1 Wednesday, 14 April 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
5 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everybody.
6 I was advised that the accused has something to raise in the
7 absence of the witness, but for the sake of saving time in the future, I
8 would like the witness to be inside the courtroom always and then parties
9 would -- who wishes to raise something in the absence of the witness
10 should communicate to the Legal Officer and the Chamber in advance.
11 Okay. That said, I'll hear what Mr. Karadzic has to say.
12 Good morning to you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Your Excellencies. I
14 will try to be as concise as possible. First of all, I would like to
15 express my high esteem and appreciation for your assistance and the tips
16 you gave me for examination. However, there are two underlying technical
17 things. At the outset, I accepted all the electronic material, a million
18 and 3.000 pages plus 700.000 of my own, which makes 2 million. I'm
19 afraid that the technical capacities at my disposal do not keep up with
20 the scope of this process.
21 Furthermore, Lord Bonomy ordered in the summer last year and OLAD
22 promised that I would receive my own server, which would make it easier
23 for me. However, I got access to the server only last Sunday. For the
24 past two
25 putting data in. This morning, I did not have time to get the documents
1 from the computer that I know I need for this witness.
2 I appreciate greatly your patience with my imperfect skills of
3 examination, but I have to say that this is a very well-trained witness
4 whose many statements have long been polished by the Prosecution, and I
5 am at a disadvantage here because the witness is not unbiassed and
6 honest. He is very biassed and very insincere. He is a direct
7 participant, and he is clearly inclined to avoid many of my questions and
8 let his statements stand as facts --
9 MR. TIEGER: Your Honours --
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
11 MR. TIEGER: We accept the procedural mechanism of occasional and
12 necessary oral submissions pertaining to issues that arise during the
13 course of these proceedings. We do not accept argument about the
14 witnesses, particularly unfounded argument, I would add. If the --
15 secondly, if the accused has a motion to make, the opportunity for oral
16 submissions presented by Court should not supplant the written procedure
17 which give rise to the opportunity for considered review, timely
18 responses by the Prosecution, and so on. So I want to urge at the outset
19 the avoidance of replacement mechanisms for the procedures which are well
20 embedded in this institution for making submissions. But again, more
21 importantly, I want to discourage argumentation in the guise of
22 procedural submissions.
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Tieger. While I understand your
24 concerns, I did let it go because he's rather concentrating his
25 submission on the procedural issues than his submission as to the
1 credibility of the witness himself.
2 But bearing that in mind, Mr. Karadzic, so what is your point?
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency. I see
4 that you fully understand where I'm going, and I believe this
5 intervention by my learned friend Mr. Tieger is quite unnecessary. I did
6 not wish to discredit this witness. I just wanted to indicate how I will
7 be working as I continue this cross-examination and why I will be working
8 that way.
9 Yesterday, you quite rightly asked me where I was going when I
10 was asking about the names of various people or his grandchildren. I
11 have to say now that this is a witness who will keep trying to wriggle,
12 and I have to be persistent and I have to try to stop him from wriggling
13 out of my questions and get to the truth. This is just an explanation of
14 how I intend to proceed from now on. I will present today, in keeping
15 with the tips given me by Judge Morrison yesterday, certain statements
16 and I will ask the witness to say: Yes, no, or I don't know. And I will
17 not have time to discredit that today or refute it, but during the trial
18 I will refute it because there are certain truths that no one can change,
19 and they throw a completely different light on what the witness has said
20 so far in his multiple statements.
21 That is all I wanted to say. I will make certain statements.
22 Please say: Yes, no, or I don't know, because his statements are full of
23 lump-sum claims, and if I do not prove that they are ungrounded and
24 false, they can later serve as grounds for a conviction.
25 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, even if you are minded to challenge
1 the credibility of the witness, the Chamber is of the view that you do
2 not need all that time you indicated yesterday. You -- of course you
3 have ample opportunity to bring your witnesses during the Defence case.
4 You don't have to put every point to the witness to challenge the
5 credibility of the witness if you concentrate on real issues.
6 Given that the Prosecution spent about an hour and 20 minutes
7 yesterday and you spent about approximately one hour and 40 minutes and
8 also given that you indicated you would need four hours to cross-examine
9 this witness, the Chamber is of the view that you do not need more than
10 an hour and a half from now to finish this witness. So given -- bearing
11 in mind that the advocacy lesson you had yesterday. So try to
12 concentrate on real issues.
13 So that said, let's bring in the witness.
14 [Trial Chamber and Legal Officer confer]
15 [The witness takes the stand]
16 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, Mr. Zulic.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good morning.
18 JUDGE KWON: I hope you had a good night, a good rest.
19 I'd like to remind you of the oath you took yesterday still
21 WITNESS: AHMET ZULIC [Resumed]
22 [Witness answered through interpreter]
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
24 JUDGE KWON: So, Mr. Karadzic.
25 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]
1 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Zulic.
2 A. Good morning.
3 Q. I will seek to present to you the view of the Defence on certain
4 points and see if you can answer with yes, no, or I don't know; and
5 please understand that I'm not accusing you of anything at any point.
6 I'm just trying to find out what you know about certain things and what
7 you can testify. Yesterday, we left off with a claim made by Muslim
8 commanders to the author Zilhad Kljucanin that they had had difficulty
9 mobilising fighting men at the time because a large number of them
10 believed that there will be no conflict and that Serbs would do them no
11 harm. And when they formed that armed unit in Mahala, it was their
12 problem and you said you were among those who believed there would not be
13 a conflict; is that right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. I would be only too happy to believe you, but my problem is that
16 you acquired a machine-gun which is not really a hunting weapon and you
17 did not turn it over. And there was a point when you took up position at
18 a graveyard behind that machine-gun, but you did not fire because you
19 said the Serbs would then return and fire back.
20 A. Yes. I said I laid down on the ground in that Muslim cemetery,
21 that nobody shot at the Serbs because the Serbs would have returned and
22 killed the entire village, and that's true; which means I didn't use the
24 Q. But you took up that position, didn't you?
25 A. Yes, I laid down on the ground behind my machine-gun.
1 Q. Isn't it a fact that explosives were found in your home,
2 explosives that may have originated from your mine? Doesn't that work
3 contrary to your claim that you believed there would be no conflict?
4 A. No, there was no explosive.
5 Q. All right.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we then call up a statement in
7 e-court. Defence document 1D29. While we're waiting -- oh, here the
8 document is.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Do you know Djordje Todorovic?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. What was he?
13 A. A Serb.
14 Q. What was he by position, occupation?
15 A. I really don't know.
16 Q. Didn't he have a concession on the mine where you worked?
17 A. Yes, yes, I remember now.
18 Q. Didn't you say yesterday, and you said so in your statement as
19 well, that because of the turnout of Serbs to the mobilisation call of
20 the JNA, only non-Serbs remained to work in the mine because the Serbs
21 had gone to Croatia
22 A. I didn't say that yesterday. It was in the statement.
23 Q. But did you refuse to go to Croatia to fight?
24 A. Well, nobody asked me.
25 Q. But were you asked, or rather, called up to military drills in
1 the past?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Were other Muslim reservists called up to drills in the JNA?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. During the war in Croatia
6 A. I was hoping you would ask that question. I can't wait to
7 answer. Yes, in June 1991, all reservists were called up between
8 Ostra Luka and Koprivna, Serbs, Croats, and Muslims alike, and they were
9 supposed to go, as they put it, to the theatre of war in Croatia.
10 However, when the supply of weapons ran out, and I think it was a certain
11 Captain Zeljaja who took the weapons, then the Muslims abandoned the
12 drill, this military exercise. And then the Serbs were sent to the
13 theatre of war, some to Vukovar, some to Knin.
14 Q. Thank you. Then it means that the Muslims did not respond to
15 that mobilisation call up?
16 A. No, they didn't.
17 Q. This Captain Zeljaja, was he in the military chain of command of
18 the JNA? Was he an active-duty officer?
19 A. Yes, he was.
20 Q. He was mainly stationed in Prijedor, wasn't he?
21 A. I don't know.
22 Q. Leaving aside your comment that he could have distributed or
23 taken some weapons, if he had been ordered to do so by his chain of
24 command he had to do it. In any case, the Serbs went to war instead of
25 working in the mine?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And how many Muslims and Croats remained in the mine?
3 A. I really don't know.
4 Q. But the production went on?
5 A. It did.
6 Q. Let's look at the statement of Mr. Djordje Todorovic obtained by
7 my investigator.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Page 2, please.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Please, just say: I confirm, I deny, or I don't know.
11 In peacetime, even without any goings on on the front line, the
12 ethnic composition in the mine where he owned a concession was Muslims 60
13 per cent, Croats 10 per cent, and Serbs 30 per cent; and when these Serbs
14 went to the front line, Muslims and Croats made up 100 per cent; isn't
15 that so?
16 A. That's how it should be.
17 Q. He had two open-pit mines?
18 A. No, not really.
19 Q. There was one deep mine and you were the manager?
20 A. For both --
21 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. Could both of you kindly put a pause
22 between the question and answer, please. Please proceed.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Do you agree or do you deny that the technical director was
25 Zijad Okanovic, who was a Muslim?
1 A. I'm not denying that. He was the technical director.
2 Q. Was the production manager in the pit Salim, I don't know his
3 last name?
4 A. A man with the last name of Strbac was, in fact, on that
6 Q. But Salim was in a senior position. Was the manager of the
7 open-cast mine Alija Plavnik?
8 A. I know he worked there, but whether he was a lawyer or a manager,
9 I don't know.
10 Q. But he was in an executive position, not a worker?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Was Zdenka, a Croat, also in a managing position?
13 A. Wait a little. What Zdenka was by ethnicity, as I said
14 yesterday, I didn't go in such things, and we didn't really know each
15 other by ethnicity. We valued each other for personal qualities.
16 Q. Was the chief of accounting Mr. Raif, a Muslim?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Was the chief of commercial affairs Enisa Vajzovic?
19 A. I know she was chief of something.
20 Q. All right. Was she a Muslim?
21 A. I suppose so.
22 Q. We can determine by name, you and I, but the Chamber cannot.
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. You mentioned in your statement that you were called by the
25 secretary of the manager of the mine and told you not to come to work for
1 a while. But she didn't give you a letter of dismissal, just told you
2 not to come to work for a while?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Was it Sanja Grapcanovic, a Muslim?
5 A. No, it was Zdenka.
6 Q. So it was Zdenka, the one we mentioned a moment ago.
7 Let's see what it says further on. In point 8, Mr. Todorovic
8 says all the other lower-ranking executives were also occupying their
9 positions only because of their professional qualifications, not because
10 of ethnic background, as proved by this list?
11 A. I don't know what he was saying.
12 Q. But the picture of the work force shows that it wasn't important
13 who was of which faith?
14 A. It didn't matter.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we get the next page of this
16 document. This is page 3. Is that how it should be? Is there a page 2?
17 This is page 3. Then please, let's see the previous page but the bottom
18 of the previous page which we did not see, item 9.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. As you see item 9 says:
21 "The aforesaid Zulic, Ahmet, was not arrested because he was an
22 employee of the Kamengrad mine but for other reasons. To my
23 recollection, a certain quantity of explosives ..."
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Next page, please, in B/C/S.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. "... a certain quantity of explosives and one machine-gun were
2 found on him. The explosive that was found originated from the Kamengrad
4 What do you have to say about that?
5 A. What you claim about this explosive is a pure lie because, first
6 of all, I have to say this to the Chamber and explain. You could not
7 just come in and take explosives because it was very well kept in a
8 special depot for explosives. And in 1992, this depot was controlled by
9 the JNA and the Serbs. So unless you were an authorised worker, the one
10 who needed explosives for his work in the mine - and even they, when
11 using explosives, had to explain and report exactly how many bores they
12 had made with that explosives and they had to count and report the number
13 of fuses that had to be retrieved. So you could not easily get access to
14 explosives and take it out of the mine even in peacetime, let alone in
15 war time.
16 Q. Thank you. Thank you. I can believe that this used to be so
17 before all the Serbs went to the front line, but what was it like when
18 only Muslims and Croats remained in the mine, who then controlled the
20 A. The JNA and the Serb police.
21 Q. They were in the mine?
22 A. No, they were not in the mine. They were by the depot of
23 explosives, and the depot of explosives was in a place called
24 Dolnica [phoen]. It had five circles of wire fence around it, and it was
25 guarded by Serb policemen and then JNA. So there was not even a
1 theoretical possibility to take explosives out for that reason. I just
2 want to say that the person who wrote this is a liar. The submachine-gun
3 that I acquired is the truth and I'm not denying that.
4 Q. Do you know the names of any people who worked with explosives?
5 A. I know Milos Strbac, Mirsad Burnic.
6 Q. Muslim?
7 A. Yes, Muslim.
8 Q. Any more?
9 A. I can't remember all of them now, but there were ten of them.
10 Q. This Mirsad, was he related to Enver, the chief of police?
11 A. No.
12 Q. But they're from the same family and the same last name?
13 A. Yes, but they lived 7 kilometres from one another.
14 Q. Thank --
15 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, I notice that you are overriding the
16 interpretation of the answer given by the witness. Please put a pause
17 after the answer. Proceed, please.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, thank you. I want us to get
19 through this as quickly as possible, so that's why I'm speeding up.
20 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. But can you tell us any other names of people working with
22 explosives and could set off mines and explosives, especially when the
23 Serbs were not there. Who worked with the explosives then?
24 A. I don't know who worked on the open-cast mines with the
25 explosives, but I know that there was just Mile, and Mirsad, Mile Strbac
1 and Mirsad.
2 Q. Very well. Thank you. Now, you said yesterday that your brother
3 worked in Kamengrad; is that right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. And he stayed on there throughout the war?
6 A. No, he didn't.
7 Q. He worked there until when?
8 A. Well, until the end of 1995 or thereabouts.
9 Q. Well, that's the end of the war, until the end of the war?
10 A. But not the whole time. Until August 1995, that's how long he
11 worked for.
12 Q. Thank you. Now, in point 11, Mr. Todorovic says here:
13 "I state that no one fired Ahmet Zulic from the company because
14 of his nationality and by helping his mother, I ignored that at that
15 moment." Well, actually, I want to refer to point 10. It says:
16 "Their mother suffers a stroke and they turned to me for help
17 during the war. I personally drove their mother to the hospital in
18 Prijedor for treatment, which goes to show my way of thinking, both then
19 and now."
20 Did your mother have a stroke during the war?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Did she have any trouble with her blood pressure or anything like
24 A. No. What I want to say is this: Before the war my father was --
25 well, had a stroke in 1981, but not my mother. My mother never suffered
1 a stroke and he never drove her. I know Djordje personally, and I'd like
2 to see him so I can tell him that he's lying.
3 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, tell me this, please, you said
4 yesterday that you had three brothers?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Were they in the Betonirka firm or at Manjaca?
7 A. No.
8 Q. And are they Muslims like you?
9 A. Yes, they are.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 A. But that's why they were expelled, the two brothers were expelled
12 in convoys. When the mop-up operation took place, they left with their
14 Q. You didn't say that, but you said that it was difficult to leave
15 Sanski Most. So they left at their own request, but let's leave that
16 aside for the moment.
17 A. Don't put words into my mouth and say that I said it was
18 difficult to leave Sanski Most; that's not what I said. I didn't say it
19 was difficult to leave Sanski Most. That was the easiest thing in the
21 Q. All right. Thank you. Now, I'd like to refer to the paragraph
22 of your statement where you said that your wife had difficulties in
23 obtaining permits to leave Sanski Most.
24 A. Well, yes, she did. And let me explain, Your Honours, why she
25 had difficulty.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I've refrained from doing it until
3 this point, but can the accused please give the page number and the
4 paragraph number in the amalgamated statement that he's referring to, or
5 if he's referring to one of the witness's previous statements or
6 transcript, can he give that statement and then the page number in the
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
9 If you could give the para numbers, as Ms. Sutherland indicated.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, I would have done
11 that had I expected the witness to expand on his statements and views
12 with respect to the difficulties and the persecution from Sanski Most.
13 We know that in Sanski Most - and you'll see this in the transcript, that
14 the witness confirmed this, and let me just find that part of the
15 statement. I would have prepared this had I known that he was going to
16 deal with the departure from Sanski Most, but I will find the paragraph
17 by the end of my cross-examination. He says that his wife had a great
18 deal of problems in obtaining what she needed to leave Sanski Most, and
19 we have evidence of that. In the whole of Bosanska Krajina, they had to
20 have a lot of papers and permits and certificates in order to leave. It
21 is paragraph 40 -- 140 for everybody's benefit. So let's see what it
22 says in paragraph 140. This is what it says:
23 [In English] "In December 1992, my wife decided to leave
24 Sanski Most municipality. She thought I had been killed. She wanted to
25 get out -- of our four children out of -- because the house have been
1 attacked. In order to do this, she first had to go to Sanski Most
2 municipality authorities to sign a statement renouncing her house to the
3 municipality to the authorities. She had to pay all the utilities. She
4 had to go to the re-settlement authorities in Sanski Most for a receipt
5 that she had signed off to the Serb authorities all her property. A Serb
6 friend of the family came to Sanski Most and took my wife and children to
7 his house in Banja Luka. In order to leave Banja Luka, she had to pay
8 money to the Bureau for Resettlement which was run by the Serb
9 authorities. She said two amounts: 22.000 dinars for bureau expeditious
10 and 175.000 dinars for the transport costs. However, she still had to
11 pay for bus fare. She had copies of the renouncement documents, however,
12 in Bosanska Gradiska the 'customs officers' took her possessions from her
13 including her documents," and so on, and so on.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. So, Mr. Zulic, your wife informed you that she had many obstacles
16 to surmount and difficulties to leave. Not only was she not expelled,
17 but she was discouraged to do so with all these different procedures by
18 the authorities, and I go into this only because you've expanded on what
19 you've said.
20 A. I did not expand on what I've said, Your Honours. I have to
21 explain this situation. The Serbs organised convoys going out of
22 Sanski Most, and men, women, children, they would get into those convoys
23 and leave. However, those people who did not have, just like me, I was
24 detained by those Serb Chetnik authorities. So people who didn't have a
25 chance to leave and she didn't have a chance to leave in the convoy
1 because the convoys were checked. And then finally, she had to pay all
2 this money, go around looking for permits, because there was great
3 pressure on her to leave. So my brothers had no problems because the
4 Serbs organised the departure, if you remember my talking about that, the
5 departure of non-Serbs from Mahala and Muhic to Kladusa. And that's how
6 they organised the departure of non-Serbs from Kamengrad,
7 Muslinovci [phoen], Sanski Most, Pobrijezje, and so on. All of these
8 were organised convoys. People got into these vehicles. Some people
9 were taken across Travnik, Vlasic, and so on. Others went a different
10 route, who knows where.
11 But what usually happened was that the people who were captured
12 and detained, their families weren't able to leave. Hand-grenades were
13 thrown at them, they were threatened over the phone, and so on. And then
14 you had to ask the Serb authorities for a permit to take your children
15 out alive and your family out alive. So she couldn't leave, and I assume
16 the reason was because I was in detention. So they wanted to keep my
17 family there so that they could do to them what they did to other
18 families, which is to kill them. They would certainly have killed my
20 Q. We'll come to that, whether families were killed and what
21 happened. But you said two things there, there were two points you made.
22 First of all, you said that your wife did not have the connections she
23 needed to allow her to board the buses and leave, and you said that all
24 those who had no connections had no chance of getting on to the buses.
25 So how could somebody who was being expelled wouldn't have a place in a
1 bus to leave? Mr. Zulic, they weren't expelled. It was them forcing the
2 authorities to allow them to leave; that's the conclusion one can draw
3 from what you've just said.
4 A. No, that's not the conclusion you can draw from what I said.
5 You're telling us what you want people to hear. I'm telling you the
6 truth, and I think in my statement somewhere it says that in Pobrijezje
7 we were told for the first time that we would be moving out, and then we
8 were told, You're not going now, you're going next time, while they were
9 picking up the refugees for Kladusa and so on. First of all, Jajce, then
10 they returned them, and then --
11 Q. Thank you, thank you, we'll come back to that.
12 A. Not only were they not expelled, but they -- the Serb authorities
13 would tell them when the convoys would be organised so that they could
14 prepare themselves. For example, the village of Husinovci or Pobrijezje,
15 and then a selection would be made in those villages and they would say,
16 Right, her husband is in the camp at Manjaca or at the camp in Betonirka,
17 so she can't board the bus or truck or whatever. That's what they would
18 do. In the best of cases it was buses, otherwise it was freight trucks.
19 Q. Thank you. So they would make this announcement over the radio,
20 is that right, that there'd be a convoy for such and such a village; is
21 that how it worked?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And then they allowed some people to get into the buses and
24 others not; is that right?
25 A. Yes, that's right.
1 Q. Thank you. Now, the second point that we have to address here
2 and throw light on is this: You mention all the very small differences
3 between you and your brothers, but a major difference strikes the eye.
4 Your brothers did not have a machine-gun and they did not have
5 explosives, otherwise everything was the same, they were Muslims, they
6 were citizens of Sanski Most. The only difference between you and them,
7 although they were from the same mother and the same father, is that they
8 didn't have a machine-gun and explosives and you did?
9 A. First of all, let me say I didn't have any explosives, so don't
10 say that.
11 Q. Well, we're going to prove that and show that during these
13 A. You can do what you like, but I know this man Djoko very well,
14 but I'm telling you now I didn't have any explosives. Had I had
15 explosives I would have said so straight away, Your Honours, just as I
16 acknowledged having a machine-gun. That's why I'm here, to say what
17 happened. Furthermore, my brothers, had they not left, they would have
18 ended up where these others ended up, the same way.
19 Q. How do you know that?
20 A. I know it because in Pobrijezje, 42 men remained until the end of
21 the war. And my youngest brother, the one working in the mine, purely by
22 chance, stayed alive. Arkan killed all the rest in the village of
23 Sasin [phoen] in 1995, 64 men, able-bodied men were killed, and after the
24 liberation of Sanski Most about 300 to 400 women and children were found
25 in Sanski Most and ten Serbs, according to my knowledge and information.
1 Whether that's the right figure or not is another matter.
2 Q. Mr. Zulic, if you introduce new elements into your testimony all
3 the time, then all this is going to last much longer and I'm going to
4 have to ask the Trial Chamber for you to come back for another
5 cross-examination because if you say that somebody from the Serb army,
6 whether they be a volunteer or whatever but under the united command of
7 the Serb army, could kill some civilians in cold blood, I have to throw
8 light on that case. So please stick to your statement, otherwise we'll
9 never get to an end.
10 JUDGE KWON: Concentrate on your examination. Move on, please.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. So the only difference was not the explosives and the
14 machine-gun, just the machine-gun you say. Now, how come you make the
15 conclusion that your two brothers would have been killed had they not
16 left Sanski Most, whereas third brother worked in the mine in 1995,
17 almost until the end? That means he had to go from his home to the mine
18 every day to work in the mine, and then go back home from the mine and
19 nobody killed him. So how can you then make the conclusion that your
20 other two brothers would have been killed had they stayed on in
21 Sanski Most?
22 A. Well, even if this youngest brother wasn't an expert, they
23 wouldn't have kept him there. So it was just through force of chance
24 that he stayed alive because in April his children, in 1995 -- well, they
25 hid him. His two daughters hid him when Arkan was going through the
1 village searching for men. So the fact that he wasn't killed is because
2 they needed him to work.
3 Q. And they didn't need you to work? You were an expert too,
4 weren't you?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. And the Serbs were up at the front, they needed every man they
7 could get?
8 A. Well, they didn't need me.
9 Q. I see, that's why they let you go and arrested you, not because
10 you had a machine-gun; is that it?
11 A. Well, they let everyone go -- they dismissed all of us.
12 Q. What about your brother?
13 A. My brother was let go too, and then they introduced these labour
14 obligations. It was called a work obligation that you were under.
15 Q. Mr. Zulic --
16 A. Allow me to finish. I'm waiting for the interpreters to do their
17 work, but I'll carry on. I have to finish what I was saying. So there
18 was this work obligation, and everybody had to report to dig trenches and
19 to do what the Serb fighters needed, to chop wood and so on. This is
20 what I learned after the war. Let me make that clear. This is what I
21 learned after the war. So that these people were usually escorted, under
22 escort from Serb soldiers and the police.
23 Q. Mr. Zulic, I'm afraid we're not going to get through this
24 cross-examination even in a week's time, so I have to clarify the
25 situation. Your brother, was he taken from home to the mine under police
1 escort or could he go alone?
2 A. He never went to work alone, on his own.
3 Q. What then?
4 A. Other Serbs went with him.
5 Q. You mean his Serb neighbours?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. But was he under police or military escort or a police patrol
8 taking him from home to work and back again?
9 A. I don't know that. I know that there was always a Serb who went
10 to work with him and came back from work with him. That's what I know,
11 the Serb was some sort of official. I don't know what he was. But
12 that's what he told me, that's the story he told me, so I'm telling you
13 it now, what I heard.
14 Q. Thank you, sir.
15 You mentioned Mr. Simo Simetic?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. You also mentioned in that context a policeman who helped the
18 Muslims, and his name -- what was his name Milan Tontic or Tonci?
19 A. I know him as Tonci.
20 Q. All right. Would you recognise him if you were shown a
21 photograph of him?
22 A. Well, I might if it was an early photograph taken during that
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Do we have a photograph of the man?
25 1D27, could that be placed on our screens, please.
1 Your Excellency, there is a bit of a doubt whether it's available
2 because some documents were left out of e-court by technical error.
3 JUDGE KWON: It's here. Let's check whether it's [Overlapping
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Is that the man?
7 A. I really can't identify him.
8 [Defence counsel confer]
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I really can't recognise him. He
10 looks much older.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. But does it look like the man?
13 A. Not really. He -- his hair was totally different.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Then 1D24. 1D24 is a hard copy.
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. While we're waiting, you confirmed yesterday that Tonci was
17 alive, whereas in your statement you said that Serbs had killed him --
18 sorry, in one testimony you said he was killed by the Serbs because he
19 had helped the Muslims?
20 A. What I said is that I heard he was killed. I didn't confirm it.
21 I don't know whether the man is alive or not. I cannot confirm. When I
22 say I heard he was killed, that means I heard. If you say he's alive,
23 then thank God.
24 Q. In paragraph 63 of your amalgamated statement, 718, paragraph 63,
25 as well as in your testimony in the Milosevic trial, transcript 6972, it
1 says Serb policeman Tonci helped the Muslims and he was the only one he
2 didn't beat them, that's why Tonci is no longer alive today. That's a
3 statement, a claim?
4 A. That was the information I had, and on that basis, that's what I
6 Q. We now have 1D24, and this is a document that confirms that Tonci
7 is still alive today, and this is an excerpt from the civilian register
8 from Banja Luka from which it is obvious he's alive and he lives there.
9 A. I'm only too happy if he's alive. I just told you that I was
10 told after the war that he had been killed. I had no information to the
11 contrary. If I knew the man was alive, I would have visited him,
12 Your Honours.
13 Q. Mr. Zulic, don't take it against me. I'm just saying that you
14 are too loose with your statements. You claim things you can't know
15 about. Your statement says something quite different.
16 JUDGE KWON: The name the witness referred to in his statement
17 was -- the name of the Serb policeman was Tonci, but the name of this
18 gentleman whose picture is before us is Tontic, as I read it. What's the
19 basis on your part that the two are the same person?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, Tonci is a
21 nickname, not a surname. In our parts, nicknames are usually formed on
22 the basis of the last name or its shortened version. All of us, almost,
23 have nicknames and they are based usually on the last name, not the first
24 name. There was no other policeman with the surname beginning with
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Is that a question to me?
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. No, it was just an explanation for the Chamber.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We can remove this document.
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, very well. Let's proceed.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Now, Mr. Zulic, I would like to put to you a couple of things
8 that should not upset you. It's no accusation against you. I just want
9 to hear from you: Yes, no, or I don't know. I don't have to go through
10 all of this today, but we have to get to the facts. I will tell you how
11 we see things and you will say: Yes, no, or I don't know.
12 In the course of 1991, especially in the first half of 1991 and
13 all the way up to May 1992, at the level of the republic and the level of
14 municipalities there were negotiations about the transformation of Bosnia
15 pending its recognition; yes or no?
16 A. I don't know what you mean by "transformation." Could you repeat
17 that question or place it in a different context.
18 Q. Mr. Zulic, the Serbs had accepted that the entire Bosnia should
19 no longer be part of Yugoslavia
20 of the European community that Bosnia
21 cantons, mainly ethnically determined, and that agreement was sanctioned
22 in 1992. In parallel, there was a process of negotiations concerning the
23 transformation of municipalities, and there were long talks for a long
24 time successful in Sanski Most about forming two municipalities, one
25 Serb, one Muslim. And these talks took quite a long time.
1 A. I don't know they were talking about something -- they were
2 talking about something in the municipality, possibly about dividing it.
3 It could have been on the 18th of March. I really can't remember the
4 date and I cannot confirm the date. I know that these talks were going
6 Q. Thank you. You said that Serbs took power, took over in
7 Sanski Most in 1990, and in 1992 they were strong and powerful in every
8 respect. They held a greater part of the authorities than the Muslims,
9 and the Serbs insisted that Muslims too form their own municipality in
10 Sanski Most.
11 A. Whether they persisted or not, I don't know. I know there were
12 negotiations about division. I know certainly about the division of the
13 police force in Sanski Most. I believe I mentioned it in one of my
15 Q. All right. Now we will look at the transcript from a session of
16 the SDA board of Sanski Most, from which it will be evident that they
17 were negotiating and what they were negotiating about. D1 -- sorry, 1D9
18 is the document I would like to call up. We have it on the screen now.
19 This is a meeting held on the 16th March 1992. At that point in
20 time in Sarajevo
21 on the 18th of March, 1993, with the famous Lisbon Agreement, which means
22 acceptance of the Cutileiro Plan. But let's go back to Sanski Most. Did
23 I say 1993 or 1992? It should be 1992.
24 The session was convened by the president of the SDA Sanski Most,
25 Mr. Redzo Kurbegovic. Guests of the session are officials of the SDA
1 Sanski Most, the secretary of the -- I'm being warned to slow down when
2 reading. And from the centre in Sarajevo, there is a representative
3 Osman Brka. Have you heard about him?
4 A. No.
5 Q. He was a high official of the SDA?
6 A. How high? A metre 80? 2 metres?
7 Q. Very witty. Thank you.
8 A. I don't know the man, I only know that he was tall.
9 Q. But you know Redzo?
10 A. I know Redzo personally.
11 Q. We see the agenda briefing about the current political and
12 security situation in the territory of the republic and the operation of
13 the SDA. Will you read this or --
14 A. Is this politics? I'm not going to read this. I didn't come
15 here -- Your Honours, I've been saying for the umpteenth time that I'm
16 not a politician. I never was involved in politics. If I know people,
17 I'll say I know them. If I don't know some people, I'll say I don't know
18 them. These politicians and what they were doing, I don't know. At that
19 time we were only allowed to go to work and back home and listen to the
20 radio a little. That's the only information I had. What was going on
21 behind the scenes, all these things I have no idea about.
22 Q. Let's just clarify this. Who restricted your freedom in
23 March 1992?
24 A. The Serbs.
25 Q. And do you know at that time that president of the Presidency of
1 Bosnia and Herzegovina was Alija Izetbegovic; the foreign minister was a
2 Muslim, Alija Delimustafic; and the minister of defence was Jerko Doko;
3 the chief of police in Sanski Most was Burnic; the commander of the
4 Territorial Defence was a Muslim, Halilovic. So who restricted your
5 freedom in March? Yugoslavia
6 still part of Yugoslavia
7 March 1992?
8 A. The Serbs.
9 Q. Which Serbs and how?
10 A. Easily. From January 1992 at all check-points - and it's in my
11 statement, Your Honours - at all check-points there stood Serb soldiers
12 wearing all sorts of uniforms. They asked you to produce your ID. If
13 they saw you were a Muslim, they will search you and inspect you. If
14 they see it is a Serb by the ID, they will let them go. That's how they
15 searched cars and everything else. They would also ask you, Where are
16 you going? If it's a private passenger car, they would send you back
17 home. If it's a service car and you're going on business, they would let
18 you go but say you have to come back in ten minutes exactly. And you
19 really couldn't get to the other side. Whatever -- all these names that
20 were just listed, I knew that Enver was the commander of the police;
21 however, he had no say at that time. He didn't play a role. I don't see
22 why he's asking me these things when I made it clear in my statement that
23 it was already so at the beginning of January 1992. Mr. Karadzic only
24 makes the point that Republika Srpska functioned in certain territories
25 in full, and the 8th of March is still celebrated as the day of
1 Republika Srpska.
2 Q. Thank you. We'll come back to this statement, but I have to
3 answer this. The Republika Srpska did not operate until the war broke
4 out, and we will prove that. I just want you to be precise in your
5 statement. Any expansion you make poses new challenges to me and makes
6 it incumbent on me to ask additional questions. Let's look at your
8 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, please bear in your mind that you are
9 not giving evidence. Just put the questions to the witness, and I note
10 the time. Concentrate on real issues -- concentrate on your questions.
11 Please proceed.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency. I
13 wasn't intending to make a problem of this again --
14 JUDGE KWON: Please move on --
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- but this --
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Let's look at paragraph 9 of your statement:
18 [In English] "From April 1992, military police manned the
19 check-points and there were no longer Muslims among them and if they
20 stopped Serbs they wouldn't check them, they would just let them go but
21 they would check the Muslims. They would check their cars. And that
22 happened to me a few times."
23 [Interpretation] The rest is redacted. Sir, only when the war
24 broke out as of 6 April onwards, according to your statement, "there were
25 no longer any mixed check-points," until the 6th of April, the patrols at
1 check-points were assigned by Enver Burnic, and frequently there were
2 more Muslims than Serbs in these crews, in these patrols; is that so?
3 A. No, it's not so because I know that only one Muslim was in
4 Pobrijezje. From what I know there was only one Muslim from 1991. It
5 was Hajro Oknic; only one Muslim at that check-point or whatever you call
6 it. Were you in Sanski Most? Do you know better than I? Enes Burnic[as
7 interpreted], you say he assigned people, Enes Burnic [as interpreted]
8 had nothing to do with it. Nobody asked him a thing. Brane Sobot did
9 all this. Now, after the war, everyone found out who made the decisions.
10 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, it's a procedural matter for the
12 accused. The rest of that paragraph 9 has been redacted from the public
13 version of the document. If he wishes to -- and as for this redaction
14 and the other three redactions in the statement, if he wishes to take the
15 accused [sic] to that, he would have to go into private session, but it's
16 not redacted as evidence and Mr. Karadzic can do with it with the
17 witness. It's redacted from 65 ter 90111A --
18 JUDGE KWON: Do you see the document which is appearing on the
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes.
21 JUDGE KWON: It has been redacted.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: I'm just saying if the accused wants to discuss
23 matters that are redacted, he has to go into private session and we can
24 go to the Exhibit P717. This is Exhibit P718 because it's the public
25 version. I was just alerting the accused to that in case he thinks he
1 can't deal with it because it's redacted.
2 JUDGE KWON: I think he understands. Thank you for your
4 Let's proceed, Mr. Karadzic.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Mrs. Sutherland. But I
6 don't need this because this passage does not relate to my subject. I
7 wanted to avoid going into private session.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. I'd like to go back to this meeting of the SDA on the 16th of
10 March, 1993 -- sorry, 1992. I think it's quite clear that until April,
11 and according to your statement that's true, there were mixed patrols.
12 We'll leave the subject, unless you want to go on. Let's look at this
13 meeting on page 2 of this document.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see page 2, 1D9. The
15 previous document. The one before this one. Here we are. 1D9 is the
16 document number.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. I'm just going to read out a few excerpts. It says at the top:
19 "Osman Brka," he says, "that everything that happened should have
20 happened," and then he goes on to say:
21 "I have to say that all this is necessary."
22 And at the end of the paragraph, he goes on to say:
23 "For the Muslim people which -- who are in full swing, the
24 awakening of the Muslim people in full swing. It is important to be
25 organised with Allah's help, and we will be the moral and overall winners
1 to emerge from this chaos."
2 And then further down he says, "there will be more victims and
3 who knows what else, but in return we'll obtain what we want."
4 Then towards the end of the page he says:
5 "Alija Izetbegovic, Haris Silajdzic, Ejup Ganic are doing their
6 jobs very well, given the situation."
7 Now may we have the next page, please. Next page. Next page.
8 Yes, they're handling the situation well. A little further down for the
9 Serbian version, please. The Serbian version. The Serbian version could
10 you zoom down. That's fine. Mr. Brka says:
11 "It's important to be well organised up until the time when it
12 will become our legal army. We have to gain time and prolong matters?"
13 And then Salim Sabic goes on to say:
14 "I think that our people are very well organised. I think that
15 when things come to a head, our people will be able to respond. We
16 agreed to sign a statement to freeze all activities relating to the
17 proclamation of the Serbian or Muslim municipality. They would not
18 accept, under any circumstances, to remain in the Muslim canton. We
19 don't have to trust the Serbs in anything."
20 And then Sabic goes on to say -- it seems to be a new page,
21 page 3. He proposes the following. Sabic again. Let's go on to page 3.
22 Let's move on to page 3, please. It says -- what does it say here? Oh,
23 these are the proposals, right:
24 "Contact the police commander, the commander of the TO, ensure
25 weapons for the units."
1 As we know, the police commander was Mr. Enver Burnic, the man
2 you say wasn't asked about anything, whereas they are giving him these
3 tasks to carry out for the party. The commander of the
4 Territorial Defence is Mr. Halilovic, also a Muslim. Now, Osman
5 Djukanovic on that same page says:
6 "The commander and I agreed that we should -- he said that we can
7 count on self protection."
8 Now, on -- we have it in English, and he says who's in charge of
9 Vrhpolje, Tomina, Kijevo, and Capljina. It says "Haso and Emir." For
10 Husinovci, the people in charge are commander P. Ibro, I don't know who
11 that is. For Trnovo and Sehrevci -- it's difficult to read, but anyway,
12 sir, what I want to put to you is this - you can say you don't know or
13 you do know or you knew nothing about it - but on the 16th of March, the
14 SDA is devising a variant to ensure that they are victors, emerge from
15 the situation as victors, with the Lisbon Agreement and so on, yes or no?
16 A. I don't know what they discussed. I have to repeat again,
17 Your Honours. I'm not a politician. I said that yesterday. I've been
18 saying that all the time. I'm not a politician, and now putting it to me
19 that way, I suppose that means that we Muslims should have just lay down
20 and waited for them to slaughter us. Because in December 1991, around
21 Sanski Most -- well, Sanski Most is in a valley, and the JNA had already
22 taken up artillery positions around Sanski Most, which means, I assume,
23 that they reacted to a situation like that. I don't know, but I assume.
24 I don't know what they did, whether they did this, as it says here, who
25 they reached an agreement with, I don't know. But I can say that
1 Enver Burnic was the police commander and this other man Nijaz was the
2 commander of the Territorial Defence. I know that Nijaz was disarmed on
3 the 18th of April, 1992. I do know that. And Enver Burnic, he was
4 disarmed on the 18th of April, 1992. That I do know because they worked
5 in Betonirka together with me. So that's how I come to know that. Now,
6 what they agreed about over there, I can't say.
7 Q. Now, how far is Croatia
8 A. As the crow flies, well, I don't really know. When I fly by
9 plane, they don't say. When I drive, it's about 90 kilometres.
10 Q. You mean going doing down the Sana River valley, Bosanski Novi to
11 Dvor, that way?
12 A. I usually take the Kostajnica route.
13 Q. But this other route is quicker, right?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. So do you know that at that time, the JNA was waging war in
17 in its rear?
18 A. Yes, I do know that.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, Enver Burnic, the person you mentioned, was he a
20 member of the Patriotic League?
21 A. I don't know that. I don't know because I wasn't a member of any
22 league, and that's what I'm trying to tell you. I did not belong to any
23 of those political or whatever --
24 Q. Thank you, thank you. I'm not claiming that. Tell me this: Did
25 the Patriotic League have a branch in Sanski Most?
1 A. I don't know. If it did, it did; if it did, I don't know.
2 Q. Thank you. Did you know that the decision to form the
3 Patriotic League was taken on the 31st of March, 1991?
4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. Thank you. That's fine.
6 A. It's the first time I'm hearing about that.
7 Q. And are you hearing that the Patriotic League existed for the
8 first time now?
9 A. I heard of the existence of the Patriotic League after the war,
10 when I returned home, that's when I heard about the Patriotic League and
11 its existence.
12 Q. Yes, thank you. I'm waiting for the interpretation.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we have called up a document --
14 a Defence document, 1D11.
15 JUDGE KWON: After this we'll take a break.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. We have the document on our screens now. This document was
18 issued by the municipal court of Sanski Most in 1997, on the 14th of
19 July. That is to say when Sanski Most was in the Federation because
20 these are the Muslim authorities that we're talking about here; right?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. I don't want to read it all. You have it in front of him, but
23 Burnic, Enver, son of Mustafa and Fatima, has been declared dead; is that
24 right? And Burnic, Hadzira, has submitted a proposal to this court that
25 a judgement be pronounced to proclaim her husband dead. According to
1 what she says, after the aggression against BiH, her husband who, as
2 before, was the commander of the police in Sanski Most was prominent in
3 the defence of the country -- yes, I'm being asked to slow down but I do
4 believe that there's a translation there. Anyway, as commander, police
5 commander in Sanski Most, he was prominent in the defence of the country.
6 He refused to submit to the ultimatum of the SDA and be loyal to the Serb
7 authorities, et cetera. It says the fascist SDS, so the -- they had
8 already judged us fascists. Then it goes on to say witnesses who will
9 testify stress that Burnic, Enver, was very patriotically oriented. And
10 then in the middle of that paragraph it goes on to say that he worked
11 actively to prepare an armed resistance to the aggressor, and on his
12 uniform and cap he placed an insignia of the Patriotic League, or rather,
13 the lily emblem.
14 Is it clear to you that the Patriotic League existed, that it had
15 its insignia, and that Enver Burnic placed that insignia on his cap as
16 commander of the joint police force and with insignia like that walked
17 around Sanski Most?
18 A. Well, I can't agree with -- are you asking whether I agree? How
19 can I agree when I didn't see Enver wearing that kind of cap? I saw
20 Enver in Betonirka; when I was taken there, I found him there and he was
21 wearing slippers and some sort of shirt. So I don't know any of that.
22 If somebody wrote that, it's not my problem and it's not up to me. I
23 can't say anything about that. I can't make any comments. All I can say
24 is what Enver looked like when I came across him. Now, did he wear a cap
25 or hat, I don't know, he would have worn whatever he wanted on his head,
1 horns or whatever.
2 Q. Thank you. Now, in paragraph 54 of your statement --
3 JUDGE KWON: Now we will take a break for 20 minutes.
4 When we resume in 20 minutes, you will be given 30 minutes to
5 conclude your cross-examination.
6 20 minutes.
7 --- Recess taken at 10.23 a.m.
8 --- On resuming at 10.49 a.m.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Zulic, I hope I'm not going to have to ask the Trial Chamber
13 for additional time or for you to come back another time. So if you were
14 to give me yes or no answers, perhaps we could complete this on time.
15 Did Enver Burnic, in Betonirka, while you were there, when you were
16 detained, did he tell you anything about what this record speaks of?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Thank you. Now, in many villages around Sanski Most are there
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Was there fighting going on in those villages?
22 A. Yes, in Vrhpolje, but in the rest no.
23 Q. Was there fighting in Hrustovo?
24 A. No, there was no fighting in Hrustovo, as far as I know.
25 Q. Very well. I see. Now I'm going to put my case to you and you
1 can say yes or no. In Sanski Most, a large number of villages had a
2 mixed population. Tomina was half/half Serbs Muslims, a 50/50 ratio, and
3 in Tomina there was no fighting; right?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. The mosque wasn't destroyed nor was anybody disturbed and they
6 all lived together -- or rather, the Serbs still lived -- the Muslims
7 still lived there; is that right, not the Serbs?
8 A. All the Muslims were expelled from Tomina in 1992. The mosque
9 was destroyed in Tomina, so that's not correct.
10 Q. Well, we'll come to show evidence about that. We have Zemina and
11 her statement, and she talks about these things.
12 Is it true and correct that the fighting, or rather, the conflict
13 was around Vrhpolje, Hrustovo, four villages, Mahala, Hrustovo, Vrhpolje,
14 and which were the others? What was the other one? Just a moment,
15 please. Can you tell us the villages where there were clashes?
16 A. Your Honours, I have to explain something here. There wasn't a
17 conflict in Vrhpolje. From Vrhpolje upwards in that other place, they
18 didn't clash there, the Territorial Defence and the paramilitary
19 formations. They didn't clash in Vrhpolje or in Hrustovo, but there's
20 another place above Vrhpolje which is where those groups were
21 concentrated, the Muslim groups, putting up a resistance. But in
22 Vrhpolje proper, in Hrustovo, in those villages, there was no fighting.
23 I've just remembered. The place is called Galaja, it's about -- well,
24 it's outside the village, further away.
25 Q. Thank you, Mr. Zulic. I'd like us to go back to the village of
1 Hrustovo now.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] So may we have document 1D30 called
3 up again, please.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Microphone not activated]
5 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please, microphone.
6 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, could you turn on your microphone.
7 Your microphone is off.
8 THE ACCUSED: Sorry, sorry.
9 May we have page 3 of this document, please. No, it's not
10 page 3. Well, yes, towards the bottom of page 3 it says:
11 "Parallel to the increasingly prominent presence of regular units
12 of the former JNA."
13 And we agreed that the JNA existed until the 19th of May, right?
14 A. I didn't agree with that.
15 Q. But it's general knowledge, it's a generally known fact:
16 "At the initiative of some individuals in the party of democratic
17 action, the gathering of weapons and the formation of smaller assault
18 units under the supervision of the organisation of Bosna Green Berets
19 began. One such group operated in the town itself and very quickly
20 groups were organised in Vrhpolje, Trnovo, Hrustovo, and parts of
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now may we have page 5 displayed,
23 please. We're looking at page 5 now.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Towards the bottom of the page it says:
1 "This meant the beginning of any and many attempts to take over
2 the villages of Hrustovo and Vrhpolje. At the same time, that is the
3 period of frequent artillery activity against these villages from several
4 positions held by the aggressor. The lines of defence of Vrhpolje unit
5 were established by the Vrhpolje bridge and -- yes, by Vrhpolje bridge,
6 and at that time, they were unattainable for the aggressor with a tactic
7 of weakening the lines and frequent artillery attacks the enemy attempted
8 daily to break down the resistance of the defenders. Besides a part of
9 the unit that secured the Vrhpolje bridge, a part of the unit was
10 stationed in the forests of Vrhpolje, Galaja, where the necessary
11 conditions for life and training of the field unit were created."
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Now may we have document 1D -- or
13 rather, before we go on to that, could you focus on page -- on paragraph
14 32 of your amalgamated statement where you say that the regular -- on the
15 27th of May, 1992, [In English] The regular army and the reservists
16 gathered the population of Mahala in the soccer field located in
17 Krkojevci. The population of Muhic was gathered in the driving school
18 training and on the road to Kljuc," and so on, and so on."
20 "The population of Mahala was asked to leave their houses so that
21 the Serbian forces could deal with the Green Berets. The same day I also
22 heard on the radio that the Green Berets had attacked the Serbian forces
23 in Hrustovo. That was simply not true."
24 Now may we have 1D15, please, which is a list of the fallen Serb
25 fighters, fighters who were killed in Hrustovo.
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. So in Hrustovo, the persons that were killed were those listed
3 under number -- from number 3 onwards, Cedo Lazic; number 4, Rajcic,
4 Goran; 5, Vaso Stupar; 6, Mirko Cicic; 7, Rade Malic; 8, Marko Ljuboja; 9
5 Bogdan Rajic; 10, Milivoj Majkic; and 11, Milorad Panjak.
6 So, sir, there was fighting in Hrustovo. There were 900 armed
7 and organised fighters who had been prepared even before the outbreak of
8 the war, yes or no or you don't know, but just without a discussion. I
9 can accept all three answers.
10 A. Well, you can't make me say yes or no and put words into my
11 mouth. I have to explain what you're asking me about. Your Honours, I
12 have to explain certain things because there's explicit mention of
13 Hrustovo here, and in Hrustovo, according to my statement and everything
14 else, says that there were units -- well, the report said -- what I mean
15 is that the defence was at Vrhpoljski bridge and Galaja forest, so that's
16 not Hrustovo nor is it Vrhpolje, so it's Galaja forest. Those are two
17 different things. So who attacked there, I don't know. I'm wondering
18 what the Serb forces were doing in exclusively Muslim villages, and the
19 epilogue of all of this is 300 people were killed in Hrustovo, that was
20 the upshot, and in Vrhpolje when the defence was routed. That's what I
21 heard, but I didn't see it myself.
22 Q. Thank you. Mr. Zulic, we saw in the book of Zilhad Kljucanin
23 that from the moment when the Muslim military forces in Hrustovo decided
24 to launch an offensive, it is at that moment that the Serb forces
25 responded, not when they were just standing guard. We can look at the
1 document again, but I'm wasting time. And I'm just referring to your
2 paragraph 32 in your statement, where you say:
3 "It is not correct that Serb forces were attacked and it's not
4 correct that there was fighting there."
5 Whereas I am putting it to you now that in the Sana Valley River
6 which includes Kljuc, Sanski Most, Prijedor Bosanski Novi, there was an
7 elite unit of the Patriotic League which caused clashes beginning with
8 the 23rd of May in Prijedor and on to the end of May. It was defeated.
9 And your author, Mirza Mujadzic, president of the SDA of Prijedor, writes
10 that it is still unclear today how an elite unit of the Patriotic League
11 was defeated so quickly in Prijedor. I don't want you to debate. I want
12 to see the status of your statement in this trial, your statement was
13 used for a conviction in the Brdjanin and the Krajisnik trials --
14 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, what is your question?
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My question is to say I confirm, I
16 deny, or I don't know.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I didn't read this. I don't know
18 any of this. I put in my statement what I know, what I heard from the
19 refugees. And when I wrote the statement, I made it clear I heard it
20 from the refugees, from Hrustovo and Vrhpolje, from those who managed to
21 escape. And that's what I wrote.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. At the end of paragraph 32, in your statement, you say:
24 "This was simply not true."
25 A. It is simply not true. I don't know what you mean to say by
1 calling them an elite unit. How many men were they? An elite unit can
2 number 10 or a hundred men or 15.000.
3 Q. I'm talking about your paragraph 32, it ends with the words:
4 "This was simply not true."
5 A. It's not true.
6 Q. Thank you. Let's move on. Mr. Zulic, since we don't have enough
7 time, we have to deal with certain things that must be clarified and that
8 includes the incident at Kriva Cesta. This is what you say about it, and
9 I maintain that you made up the whole event, and you said that there was
10 a huge commission for slaughter, including the president of the
11 municipality, Rasula, who you didn't see with your own eyes but you heard
12 his voice through the megaphone?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. And you identified him only by his voice?
15 A. By his voice and his suit.
16 Q. Did you see his face?
17 A. No -- yes.
18 Q. You say General Milan Daljevic was there?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Is that the well-known general from the Second World War?
21 A. Whether he was from the Second World War or not, I don't know. I
22 know where he comes from and when he came to Sanski Most, and I know the
24 Q. You said in your statement that there were many people sitting
25 there and there was even a lot of Serbian elite looking and enjoying
1 watching Celo slaughtering Muslims, and there was Milan Daljevic and
2 Rasula among them whose political ideas I don't share and who viewed the
4 A. Will you show me that paragraph where I said that Milan Daljevic
5 was there.
6 Q. Well, here is your statement. It's in your statement
7 paragraph -- I'll let you know which one.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: It's paragraph 79, to assist.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Paragraph 79, sir. Answer, please. Was Milan Daljevic there?
11 A. Yes, he was.
12 Q. All these Serbs you enumerated which are more numerous even than
13 those who were slaughtered, were they on this panel that watched people
14 being slaughtered?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Did this Simetic really cut the throats of 20 people?
17 A. Some he did. Maybe he -- some others killed the rest.
18 Q. What will you say if Simo Simetic was in the corridor at that
19 time, in his unit. He was not a policeman, he was a soldier. What will
20 you say if I tell you that we have proof and that he will personally sue
21 you for libel and perjury because he has proved that he was in his unit
22 at that time?
23 A. He can get any certificate he wants. Even I can get, for money,
24 any certificate for anything. Your Honours, I have a scar given me by
25 Simo Simetic, here, right here, you can see it from the knife, his knife,
1 and here I have a cross carved on my skin. You can see the cross carved
2 on my chest. I would like him really to sue me. I can't wait for his
4 Q. Nice.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I have document 1D32.
6 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Zulic, are you okay? We can go on? Thank you.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Document 1D32.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. This is a state authority municipality of Prijedor
10 administrative service, the section for invalids of war. It's not
11 translated. I'll read it:
12 "Certificate that Simo Simetic," and then his unique citizen's
13 number, "permanently residing in Prijedor," at such and such a street,
14 "was a member of the armed forces of the SFRY, Republika Srpska, for the
15 duration of the state of immediate threat of war, namely from the 17th of
16 August, 1991, until 10 December 1996, military post 7421 Sanski Most, and
17 from 11 December 1996
18 post in Prijedor."
19 How come, Mr. Zulic, that such a dramatic event attended by the
20 political and every other elite headed by a national hero who's critical
21 of the SDS
22 event is totally unknown?
23 A. That nobody was tried, and there is another piece of evidence in
24 the Office of the Prosecutor about this man, I don't know why you haven't
25 received it. If this certificate is important, I don't know how he got
1 it. He wasn't in Prijedor, he was in Sanski Most. He came almost every
2 night along with Danilusko Kajtez. They came almost every night to beat
3 us in Betonirka. There is proof of that as well, and there is another
4 piece of evidence, the post mortem of a Muslim man who was found in 1995
5 or 1996, I don't know. It coincides completely with all that I have
7 Q. Except that he wasn't slaughtered by having his throat cut. He
8 was shot by a bullet.
9 A. I think the post mortem report says, and I had this report in my
10 hands, it says that the body is in a good state. And I would kindly ask
11 the Office of the Prosecutor to present this document here, including the
12 post mortem report produced by the doctor in Sanski Most, Ibro Eminic,
13 and that his son's statement be read out.
14 Q. I will read now what we have:
15 "Concerning the event on or around the 22nd June near the
16 partisan cemetery, this event is completely invented, in which
17 Simo Simetic is prepared to give evidence, a butcher from Sanski Most,
18 alleged butcher, also two other eye-witnesses are prepared to give
19 evidence. The only truth is that on this location" --
20 THE INTERPRETER: Could the accused slow down when reading,
21 please, this cannot be interpreted.
22 JUDGE KWON: The interpreters were not able to follow.
23 THE ACCUSED: Sorry, sorry.
24 JUDGE KWON: Is it from the witness's statement?
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No, no. We got this from our
1 investigators, and it says the post mortem says that both victims were
2 shot from fire-arms, and they were found in two different ends of
3 Sanski Most, and there was no other trace on the road of any slaughtering
4 or massacre. There was and there is no evidence of that.
5 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I kindly ask the Prosecution to
6 read the post mortem report by the doctor. What Mr. Karadzic is saying
7 is a report from some people who are all unidentified perpetrators. All
8 of them were allegedly killed in different locations. In my statement, I
9 said that it was impossible to bury anyone because it was a brook, a
10 river. All these reports are doctored.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. We'll find evidence of that elsewhere at another time. You say
13 that Serbs announced where there will be bombing, that they rounded up
14 civilians from Mahala at the stadium and said they needed to deal with
15 the Green Berets, both in Mahala and in Vrhpolje and in Hrustovo, and
16 that, among other people, your mother-in-law was also called up on the
17 radio. It was all announced on the radio and the civilians were invited
18 to gather in one place; is that right?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, how much more time
22 do I have?
23 JUDGE KWON: Could you finish in five minutes.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll try. Thank you.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. You say that you were transported by lorry. How many of you were
2 there in the lorry, 60?
3 A. 64.
4 Q. In what position were you?
5 A. Sitting down, standing up.
6 Q. Could 60 people sit down in such a truck?
7 A. I said both sitting down or standing up. Some people who got in
8 first sat down, others stood.
9 Q. How could some people sit down when it is hardly possible for 60
10 of them to stand? There's just no room enough.
11 A. Well, you know, when we really had to do it, we had to ask each
12 other to -- for one to spread the legs so the other one could press
13 himself against him. They were just pushing us in with sticks and cables
14 and truncheons. We were being packed in and I know exactly how, without
15 water, without anything.
16 Q. In that situation, let's just leave it at that. Sixty people, if
17 there were 60 people, they all had to be standing. And still, you had
18 enough room to take this small bottle and urinate into it and drink that
19 urine. How did you manage?
20 A. Very simply, very easily.
21 Q. We'll have to bring such a bottle once here and try it.
22 A. It can be done now if you wish.
23 Q. Mr. Zulic, you said you had your own block at Manjaca?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. There was Dr. Dervis Kadic there?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Was he a Muslim?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Did they found a needle on one prisoner?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. How come they didn't find your notepad?
7 A. Well, they didn't.
8 Q. [No interpretation]
9 A. No, let me clarify about the notepad. I received it sometime in
10 August from a Serb, and in that notepad there were telephone numbers, if
11 I ever get out of there alive so I can call my family in Germany
12 abroad. And I kept -- I buried it first into the ground, this notepad,
13 and then I urinated on it. And then they would always say, God, fuck his
14 mother, he's pissing below him, under him.
15 Q. You didn't say that in any statement?
16 A. No, but now you're asking me how I managed. I'm trying to
18 Q. The other three or four notebooks you wrote somewhere else?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And where was that?
21 A. In camp when I left Karlovac -- in Cologne when I left Karlovac.
22 Q. So is that a diary or your memoirs?
23 A. Well, my memoirs copied out from the notepad.
24 Q. You just copied out the names from your notepad?
25 A. Yes, and then I wrote according to my recollections.
1 Q. So they were your recollections and not a diary where entries
2 were made as the events unfolded?
3 A. Well, no. I didn't make the entries as the events took place,
4 but when I went to Cologne
5 Q. Thank you. You said that you did your military service in the
6 navy in Split
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. You told us here that your disability resulted from the beatings
9 you received at Manjaca or Betonirka; right?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. Why in the army were you listed as unfit?
12 A. Because I had an ulcer.
13 Q. But it doesn't say that.
14 A. I don't know what it says, but it said ulcus duodenum in my
15 military booklet.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we have called up on e-court
17 document number 1D, Defence document -- I have it here. Just let me
18 check the number, please.
19 JUDGE KWON: Are you going to call up 22?
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Here it is, yes.
21 Thank you, Your Excellency. 1D22. That's the number.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Under number 608, on this document, it says Ahmet Zulic, son of
24 Azem, or rather, Aziz, and in the last column, it says "unfit, cessation
25 of military service," on such and such a date.
1 So you went to do your military service and they found you to be
2 unfit for service but there's no diagnosis, the one you mentioned here?
3 A. I don't know why. They just failed to write it in. I know why.
4 They said they couldn't provide the kind of food that I needed with an
5 ulcer and that they didn't have the necessary medicaments, so that's why
6 they wrote this "unfit," Your Honours.
7 Q. When was that?
8 A. That was in 1967 or 1966. I can't be quite sure.
9 Q. I see. Very well.
10 JUDGE KWON: But, Mr. Zulic, you agree that this is an entry
11 which is related to you?
12 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I agree that that is me. I'm
13 just telling you the diagnosis for which I was released from the army.
14 It was a duodenum ulcer, the diagnosis was in Latin, but translated into
15 Bosnian is ulcer of the duodenum.
16 JUDGE KWON: But I think you managed very well since 40 years has
18 Do you have further questions?
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, I would have a lot of
20 questions because his statement was a long one, but I don't want to
21 broach new topics. Although, if necessary, I should like to ask to have
22 this witness re-called at some point; otherwise, this completes my
23 cross-examination at the moment.
24 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Sutherland, do you -- I take it you have some
25 re-examination or not?
1 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
3 Re-examination by Ms. Sutherland:
4 Q. Mr. Zulic, this morning at page 43 of the LiveNote transcript,
5 Mr. Karadzic was cross-examining you about the killings in Kriva Cesta,
6 and he said that you identified Rasula being present there by his voice
7 and his suit and that you didn't see his face. Do you recall that?
8 A. Yes, I do.
9 Q. You said yesterday in your transcript at page 33 of the
10 yesterday's LiveNote that you had known Rasula for well over 30 years.
11 Do you recall saying that?
12 A. Yes. I don't have to see his face or what he was wearing,
13 although he was always in a dog's-tooth jacket with a red tie and had the
14 kind of hair that he had. So I didn't need to see his face. Just
15 hearing his voice I would be able to recognise him.
16 Q. And you said that he was always wearing this particular suit.
17 What is the name for this particular suit in B/C/S, in your language?
18 A. We called it "pepita," which is the black-and-white little
19 squares, chequered like little rhomboid shapes.
20 Q. You said he was always wearing this jacket.
21 A. Yes. Yes. A whole suit actually.
22 Q. You were also asked just a moment ago about the disabilities as a
23 result of the injuries, your disabilities. What disability -- what
24 injuries did you suffer permanently as a result of the beatings that you
25 incurred in Betonirka and Manjaca and the end -- what occurred to you at
1 the incident at Kriva Cesta?
2 A. I said -- I think I said, and it says in my statement, that
3 six -- seven of my vertebrae have been damaged, that all my ribs were
4 fractured, and I showed you the scars earlier on, and that this finger
5 was broken because they stepped on that one because they wanted the three
6 fingers to remain to make the sign that I told you about when I was doing
7 push-ups. And you can see that this finger was fractured. And in
8 addition to that - and I have nightmares about this -- well, I have
9 nightmares very often. I very frequently dream of people who were killed
10 beside me or were dying beside me, so nightmares, generally. And I had
11 one last night, but that, of course, is my problem, my personal problem,
12 and it's something I have to deal with.
13 Q. As a result of when you were at Kriva Cesta, was a gun placed
14 into your mouth?
15 A. Yes.
16 JUDGE KWON: It's a leading question.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I was taken to Kriva Cesta twice.
18 I was taken to Kriva Cesta twice. The first time they took me away from
19 home, and the second time when I was with this group of people.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND:
21 Q. Mr. Zulic, do you have -- do you have false teeth?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And how did that come about?
24 A. Well, when they pulled the gun out of my mouth, they bashed my
25 teeth in wit.
1 Q. And this was at the Kriva Cesta incident on the 22nd of June,
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. You were asked questions about Simo Simetic. How often -- how --
5 how long had you known him for before you saw him on the 22nd of June,
7 A. Since the beginning of the war, as a butcher in Sanski Most, so a
8 long time.
9 Q. Did you know him before the war as a butcher?
10 A. Well, yes, that's what I've just said. I've known him for ten
11 years -- I knew him for ten years before the war. And Simo Simetic --
12 the whole town of Sanski Most knew that he was a little mentally
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Just one moment, Your Honour.
15 [Prosecution counsel confer]
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: I have no further questions, Your Honour.
17 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. Sutherland.
18 That concludes your evidence, Mr. Zulic. Again, on behalf of the
19 Tribunal and the Chamber, I deeply appreciate your assistance and
20 contribution to the Tribunal. Thank you for your coming all the way to
21 The Hague
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you. Thank you.
23 [The witness withdrew]
24 JUDGE KWON: Before we hear the evidence of the next witness, we
25 need to deal with the exhibits of the Defence and also -- first of all, I
1 have to check whether you are minded to tender any documents you used
2 with this witness, Mr. Karadzic. Then we'll come to it. But before
3 that, I need to -- I need to give some more guidance to the Prosecution
4 on the process by which exhibits should be tendered in light of the
5 experience yesterday with Mr. Zulic. Because it was the first witness,
6 we just let it go, but this new -- this regime should apply to the
7 Defence as well.
8 For the Rule 92 ter witnesses, once the formalities of the
9 admission of the 92 ter statement or prior testimony is completed, I
10 would like the Prosecution immediately to tender that statement or
11 transcript into evidence, as Ms. Sutherland did yesterday. Then the
12 Prosecution should proceed to read out the short summary of the admitted
13 statement or transcript. After reading that summary, the Prosecution
14 should put its question to the witness. During such questioning, any of
15 the associate exhibits listed in the Rule 92 ter notification may be put
16 to the witness as may other documents, as happened yesterday.
17 Immediately following this discussion with the witness of particular
18 items, the Prosecution is required to tender that item into evidence, and
19 the Chamber will then hear any objection from the Karadzic and proceed to
20 rule on its admission. But otherwise, admission will be decided item per
21 item when used -- directly used during the course of examination.
22 At the end of the examination, if there remain any associate
23 exhibits which have not been discussed with the witness and tendered into
24 evidence, the Prosecution will be given the opportunity to tender those
25 items and the Chamber will hear from the accused before ruling on their
1 admission. I think this is more coherent and efficient manner in which
2 to proceed rather than having the Prosecution tender the associate
3 exhibits before it has put any questions to the witness, as occurred
5 Any questions?
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: Mr. President, can I clarify --
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- with this witness, though, that all the
9 documents that are associated with his statement are admitted because I
10 didn't deal with every exhibit simply for that reason, because they were
11 already admitted because they formed part of the statement.
12 JUDGE KWON: But if you are going to use it during the course of
13 the examination, it's better for various purposes to be admitted during
14 the course of examination.
15 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, but those documents that I
16 didn't show he Mr. Zulic yesterday --
17 JUDGE KWON: Yeah, those are -- they can be admitted --
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes --
19 JUDGE KWON: -- at the end of the examination-in-chief.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, thank you.
21 JUDGE KWON: That regime should apply to you, Mr. Karadzic, as
22 well. So if you are minded to tender the documents into evidence, in
23 addition to using them during the course of cross-examination, you should
24 apply so to the Chamber, and the Chamber will rule on its admissibility.
25 Now --
1 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, sorry, you asked if there were any
2 questions about the procedure --
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
4 MR. TIEGER: -- and I just wanted --
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Tieger.
6 MR. TIEGER: -- one point of clarification. If I understand this
7 process accurately as the Court has described it, it's not necessarily an
8 invitation to re-visit documents that were discussed extensively in the
9 92 ter statement; but instead it gives the Court an opportunity to be
10 apprised of the full extent to which any particular document may have
11 been discussed at the conclusion of all the evidence, both the 92 ter
12 evidence and the evidence adduced in court. That's essentially the
14 JUDGE KWON: I think you understand correctly.
15 MR. TIEGER: Okay.
16 JUDGE KWON: But it's entirely in your discretion whether to put
17 any of the documents to the witness or not.
18 MR. TIEGER: Understood. Thank you.
19 JUDGE KWON: So, Mr. Karadzic, I have the list of your exhibits
20 to be used in relation to the previous witness, amongst which you used
21 number 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 22, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32. Among them, what
22 are you minded to tender into evidence?
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, thank you. To
24 facilitate and expedite matters, I would kindly request that all these
25 documents which were put to the witness be admitted into evidence. I'd
1 like to tender them. And if I've understood you correctly, the
2 opportunities and possibilities open to the other side to tender
3 documents not shown, then I should like to put forward all the documents
4 that we have, from 1 to 32, if that is possible. I'd like to tender them
5 and have them admitted, but they'll always be confirmed and brought up
6 again because they're usually state organ documents which we did not have
7 time to go through but which relate to the testimony of the witness. So
8 although he didn't comment on them, they are all documents with facts and
9 contents, material facts which relate to this witness.
10 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Sutherland, do you have any observations on
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, we would object to all of the
13 documents that he's downloaded into -- uploaded into e-court for this
14 witness to be tendered and only those documents that were shown to the
15 witness, we can deal with those documents and those are the documents
16 that you read out, the numbers.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: So in relation to document number 9, we would
19 ask that that be MFI
20 document because the document is -- there was only a partial translation,
21 a summary translation of that document available.
22 JUDGE KWON: I have to check whether he has used 8 or not.
23 Probably it's my mistake. He didn't use it. Yes. I was told that he
24 used it.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Microphone not activated]
1 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry, Your Honour --
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Mr. Tieger will deal with this document.
3 MR. TIEGER: I'm only -- and I actually don't want to deal with
4 the particular documents, but because this is the first time we're
5 addressing many of these issues which will have larger- and longer-term
6 implications, I wanted to make a few observations and clarify a few of
7 the Court's guiding principles and some of the Prosecution's observations
8 as well.
9 JUDGE KWON: We are allowing some latitude to the accused as
11 MR. TIEGER: I appreciate that. Of course it's the Prosecution's
12 position that the Court should get as much useful, relevant information
13 as possible in order to make its decision. We appreciate at the same
14 time there has to be some balance struck and the Court has to make a
15 determination about where the line is drawn so it's not inundated with
16 information. As a general matter, we do want the Court to get
18 Now, with respect to a number of these documents, I note they
19 were put to the witness, the witness had no knowledge about those
20 documents at all. Therefore, the submission or the tendering of these
21 documents for admission into evidence is, in effect, a bar table
22 submission. Now, we don't -- we obviously don't discourage the bar table
23 process, provided that the documents are both relevant and probative and
24 reliable and those factors are clearly identified. But they need to be
25 identified in that manner. In this case, in drawing or attempting to --
1 or in these instances I should mention, in attempting to strike the
2 balance between the desire to get as much useful information as possible
3 and the need to draw the line somewhere, the Court will have to make
4 various assessments. But I note that many of these documents are not as
5 probative or, at least, would not be given as much weight as many of the
6 documents the Prosecution submitted in its recent bar table submission as
7 official records, for example, or temporaneous recordings by participants
8 in the various events at issue.
9 So I don't draw any kind of rigid line, but I note that some of
10 these would fall on the periphery, and the Prosecution notes that.
11 In addition, there are quite a number of documents for which we
12 haven't received a partial -- any translation at all or for which there
13 are partial translations. Clearly, I think the Prosecution should have
14 an opportunity to review those documents to determine whether other
15 portions of the documents should be or may be proffered for admission to
16 provide appropriate context, to corroborate testimony that was attacked
17 by the same document, and so on. Some of those documents may, therefore,
18 need to be marked for identification rather than have any particular
19 decision made at the moment.
20 So I wanted to make those preliminary observations because I
21 think they will guide the process. We are tendering documents, both the
22 Prosecution and the Defence. We're going to have -- we will be devising
23 guide-lines and appropriate tests for such documents and we know there
24 won't be a bright-line test in very many instances for certain categories
25 of documents that's going to depend on those various factors. We want to
1 ensure that the Court has all the information it needs to make this
2 decision and is properly informed about the evidence it bears on these
3 issues. To some extent, that's going to be a case-by-case determination.
4 I think some of the factors I've outlined in this case will apply to all
5 the documents, but in assessing the individual documents the accused has
6 tendered for admission here I think those are a couple of factors we need
7 to bear in mind.
8 Finally, with respect to the documents the Defence didn't use,
9 clearly if he's going to make bar table submissions about that, he needs
10 to follow the appropriate procedure, and that is to identify, at a
11 minimum, the relevance and providence.
12 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Sutherland, do you have further specific
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, I meant Mr. Tieger was going
15 to deal with the broader issue of documents, not that particular
17 In relation to 1D10, we would ask that it be MFI'd at this stage.
18 In relation to 1D11, we would also ask that it be MFI'd at this stage
19 until we receive a full translation. In relation to document 1D15, we
20 have no objection to that. I would note that that's part of one of our
21 65 ter numbers 17757. In relation to 1D22, we have no objection to that.
22 In relation to 1D27, we do object to that and 1D29. In relation to 1D27,
23 for the reasons that we don't know that this -- that the witness couldn't
24 recognise this person. We don't know if this is, in fact, the person
25 because the witness only knew of him by a nickname. We don't know
1 whether, in fact, this is the right person. In relation to 1D29, we
2 object to statements being admitted circumventing Rule 92 bis procedure
3 or the witness being called to testify. In relation to 1D30 and 1D31,
4 which are excerpts from an approximate 400-page document, we would ask
5 that that be MFI
6 pages that have been uploaded. And in relation to 1D32, we would ask
7 that that be MFI
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellency, before you make a
10 decision, I would like to say something.
11 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I?
13 First of all, we see now clearly what kind of difficulty the
14 Defence is facing. If a witness is brought here together with a
15 statement that is admitted a priori, a statement of 159 paragraphs, each
16 of which is a piece of evidence, then the Defence would either need a lot
17 more time for preparation and a lot more time for cross-examination to
18 challenge and counter all these paragraphs. And if this is the position
19 of Mrs. Sutherland, I am between a rock and a hard place, between
20 restricted time for cross-examination and a one-sided approach to which
21 we are not used. If we had an investigating judge here, or if the
22 Prosecution had done their job in an unbiassed way and under the Rule 68
23 provided all the evidence, then we wouldn't have this problem. Now we do
24 have a problem. The Defence has to do their job, or rather, the job of
25 the investigating judge from our system.
1 On top of that, I cannot understand that my 32 documents,
2 including some that I didn't have time to show to the witness but that
3 speak explicitly to the paragraphs from his statement, I cannot
4 understand that they cannot be admitted. Then it means that I really
5 have to have much more time for examination.
6 Third, the example of Defence document number 8, it was seized by
7 the UNPROFOR or the NATO when they were searching various locations in
8 Republika Srpska, and here they seized a report of an operative officer
9 which has no political or propaganda or media connotation. He simply
10 reports to his centre about operative intelligence that is directly
11 relevant to statements made by this witness in his written statement.
12 What are we going to admit if we are not going to admit number 8, a
13 document that the Prosecution disclosed to us and that they received
14 after the searches conducted by NATO on the ground? As for number 29,
15 for instance --
16 JUDGE MORRISON: Dr. Karadzic, I don't want to interrupt your
17 flow --
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, if I may interrupt, I'm sorry. I
19 didn't deal with 1D008. We don't object to the admission of that
20 document, and, in fact, it's 65 ter 20943. And I apologise for not
21 dealing with that a moment ago.
22 JUDGE MORRISON: I was about to say, Dr. Karadzic, this isn't the
23 only opportunity that you're going to have to tender these documents into
24 evidence. They can -- any document can be tendered into evidence during
25 the course of the Defence case as long as its provenance and relevance is
1 shown. So the fact that they're not being admitted at this stage is not
2 a preclusion to them being admitted in due course.
3 JUDGE KWON: Do you have more to say, Mr. Karadzic?
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency. Thank
5 you, Your Excellency. Just regarding what you just said, unfortunately
6 among the accused and in our parts in the Balkans, the rule of thumb is
7 that what you have done in the Prosecution case is the only thing that's
8 done and not much attention is going to be paid to the Defence case. But
9 I would like to draw your attention to the witness statement of
10 Djordje Todorovic. This witness confirmed a few things from that
11 statement. Yes, this is correct, this is correct, but I didn't take the
12 exclusive. Everything else is confirmed, that his brother was working
13 until the end of 1995 almost, et cetera. That's why I believe this
14 statement is important. Generally speaking, I believe all these should
15 be admitted or I should be given more time to examine.
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
17 The Chamber will --
18 MR. TIEGER: I'm sorry, Your Honour, one more broad point I think
19 is clear that I think should prevail during the course of the
20 proceedings, and that is that to the 92 bis process and procedure must
21 prevail for the tendering of statements, and merely putting one's case to
22 a witness that arises from a statement doesn't render that particular
23 statement admissible in the absence of fulfilment of 92 bis or the
24 appearance of that witness.
25 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. The Chamber will have a break now for 30
1 minutes, after which we will rule -- the Chamber will give its ruling on
2 this -- on the admissibility of these documents and hear the next
4 --- Recess taken at 11.56 a.m.
5 --- On resuming at 12.29 p.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Harvey
7 MR. HARVEY: Good afternoon, Your Honours. You had asked that
8 each of us should introduce any fresh face that appeared in the
9 courtroom, and I should just say that I'm accompanied, therefore, today
10 by Ms. Mirjana Vukajlovic. Thank you.
11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Thank you. Welcome, Madam Vukajlovic.
12 And I take it Mr. Tieger has a member to be introduced.
13 MR. TIEGER: Yes, Your Honour. Mr. Gaynor, Mr. Fergal Gaynor
14 will be taking the next witness. And I believe he's known to the Court,
15 but I introduce him formally in these proceedings.
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Welcome, Mr. Gaynor.
17 We will give the ruling on the admissibility of the documents
18 used by the Defence during his cross-examination of Mr. Zulic. Items, I
19 just referred to the numbers. Numbers 8, 15, and 22 are admitted. Among
20 them, number 8 and number 15 are not confirmed by the witness; however,
21 considering the -- those exhibits were not contended or objected to by
22 the Prosecution, we are admitting them.
23 There are other documents number 9, 10, 11, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31,
24 32 are not admitted. The reason is as follows: The witness didn't
25 confirm their content at all, nor did he give any evidence relating to
1 the authenticity or foundation of those documents. In particular,
2 Mr. Karadzic, regarding the statement of a witness or anybody else, we
3 cannot admit it -- admit them in a vacuum. As Mr. Tieger properly
4 indicated, we have a proper rule pursuant to which we can admit such
5 documents. So you can have ample opportunity to use 92 bis, 92 ter
6 regime later on.
7 And as for the photograph, since the witness didn't identify the
8 person in the photo, it has no probative value at all. And as to the
9 book as well, the -- not only because the witness didn't confirm its
10 content but also relevant parts are already put to the witness, there's
11 no need to admit them all. Although the Prosecution suggested marking
12 it -- marking them for identification and requesting for their
13 translation, the Chamber is of the view that -- is of the view that since
14 it should not be admitted, it does not need to be translated at all. But
15 our decision, Mr. Karadzic, does not necessarily mean that you can't
16 tender them into evidence through other witnesses, either by the course
17 of cross-examination or during the course of Defence case.
18 One point I'd like to make in this regard is that if the witness
19 is not agreeing to or confirming the contents of these specific
20 documents, you don't have to go over and over again as to its contents.
21 I think it's clear from the advice of Judge Morrison of yesterday.
22 There's one further matter, Mr. Tieger or Ms. Sutherland. It's
23 about the 92 ter amalgamated statement of Mr. Zulic. My understanding is
24 there are two kinds of -- two versions, one confidential, one redacted
25 public version, and the reason why we have the public redacted version is
1 that part of his amalgamated statement is -- was based on his evidence
2 given in private session in previous trial.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: That's correct, Your Honour.
4 JUDGE KWON: But given the prior protective measures have been
5 rescinded by the Court decision and the -- if the reason for giving
6 evidence in private session in previous trial was because of the
7 protection of his identity himself, then I don't think there's further
8 need to retain the confidentiality of that part. So if you could come
9 back to us with the reason -- what the reason was why he -- those --
10 evidence was given in private session.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour, I can do that now.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: One moment.
14 JUDGE KWON: If you need to go to private session, you can
15 request so.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, there were four portions. The
17 first portion, if I can take you to P717, and this shouldn't be broadcast
18 on the screen. Paragraph 9, the last four sentences were redacted
19 because that was dealt with in private session in the Krajisnik case.
20 And on a reading of the transcript it would seem --
21 JUDGE KWON: We don't have it before us, but -- Ah, yes, I have
22 an unredacted version, yes.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, this is material that I don't -- it
24 was dealt with in private session, and, therefore, that was why I
25 redacted it from the statement, but on reading of the transcript it seems
1 that it was something that was said in private session simply because
2 they, the Court, had forgotten to go out of private session and back into
3 open session. So it's something that doesn't -- wouldn't have identified
4 the witness, but simply because it was dealt with in private session I
5 redacted it. But I don't know it's something that needs to remain in
6 private session for that reason, but we didn't have a decision -- we
7 don't have a decision from that Trial Chamber and so we have to, as a
8 matter of course, redact those things that are dealt with in private
10 JUDGE KWON: Sorry to interrupt you, but the reason they went
11 into the private session was protection of Mr. Zulic?
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, his identity. And then they didn't come
13 out of private session when they were dealing with this particular matter
14 that's dealt with in paragraph 9.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Next one.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: So I don't have any issue with that. In
17 relation to paragraph 70, this was specifically dealt with when the
18 witness was in open session and he actually asked to go into private
19 session because he didn't want to say these -- what's contained in
20 paragraph 70 in open session.
21 JUDGE KWON: He also stated today as well that if he wanted to
22 say that he would go into private session.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, he said that yesterday. So I would ask
24 that that still remain redacted.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
1 MS. SUTHERLAND: In relation to paragraph 80, the fourth and
2 fifth sentences, again that was actually in open session in Krajisnik but
3 was subsequently redacted pursuant to an order of the Presiding Judge
4 because it would identify him. And the same for paragraph 84, the second
5 sentence in paragraph 84 -- no, I'm sorry, that was dealt with in private
6 session. But the same thing, for those two reasons because it may
7 identify him. And I don't think there's a problem at all with those
8 paragraph 80 and 84 not being redacted.
9 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. Sutherland.
10 [Trial Chamber confers]
11 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will give its guidance later on, after
12 deliberating on this.
13 And there's one further housekeeping matter.
14 Ms. Sutherland, I remember the Chamber did not admit the 65 ter
15 number 22038, list of persons arrested and detained because we haven't
16 heard any evidence as to its authenticity or foundation.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE KWON: But I failed to rule on its -- your motion to add it
19 to the 65 ter list. So I didn't mean to exclude your possibility to
20 introduce -- to tender that evidence through another witness. So your
21 motion to add that item to the 65 ter list is granted.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour. Yes. I was actually
23 going to clarify that with you at the end of the -- your ruling this
25 JUDGE KWON: That said, let's bring in the next witness.
1 MR. TIEGER: Your Honour, may I raise one matter quickly?
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
3 MR. TIEGER: I spoke with Mr. Harvey and with Mr. Sladojevic at
4 the break about the possibility of releasing for today Witness KDZ-064.
5 They agreed. I don't know if Mr. Sladojevic had an opportunity to convey
6 that to Mr. Karadzic, but it simply means that the third anticipated
7 witness would be able to go home today rather than waiting around.
8 JUDGE KWON: I don't think it's plausible to --
9 MR. TIEGER: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE KWON: -- hear that evidence. Thank you.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, may I be excused?
12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you.
14 MR. TIEGER: And, Your Honour, while we're waiting, if I could
15 quickly raise one point of clarification about the documents. With
16 respect to larger documents for which certain excerpts are translated and
17 tendered, the Prosecution was not suggesting that the entirety of the
18 document be submitted for full translation, but simply that an
19 opportunity be given to the Prosecution to review the untranslated
20 portions to see if portions, in addition, should be tendered.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, while we're
23 waiting, can I just make a few points? It appears to me that your
24 decision regarding language, the Serbian language for my needs, applied
25 to transcripts, that transcripts need not to be translated. As far as I
1 remember, that did not apply to the basic statements, and if my
2 understanding is correct, I would kindly ask that witness statements that
3 formed the basis for 92 ter be made available to me in the Serbian
4 language. And secondly, we had some technical problems today with the
5 uploading of documents, problems that were beyond our control, but I hope
6 that they will have been dealt with by tomorrow.
7 [The witness entered court]
8 JUDGE KWON: If the witness could take the solemn declaration,
10 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
11 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
12 WITNESS: SULEJMAN CRNCALO
13 [Witness answered through interpreter]
14 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please be seated.
15 Before Mr. Gaynor asks you some questions, I have some orders,
16 Mr. Crncalo, for you. On behalf of the Tribunal and the Bench, I would
17 like to thank you for coming here to give evidence in this trial. The
18 Chamber appreciates that this is the third time you have travelled to
19 The Hague
20 reasons why we were unable to hear your testimony on those previous
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I understand.
23 JUDGE KWON: We are aware that such repeated journeys on your
24 part are not easy and that you have had to make personal arrangements to
25 accommodate us. So I wish to express our gratitude to you for being
1 willing to come.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
3 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Gaynor, it's your witness.
4 Mr. Gaynor: Thank you, Mr. President.
5 Examination by Mr. Gaynor:
6 Q. Sir, could you state your name for the record, please.
7 A. My name is Sulejman Crncalo.
8 Q. Now, on the 1st of November, 2009, you signed an amalgamated
9 witness statement; is that correct?
10 A. Right.
11 MR. GAYNOR: Could I request that 65 ter number 90014 be brought
12 up and that we go to page 16 of that document.
13 Q. Now, on the screen in front of you, Mr. Crncalo, underneath the
14 declaration, you see your signature; is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And, in fact, you signed every page of this statement; correct?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Now, I understand that you want to correct one word in this
20 MR. GAYNOR: And could page 9 of the statement be brought up,
22 Now, Your Honours, on the fourth line of paragraph 52 of the
23 statement, the witness refers to young soldiers in Pale who "wore Chetnik
24 armbands, ribbons, on their arms and on their heads." Mr. Crncalo wishes
25 to change the word "Chetnik" in that sentence to the word "red."
1 Q. Is that correct, Mr. Crncalo?
2 A. Yes, it is. If I may explain. There were no insignia on them.
3 There were just ribbons tied on both upper arms and around the head, red
5 Q. Now, subject to that correction, do you confirm that the
6 amalgamated statement accurately reflects your evidence and that you
7 would provide the same answers to questions if you were asked under oath
8 about those topics today?
9 A. Certainly this is my statement and I stand behind it.
10 MR. GAYNOR: At this time, Mr. President, I would seek to have
11 the amalgamated witness statement admitted into evidence, that's number
13 JUDGE KWON: That's admitted.
14 What would be the exhibit number?
15 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, that will be Exhibit P733.
16 JUDGE KWON: I forgot to give the numbers to the Defence
17 documents, three documents, that we admitted, 8, 15, 22. What would the
18 numbers be?
19 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, the exhibit numbers would be D5, 6,
20 and 7, respectively.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 Mr. Gaynor.
23 MR. GAYNOR: Your Honour, I now propose to read a brief summary
24 of the witness's evidence.
25 Mr. Crncalo is a Bosnian Muslim who was born, lived, and worked
1 in Pale.
2 In 1991 and early 1992, Mr. Crncalo noted increased public
3 manifestations of Serb nationalism in Pale, the covert distribution of
4 weapons to the local Serb population, and the mobilisation of his Serb
5 coworkers. In response, the Muslim community felt threatened and started
6 guarding their households.
7 On the 3rd of March, 1992, the witness was arrested by policemen
8 while guarding his house, taken to Pale police station, interrogated by
9 police, including the chief of police, Malko Koroman, threatened with
10 death, and beaten for three hours.
11 Shortly thereafter, Malko Koroman issued a call over the
12 television directed to all non-Serbs to surrender all weapons to the
13 police. Serb paramilitaries conducted searches of Muslim houses.
14 At the beginning of March 1992, the Crisis Staff of the
15 municipality of Pale was established. It controlled all municipal
16 activities. It was headquartered at the police headquarters and
17 consisted of SDS
18 police, and the municipality president.
19 In mid-March 1992 the Serb authorities started a campaign to
20 convince Muslims to leave the municipality. A Serb police officer and a
21 paramilitary unit commander, Radomir Kojic, came to the witness's street
22 to deliver a message to the Muslims that it was better to leave in peace
23 and thereby avoid trouble later.
24 In the second half of March, a Muslim delegation from the
25 municipality, including Mr. Crncalo, met with Nikola Koljevic and the
1 Pale chief of police, Malko Koroman. Koljevic told the delegation that
2 local Serbs did not want Muslims living in Pale. Koroman informed the
3 delegation, in Koljevic's presence, that he could no longer guarantee the
4 Muslims' safety, as he could not control the Red Berets who had arrived
5 in the municipality.
6 Intimidation of the Muslim population by armed Serbs increased in
7 April 1992. Check-points, ordered and controlled by the SDS Crisis
8 Staff, and manned by paramilitaries and reserve soldiers, severely
9 restricted movement of Muslims and cut them off from neighbouring Muslim
11 In May 1992, the Crisis Staff ordered that telephones belonging
12 to Muslims be disconnected. In mid-May, the witness and his fellow
13 non-Serb coworkers were dismissed from work.
14 Also in May 1992, Mr. Crncalo saw three civilian transport trucks
15 full of civilian Muslim men from Bratunac arrive in Pale escorted by Serb
16 paramilitaries. The president of the municipality, Starcevic, directed
17 that the Muslim men be taken to the cinema where they were detained.
18 In May and June 1992, there was a buildup of regular and
19 paramilitary Serb personnel in the municipality. There were also random
20 arrests of Muslims, and in June and July several Muslim men were arrested
21 in their homes by Serb paramilitaries and killed.
22 In June 1992, after the killing of Serb soldiers near Zepa,
23 Radovan Karadzic gave a speech to a crowd in front of the Dom Kultur in
24 Pale. Mr. Crncalo was present for part of the speech, and he heard
25 Karadzic say words to the effect that the best way to defend Serb houses
1 was to attack Muslim houses.
2 In late June and early July, the Serb authorities organised
3 convoys to forcibly remove non-Serbs from Pale. A written notice put up
4 in the witness's area instructed the Muslim population where and when to
5 gather in order to be transported out of the municipality. The Muslims
6 gathered at the designated location, were permitted to take with them
7 only what they could carry, and were transported in convoys of buses
8 under police escort to Sarajevo
9 The witness was obliged to fill in a contract agreeing to
10 transfer ownership of his house to a Serb woman. He was also obliged to
11 leave behind his car and the registration papers to his car.
12 The witness and his family left Pale town in the third of three
13 convoys. The three convoys consisted of 18 buses in total. Each bus
14 could hold 90 to a hundred people and each bus was packed full with
16 Mr. Crncalo has been shown four documents, all of which were
17 issued by Bosnian Serb authorities in July 1992. Two were issued by the
18 SJB of the Bosnian Serb MUP in Pale, one by the Executive Committee of
19 Pale municipality, and one by the Presidency of the Serb Republic
20 Bosnia and Herzegovina. All four documents state that the movement of
21 Muslims out of Pale municipality was voluntary. Mr. Crncalo says that he
22 does not know of any Muslim or Croat who left Pale municipality
23 voluntarily in July 1992.
24 Mr. Crncalo learned, after his expulsion from Pale, that the
25 three mosques in the Pale area were destroyed between July and September
1 1992. He also learned that several Muslims who refused to leave the Pale
2 area in July 1992 were killed.
3 The witness's convoy went to Sarajevo
4 family lived for over three and a half years. Living conditions in
6 running water where they lived. Only urgent medical cases received
7 professional medical attention, as doctors and other medical staff had
8 too many cases of serious injury to deal with.
9 Food was in short supply. When the Serbs cut off humanitarian
10 supplies to Sarajevo
11 could find, including boiled grass and boiled leaves.
12 The difficulty of life generally was compounded by anguish caused
13 by the sight of blood on the streets and corpses which had not been
14 collected for burial.
15 Shelling and sniping were a constant and terrifying feature of
16 life. On several occasions, Mr. Crncalo was near civilians killed by
17 snipers. During the over three and a half years that he spent in
18 besieged Sarajevo
19 family would be killed due to shelling or sniping. When Mr. Crncalo left
20 the house, he was never sure that he would ever return alive, nor was he
21 ever sure that those he had left behind would be alive when he returned.
22 On 28 August 1995
23 market-place, as she had heard a rumour that powdered milk would be on
24 sale there. She was killed when the market-place was hit by shelling.
25 Mr. Crncalo, his son, and daughter continued to live in Sarajevo
1 until the siege ended. At no time during the siege did he, or any of his
2 family, have an opportunity to leave Sarajevo.
3 Your Honours, I now intend to ask the witness several questions
4 which are limited to clarifying and highlighting particular aspects of
5 his evidence.
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please.
7 MR. GAYNOR: The first subject, Your Honours, concerns paragraphs
8 36 to 41, which is on page 7 of the amalgamated statement. There's no
9 need for it to be shown to the witness.
10 Q. Mr. Crncalo, I would like you to focus on a meeting which took
11 place in May 1992. You were part of a Muslim delegation of about 15
12 people who attended a meeting with Nikola Koljevic and Malko Koroman in a
13 coffee shop in Pale. Do you recall that meeting?
14 A. I remember it well.
15 Q. Did you see Nikola Koljevic at that meeting yourself?
16 A. Yes, I saw Nikola Koljevic with my own eyes and I can explain why
17 he came there. We asked the police chief to get a higher official from
18 the government to come to explain to us or to give us assurances that we
19 can continue living in Pale together with our Serb neighbours.
20 Nikola Koljevic replied to me, It's no use that you want it because Serbs
21 don't want to live together with Muslims. Then Mr. Koroman, chief of
22 police for Pale municipality, probably supported or encouraged that
23 statement, saying that he, as police chief, Malko Koroman, is no longer
24 able to keep under control the Red Berets that had come from Knin, and
25 they had come to do their work. And we saw very well what kind of work
1 they did in Knin. In Knin and in Gospic, fire swallowed everything,
2 everything that could be looted was looted, everything that could be
3 killed was killed. And they had the intention probably to do the same in
4 Pale. That's why Malko Koroman told us that he could no longer keep them
5 under control.
6 Q. Thank you. Now, could you just tell the Court, why are you
7 certain that the person who you said was Nikola Koljevic, why are you so
8 sure that that was Nikola Koljevic?
9 A. I was not alone. All of us who were there had occasion, many
10 times, to see Nikola Koljevic on television, and there was also Vucic, a
11 member of the government of Republika Srpska. And when he was supposed
12 to come to this meeting with us, one policeman, Novica Stanar suddenly
13 disappeared, but he wasn't gone long. He came soon back with one
14 policeman, Predrag, and they brought Nikola Koljevic. He was dressed in
15 a green jacket. All of us present recognised him. There is no dilemma
16 whether that was him or not. Everyone recognised him. That was him.
17 Q. Did Mr. Koljevic distance himself in any way from the words
18 spoken by Mr. Koroman?
19 A. No, he didn't distance himself from anything. A strong drink was
20 served, I didn't see what exactly, and they stayed on after we left. I
21 mean us, the people who came seeking assurances of safety if they
22 continued to live in Pale. We left that cafe bar and they stayed on.
23 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to move, Your Honours, to paragraph 78,
24 which is at the top of page 14 of the amalgamated statement.
25 Q. Mr. Crncalo, you referred in your previous evidence to a speech
1 by Radovan Karadzic in Pale in 1992, in June 1992. Do you recall your
2 previously testifying about that?
3 A. I did not testify before. I just gave witness statements. I
4 never testified in a courtroom before.
5 Q. That's right. Thank you for the correction. That's absolutely
7 Now, going to that speech by Karadzic, where were you standing
8 when he was speaking?
9 A. I stood next to a lamp-post.
10 Q. And where was Karadzic standing at the time?
11 A. Karadzic was standing in the middle of the crowd of people in
12 mourning, people whose nearest and dearest were killed.
13 Q. Was he using a microphone?
14 A. I did not see a microphone.
15 Q. How far from him were you standing?
16 A. Roughly 15 to 20 metres away.
17 Q. And could you just tell the Court the words that you heard
18 Karadzic say during his address, for that portion of his address that you
19 were present.
20 A. I can. Those were terrible words to our ears. He was saying to
21 those present that every Muslim house had to be attacked because that's
22 the way to defend Serb houses.
23 MR. GAYNOR: Your Honours, for the last subject I'd now like to
24 move to the final paragraphs of the statement, the events of the 20th of
25 August, 1995. These are at paragraphs 94 to 97 on page 15.
1 Q. Mr. Crncalo, I have to ask you to focus on the events of the
2 28th of August, 1995. Where were you on that morning?
3 A. That morning I was at home together with my wife and children.
4 Q. Your wife left the house; is that right?
5 A. In the evening, we heard some rumours that at the market in
7 important at that time, especially for children. And my wife decided to
8 go and get the milk. She left the house around 8.30, and we agreed that
9 she shouldn't linger, that she should be back no later than 11, hoping
10 that she would stick to that agreement. I began to worry when she didn't
11 show up after 11.00. I went towards the market-place to look for her.
12 Halfway there, I ran into some people and started talking to them. They
13 asked me, Where are you going? And I said -- and then they said, There
14 was a catastrophe there. A shell fell and there was a massacre. And I
15 continued walking to the site of that massacre.
16 Q. Now I'd like to ask you to describe for Their Honours the scene
17 at the market-place when you arrived there.
18 A. I will. When I got to that place, or rather, a few steps before,
19 I saw a great mess and commotion. There was blood all over the place,
20 flowing in the streets, bits of human flesh scattered around, bits of
21 clothing torn and scattered all over, shoes mostly torn -- torn off human
22 feet. That fence that was put up there for people to be a little safer
23 when passing through, it looked like it was painted red from the blood.
24 A passer-by told me to go to the Kosevo Hospital
25 I was hoping that it would not be the worst. I checked -- I wanted to
1 check the lists of wounded people. I didn't find her on that list. I
2 asked a doctor, Well, what shall I do? My wife is not on the list of the
3 wounded people. He said, Go to the morgue. And when I got there, I
4 found my wife. She was killed.
5 Q. My final question, Mr. Crncalo: What impact did your wife's
6 death have on you?
7 A. First of all, great sorrow. Second, until then I had been trying
8 to provide money and clothing and food for my children. After she died,
9 I had to be both father and mother. I had never cooked before, but from
10 that time on, I had to cook, I had to clean my children's clothes,
11 prepare children for school, supervise them on the way from home to
12 school and back. I was able to have some sort of talk with my son, but
13 it was horribly difficult with my daughter. But I had to. I had no
14 choice. I had to keep them with me. I had to tell them something so
15 that they would listen to me and go on going to school --
16 Q. Thank you.
17 A. -- that they continue with school. Thank God they listened to
18 me. They completed school and now they are both employed.
19 Q. Thank you, sir.
20 MR. GAYNOR: Mr. President, that finishes the
21 examination-in-chief. I would now request that six exhibits be admitted
22 in evidence. These are the -- they form an integral part of the
23 amalgamated statement, and in accordance with Your Honour's direction, I
24 will read out the 65 ter numbers of those.
25 JUDGE KWON: I don't think it's necessary, since we have all the
2 MR. GAYNOR: Very well, Your Honour.
3 JUDGE KWON: Before we go through that, Mr. Crncalo, are you okay
4 now? If you so wish, we may have a break, a short break for you. How
5 are you feeling?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The main part of the evidence I've
7 already got through, I managed to get through that. So if you like, I
8 can continue.
9 JUDGE KWON: Thank you very much.
10 Mr. Karadzic, do you have any observation on the -- these
12 You are offering six documents which is attached to the -- your
13 motion -- notification?
14 MR. GAYNOR: That's correct, Mr. President.
15 JUDGE KWON: Which are all part of the statement?
16 MR. GAYNOR: That's correct, Mr. President.
17 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] No objection, Your Honour.
18 JUDGE KWON: We have gone through briefly those items. We find
19 them all relevant and of probative value, and also the Chamber finds that
20 all of them form indispensable and inseparable part of the statement,
21 therefore, so we are admitting them all. So shall we give the exhibit
22 number now. They will be six, so 734 to 739 in the order --
23 THE REGISTRAR: That's correct, Your Honour --
24 JUDGE KWON: In the order of the 65 ter number.
25 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, that will be done.
1 JUDGE KWON: So 01511 will be 734 in terms of clarity.
2 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
3 JUDGE KWON: So could you do a memo and file it for the clarity
4 of the parties?
5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour, a memo will be filed in due
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.
8 MR. GAYNOR: Thank you, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, it's now for you to cross-examine
10 Mr. Crncalo.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Excellency.
12 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
13 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Crncalo.
14 A. Good afternoon.
15 Q. Since the last topic was very emotional and understandably so, I
16 should like to clarify a point in that regard, first of all. But before
17 I do that, I'd like to express my condolences for your loss. All the
18 more so -- well, I'm going to try and prove to this Court and show who
19 committed the acts that happened on the 28th of August at Markale, and
20 you suffered this heavy loss yourself. This isn't a question. I'd just
21 like to express my condolences and sympathies, and I promise you that we
22 he will show who did that and who you can blame for it.
23 MR. GAYNOR: Mr. President, could I object. Expressing
24 condolences is all very well, but the rest of the content of the
25 accused's submission consists of argument which is best expressed in
2 JUDGE KWON: I agree.
3 Come to your question.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I agree. Thank you. But we have
5 here a man who has suffered a heavy loss.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Now, I'd like to ask you, Mr. Crncalo at what place, or rather,
8 where were you living on the 28th of August?
9 A. [No interpretation]
10 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreters did not hear the witness's
11 answer. Could he repeat, please.
12 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. We didn't hear the interpretation of
13 your answer, Mr. Crncalo. Could you repeat your answer.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I met people from Pofalic halfway
15 up until --
16 JUDGE KWON: No, the question was: Where you lived at the time
17 in August -- 28th of August.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] In Pofalic.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
20 Please continue.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. What's the distance from Pofalic to the market-place in Markale,
23 roughly what's the distance?
24 A. [No interpretation]
25 THE INTERPRETER: Could the witness kindly be asked to speak up
1 and approach the microphone. Thank you.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Three kilometres, right.
4 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Crncalo, could you come closer to the
5 microphone. Thank you very much.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. So how far is it from Pofalici to Markale? You said
8 3 kilometres, I think.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Yes, I can agree with that, since I spent 50 years living in
12 kilometres, but I'll expect that -- rather 4 than 2, right?
13 A. Well, I said 3 kilometres, not 2.
14 Q. All right. So where did you meet the man that morning who
15 informed you about what had happened at Markale?
16 A. By the hygiene building.
17 Q. Can you tell us what this hygiene building is, you mean the
18 hygiene institute?
19 A. Yes, hygiene institute, that's right, where he was a worker.
20 Q. How did you reach that point from Pofalici? Did you go on foot?
21 A. Yes, on foot. I didn't have any transport.
22 Q. And when did you meet the man by the hygiene institute?
23 A. Well, I was walking fast, so I had much more energy than I do now
24 and it took me about 20 minutes.
25 Q. 20 minutes from where?
1 A. From my home to that place. I got there in about 20 minutes.
2 Q. And when did you set out?
3 A. Well, I set out around 11.00.
4 Q. Thank you. So you met the man before half past 11.00; right?
5 A. Yes, thereabouts.
6 Q. Thank you. So how much time did you leave -- did you need from
7 the hygiene institute to Markale?
8 A. Well, I didn't look at my watch. I can think about it now, but I
9 can't tell you exactly. Roughly, it took me an hour from my home, from
10 where I lived, to the actual spot.
11 Q. So that was around 12.00; right?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Thank you. Now, you say that when you got there you found that
14 there was nobody there, no bodies, no body parts, or anything like that?
15 A. That's right.
16 Q. Were there any other people?
17 A. Well, yes, people were surprised to see what had happened.
18 Q. Was there anybody else there?
19 A. How do you mean anybody else?
20 Q. Well, you saw passers-by, and they were wondering what had
21 happened. Did you see anybody else?
22 A. You mean somebody filming or something like that? No, there was
23 none of that when I came by.
24 Q. I see. Now, do you mean to say that at 12.00 there were no
25 investigating organs or no officials there at all?
1 A. Well, I didn't see them. I didn't see any.
2 Q. Thank you. How close to the site were you?
3 A. I had to cross over -- walk through blood.
4 Q. Thank you. Now, what did these pools of blood look like? How
5 large were they? You said that everything was swimming in blood.
6 A. I didn't say "swimming in blood," but, yes, everything was
7 covered in blood. As they dragged the wounded people or the people who
8 had been killed, there were traces of blood as wide as a human body,
9 about 10 metres on one side, 10 metres on another side. I suppose there
10 was a car that came by to pick up these bodies from lying down in the
11 street. So when they were dragged and moved, it was red all over.
12 Whether it was swimming in blood or not, I don't know, but it was all
13 red. And as I say, you could see bits of bodies, parts of clothing, that
14 kind of thing.
15 Q. Thank you. I was just waiting for the interpretation.
16 Now, can you tell me who decided -- who was it who decided to
17 drag these dead and wounded people along the street? How did that come
18 about? You said, Yes, it was all coloured in blood, but how did these
19 people get to be pulled across the streets?
20 A. The people in Sarajevo
21 people were wounded and killed. They would immediately run up to these
22 people and try and save them if they saw something like that happen. And
23 later on I heard that, first of all, they picked up the people that first
24 gave signs of life and brought them to Kosevo clinic. Those who gave no
25 signs of life were taken directly to the morgue, and I suppose cars
1 turned up. They didn't wait for any order from anybody. People went
2 there of their own accord, trying to save anything that could be saved.
3 Q. Well, nonetheless, Mr. Crncalo, it seems a little strange to me
4 that somebody should drag people who are wounded or dead along the
5 streets. I don't think this is a mark of solidarity or friendship, a
6 gesture of friendship or solidarity in any way. I would rather say that
7 it was hostile and unusual for people to be dragged around while they
8 were bleeding and have their blood bleed on to the street; do you agree?
9 A. No, I don't agree and I'll tell you why. So much had happened
10 and so many people had been killed there, 43 people were killed there. I
11 don't know how many were wounded exactly. But they tried -- people tried
12 to save those people and they couldn't carry the bodies so they had to
13 push them along or pull them along. And as to hostile, that was an enemy
14 hostile act, that's true. But now the investigation and the measurements
15 of everything else, this was done later on by United Nations experts to
16 determine where the shell had come from and who had fired it.
17 But on that day, on the day itself, nobody had any time to make
18 any measurements or anything like that by the time I got there. Later
19 on, United Nations experts did come to conduct an investigation to do the
20 measurements. But when they arrived, everything had been cleared up,
21 washed, there was just the trace of the shell.
22 Q. Mr. Crncalo, is it customary for investigations to be conducted
23 after everything's been washed away and brought into some kind of order?
24 JUDGE KWON: That's nothing for the witness to answer such
25 questions. What is your next question?
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] My next question is this:
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Mr. Crncalo, you described the action to save the people very
4 vividly, how assistance was given and so on. How do you know when you
5 weren't there at the time?
6 A. Well, it's not difficult to imagine that it happened the way I
7 described it. The shell had fallen as I'd heard at around 11.00, and it
8 caused what it caused. When I arrived, that wasn't visible, but you
9 needed some organisation and several hours to organise all this and to do
10 the job. So that can only be done by people with feelings of solidarity,
11 they can only be efficient in that kind of way.
12 Q. So during that time all the wounded and the dead were removed and
13 what you saw were the traces of people being dragged along the streets,
14 whether they were alive or not, and it was the blood that had splattered
15 over the street?
16 A. That's right, but they couldn't pull them over the rail that runs
17 along the tram tracks. And there was still some bodily -- there was
18 still some parts of torn clothing on this railing.
19 Q. In your opinion, what would be the surface area covered in blood?
20 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
21 Yes, Mr. Gaynor.
22 MR. GAYNOR: Well, I object to that question, Your Honours. It's
23 more of a question which should be directed at one of the many
24 investigators and those type of witnesses who investigated shell sites in
2 JUDGE KWON: Could he not answer the question as far as he
3 remembers or as far as he saw it?
4 MR. GAYNOR: As the Court wishes, yes.
5 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Crncalo, could you answer the question?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I can.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please.
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I can't sort of take a tape measure
9 and measure it, but I have the picture before my eyes even now. I can
10 see it all even now. The street might have been 4 metres wide from that
11 first -- from the first traces of where the event took place to the last.
12 Well, about 30 metres in all, an area of about 30 metres. And where the
13 shell fell, most of that area, that's where there was most blood. And it
14 was about 20 metres to that area. So you can calculate it all and you
15 can see just how much blood there was.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. If I understood you correctly, the whole width of the street was
18 bloody, and in length it was 30 metres in one and 50 metres in another --
19 no, you said 20, I believe, a total of 50. So 30 metres in one direction
20 and 20 metres in the other direction. That's what you said, I think.
21 A. Not a total of 50 metres. A total of 30 metres. So there was
22 most blood within 30 metres. There weren't that many people over there.
23 Whether -- well, where the shell fell, that's where it -- where the
24 people were gathered mostly, in the middle of the crowd.
25 Q. Thank you. We won't dwell on that.
1 Now, you went to the hospital of that. When were you at the
3 A. Well, you know where the hospital is, you know where the event
4 took place, so I needed more than an hour to reach the hospital. If you
5 go on foot, I have to go down to the junction and then walk to the
6 hospital that way.
7 Q. Well, I studied in that hospital and worked there for 50 years.
8 A. I know, so you should know the distance.
9 Q. What I want to say is that it's much closer to Markale than
10 Pofalici are to the hygiene institute, it's two or three times nearer.
11 A. Well, can you imagine somebody like me seeing what I saw and not
12 finding who I was looking for, where would I get the energy, the same
13 energy to walk as fast as I did when I was going there? So you must take
14 all of that into account.
15 Q. Yes, I understand that. So let's say you were at the hospital by
16 about 1.00.
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. All right. Thank you. There was already a list of wounded
19 there. Who did you get the list from?
20 A. We didn't get them from anybody. It was stuck to the door, the
21 entrance door, the list was there, taped to the door.
22 Q. Thank you. Then you were sent to the morgue, the mortuary?
23 A. Not straight away. I stayed there for half an hour, looking at
24 all the lists. There wasn't just one list. I was looking for my wife's
25 name on one of the lists, but I didn't find it. And then a doctor came
1 by, and I asked him and he directed me to the mortuary.
2 Q. Thank you. What mortuary was that? Was it within the
3 Kosevo Hospital
4 A. It was to the left, looking at it from "cum," [phoen] near that
5 semi-circular building, you know that semi-circular building, well the
6 mortuary is next to that. You know where that is, I'm sure.
7 Q. Yes, we'll come to that. I'm just waiting for the interpretation
8 to finish.
9 So is that the mortuary at one of the exits, which is where it
10 always was, the exit towards the faculty of architecture, that way?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Thank you. Now, what did you see when you entered the mortuary?
13 How many bodies were there? What position were they in?
14 A. When I reached the mortuary, I can't tell you the exact number
15 but there were about nine, about nine bodies, and they were all lying on
16 their backs. When I came to my wife, there was a woman lying next to my
17 wife and her arm was thrown across my wife's body. I just cried. As
18 soon as they heard my voice in one of the other rooms, three men came out
19 straight away and asked me what had happened, whether I'd recognised my
20 wife, and I said, Yes, that's her, it's this one here. They took a note
21 of that. They showed me the wound where she had been hit, and I asked to
22 be given a document straight away, some kind of document stating that in
23 the massacre my wife had been killed. But they didn't want to give me
24 that piece of paper.
25 Q. Who were the other eight bodies? Were they male or female?
1 A. Mostly women.
2 Q. If it's not too difficult for you to talk about it, could you
3 tell us where your wife was wounded? Where was the wound?
4 A. It was in her left shoulder. A shrapnel from the shell hit her
5 in her left shoulder blade.
6 Q. And your wife was wearing clothes, of course?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. What about the other 40 dead, where were they?
9 A. They were in another room from where those three men came out.
10 Q. In that same mortuary?
11 A. Yes, in the same mortuary.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With everybody's permission, I
14 would like to go back to that tomorrow and ask permission for us to add
15 another piece of evidence to throw some more light on the topic that
16 Mr. Crncalo has just talked to us about. And I'm very thankful to him
17 for that, despite -- I know it's very difficult for him and very
18 emotional for him to speak about it, but thank you for -- I'd like to
19 thank him for testifying about it. Do we still have a little time,
20 Your Excellency, because I'd like to go back to one point.
21 MR. GAYNOR: Can I just ask for clarification, is the additional
22 item of evidence -- I would like the accused to clarify whether that's on
23 the list disclosed by the Defence at the commencement of the
24 cross-examination or is that an additional item of evidence?
25 JUDGE KWON: I was about to ask the same question.
1 So we have still five or seven minutes for that. So if you have
2 anything to further examine the witness, you may do so, and if you could
3 clarify what you meant by adding evidence.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, I'll be happy to do that.
5 Yes, that's quite right. It's an exhibit that was not announced, and
6 this came about because Mr. Crncalo described to us a situation in which
7 he was an eye-witness, and that was more exhaustive than was the
8 description given in his statement. So he described to us what he had
9 seen, where he went, where he came from, where he went, what he saw at
10 the site itself, and this requires the Defence to put forward another
11 piece of evidence. Had we known that Mr. Crncalo would be speaking about
12 the site itself in the way he did, we would have done that and produced
13 that evidence. But the exhibit will be presented in many other cases.
14 We're just going to show one or two pieces of that evidence tomorrow.
15 JUDGE KWON: You should let the Prosecution know what they are
16 about during the course of today, and then we'll hear from the
17 Prosecution and decide whether to allow the accused to adduce this
19 Is there any questions -- are there any questions to put to the
20 witness today?
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, perhaps I could go back to
22 the beginning if we have time, the beginning of his statement. Well, I
23 don't want to belabour this topic which is a very painful one for
24 Mr. Crncalo, but if we have time, I can go back to the beginning of the
25 statement or should we leave it for tomorrow? Whichever you prefer.
1 JUDGE KWON: We have five minutes. We can use as much as
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Mr. Crncalo, you said that at the high court in Sarajevo on the
5 23rd of August, 2005 [as interpreted], you gave a statement. That was
6 five days before your wife was killed; right?
7 A. You mean before her death?
8 Q. Yes.
9 THE INTERPRETER: On the 23rd of August, 1995, interpreter's
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. 1995, that's five days before your wife was killed.
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Or was that after the death of your wife?
15 A. I think they asked me during that hearing about my wife's death.
16 I think that's what they asked me. They asked me about my wife being
18 Q. You mean in that statement?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So this statement is not sufficient?
21 A. May I add something? If no mention is made of my wife's death in
22 that statement, then that means it was before, that it was before.
23 Q. All right. In any case, we need that statement in order to be
24 able to establish the circumstances. So I kindly request the opposite
25 side to provide that for us because this amalgamated statement does not
1 cover that fact. So we do need that other statement.
2 Now, to go back to the beginning of your statement --
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Gaynor.
4 MR. GAYNOR: Mr. President, could I just clarify, the statement
5 of the witness, which was given on the 23rd of August, 1995, has, to the
6 best of my knowledge, already been disclosed to the Defence in
7 English and in the original.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
9 MR. GAYNOR: That's my understanding. I will re-check it, but
10 I'm pretty much 100 per cent sure.
11 JUDGE KWON: Just for convenience, could you make another
12 photocopy and disclose it to the accused today?
13 MR. GAYNOR: Yes, as Your Honour wishes.
14 JUDGE KWON: I see the time. We'll adjourn and rise for today,
15 and we'll resume tomorrow at 9.00. But during the adjournment,
16 Mr. Crncalo, you should not discuss your evidence with anybody else.
17 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Thank you. I know about
18 that. Yes.
19 JUDGE KWON: 9.00 tomorrow.
20 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.44 p.m.
21 to be reconvened on Thursday, the 15th day of
22 April, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.