, and
15 then on top of that, and really at the Defence request,
16 I will get the witness to tell us what he knows, if
17 anything, of certain names on the two lists simply
18 because it's better that we have that out straightaway
19 and then Mr. Greaves is in a position to prepare for it
20 over one of the breaks. That might take us to about an
21 hour, but that would be about it, a quarter an hour,
22 and that would really be doing their work for them.
23 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Thank you,
24 Mr. Nice.
25 How is Mr. Jelisic feeling?
1 MR. GREAVES: Your Honour, an ambulance has
2 been summoned for him, and my colleagues tell me that
3 he appears to be in considerable pain and that there is
4 a physical manifestation. There's this large and
5 substantial rash on his stomach.
6 Your Honour, I can't be satisfied that
7 although he gave his consent, that he gave it at a
8 moment when he was giving proper thought to the
9 consequences of giving that consent. I would
10 respectfully invite Your Honours to say that in the
11 absence of a proper informed consent, you should
12 suspend the hearing until he's fit and available to
13 come and attend court again.
14 I'm sorry this has happened, but sometimes
15 these things do happen in the ordinary course of
17 JUDGE JORDA: [Interpretation] Yes, that's
18 right. We will wait for him to feel better.
19 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at
20 5.35 p.m., to be reconvened on
21 Wednesday, the 1st day of September,
22 1999 at 2.00 p.m.