1 Thursday, 3 June 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.17 p.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, everybody. Good afternoon, Doctor.
7 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon, sir.
8 JUDGE KWON: Different but familiar setting.
9 Yes, Mr. Karadzic. Let's start.
10 WITNESS: ROBERT DONIA [Resumed]
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]
12 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good afternoon to everybody.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Good afternoon, to you, Mr. Donia. Mr. Donia, I'd like us to
15 look at the period before the parties were established, briefly, and to
16 see which points we agree upon so we don't have to debate them and go
17 through documents that would be superfluous in that place.
18 Now, in my books, and, you know, that I've written several books
19 of poetry, a poetry book for children, a comedy and a novel. So in my
20 books, did you ever come across anything that would indicate to you
21 that -- what my state of consciousness was which would act against me in
22 these proceedings, for instance?
23 A. I don't -- I'm not sure how to answer that. I have read some of
24 your poetry, in particular, and I guess find there a particular style of
25 expression which is really not something that I would say reveals a state
1 of consciousness that would act against you in those proceedings, no. I
2 wouldn't say that.
3 Q. Thank you. Now, have you read my novel, "The Magical Chronicle"?
4 A. Unfortunately not, no.
5 Q. Thank you. Well, many of my books receive prizes and I'm not
6 saying this from the literary point of view but from political
7 correctness. All those books were awarded many prizes, from the
8 Sholokhov prize, smaller ones, bigger ones, the Jovan Ducic prize, and so
9 on and so forth. Do you know about that?
10 A. I don't know about all the names that you just gave, but I know
11 that you have won prizes and your literary works in general have been
12 hailed by a good number of people.
13 Q. Thank you. Now, going back to the period before the
14 Serb Democratic Party was formed. Do you know what my relationship was
15 and attitude towards others and with others in the religious sense and
16 national sense?
17 A. Well, I think you -- in the national sense you arrived in
19 loyalty -- kind of a local loyalty to Montenegro which often expressed
20 itself as a kind of a Serb loyalty. I think that changed a bit over time
21 and became more of a Serb identity, at least as I -- as I understand it,
22 and I'm obviously not able to speak to this like you are, but that in the
23 course of the 1980s, in particular, as you went to Belgrade for several
24 months and spent a year in prison that your Serb identity became more
1 Q. Thank you. Now, do you agree that the area I came from in
3 present day it is called Old or Ancient Herzegovina?
4 A. Yes, mm-hmm.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, did you happen to note in the books of
6 Vuk Karadzic that it says he's a -- from Herzegovina, Drobnjak, from
7 Petnjica, and that is all my general area, the area I hailed from and my
8 particular village?
9 A. Well, Petnjica is indeed your home village and then you lived in
10 Savnik for a while and moved to Niksic and finally to Sarajevo. So I'm
11 aware of that and was not aware specifically of what Vuk Karadzic's
12 association with that area was, but as I indicated earlier, recognise
13 that his family and your family background intersect at some point.
14 Q. Thank you. His father was born in my village, in actual fact.
15 Now, do you agree that by joining up with Montenegro we still --
16 we still remained Herzegovinian but with a great love for Montenegro
17 that's why we joined up?
18 A. I'm sorry, joined up when or what -- to what did you join?
19 Q. Well, Montenegro
20 just like Serbia
21 A. Yes, it was, mm-hmm.
22 Q. And Montenegro
23 territories, and my territory, Old Herzegovina, united with Montenegro
24 rather than remain in Herzegovina
25 A. Well, it -- Herzegovina
1 but under Austro-Hungarian administration after 1878. Demonstrably it
2 wasn't then a part of Montenegro
3 Q. But Old Herzegovina, which united with Montenegro, was no longer
4 under Turk sovereignty as Herzegovina
5 was under them. So do you agree that my Durmitor area and
6 Old Herzegovina
7 it was free and that's why we united with it, because it was all Serb
8 land anyway; right?
9 A. Well, there's a number of assertions there, some of which is -- I
10 would -- I would question. The basic diplomatic outcome of the Congress
11 of Berlin
12 Old Herzegovina
13 that, no.
14 Q. But do you know anybody else who was a state? We call it
15 St. Sava's land. But in any other state was the population anything
16 other than Serb from time immemorial or from the Illyrians, let's say?
17 A. Well, I think we've been talking about Montenegro, and many
18 Montenegrins would disagree with you about that statement and note that
19 the land has been inhabited by Montenegrins for a long time. I would say
20 it is a contested issue.
21 Q. Very well. Let's move away from Montenegro. But at that point,
23 Czar Nikola, King Nikola later on. He considered himself to be the Serb
25 A. Well, Montenegro
1 was declared an independent principality.
2 Q. Well, it was an independent state, but it was a Serb state, not
3 part of Serbia
4 that. My area was inhabited by a Serb population, and that when we
5 joined up with Montenegro
6 that right?
7 A. There was nothing about joining Montenegro that would have
8 changed the national identity in that area, that's correct.
9 Q. Thank you. I want us to throw more light on this, that my Serb
10 national identity became slightly more marked in the 1980s, and we'll
11 come to why in due course. But do you happen to know that my late father
12 had a Montenegrin Albanian blood brother? He was a Muslim Albanian. Did
13 you know about that?
14 A. That I did not know.
15 Q. Well, I mentioned that in my interviews, but did you note in my
16 interviews that my next-door neighbour in Niksic was Mahmut Adzajlic, the
17 uncle of the great Montenegrin hero Mujo Adzajlic who was a Muslim and --
18 but fought against the Turks?
19 A. I have not noted that in your interviews. I don't have any
20 reason to believe at this time in your life that you harboured ill
21 feelings towards Muslims or toward -- toward Muslims in general or
22 certainly the individual Muslims that you knew.
23 Q. Thank you. Do you know that the Montenegrins mostly go to
25 law? A little bit of an anecdote now.
1 A. I'm dying to hear it. I'm interested in why you went to
3 Q. Well, I'll explain that too. Since Radio Belgrade couldn't be
4 heard in Niksic and Radio Titograd began broadcasting at 12.00, we always
5 listened to Radio Sarajevo, and we saw Bosnia as something very close to
6 us, and instead of going to Belgrade
7 went to Sarajevo
8 you, does it sound plausible?
9 A. Yes, I would -- that's close to my understanding of how it
11 Q. Do you agree that in 1960, when I was a 15-year-old boy coming to
13 from any kind of nationalism or disruption of Yugoslavia?
14 A. That year could be the pinnacle, the high point of Yugoslavia
15 a state that was really quite free from these nationalist divisions.
16 Q. Thank you. Now, what you said a moment ago, that I was well
17 integrated or what was it, what was the word you used, in Sarajevo, that
18 I felt very good in Sarajevo
19 entity, I took on the Sarajevo
20 accept that where you hail from gives you one identity and your national
21 identity gives you another identity?
22 A. Well, I don't know about that general proposition. I think what
23 you're suggesting in general is what I call a hybrid identity, and it's
24 something that actually most of us in one way or another have, a loyalty
25 to a country or a nation and often to a city or locale and sometimes to a
1 family or even a profession simultaneously, and I think the way you
2 described your feelings about Sarajevo
3 in the B/C/S the term "zavicajno," your, let's say, home-base loyalty to
5 Q. Thank you. But you're not the only one. Some Montenegrin
6 writers, too, saw the fact that I love Montenegro and Montenegro
7 entity, my opting for the Montenegrin nation. But Montenegro for all
8 Serbs is something that is very respected. They all respect the ethics
9 of Montenegro
10 ethics, ethos, not ethnos?
11 A. Yes, but they tell terrible jokes about them.
12 Q. Well, we all tell jokes like that about all of us.
13 Now, do you know, and I also spoke about this in my interviews,
14 that all my business contacts in Sarajevo were mostly with Muslims? I
15 don't want to enumerate them all, not to waste time. The professor who
16 taught me clinical psychiatry was a Muslim, and I chose him. My internal
17 medicine professor was a Croat, Ivan. My dentist, according to my own
18 choice, is Faruk, a Muslim. My lawyers, once again due to my personal
19 choice, are Ekrem and -- I know the surname but I'll remember his name
20 too. He was also a Muslim, and I think he originated from Kosovo. That
21 my hairdresser is a Muslim, or barber, and that everything I did in
23 A. Well, I think I wouldn't really -- I wouldn't quarrel with that,
24 but I think that the time that you got there and the time that you
25 entered into many of these relationships, no one was paying much
1 attention to this identity other than as a basis for kind of casual
2 conversation and personal interest. So it wasn't really a matter of
3 I'm -- and I think this is what you're saying, you didn't deliberately
4 seek out Muslims because they were Muslims for this, but many of the
5 professional people that you engaged with were Muslims or Croats by --
6 basically by coincidence. Is that what I understand you to be saying?
7 Q. Well, you understood me correctly, but the fact remains that
8 those relationships of mine lasted until the outbreak of the war in 1992.
9 Nothing changed. My last haircut was at Meha's [phoen]. He was my
10 barber, the best barber in Sarajevo
11 choose him because he was a Muslim but because he was the best, but I
12 didn't not choose him because he was a Muslim. So I want to link up
13 something that you said, that on the 13th of July -- yes. I've been
14 asked to slow down for the benefit of the interpreters. I will.
15 But my point is this: In Sarajevo, there were very prominent
16 professionals among all three ethnic groups, the Serbs, the Muslims, and
17 Croats, and I always looked at the -- their professional capabilities and
18 didn't choose according to religion. Do you agree with that?
19 A. As I understand your life at that time, that's true, yes.
20 Q. And that went right up until the outbreak of the war. Even in
21 March, after - what's it called? - the barricades. Right up until the
22 6th of April I had the same people and interacted with them. Do you
23 accept that?
24 A. I'm not sure that it lasted that long for everyone that you were
25 associated with who was of another ethnicity, but I certainly find it
1 plausible that that was the case with some -- some of those folks.
2 Q. Thank you. I'd like to link that up to what you say in your
3 report about the origins of Republika Srpska and that I, on the
4 13th of July, said, I'll read it out in English:
5 "[In English] At the SDS
6 Muslims, 'Our goal is to repair the relations between the nationalities
7 and to establish equality, reciprocity, and civil peace. I believe in
8 the great potentials of the Muslim nation. I believe in its simple
9 humane good.'"
10 This is page 20. [Interpretation] I haven't read it all out, but
11 that's as far as I got, and what I want to -- us to establish now is
12 this: That our relationship -- or, rather, whether our relationship
13 towards the Muslims was political or religious, our relationship towards
14 Islam in general, was it the cause of anything? And in view of the fact
15 that you noticed and recorded those words, do you believe that we really
16 stood by what we said there?
17 A. You certainly stood by what you said in the subsequent several
18 months prior to the election when the three national parties,
19 particularly the last few weeks of the election campaign, were holding
20 joint rallies, made appearances together. You made appearances with
21 Mr. Kljujic and Mr. Izetbegovic, worked together to ensure registration
22 of all voters, and in general became a kind of partnered opponents of the
23 Social Democrats and Reformists in the election campaign. So I see that
24 period right up until the election and a little bit beyond it as
25 characterised by these kinds of cooperative sentiments and -- and
2 Q. Thank you. You called them Social Democrats and Reformists very
3 kindly, but we fought against them as Communists for replacing the
4 regime. Do you agree?
5 A. Well, the name I guess technically at that point was the
6 Social Democratic Party/League of Communists. So we're, I think, both
8 Q. Thank you. Now, did you happen to note at the founding Assembly
9 of the Serbian Democratic Party, and I see that you saw 3.000 people
10 present, did you happen to notice the programme and platform of the
11 Serbian Democratic Party, and, if so, did anything in that programme
12 attract your attention?
13 A. Well, I believe I summarised a few points anyway in the paper,
14 but frankly, it's been a while since I looked at it. If you are prepared
15 to refresh my memory or something I'd be -- be happy.
16 Q. Thank you. Well I hope we'll be able to call up on e-court the
17 party programme, but let me ask you this: Do you remember the speech I
18 delivered at the founding Assembly?
19 A. Generally, yes, but I don't remember specific words or passages.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I have 1390 called up, please,
21 which is the programme of the Serb Democratic Party at the founding
22 session on the 12th of July, 1990.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. I'm sure you noticed that I didn't wish to be the party president
25 and that I offered the position to everybody else. Is that right?
1 A. That's correct.
2 Q. I'm sure you also noted that I proposed that there be a national
3 wing and a social democratic wing?
4 A. Yes. I referred to that yesterday.
5 Q. Thank you. Since you speak Serbian -- well, perhaps the
6 Prosecution has the translation of this document.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
8 MS. EDGERTON: In fact, this appears on the Prosecution's
9 65 ter list as 00928, and there is a translation.
10 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Shall we wait for the translation
12 then. 00928. May we have that called up, please.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. I'm going to read it out in Serbian, and we see the English on
15 the screen.
16 "Programme of the Serbian Democratic Party of BH.
17 "In the process of revitalisation of political life in -- of
18 Serbian people in BH in the spirit of liberty-oriented traditions, the
19 Serbian Democratic Party of Bosnia and Herzegovina finds its activities
20 on the following humanistic and civilised principles and objectives.
21 "1" --
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we zoom in, please thank you.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. "Democracy that rests on the abolishment of the monopoly of one
25 political party.
1 "2. Peace and co-operation among people as the prerequisite of
2 development and social progress.
3 "3. Freedom and rights to humans and citizens as supreme values.
4 "4. Legitimate authority and rule of law.
5 "5. Equality as the basis of cohabitation.
6 "6. A democratic Yugoslavia as a modern federal state.
7 "7. International relations -- internationality relations
8 founded on mutual respect and tolerance.
9 "8. The establishment of equal, fair, and civilised dialogue of
10 legitimately elected representatives of all peoples and citizens.
11 "9. Bosnia and Herzegovina as a republic with equal rights
12 within a modern federal state.
13 "10. Kosovo and Metohija within the state of Serbia
14 autonomy of the Western European type.
15 "11. Co-operation with the Serbian Orthodox church and its
16 involvement in the life of the Serbian people on an equal basis."
17 Now, I don't have 12 there in the Serbian, but anyway.
18 "Return to cultural, historical and national heritage alienated
19 from" --
20 Do you want me to read it all? I don't think there's any need
21 for me to go through them all, all these points. We have the programme
22 before us.
23 JUDGE KWON: You could have stopped a long time ago.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Yes. Let's look at number 20; that's an important point.
1 "20. The development of rural areas and agriculture by
2 abolishing the land maximum and taxes and to have agrarian policy to
3 protect the farmers from the vagaries of agriculture," et cetera.
4 Was this a programme a correct programme and acceptable to one
5 and all?
6 A. Much of it was. I think there are a few points here that
7 provided an entry point into the debates that took place during the
8 pre-election campaign and on which there were some pronounced
9 differences, and I would -- if I could go back to the first page,
10 perhaps. There is -- number 6, the "Democratic Yugoslavia as a modern
11 federal state." And number 9, "Bosnia and Herzegovina
12 equal rights want modern federal state," would become a source of
13 contention. Not so much for what they said, but for how they were
14 interpreted by you and other party leaders in terms of some of the
15 constitutional debates that we talked about yesterday.
16 I think the -- the rest of this -- certainly point 10 is really a
17 statement of -- almost advocates returning to Kosovo and Metohija the
18 autonomy that it had lost, that had been taken from it by Milosevic in
19 1989, and so I think on that point you would have found -- you did find
20 wide agreement with the other parties.
21 Now, without looking at all the rest of them, I think I've
22 identified two, anyway, that would become the source of contention in the
23 course of the election campaign. I think pretty much everything else
24 is -- was widely accepted and hailed.
25 Q. Thank you. Do you recall then we announced that we would be
1 forming the SDS
2 not even talk to any of the parties that were in favour of the
3 dismantling of Yugoslavia
4 proclamation in which they announced the setting up of their party.
5 A. I -- I don't have a specific recollection of that statement. It
6 would certainly be the case that the SDA, the Muslim party, in its first
7 platform expressed support for Bosnia-Herzegovina as a unified republic
8 within Yugoslavia
9 Q. Thank you. You noticed, then, confirmed that Mr. Izetbegovic,
10 with the other Muslim leaders, actually attended this first founding
11 Assembly, welcomed it, and he said, "What have you been waiting for? We
12 are waiting for an authentic Serbian party." Is that not the case?
13 A. I think his words were more, "We have been waiting for you."
14 Q. That's right. Do you recall when somebody from the audience
15 asked him, "What kind of a Yugoslavia
16 replied, "I'm in favour of a reasonable federation."
17 A. Words to that effect I do recall, yes.
18 Q. Thank you. Do you remember how I explained why Krajisnik was the
19 president, the speaker of the Assembly, and why he was often in -- on
20 negotiating teams? In addition to his obvious ability, I also said that
21 it was Izetbegovic's wish for Krajisnik to be on those teams because they
22 understood each other well.
23 A. I don't have a specific recollection of that statement.
24 Q. Thank you, but I wish to point out this: When I said -- when we
25 said that a democratic Yugoslavia
1 state, was this something what -- that Izetbegovic wanted? He wanted a
2 reasonable federation. Was it a step towards that reasonable federation
3 that he wanted, that we had made to accommodate his wish?
4 A. I -- well, I think this enters into the question of what was
5 meant by "federation" and what was meant by "confederation." I think
6 your question, though, is a little bit different in that you're
7 suggesting, I take it, that Izetbegovic supported Mr. Krajisnik's
8 participation because he liked his approach to a modern Yugoslavia. Is
9 that what you are suggesting?
10 Q. I want to say that we took into account what sat well with the
11 Muslim side. So I asked the Muslim side what their opinion would be if
12 Milan Trbojevic or Krajisnik were to become speaker of the Assembly,
13 because we wanted to avoid any misunderstandings. That is why I chose
14 this formulation, a modern federal state in order for [indiscernible] to
15 be affected with the view that Izetbegovic held. Do you agree that I
16 managed to do that?
17 A. Well, I think there are two quite separate topics here. One is
18 the selection of the president of the Presidency, the president of the
19 Assembly, and the president of the government, which was done in accord
20 with the inter-party agreements after the elections. And I think we're
21 still talking about the compatibility of the approaches to Yugoslavia
22 which characterised this period right around the founding of the parties
23 but quickly diverged into two quite different views of what it meant to
24 be a modern federal state.
25 Q. Thank you. I wasn't clear enough. I myself was not in favour of
2 federation," is something that I wanted actually to use in order to be as
3 close as possible to the formulation which Izetbegovic used, which was a
4 "reasonable federation." Do you agree with that?
5 A. I think the modern -- the formulation of the modern preceded
6 what -- what Izetbegovic said. I -- I do not know what consultations you
7 may have had with him prior to the adoption of the platform, but the
8 platform was adopted at the founding Assembly on -- in July, and at that
9 same meeting, I believe, is when he made that statement. The issues
10 subsequently centred around statements during the campaign where clearly
11 there was a difference of views on what Yugoslavia should be and what it
12 should be called, as well as what it -- what any changes in it should
13 amount to.
14 Q. Thank you. Did you note anywhere in my interviews that
15 Izetbegovic and I myself were neighbours and that we used to see each
16 other before either his or my party were set up, and even before this
17 founding Assembly was held I knew what views he held?
18 A. Fine. I wasn't aware of -- I don't know how much contact you had
19 with him, but I certainly find that plausible.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this document be tendered into
22 evidence and can we call up P929, please, the OTP's document.
23 JUDGE KWON: 928 is admitted.
24 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D254, Your Honour.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now see document 929 of the
1 OTP. That is my speech at this founding Assembly. First of all, we
2 should like to see the first page, and then if we could move on to
3 page 4, please. We do not have to devote any time to the entire speech.
4 We just have to focus on the relevant segments of it.
5 929. Prosecution exhibit. 65 ter -- 65 ter 00929. The Serbian
6 version is there. Now we need the English one. Yes.
7 This is the inaugural speech of the founding Assembly. Can we
8 now look at page 4. Can we see page 4, please. Actually, in the English
9 version it is page 3, and it is all right.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Please take a look at this penultimate paragraph which starts
12 with "Co-existence."
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could you scroll up the Serbian
14 version a bit, please.
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. "Co-existence has also created some permanent values which the
17 Serbian Democratic Party will nurture and develop. In that sense, the
18 party shall be open to co-operation" - can we please go to the next page
19 in the Serbian version - "with all democratic organisations in the
20 republic and the country. We can cannot and shall not co-operate with
21 parties which have even the slightest trace of anti-Serbianism,
22 anti-Yugoslavism, anti-Semitism, and anti-democracy in their programme or
24 "The name the party is its most complete and its most correct
25 legitimacy. It is the party of the Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina
1 is a democratic party which will work in the interests of the Serbian
2 people and citizens and thereby also in the interests of all peoples and
3 citizens in our region."
4 Did you notice or did you know, were you aware, of this speech of
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that Izetbegovic's standpoint voiced on
8 the 26th of March to the effect that he would not even talk to parties
9 that were in favour of dismantling Yugoslavia and his statement that he
10 was in favour of a modern federation, and that this part of my speech, of
11 my programme, were good foundations for a future coalition of these two
12 national parties?
13 A. As I indicated earlier, I'm not aware of that specific statement
14 from 26th of March. I am aware that he embraced something in the
15 language that was close to -- I think it was a -- a modern state or a
16 modern -- it could have been modern federation. It -- I've never been
17 able to figure out exactly who you had in mind with that phrase that you
18 would not -- and would not co-operate with parties who have the slightest
19 bit of anti-Serbian, anti-Yugoslav, anti-Semitic and anti-democratic
20 inclinations. That seemed to me a wide barn door which could be
21 interpreted by just about anybody to encompass all sorts of parties that
22 you planned not to co-operate with. It's very open.
23 But I think with the exception of that statement which leaves me
24 a bit puzzled, this was indeed a sound basis for co-operation with the
25 SDA as a partner party.
1 Q. Thank you.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see page 3, paragraph 2 in
3 the Serbian version.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. And until that is called up, can I remind you that we already had
6 the Croatian Party of Rights in Zagreb
7 traditions of the Party of Rights from the Ustasha times, which actually
8 engender the Ustashas. Actually, it was the Croatian Party of Rights
9 that had engendered the Ustasha movement prior to the Second World War, a
10 fascist movement which actually created the Independent State
11 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
13 MS. EDGERTON: That's comment by Dr. Karadzic.
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes. I've been wondering who's giving evidence.
15 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. Do you recall, do you agree that the Croatian Party of Rights had
17 set up the Ustasha movement which was at the helm of the independent
18 State of Croatia
19 A. No.
20 Q. Do you agree that the Croatian Party of Rights was restored and
21 that its work was revived in the 1990s, in the early 1990s, in Croatia
22 A. There was a political group that was formed called the Croatian
23 Party of Rights that claimed the heritage of the earlier Croatian Party
24 of Rights. I don't know that it -- we could say it was revived. It was
25 formed, I would think, anew and claimed those -- that tradition.
1 Q. Do you agree that that Croatian Party of Rights again restored
2 the demands for the -- for the restoration of the Independent State
4 that it previously included?
5 A. I -- to be that specific, I don't know.
6 Q. But they published this map, and they said they were reviving the
7 work of the Croatian Party of Rights upon the same programme. Do you
8 agree that the basis for the Croatian Party of Rights is Ante Starcevic's
10 A. In part, yes.
11 Q. Do you agree that the new, just like the old, Croatian Party of
12 Rights was markedly anti-Serbian, anti-Yugoslavian, and anti-Semitic?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Do you agree that the Ustashas were anti-Yugoslav, anti-Serbian,
15 and anti-Semitic?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. You recall you confirmed that we even had certain doubts in
18 respect of President Tudjman when he said that he was happy, that he was
19 fortunate that his wife was neither Serbian nor Jewish?
20 A. We confirmed that statement, yes.
21 Q. In the light of that, does this position that we will not
22 co-operate with anti-Serbian, anti-democratic, anti-Yugoslav,
23 anti-Semitic parties, does it now seem justified to you in that speech
24 which we saw?
25 A. I don't know if it's justified or not. I simply said I really
1 don't know what you meant by it.
2 Q. But is it clear now when I point out the fact to you that there
3 existed an even more extreme and even more rightist party than the
4 Croatian Democratic Union was, and that we could expect that even more
5 right-wing parties would be formed, and that we had the right to say with
6 whom we would not be co-operating because we had before our eyes the
7 existing examples, and the HDZ was partly an a party of that ilk?
8 A. Well, as I read it, it looked to me like it opened the door for
9 you to say you would not co-operate with just about anybody that you
10 chose not to co-operate with. It was a wide-open designation, and you
11 reserved the right to label any group that you found to be so with one of
12 those labels.
13 Q. Thank you. Would you co-operate -- would you have co-operated
14 with a party of anti-Serbian, anti-Yugoslav, anti-Semitic,
15 anti-democratic orientation? Or any such exclusivist orientation, would
16 you have co-operated, in our shoes, with them?
17 A. Well, I don't know. I -- I think you -- when I first read this,
18 I thought you were referring to the League of Communists with your
19 anti-democratic statement. I would have no trouble co-operating with the
20 League of Communists if I had been in your situation at that time. But
21 again, I don't know who you meant here, and it seemed to me to leave the
22 door wide open. So I really couldn't give you a meaningful answer to
23 that question without delving into exactly who you considered anti-Serb,
24 anti-democratic, anti-Yugoslav, or anti-Semitic.
25 Q. Can I read out for you the second paragraph on page 3.
1 "The basic -- the basic aim of the party's full and unconditional
2 civil, national, cultural, religious, and economic equality of the Serbs
3 in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We cannot have leading and auxiliary peoples,
4 first-rate and second-rate citizens, constituent and unconstituent
6 It is the second page in the English version. And we shall see
7 what Mr. Zulfikarpasic had to say about this, about whom you know quite a
8 few things. But let us conclude. Is this a decent and acceptable
9 programme and speech at the founding Assembly of this party?
10 A. I would only be troubled by the degree to which you suggested
11 that the Serb Nation is such an integrated, delineated, highly
12 identifiable group, and furthermore, by the degree to which you saw the
13 previous couple of decades as injuring, depleting the welfare of the Serb
14 people that you postulated as existing. That seemed to me to open the
15 door to recriminations and blame pointing that would not be constructive
16 in the course of a political party's life. That observation is -- really
17 goes to the kind of, let's say, concept that you had at that point
18 already of an integral Serbian people and set out about assessing its
19 welfare based on standards that you applied from your own experience
20 and -- and views. I find the list of objectives of the party to be,
21 again, I have not read through all of them, but those that I have seen
22 here look to me to be laudable.
23 Q. Thank you. And was the Serbian people in Yugoslavia, whatever it
24 was called, was it integrated into a single state, that it was already an
25 achievement, it was something that had already been achieved? It was not
1 something that I had to accomplish in 1990.
2 A. I'm sorry, what's the question?
3 Q. You mentioned that I was in favour of integrating the entire
4 Serbian nation. Was the entire Serbian nation integrated in Yugoslavia
5 in 1918 when it entered Yugoslavia
6 A. Well, I don't think it's -- that those who identify themselves as
7 Serbs have ever been as integrated, distinct and compact as you suggest
8 they were at that time.
9 Q. I don't understand what you want to say. What I want to say is
10 this: In 1918, all Serbs, Croats, Muslims, Slovenes lived in one state
11 through integration, integration with themselves and with other peoples;
13 A. No. There were a good number of Croats living outside of the
14 Trianon kingdom. There were -- or the Kingdom of Serbs
15 Slovenes. There were many Muslims living outside that polity, Slovenes
16 in Austria
17 most of those who identified themselves as such residents of the new
18 Yugoslav state or the Kingdom of Croats
19 Slovenes, yes, they were, but I wouldn't call them integrated in the
20 sense that they didn't live anywhere else or that they were all compactly
21 joined together in a single polity.
22 Q. Thank you. Well, the facts are different to what we're saying.
23 It was a united country that was later divided into banovinas; right?
24 But it remained a unitary state until 1945 or, rather, 1941; it was a
25 unitary monarchy.
1 A. Well, maybe it's quarreling with the term, but I think that very
2 soon as the kingdom -- in the history of the kingdom, the rejection of
3 much of the Croatian political elite of the form that the state had taken
4 would bring that into question.
5 Q. Thank you.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'd like to tender this document
7 into evidence. First of all the programme, the platform; and second, my
8 inaugural speech at the SDS
9 JUDGE KWON: I think we have already admitted the programme and
10 then we'll admit this speech, which is of three pages, I take it. Yes.
11 We'll admit it. Give the number.
12 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D255, Your Honour.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. May we back to page number 4 in Serbian to show you that there
15 was co-operation with the Communists and that there was no revanchism.
16 If you omitted to see that, I just wanted to point that out to you.
17 There was no revanchism. Do you accept that?
18 A. Yes. I agree there was no expression of revanchism here. I
19 didn't suggest there was. I simply said that in terms of the party, the
20 League of Communists, that it may have been among those that would have
21 been referred to in parties that you had no intention of co-operating
23 But I agree with your statement. There was an open expression by
24 you here of the openness of the SDS
25 Communists or people who had been members of the League of Communists to
1 join the SDS
2 Q. Thank you. But just to see that we didn't dispute their right to
3 have their party, and if we look at this paragraph there won't be any
4 revanchism or anti-communism. We don't question anybody's right to
5 political life, to the electoral campaign and participation in the
6 government. Furthermore, the party will be open to all democratically
7 minded Communists, Socialists, and other parties who accept the programme
8 of the Serbian Democratic Party, et cetera, et cetera.
9 So we tried to deal with the ideological differences and even
10 them out.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I think we're finished with that
12 document now. Thank you. It can be removed from the screen.
13 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Now, Mr. Donia, do you agree that the pre-electoral campaign
15 evolved in a tolerant atmosphere for the most part, without any excesses
16 or incidents or impediments?
17 A. For the most part, yes.
18 Q. Do you remember that the only thing that we at the time demanded
19 was a different designing, if I can use the term, of the municipalities
20 and the municipal communities?
21 A. That certainly is not the only thing that you were demanding. I
22 think it was part of -- it played a role in the electoral campaign and
23 was certainly a part of the general critique of the Communist era that
24 was part of the electoral campaign targeted specifically against the
25 League of Communists party.
1 Q. Thank you. Now, did you happen to note a moment ago in the
2 programme that we were in favour of abolishing the maximum land holding
3 and that that existed in Communist Yugoslavia, the land holding maximum
4 which meant that a household could not have more than ten hectares of
6 A. I did note the provision in the platform, yes.
7 Q. And do you agree that that was most detrimental to the Serbs
8 because they were mostly an agricultural people in Bosnia-Herzegovina?
9 A. No.
10 Q. And do you agree that it was mostly the Serbs who lived, mostly I
11 say, in the rural areas, whereas the Croats and Muslims, especially the
12 Muslims, lived in urban areas, in the towns?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Very well. We can prove that very easily. But do you agree that
15 the new power and authority in all the republics abolished this communist
16 restriction of land holdings to ten hectares and that after that
17 everybody could have as much land as they wanted?
18 A. I don't know about all the republics, no.
19 Q. Thank you. I'm sure you remember and know that we were
20 victorious at the elections. We beat all the three national parties, the
21 former Communists, rallied in the Reformists and Socialists, and we
22 managed to realise our coalition platform; right?
23 A. I think it's accurate to say that the three national parties won
24 the election and won it at all levels and in most municipalities. The
25 former Communists in the form of the Social Democratic Party and the
1 Reformists did well in certain areas and prevailed, for example, in the
2 municipality of Tuzla
3 municipality of Sarajevo
4 was convincing, but it wasn't universal.
5 The term that I believe you preferred to use at the time was not
6 coalition platform but, rather, a partnership of three parties, and that
7 partnership rested largely on respecting the inter-party agreements that
8 had been reached verbally during the campaign period, and then there were
9 some actual agreement in writing that inter-party agreements being an
10 agreement to divide offices in each municipality and at the republic
11 level according to the percentage of votes that each of the national
12 parties received. Those inter-party agreements completely excluded the
13 20 to 25 per cent of those elected in the election of 1990 who were a
14 part of what was called the opposition. So they were both distributive
15 and exclusionary.
16 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber is minded to take a break
17 earlier than usual, if it is convenient. We'll break now. Twenty-five
19 --- Recess taken at 3.26 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 3.54 p.m.
21 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Mr. Donia, I'm not going to ask you whether you vote for the
25 democrats or republicans, but I see that you feel sorry for our left
1 wingers, for us not including them in executive power. Now, do you --
2 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Karadzic repeat his question, please.
3 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, did you note that? Could you repeat
4 your question.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, yes.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. I said that I see you feel sorry for our left wingers, for not --
8 for us not including them in executive power, but I'm sure you'll agree
9 that the elections are there to change the powers?
10 A. Well, some elections change power and some keep it the same.
11 Q. I'd like to ask you what you meant when you said that we excluded
12 the left-wing parties. Do you hold that against us?
13 A. I referred to the inter-party agreements and pointed out that the
14 inter-party agreements as they were struck and carried out were
15 exclusionary in that they excluded from power the Social Democratic
16 Party, League of Communists, and the Reformists and other small parties
17 that won a few seats here and there and that that was -- well, it meant
18 that there was a -- an opposition which became known as the left
19 opposition but, in fact, included parties that were of quite different
20 orientations. The Reformists really were not a leftist party as much as
21 they were a Reformist Party. So the agreements did, in fact, mean that
22 the three national parties together monopolised control of power at the
23 republic level, the level of the city of Sarajevo, and in almost all
25 Q. Thank you. But you're not disputing the fact that these parties
1 gained their place in legislation and all the boards, the Municipal
2 Boards. I mean, the opposition parties; right?
3 A. I believe they were excluded from the municipal executive organs.
4 Q. From all the executive organs at the level of the republic and at
5 the level of the municipalities, because they lost power. But they did
6 take part in legislative power; right?
7 A. In those -- in those areas where they had representatives in the
8 Municipal Assemblies, yes, they did. And note the one exception of Tuzla
9 and, I believe, originally -- was it Vares where they actually did very
10 well also, and I think briefly had a role in the executive of Vares
12 Q. Thank you. Now to move on -- well, before we move on I'd like to
13 go back to your origins of Republika Srpska, page 9, where you say that:
14 "The new constitution according to Serbia -- [In English] New
15 constitution gave additional powers to the president of the republic,
16 including powers -- power to command armed forces in peace and war."
17 [Interpretation] [No interpretation].
18 "[In English] It assured the centralisation of the Serbian
19 Republic by eliminating the autonomy formerly enjoyed by Kosovo and
21 [Interpretation] Do you agree that Vojvodina and Kosovo, up until
22 1974, had one type of autonomy?
23 A. They were named autonomous. One was an autonomous province, one
24 was an autonomous region, and, yes, they enjoyed some degree of autonomy.
25 Q. Do you agree that with the 1974 constitution they were given a
1 further degree of autonomy, right up to the fact that they were able to
2 control Serbia
3 A. They weren't able to control Serbia
4 autonomy by the 1974 constitution. As we indicated yesterday, they
5 acquired many of the characteristics of a republic in the -- in federal
7 Q. Do you remember that Serbia
8 until it had the agreement of the Assemblies of Vojvodina and Kosovo?
9 A. Up until their -- either the -- as in the case of the Assembly of
10 Kosovo, it was abolished, or in the case of Vojvodina, up until the
11 period of the new constitution, that is 1989, I believe, 1990, that was
12 indeed the case, yes. I just want to be clear about the time-frame we're
13 talking about, from 1974 to 1990.
14 Q. Yes. Now, when in 1989 and 1990 this situation was changed with
15 the constitution, was autonomy abolished or just part of the added rights
16 that they gained under the 1974 constitution? Were just those abolished?
17 A. The main components of autonomy were abolished but not all.
18 Q. And would you agree that even given that situation, that
19 Vojvodina and Kosovo had more autonomy than they had before 1974?
20 A. No.
21 Q. Was there less autonomy they had up until 1974 then -- before
23 A. Yes. I understand the question, and I have the impression that,
24 yes, they did have less, but if you were, you know, to ask me in what way
25 and specifically what, I couldn't tell you. So I think my best answer
1 would be I don't know.
2 Q. Thank you. Now, if I tell you that the aim and intentions
3 achieved with the 1990 constitution was that Serbia could enact laws
4 throughout its territory, laws relating to the whole of its territory,
5 that that was the pivotal point of that constitutional amendment and not
6 the abolishment of autonomy, would you agree with that?
7 A. Well, I would say that the primary purpose and consequence of the
8 constitution of 1990 was centralisation of Serbia, and that included
9 dramatically reducing the autonomy that the two areas had enjoyed from
10 1974 to 1990. I think its primary purpose was to create a more
11 centralised governance, which is in accord with what you just proposed.
12 Q. Thank you. But it's not all the same is it, Mr. Donia, I'm sure
13 you will agree, whether autonomy was abolished or whether what was
14 abolished was the exaggerated rights of the provinces to control the
15 legislature and legislative activities of Serbia. And do you think, for
16 example, that in New Hampshire, if New Hampshire were to make a decision
17 to -- could it stop the functioning of Congress, for example, if it took
18 it into its head to do that?
19 A. Texas
20 centralisation inherently means reducing autonomy of those parts of the
21 state that the previously enjoyed it. That would be the case anywhere.
22 And you have stepped into the dispute. That is, there are residents of
23 Kosovo and Metohija, at least the Albanian residents of Kosovo would
24 argue that these were rights that they were entitled to and were now
25 being denied to them in 1990, and Serbs would say the opposite. It's
2 Q. Thank you. I just want to say that we don't see eye to eye
3 there, that autonomy was abolished. It was reduced with respect to what
4 was accorded in 1974, but what I'm saying is that even after that, the
5 provinces had more autonomy than they had prior to 1974. But if you
6 don't agree with that, we'll go on to prove and show that in due course.
7 Do you agree -- well, you said that no agreement had been signed,
8 but do you agree that the criteria had been adopted for the distribution
9 of power and authority among those three parties?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. And do you also agree that a principle was established according
12 to the number of votes or seats in parliament, municipal and others, that
13 that was the numerical criterion that was to be respected?
14 A. Yes. That is the case, but the -- my understanding of the
15 inter-party agreement was that certain percentages were awarded that were
16 approximations of the votes received or the delegates won by each party.
17 So the leading party, the first party, got, I believe, the president of
18 the Assembly, the Municipal Assembly, or in the case of the republican
19 government, the president of the Presidency, and so on. There was a
20 hierarchy created among the three parties which pertained -- which was
21 based on the number of delegates elected from -- in each municipality and
22 at the republic level.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. May we now have on
24 e-court 1D93 -- 1392, 1392, please. Just to have a quick glance at those
25 criteria which were binding upon us.
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Now, do you remember that at lower levels down the chain, if the
3 chief of a security station was from one party, then the police commander
4 would be from another party?
5 A. First to this document, yes, this is indeed the percentages
6 agreement that the three parties reached. I believe this document was
7 dated December, after the elections were complete, but was clearly the
8 basis or the result of earlier discussions and agreements.
9 I became aware of this document, I believe, after I had prepared
10 the origins of RS report, but have been aware of it for some time since
12 The key question, in fact, was the issue of who got the chief of
13 police position and who got the chief of the police station job, and then
14 there was a third position, I believe it was head of traffic police or
15 something like that, that entered into the formula. And, in fact, while
16 that was the most important set of offices to be divvied up according to
17 the agreement, it, in fact, was invoked in a wide variety of other
18 positions in the government and in the -- the government of the republic
19 and in the municipalities.
20 Q. Thank you. May I read something to you. Well, the party that
21 won 5 per cent gets a vice-presidency position, which is on a volunteer
22 basis, not paid. And from 5 to 10 per cent --
23 MS. EDGERTON: If I may, Your Honour. Before Dr. Karadzic begins
24 to read from the document, it's 65 ter number 18514, I'm informed, and
25 the translation of the document should be available within about seven
1 seconds, I hope.
2 JUDGE KWON: Okay.
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. That would be better.
4 I had counted upon Mr. Donia understanding Serbian, so that's why I did
6 MS. EDGERTON: It might be about 30 seconds. I may have
8 JUDGE KWON: It's coming.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Yes, indeed it is, Your Honour.
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we just have the page in
11 English first, please.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. So from 5 to 10 per cent, one vice-presidential volunteer
14 position, and one position in the executive government; right? Then from
15 15 to 20 per cent -- other, rather, from 11 per cent to 20 per cent
16 there's a vice-presidential place, a professional, and one department.
17 From 21 to 32 per cent, one vice-presidential place to be filled by a
18 professional in two departments. From 33 per cent to 50 per cent the
19 stronger side can choose first, either to be president of a municipality
20 or president of the other sector. That's the municipal government;
22 A. Yes. And I do hope you'll go on and read: "Napomena lijeve
23 stranke se ne uzimaju u obzir."
24 Q. Well, we'd had enough of them for 45 years, in actual fact. Do
25 you agree that we had enough of the left-wing parties by that time?
1 JUDGE KWON: Excuse me, what Dr. Donia said was not translated.
2 THE WITNESS: Okay.
3 JUDGE KWON: And unfortunately I checked it myself, but there
4 seems to be no English translation.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Actually, my colleague has to -- I think they know
6 what to do, Your Honours. Something technical involving re-releasing the
7 document so that my colleague Mr. Reid can attach the translation to it.
8 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
9 THE INTERPRETER: Note: The left-wing parties are not taken into
10 account is what it says.
11 MS. EDGERTON: In fact, as I've seen how fast these two are
12 working, my respect for them has risen commensurately.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Mr. Donia said that the note at the
14 bottom says that the left-wing parties are not taken into consideration,
15 and my answer to him was that we had them for all of 45 years and that
16 we'd had enough of them.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. And do you agree that 45 years of a leftist monopoly was quite
20 A. You sound like you're still bitter.
21 Q. Well, no. I was a dissident, but the fact remains that the
22 people decided to elect another government. Do you agree? A different
24 A. Well, the electorate voted for the three national parties, first
25 and foremost; but it was the decision of the three national parties
1 working together to exclude the League of Communists and other parties
2 that were -- made up the left opposition, which was in contradiction to
3 what you had stated at the founding Assembly of the SDS, that the members
4 of the League of Communists were free to participate in the government.
5 Q. All right. They all could participate in the government, but our
6 standpoint was that there would be no revanchism, that there would be no
7 lastration [as interpreted].
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we now see the next page.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] Do you agree that this is there
10 where the -- where two parties had won at the elections and came to
11 power? And on the next page we have three parties sharing the power. So
12 the first page we had power sharing by two parties in West Herzegovina.
13 There were the Muslims and the Croats. There were no Serbs there. Do
14 you agree with that?
15 A. Yes, okay. So just to clarify, one page - I'm not sure which
16 one - addresses a situation in which three parties, all three national
17 parties, won certain numbers of votes, and the other is if only two
18 parties competed essentially and won votes in a municipality. Is that --
19 I think that's what I'm seeing.
20 Q. Thank you. That is right.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see the next page in the
22 English version.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. These are also mixed communities with all the three ethnic
25 communities participating, and all the three parties made it to the
1 municipal parliament.
2 JUDGE KWON: I'm afraid that we don't have the translation of the
3 second page.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] All right. I move to tender this
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Mr. Donia, until that is done, do you agree that this was an
8 agreement struck by the parties who had won over 80 per cent of the seats
9 in the respective government bodies?
10 A. I think about 80 per cent is right. I'm not too sure it quite
11 got to 80 per cent, but in some municipalities it got to more and in some
12 nowhere near that.
13 Q. Thank you. But at the republican level it was approximately
14 80 per cent; right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that immediately following the
17 elections I proposed that in order to ease political tensions that an
18 expert government rather than a party government be formed? Government
19 of experts.
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. And as, you know, this was not accepted.
22 A. That's correct.
23 Q. Do you agree that the Serbian Democratic Party adhered to that
24 position and delegated to the government at the central level experts
25 except for one party person. So those people were not, with the
1 exception of Mr. Ostojic, party people.
2 Let me remind you. Mr. Ostojic was a member of the party and the
3 president of the Executive Board, and the other members of the cabinet
4 were not members of the Serbian Democratic Party. Do you agree with
6 A. I don't recall. I know there were 18 ministers appointed
7 altogether, and something like a third of them were appointed by the SDS.
8 I don't remember how many were party members.
9 Q. Let me try to jog your memory. There were 18 ministers, but
10 there were also deputy ministers in all 36 members of the government,
11 because the deputy minister is also a member of the government; right?
12 A. Yes. It -- the term "government" being the equivalent of what in
13 the United States is the cabinet or in European systems is the council of
15 Q. Yes. Thank you. Do you remember that where the minister was a
16 Serb -- or, rather, from the SDS
17 HDZ or the SDA and vice versa?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that the vice-premier on behalf of
20 the SDS
21 A. Yes. Dr. Simovic being a constitutional lawyer, I believe, at
22 that time and today.
23 Q. In the previous regime he had been persecuted, and he was on the
24 slate of the Serbian Democratic Party. Do you remember that the minister
25 of justice was Ranko Pejic, who had also been a minister in the previous
1 regime and who had also been persecuted?
2 A. I don't know anything about any prosecution or persecution of
3 either Dr. Simovic or Mr. Pejic. I just know that they were in the
4 positions that you indicated.
5 Q. Can I give you a summary. Miodrag Simovic was the vice-premier,
6 Momcilo Pejic was in the finance department. Perhaps you have a list.
7 Perhaps the OTP has a list.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, I don't have a list, but with
10 respect, I would suggest that it's inappropriate for Dr. Karadzic to be
11 delivering a summary. It would -- if he has something to ask of
12 Dr. Donia in respect of these individuals, it would best be in the form
13 of a question.
14 JUDGE KWON: Agreed.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I thought that would be
16 more expeditious.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Do you remember that Momcilo Pejic was the finance minister and
19 he was not a member of the Serbian Democratic Party?
20 A. I remember that he was appointed Finance Minister. I don't know
21 what his relationship to the democratic -- Serb Democratic Party was.
22 Q. Do you remember that both Pejics, Momcilo Pejic and Ranko Pejic,
23 had been ministers in the preceding period, in the Communist period?
24 A. No, I don't recall that.
25 Q. Do you remember that the deputy minister of health was
1 Dr. Tatjana Starovic-Medan and that she was not a member of the SDS?
2 A. I do recall that she was deputy minister of health, but again I
3 don't know anything of her relationship to the SDS.
4 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that Professor Branko Djeric was a
5 minister for development, I believe. He was not a member of the SDS, but
6 he was a member of the political council as a nonparty member, nonparty
8 A. I'm familiar with Professor Djeric's biography later on in the
9 war. He was, I believe, prime minister of the government of the RS, but
10 I don't know of his relationship to the SDS at the time that he assumed
11 this ministerial position.
12 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that the agriculture minister was
13 Professor Milivoje Nadazdin, who also was not a member of the SDS?
14 A. No.
15 Q. If I tell you that they all were eminent experts in their
16 professions and were not members of the SDS, this is something that you
17 will not challenge. I mean, you have no information to the contrary.
18 A. I have no information about it.
19 Q. Do you recall that leading the slate of the Serbian Democratic
20 Party in the Sarajevo
21 cultural society Prosveta, Professor Maksimovic, who at that moment was
22 not a member of the SDS
23 A. You seem to be qualifying that. I remember Professor Maksimovic
24 as an SDS
25 moment, but I think he became a member very soon.
1 Q. You are right. Do you remember that Milan Trbojevic was among
2 the first six and that he never actually became a member of the SDS and
3 he was a deputy to parliament?
4 A. That I didn't know.
5 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that in the Banja Luka electoral
6 district the -- leading the slate was Vojo Kupresanin, who was the head
7 and founder of a small party, the Homeland Front, which joined up with
8 for the needs of election, for the purpose of the election?
9 A. Do I remember he led the slate? I do remember that, and I know
10 of the Homeland Front. I know that the Homeland Front was active in the
11 Banja Luka area. I was not aware that he was the head and founder of it.
12 Q. Do you remember that Mr. Vitomir Zepinic was the deputy minister
13 of the interior and that was never a member of the SDS?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Do you accept that none of the chiefs of security services
16 centres -- no. Let me begin this way: Do you know what security service
17 centres were in contrast to station -- public security stations?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Security stations exist in every municipality, whereas centres
20 are at the level of a number of municipalities; right?
21 A. I -- I have no reason to doubt that.
22 Q. Thank you. Did you -- you did properly notice that there was
23 quite a struggle around those positions. Did you notice that there were
24 many contenders for those positions in Banja Luka and there --
25 THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry, the interpreter is unable to follow
1 Mr. Karadzic. Could he please slow down.
2 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, the interpreters were not able to
3 follow you, so could you slow down and then repeat what you just said.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. So in Banja Luka there were two streams contending to appoint two
7 honourable people, Jevto Jankovic was a judge and a member of the party,
8 and Stojan Zupljanin was not a member of the party but he had experience
9 as a policeman. Do you remember that I, and this was published, with
10 Zepinic, actually decided that the person with the police experience
11 should be appointed to that position?
12 A. No.
13 Q. If I tell you now that in all the centres of security services
14 none of the chiefs of security service centres on the list on the slate
15 of the Serbian Democratic Party in both republic and state security
16 departments were members of the SDS
17 A. Not without further evidence of it.
18 Q. A correction. Simo Drljaca, in Prijedor, was a member of the
19 party, but do you know that Stojan Zupljanin was not a member of the
21 A. No, I don't know that.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
23 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, two points. This has gone on for
24 some long time now, and I'm actually completely at a loss as to what the
25 relevance of this line of questioning might be. And the second is about
1 the formulation, in fact, of these questions, Your Honour. I've risen a
2 couple of times on the comment and evidence-giving by Dr. Karadzic, and
3 it seems to me that every single one of these successive questions is
4 formulated with a statement of evidence by the accused before he gets to
5 the actual question, and I'm wondering how much longer this should go on
7 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber would like to remind you
8 that only Dr. Donia's answers are evidence. Any comment, statement, or
9 observation by yourself at this point is not evidence. So we would like
10 to remind you of what we said previously:
11 "The Chamber is concerned that you are not making more effective
12 use of your time for your cross-examination. The Chamber is therefore
13 contemplating setting time limits on your cross-examination of each
14 witness which we will determine on a witness-by-witness basis and which
15 you will be required to comply with unless you can show good cause why
16 additional time is necessary. Should you not demonstrate during your
17 cross-examination that you are seriously taking our advice, the Chamber
18 will begin to impose such a time limit."
19 So bear that in mind, and following the advice you take from your
20 legal advisors as well as the Bench, conduct your cross-examination
21 efficiently. We'll see.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Well, possibly
23 paradoxically, I might be losing time in my attempt to gain time and
24 avoid entering into greater investigation with Mr. Donia or establishing
25 the truth with Mr. Donia. So maybe that's the mistake I have been
1 making, which is not my intention, of course. But this line of
2 questioning is very important for me, because it is my case that the
3 Serbian Democratic Party won power but did not seize it but handed it
4 over to the experts. And that's a very important point, a landmark for
5 many things from the pre-trial brief, and later on we'll see why.
6 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
7 Q. Now, Mr. Donia, do you agree that in the executive power and
8 authority the Serb Democratic Party did not appoint party cadres,
9 predominantly party cadres, but cadres that it found in the various
10 services, who were already there?
11 A. If by "party cadres" you mean party members, I think in the main
12 that was the case for the -- for the cabinet, for the government of
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina, in the main.
14 Q. And do you agree that in the police force and in the top
15 positions we did not bring in anybody who was not already, for example,
16 in the police force and that those people weren't party members, except
17 in Prijedor?
18 A. No, would I not agree.
19 Q. Can you give us the name of a high-ranking police officer who was
20 a party member?
21 A. I just simply can't accept the proposition that was the -- the
22 way that you put it to me.
23 Q. What about Vitomir Zepinic as deputy minister, the highest Serb
24 post in the Ministry of the Interior. Was he ever a member of the party?
25 Let's take him as an example.
1 A. Well, that was not the -- oh, the highest Serb post in the
2 Ministry of the Interior. To my knowledge, he was never a member of the
4 Q. And if I tell you that he wasn't -- that Mico Stanisic at that
5 time was not either, or any of the chiefs of the security services, would
6 you agree with me there, or do you have proof and evidence that that was
7 not the case?
8 A. I don't know about Mico Stanisic. I know that he was shortly
9 thereafter a party member, but I don't know about the time that you're
10 speaking of.
11 Q. And did you happen to notice that the leadership of the party was
12 subjected to serious criticism for having given over power and authority
13 to the experts rather than party members?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Thank you. Now, do you agree that the Serbian Democratic Party
16 won the post of president of the Assembly. The SDA had the post of
17 president of the Presidency and the HDZ the post of prime minister.
18 A. That's how it came out. I don't know that the -- you could say
19 that the SDS
20 product of the inter-party agreements, and the parties under the
21 inter-party agreement, the national parties, acquired the right to
22 designate those three positions because of the percentage of -- of votes
23 that had -- that they'd won at the republic level.
24 Q. So you agree that we first of all divided up the posts and then
25 saw who the people were to fill those posts.
1 A. That -- I think that's in the main the case. It certainly is the
2 case with the three positions you just named at the republic level and
3 also at the level of the city of Sarajevo
4 many municipalities as well.
5 Q. Thank you. Now, do you agree that the Ministry of the
6 Interior -- well, that the minister post went to the SDA and the minister
7 of defence post went to the HDZ?
8 A. Those two national parties did indeed designate the people for
9 those two positions, yes.
10 Q. Do you agree that the Serbian Democratic Party did not ask for
11 any of those positions but instead asked for the Ministry of Agriculture
12 and the Ministry of Finance?
13 A. Yes. Professor Koljevic, in his diary and account of that
14 particular time notes that you had decided not to seek those two
15 positions, that is, the Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Defence,
16 because the JNA was the dominant military force in the area, so you
17 thought it was -- there was no point in seeking those positions because
18 they were of much less consequence because of the JNA's presence.
19 Q. But do you agree that the Croats were very sensitive to the fact
20 of who was going to be minister of defence in view of the presence of the
21 JNA and that we made a concession in that regard, and that we agreed that
22 the minister of defence should be a Croat?
23 A. I'm not aware of what negotiations may have led to those
24 designations. I could only say, on the basis of Professor Koljevic's
25 observation, that you didn't regard those two ministries as -- as
1 important to -- for the SDS
2 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that the reconstitution of the Assembly
3 in his speech, Mr. Izetbegovic's, in mid-January, still remained in
4 favour of the preservation of Yugoslavia
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Do you agree that it was a surprise to one and all when, on the
7 31st of January, Mr. Izetbegovic launched the initiative to adopt the
8 declaration on sovereignty for Bosnia-Herzegovina? We're now speaking
9 about 1991; right?
10 A. January 1991. No, I don't think it was a surprise to one and
11 all. I would certainly agree that he was the instrumental person in
12 launching that initiative and that the -- basically the leadership of the
13 SDA and most of the HDZ backed that initiative.
14 Q. Do you agree that the SDS
15 Mr. Izetbegovic spoke at the Assembly, and we mentioned that yesterday.
16 A. The -- a number of SDS
17 the proposal for the declaration of sovereignty once it had been offered
18 in the course of the discussion in, I think -- on the 27th of February,
19 yes. You spoke, I believe, also at that Assembly for -- I think for the
20 first time in the Assembly.
21 Q. Thank you. You confirm that Mr. Avdo Campara, the secretary of
22 the Assembly, on the occasion confirmed that we had the right to send the
23 issue up to the council for the realisation of national equality, and
24 that it was on that basis that any further adoption of that declaration
25 was deferred?
1 A. It was -- we can see a specific ruling. We were looking at the
2 session yesterday, and he ruled on constitutional grounds that the
3 application of more than 20 delegates to the Assembly would trigger the
4 referral of the proposed legislation to that body, and that until such
5 time as a decision was reached by that body, the measure could not be
6 voted upon. It could be discussed but not voted upon.
7 Q. Thank you. Now, let's go back a bit. Do you remember that on
8 the 7th of January, 1991, in Sarajevo
9 intellectuals was made public, calling for a sovereign Bosnia
10 published on the 8th of January, broadcast in the media.
11 A. Your Honours, you asked me yesterday if I would take advantage of
12 the opportunity to review the transcript of that session that we've just
13 been talking about. I wonder if I could respond to that inquiry maybe at
14 this point, because we have just -- just been talking about it.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please.
16 THE WITNESS: I don't know if it's available to bring up again,
17 the -- the transcript of the session of the 27th of February.
18 JUDGE KWON: Is it Exhibit P969?
19 MS. EDGERTON: In fact, Your Honours, the whole session is -- the
20 transcript of the whole session of the 27th of February is 65 ter 06291.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. While we're waiting for that, I want to ask you: Do you know
23 about this declaration, the resolution of the Muslim intellectuals of the
24 8th of January?
25 A. I -- yes. It's a long time since I've looked at it. I don't
1 recall much of what it said.
2 Q. And do you remember that the Presidency of the SFRY, on the
3 9th of January, issued an order on the dissolution of all irregular armed
4 forces and the surrender of weapons introduced in the country illegally,
5 and that this task was to be carried out by the 19th of January, whereas
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you. We can now move on to the 27th of February.
9 A. The page on which this occurs is -- in the internal pagination
10 is, I believe, 27/1.
11 JUDGE KWON: I'm only being amazed by your memory, Doctor.
12 Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
13 MS. EDGERTON: The -- if Dr. Donia is referring to the page that
14 was displayed yesterday, that's e-court page 101 of this document, and
15 this document is not translated yet, unfortunately.
16 THE WITNESS: Yeah. The -- I was hoping we might go back to
17 page -- you see the 6. Just back one page to the very bottom of page 5,
18 because I think this passage will add meaningful context to the statement
19 that Mr. Izetbegovic name -- made. Let's see. Yes.
20 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
21 Q. Are you going to read it out or --
22 A. This is your language, sir. Starting with [Interpretation] "But
23 let me continue," beginning with that. [In English] This --
24 Q. I see that:
25 "But I'll continue to seek for a solution which, as I said, will
1 fulfil both conditions. In my opinion there are two minimum conditions
2 to be filled. First, the -- a sovereign democratic Bosnia as a whole,
3 and the second important point is" -- may I have the next page, please.
4 "A sovereign integral and democratic Bosnia, and a peaceful road to that.
5 So not through a civil war and dead bodies. The route to that Bosnia
6 should be sought and verified, and we should launch a quest for that road
7 and use every opportunity to advance in that direction. Those two -- but
8 those two conditions which I mentioned here, a sovereign and integral
9 Bosnia-Herzegovina and a peaceful road to it, do not have the same value.
10 Because of a sovereign Bosnia
12 because this is contentious and the subject of polemics in the scale of
13 values of Bosna Yugoslavia
14 first and then Yugoslavia
15 Is that sufficient?
16 A. Just one more sentence, Dr. Karadzic. I appreciate your
17 tolerance. Just at the -- or shall I?
18 "[Interpretation] You will now have the opportunity of assessing
19 whether or not my views are something that are -- is acceptable and all
20 right and something that the Assembly stands by, and for me what is
21 particularly important -- something that is particularly important for me
22 and backed up by the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina but by Yugoslavia
23 well. It's a political and historical equality for Bosnia-Herzegovina as
24 a reality."
25 [In English] So he opens this to questions about what he has just
1 said and asks for inquiries and input in a sense. And I'd like to go
2 down, if I could, one more page and point out that Dr. Karadzic was the
3 next speaker after these words were spoken. Now, I believe that is
4 actually on the next page at the top or -- I'm sorry. It's after this
5 speech. This speech goes on to page 7, 8, 9, and 10. So it's -- it will
6 be five pages down from where we are right now. And below the box that's
7 just been created, you see that Dr. Karadzic makes a brief speech, and he
8 corrects a quote that Mr. Izetbegovic had taken from an interview that
9 Dr. Karadzic had done with the Belgrade
10 mention of the words that he had just heard from Mr. Izetbegovic.
11 Would you like, Your Honour, to read - it's just about a
12 page - through that speech, or is my, perhaps, testimony to that --
13 JUDGE KWON: If necessary, Ms. Edgerton will take it up.
14 THE WITNESS: Okay.
15 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. That was precisely what I wanted to say, but I had nothing
18 against it because it's a fact that I always strove for having a federal
19 state and federal laws predominantly. That's what it says here. Thank
21 Mr. Donia, do you remember the agreement of the 18th of March?
22 And we'll come back to that later on, but tell me first, did that
23 agreement fulfil Izetbegovic's criterion as expressed here? Or rather,
24 two criteria that he set, an integral and sovereign Bosnia.
25 A. I'm sorry, what agreement of 18 March?
1 Q. The Lisbon
2 subscribed to it, that Bosnia
3 be kept, that it was integral and sovereign.
4 A. What you've characterised as the Lisbon Agreement, Dr. Karadzic,
5 was an agreement in principle that was to be the basis for further
6 negotiations, and all three national parties, represented by their
7 leaders, subscribed to the principles but were very careful not to
8 finalise the agreement, including you. You were very explicit that you
9 would not agree to anything that had not been signed, and this document
10 had not been signed.
11 So I would dispute that there was a final agreement on the
12 18th of March, 1992, and further point out that that is some 14 months,
13 13 months, after this -- these statements were made by -- by him and by
14 you in the Bosnian Assembly and that much had changed in that period of
15 time. Many other interim agreements in principle had been reached, many
16 of them had been breached and that the situation really was radically
17 altered, both in terms of the situation on the ground and the position of
18 the primary political participants.
19 Q. Mr. Donia, would you agree with me that two questions remain to
20 be addressed, the maps and the question of the army, on the
21 18th of March, that is. Did we agree that we would continue our
22 discussions about the maps to determine them more precisely, that the
23 basic map was adopted as a starting point, but that what remained was to
24 discuss the map and the question of the army?
25 A. The agreement was characterised at the time by you, by the
1 EC negotiators as an agreement in principle as to be the basis for
2 further negotiations. What specific issues were agreed upon and not
3 signed and what remained to be resolved, I don't know.
4 Q. But we proclaimed it publicly, that what remained to be done was
5 to define the maps and to resolve the question of the army as a
6 referendum question, that the referendum should confirm the agreement
7 reached. All the principles were adopted. All that remained to be done
8 was the map. The map was adopted as a basis but the issue of the army
9 was left to the end. And that was published, it was made public,
10 completely public?
11 A. Well, I'm sure there's documentation to the effect of what was
12 announced publicly, and there's plenty of documentation on the character
13 of the agreement in principle in the extensive discussions in the
14 11th Assembly -- the Bosnian Serb Assembly and in your own statements and
15 the statements of other leaders.
16 Q. Was the -- was the minutes -- were the minutes adopted in total
17 or just a part of it because this was a joint Assembly?
18 A. Are we back in 1991 now in -- in the Assembly that we're looking
20 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. I'm talking about this text that you and I have been reading.
23 JUDGE KWON: We're talking about a minute which is of 252 pages,
24 but our practice has been to admit it in its entirety. So you'd like to
25 replace this with the previous one which has been already admitted?
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know what has been admitted
2 so far. The part that I started to read, and Mr. Donia concluded, refers
3 to Mr. Izetbegovic. Of course, I have nothing against the entire minutes
4 be admitted into the file. If that is more convenient for the Chamber,
5 the part which refers to Mr. Izetbegovic's words, what he said.
6 JUDGE KWON: We'll admit it being marked for identification.
7 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, may I just offer something that might
8 assist --
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 MS. EDGERTON: -- the Trial Chamber. Subject to what
11 Dr. Karadzic, of course, and Dr. Donia say, the passage at which
12 President Izetbegovic begins speaking is at page 96 of this
13 65 ter number 06291, and it ends at page 105. And in terms of the
14 translation issue, perhaps this might assist in providing Your Honours
15 and my colleagues in the courtroom with the appropriate context to be
16 able to evaluate the discussion and not unduly burden anybody.
17 JUDGE KWON: And Mr. Karadzic's speech that followed.
18 MS. EDGERTON: Which I can check, but I think those are the two
19 pages that follow. So 106 and 107.
20 JUDGE KWON: I note it's Mr. Krajisnik's speech, albeit brief.
21 With that note, we'll admit it being marked for identification.
22 THE REGISTRAR: As MFI
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Can we now go back, Mr. Donia, to what you said before, that we
2 should establish the causes and the consequences and their mutual
3 relationship. To that effect, do you recall that in the period prior to
4 the elections and up to this moment, up to February 1991, we spoke about
5 communities or municipalities, about the need to set up new communities
6 of municipalities?
7 A. There -- yes. There was -- you and the party had discussed
8 communities of municipalities and establishing new communities of
9 municipalities prior to this speech, yes.
10 Q. Do you agree with me that that was based on the constitution?
11 A. There -- there is -- there is a part of this question I can't
12 answer, but there was a provision in the constitution of
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1974 that provided for communities of
14 municipalities to be established with the purpose of aggregating
15 municipalities for certain specific functions.
16 What I don't know is what legislation or other constitutional
17 provisions may have been involved in the creation of such communities and
18 municipalities, whether the republic Assembly had to agree to them,
19 whether the republican -- whether the republic Presidency had to agree to
20 them and what steps were required in order to establish these communities
21 of municipalities. In fact, a number of them existed by 1990, including,
22 significantly, the Banja Luka community of municipalities, which
23 incorporated 12 or 15 municipalities in and around Banja Luka.
24 Q. Thank you. Can we just clarify one thing. You know what the
25 local commune is, of course. Do you agree this is a smaller territorial
1 unit which is comprised within a municipality?
2 A. Yes. I think we can say the smallest administrative unit in the
3 republic, in fact, in most of Yugoslavia
4 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that a local commune can comprise
5 several villages, or a large village can comprise a number of local
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Thank you. Do you know what an "atar," which is a village area,
9 is? Is this the territory of a village?
10 A. I don't know.
11 Q. So a local commune can have a number of villages, and every
12 village has its own boundaries with their forest, their woodlands, their
13 meadows. Do you know that?
14 A. A couple questions there. A local commune can include a number
15 of villages. Normally, it did not. Normally, a village was a local
16 commune or "mjesna zajednica," but it could have more. And a large
17 village could consist of several "mjesna zajednica" or local communities.
18 Q. If we imagine the boundary of a village, and the territory is
19 called in our language an "atar," do you agree that during the
20 Communists, such a territory was, for the most part, socially owned
21 property in that period?
22 A. Yes, that's true. Socially owned, that kind of vague category of
23 land which was not owned by any individual or enterprise but belonged in
24 some sense to the state or to the -- administered often by the local
25 municipality. I concur with you.
1 Q. Thank you. That means that one area, village area, or atar,
2 belonged to that village or to that territorial unit. The socially owned
3 property belonging to that particular territorial unit. Namely, that the
4 villagers of another village were not allowed to fell wood in the atar,
5 or in the district, the area of another village.
6 A. I think that socially owned land, which accounted for probably
7 half, I think a little over half of all of Bosnia-Herzegovina, was indeed
8 socially owned. It was not owned by a village or a municipality or any
9 territorial unit but was defined as socially owned land which was then
10 under the administration, if you will, if those entities.
11 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that the Communist regime actually
12 acquired such social ownership of property by actually seizing,
13 appropriating private property, after the revolution?
14 A. There certainly was some of that, but this practice of common
15 lands which did not belong to any one person goes back centuries, and
16 existed in the Ottoman period in Bosnia, was a big factor in some of the
17 discussions about land reform in the Austro-Hungarian period, from 1878
18 to 1918, and also in the time of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia
19 matter of historical continuity, it had been there a long time, but there
20 were some seizures of property that took place in the five years after
22 Q. Thank you.
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can I just ask for 65 ter 18514.
24 That is the power-sharing criteria for power sharing between these three
25 parties. And can I also ask for a map of Bosnia-Herzegovina with
1 municipal boundaries drawn up. The number of the map is number 2.
2 JUDGE KWON: I think we haven't assigned the number for the
3 documents regarding criteria, so we'll give it number -- marking for
4 identification pending translation of the second page.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, Your Honour. That will be MFI D257.
6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Karadzic, for reminding that.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we get this map. My marks are
8 02, namely the second map from 0701 to 0703. That is the Karadzic maps
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Donia, until we see this -- these, do you agree that the
12 seats of communities of municipalities had administrative institutions,
13 such as the public auditing service, the tax administration, the security
14 services centre? In other words, that it was -- that they were states in
15 a nutshell?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Can you tell us what your concept, how you see the seat of
18 community of municipalities?
19 A. Well, they certainly had no -- none of the attributes of
20 sovereignty which would make them qualify as a state. I hope there's not
21 a translation problem here, but they were not states. They were
22 typically associations of municipalities created for specific purposes,
23 such as sewer systems and water and in some cases administrative
24 convenience of financial or administrative character. They could indeed
25 have public auditing service units which was actually a powerful
1 financial tool for directing monies. Money didn't pass anywhere in the
2 former Yugoslavia
3 the name "Public auditing service" is bit misleading. It's actually much
4 more powerful than just auditing. It's actually a -- almost like a
5 regional bank. So it could have some of those administrative
6 institutions, but it always was a creature of the municipalities that
7 made it up.
8 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. If I tell you that -- and I believe it that it is Article 52 of
11 the 1955 constitution, which hasn't changed, which said that
12 municipalities had the possibility to pool into municipality communities,
13 and one of those communes would usually be the seat of that community and
14 would contain all these institutions which you, too, have now listed. Do
15 you agree with that?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we please call up this map.
19 Perhaps it is map number 2, and the binder is 0701 to 0723 on e-court.
20 JUDGE KWON: We can't seem to find, locate, the 65 ter number. I
21 was told that it's time to take a break, and in the meantime we'll be
22 able to see the map through e-court. Twenty-five minutes.
23 --- Recess taken at 5.16 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 5.44 p.m.
25 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
2 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
3 Q. Mr. Donia, can I ask you to cast a glance at this map and to tell
4 us whether this is a map with the municipal boundaries of Bosnia
6 A. Yes, it is.
7 Q. Do you agree with me that the city of Sarajevo is drawn in as a
8 single entity without the boundaries of the city municipalities
10 A. Yes, that appears to be the case.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
12 JUDGE KWON: Microphone.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we scroll it up a bit, please.
14 And a bit more so that we can see Trebinje on the map. And slightly
15 more. Thank you.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Mr. Donia, in the southern-most part we have Trebinje, Ljubinje,
18 Bileca, Nevesinje, and Gacko municipalities; is that correct?
19 A. Yes, mm-hmm. Yes.
20 Q. Do you agree that these are municipalities with a marked Serbian
22 A. As -- as I recall, they all have Serbian majorities, yes.
23 Q. Do you remember that these are traditionally designated as
24 Eastern Herzegovina
25 A. Yes, they are.
1 Q. Do you agree that as part of Stolac Municipality
2 which is called Berkovici and which used to be a municipality?
3 A. No.
4 Q. You don't know that, or you deny it?
5 A. You asked me if I recalled. I do not recall.
6 Q. But if I tell you that Berkovici used to be a municipality and
7 was later annexed to Stolac, would you accept that?
8 A. No.
9 Q. So you are actually denying it.
10 A. I'm open to see evidence that that was the case and would welcome
11 doing so.
12 Q. Thank you. Does it sound sensible if I tell you that
13 Berkovici -- the development of Berkovici stopped altogether the moment
14 Berkovici was annexed to Stolac Municipality
15 A. I don't know that.
16 Q. Thank you. Are you familiar with the term "gerrymandering"?
17 That is from the American political lingo.
18 A. That's a term from American political corruption, yes.
19 Q. Yes, that is right. Thank you for the explanation. It's put
20 much better. Your formulation is much better. It consists of
21 manipulating electoral districts, constituencies, in order for a minority
22 party to win the elections and win power; right?
23 A. Not quite, no. The term "gerrymandering" comes from a governor,
24 Gerry of Massachusetts
25 districts in such a way to ensure his own re-election, and the district
1 that he drew to ensure his own re-election looked like a salamander on a
2 map, and so the term came to refer to efforts by an existing power holder
3 to assure re-election usually through creating some very odd-shaped
4 collection of electoral stations in order to marginalise or out-vote a
5 certain group of people.
6 Q. Thank you very much for this explanation. This is what Gerry
7 did, but the gerrymandering phenomenon can be applied to all such kinds
8 of manipulation, can it not?
9 A. No. It is specifically a manipulation to ensure re-election.
10 Q. Thank you. Do you know to which community of municipalities
11 these Eastern Herzegovina municipalities belong and where the seat is?
12 A. What period are you talking about?
13 Q. Before the 1990 elections.
14 A. No, I don't.
15 Q. Would it occur to you that it would be natural for Trebinje to be
16 that seat, which is a well-developed city with a developed industry and
17 would naturally be the seat of those municipalities?
18 A. Well, there might be a couple candidates amongst those
19 municipalities that you've mentioned to be the seat of a community of
20 municipalities. I don't know specifically which one was or if there was
22 Q. If I tell you that all these Serbian municipalities are
23 associated, are linked up, with Mostar as their seat, would it make sense
24 to you that these municipalities had reason for dissatisfaction, because
25 Mostar was rapidly developing at their expense?
1 A. You've characterised these as Serbian municipalities, and I
2 wouldn't accept that characterisation. They, in fact, all had mixed
3 populations. They did indeed have Serb majority populations, but the
4 towns, in particular, had quite diverse populations, at least most of
5 them did, and had their -- it was as a unit a somewhat distinctive
6 economic category or type of area which it was quite rural and fairly
7 rocky terrain, a lot of agricultural productivity in it.
8 I don't know why Mostar would be logical or illogical as a seat
9 of a community of associations that included these municipalities.
10 Mostar, of course, is the most important, largest city in this part of
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina. It's -- it had been at that time quite economically
12 developed, very mixed population in terms of both class and ethnicity, so
13 would be certainly a strong candidate to be a suitable centre for such a
14 community -- or association of municipalities.
15 Q. Is not New York
16 and Albany
17 a rapid pace and Trebinje be lagging behind? Do you believe that to be a
18 democratic gain, a democratic achievement?
19 A. I don't accept that Mostar was developing faster than Trebinje.
20 I don't have the numbers of or economic metrics to know that.
21 Q. Yes, I can live with that, but I should like to put the following
22 fact to you: These municipalities have a population which is over
23 80 per cent majority Serbian. Their development was totally slowed down,
24 not to say stopped, over a number of decades. Do you think that a seat
25 of financial power and of administrative power, of economic power,
1 investment power which was in Mostar, if it had been in Bileca or
2 Trebinje, would it have had an impact on the development of this entire
4 A. Well, that's a rather socialist way of thinking about it. I
5 really don't think that the issue of, let's say, putting the seat one
6 place or the other is not necessarily going to make an impact on the
7 development of the region. There very well could be that the most
8 financially and administratively developed seat would be the most
9 desirable, because it could take advantage of all the resources available
10 to a somewhat larger city in order to develop the entire region. So I
11 don't accept the premise that if you just plunked the seat of a community
12 of municipalities in a remote area that it would automatically lead to
13 economic development.
14 Q. Trebinje is not in a remote area. It is the centre of
16 developed at a slower pace than Mostar, as also had other regions in the
17 Neretva River
18 A. I'm saying I don't know. I don't have the -- I'm sure that's a
19 very knowable fact based on economic indicators. I don't have those
20 economic indicators at hand, nor do I have an active recollection of
21 looking at them and so I can't answer the question.
22 Q. Thank you. I hope that next week I will be able to show you
23 something, some of these things. Did you encircle on this map the
24 boundaries of these municipalities towards Trebinje -- or could you.
25 Could you. Could you please encircle on this map the boundaries of these
2 A. What? I'm sorry, what are you asking?
3 Q. Could you draw a circle round the Serb community of
4 municipalities moving towards Mostar. Just draw them in, mark them. The
5 boundaries of Gacko, Nevesinje, up to Mostar, those municipalities.
6 Circle them, to Stolac and so on.
7 A. I don't -- I haven't agreed that there was a community of
8 municipalities of Eastern Herzegovina. I have not seen evidence that
9 there was or when it was created or anything of the kind or what
10 municipalities made it up.
11 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, if that was your purpose, we can
12 see -- the Judges can see the map ourselves. We can see where Mostar is,
13 and we can see all the municipalities you referred to.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Yes, thank you, but do you agree that these municipalities belong
16 to the community of municipalities of Mostar? That's common knowledge.
17 It was generally known.
18 A. No, I don't.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, do you see the municipalities of Foca, Gorazde,
20 Cajnice, Rudo, Visegrad?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And do you agree that that's what we call Old or Ancient
24 Old Herzegovina
25 A. Yes.
1 Q. Do you know where the seat of this community of municipalities
3 A. I don't know the -- that there was a community of municipalities.
4 I don't know -- I know there were communities of municipalities prior to
5 1990. I know approximately which ones belong to the Banja Luka community
6 of municipalities, but exactly what municipalities were members of the
7 others and where their seats were, I don't know.
8 Q. If I tell you that the seat of this community of municipalities
9 was in Gorazde, which was predominantly Muslim, and not in Foca, which is
10 larger and more developed and which was populated by a Serb majority
11 until recently or an equal ratio of the population, what would you have
12 to say to that?
13 A. I'd want to see the documentation on its creation and see, in
14 fact, what the seat was.
15 Q. Well, you would have to know that. It's the subject of your
16 expert report. You must know that, because it's a question of the
17 political history of the Bosnian crisis. If in your report you object to
18 Karadzic's position whereby the municipalities were re-partitioned, then
19 you'd have to seek the reasons for that, why Karadzic was asking for
21 My case is that Gorazde developed in an accelerated fashion
22 compared to Foca, and especially Cajnice, which was became -- was
23 desperate, and Rudo too, because the seat of that community of
24 municipalities and all the institutions, political, economic, financial
25 power, was situated in Gorazde, and that's what I'm putting to you.
1 That's my case in this particular point, and that's why we asked for a
2 reorganisation of the municipalities based on the constitution.
3 Do you consider that -- do you not consider that you should have
4 checked out what it was that Karadzic was asking for if you objected to
5 his proposals? Shouldn't you have looked into the matter?
6 A. I think I, Dr. Karadzic, described your general critique of the
7 municipal structure. I think I described it fairly. I did not go into
8 the individual municipal situations other than mentioning, I think,
9 Ozren, which you mention numerous times in your speeches and articles and
11 I, frankly, have not heard you make this case before, and I am
12 not convinced it is the case that the seat of a community of
13 municipalities would far outstrip in development the other municipal
14 seats of municipalities that are a part of that community. First time
15 I've heard you make it and I would certainly need to be convinced that
16 that's the case. And I think to do that you would have to look at all
17 the communities of municipalities and see what happened to their seats
18 over several decades, because the thesis is not self-evident, not
19 self-evidently true that you would get a rapid economic growth of a
20 single administrative centre of such a relatively thin administrative
22 Q. Very well. We'll show that in due course and we'll come to
23 Ozren, too.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] But can we move the map down a bit
25 now, please.
1 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. Can you see where it says Srebrenica and Bratunac?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Now, Srebrenica and Bratunac, do they resemble a salamander?
5 A. Well, I don't know. That's -- that's a judgement call. I don't.
6 I don't see a salamander, no.
7 Q. Well, with respect to gerrymandering, you mentioned salamander,
8 and if I tell you that at the top of that horn you have Skelani, which
9 would have developed quite properly had they been given the territories
10 which belonged to them, and the municipalities of Srebrenica and Bratunac
11 were distorted in this way. Would you agree with that?
12 A. No.
13 Q. And do you know that Skelani was a municipality at one time?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Thank you. Now, do you see Lopare, Ugljevik? Do you know that's
16 where Mount Majevica
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Do you know that on Serb territory there was a municipality
19 called Priboj, and now we can't even find Priboj on the map.
20 A. What do you mean by "Serb territory"?
21 Q. Well, that area was populated 100 per cent by Serbs. That's what
22 I mean.
23 A. What area was that again?
24 Q. The -- well, Mount Majevica
25 towards Tuzla
1 A. Well, I don't know the exact composition of those municipalities
2 in 1991, but I do know that none of them were a hundred per cent Serb.
3 Q. Well, was Bosnia
4 A. Of course not.
5 Q. How, then, can we justify attempts to have Bosnia become
6 independent when it's not even 50 per cent Muslim, whereas here your
7 criterion is you're questioning Majevica as being 100 per cent Serb?
8 Priboj was almost 80 per cent Serb and the municipality was abolished.
9 A. Well, I note you've exaggerated the number or the percentage in
10 the first time you asked me the question. Now you've come down to say
11 it's almost 80 per cent. So your representations here are inconsistent.
12 Q. Well, what I'm going to say is that it's not essential how much
13 over 50 per cent, but the fact is that Priboj was a municipality, whereas
14 now I have to use a magnifying glass to find it. It's to the southern
15 reaches of Ugljevik, and it's died a natural death. There's nothing
16 there anymore. It's a very small place now because the municipal seat
17 was abolished and joined to the neighbouring municipalities.
18 So do you consider or do you think that the municipality never
19 existed at Majevica?
20 A. Do I think that the municipality never existed at Majevica? I
21 don't think you've even suggested there was a municipality at Majevica.
22 Q. The Priboj municipality on Mount Majevica
23 Now, do you agree, Mr. Donia, that municipalities in the world
24 range from 1.500 to 5.000 inhabitants as a general rule?
25 A. The municipalities in the world?
1 Q. In most countries in the world.
2 A. No. No.
3 Q. Do you agree that the average population of municipalities in the
4 Soviet Union and Yugoslavia
5 figure was less.
6 A. That's about the average in Bosnia. I -- or was the average
7 in -- in about 1991. I don't know about Soviet Union.
8 Q. Yes. It was around 40.000. And do you know that in other
9 countries the number of inhabitants is significantly lower? For example,
11 you aware of that? Is that something you know about?
12 JUDGE KWON: How is it assisting the Chamber, Mr. Karadzic?
13 Let's move on to your next question.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Well, you'll see,
15 Your Excellencies, that gerrymandering and the manipulation --
16 manipulations with the population and municipalities is a pre-eminently
17 political category and that that's what led to the crisis. But never
18 mind, let's move on.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Now, Mr. Donia, do you see the municipality of Bijeljina
21 Ugljevik, Lopare, Zvornik? Do you see those municipalities?
22 A. Zvornik, Lopare. I'm sorry, what was the other one? Bijeljina?
23 Q. Bijeljina and Ugljevik. Do you agree that Bijeljina, Ugljevik
24 and Lopare belong to Semberija and Majevica? Semberija and Majevica,
25 that general area.
1 A. If you're using the term geographically, yes, that would be the
3 Q. Do you know where their seat was, the community of
4 municipalities, I mean?
5 A. Well, again, I don't know the precise communities of
6 municipalities that existed prior to 1990. I know that not all
7 municipalities belonged to a community of municipalities, and I
8 furthermore don't know where their seats were.
9 Q. And what was the regional centre of these municipalities?
10 Perhaps you'll find it easier to answer that way. Do you agree that the
11 regional centre of these municipalities was Tuzla and not Bijeljina?
12 A. I don't know.
13 Q. And if I tell you that it was Tuzla and that Tuzla
14 accelerated development and that it wasn't Bijeljina and that Bijeljina
15 is just beginning to develop now, what would you have to say to that?
16 A. I think that's the case, but the reasons for the accelerated
17 development of Tuzla
18 the seat of a community of municipalities. To my knowledge, Tuzla
19 grew upon its salt deposits and the substantial industrialisation that
20 was put there, including the soda chemical plant and other facilities
21 that were developed in the municipality.
22 Q. And how do you now explain the fact that Bijeljina is flourishing
23 although it went through the war and sanctions and poverty, that suddenly
24 Bijeljina is flourishing and developing because it's now the regional
1 A. Well, I've been to Bijeljina but I saw it as actually having
2 developed in the socialist period a great deal. I wouldn't agree with
3 the characterisation. Again, it may be some numbers that -- some
4 economic metrics that can establish this, but it's a place that's grown
5 rather dramatically, I think, under socialism. In fact, that whole strip
6 along the Drina River
7 Q. And if I tell you that Bijeljina started developing after this
8 latest war, the civil war, our war, when it became a regional centre and
9 that everything is flourishing there, how else could you explain that but
10 to say that income from Bijeljina no longer goes to Tuzla?
11 A. Well, I think you're wrong about, really, the trajectory of
12 development throughout the socialist period. I understand that you have
13 plenty of reasons to be unhappy with Communists and Socialists, including
14 some very personal reasons, but I think you have to acknowledge that the
15 development of Bosnia-Herzegovina under socialism was enormous,
16 particularly in the first 30 years of -- of socialism, and that virtually
17 every city grew larger. The economy really prospered. Industrialisation
18 was widespread, population increased and became more literate. So those
19 are all simply facts of the era of economic development under socialism.
20 So I'd submit that you probably can't find much of a town that didn't at
21 one time or another prosper more so than it had in earlier decades under
23 Q. Do you consider that the development of Bosnia-Herzegovina was
24 regionally well balanced, and did you see in our platform the call for a
25 well-balanced regional development? That was one of the points in the
1 platform of the Serbian Democratic Party. Just take it one by one. Did
2 you notice in our programme or platform the call for equitable regional
3 development or well-balanced regional development?
4 A. Yes, I do recall that.
5 Q. Do you claim that a well-balanced regional development existed in
6 Bosnia-Herzegovina? Before these elections, I mean.
7 A. I think it depends on how you define the regions. The --
8 certainly the development in the Sarajevo
9 dramatic and the greatest. There were other areas that didn't
10 industrialise at the rate of Sarajevo
11 probably didn't industrialise at the rate Sarajevo did. But in general,
12 I think the -- I haven't seen evidence to suggest that regions, whole
13 regions, were dramatically backward relative to the rest of the republic.
14 I remember when the Banja Luka leadership started to organise the
15 community of municipalities of Bosanska Krajina. The principal promoter
16 of that project was Dr. Dusko Jaksic, who was then the director of the
17 economic institute in Banja Luka. As far as I know, he still is. And
18 when that political demand arose for -- to correct the backwardness of
19 Bosnian Krajina, he, who was the principal promoter of the idea, frankly
20 told interlocutors that there were no numbers to show that. So I think
21 it -- it remains in my mind to be established that there was this
22 discrimination against regions or backwardness of regions based on some
23 political criterion.
24 Q. Well, we'll come to that Mr. Donia, but do you see Gracanica,
25 Lukavac, Maglaj, Zavidovici, Banovici, and those two rivers there, to the
1 left is the River Bosna, passing through Maglaj, and to the right is
2 Braca, which goes from Lukavac, Gracanica, and they -- their confluence
3 is in Doboj.
4 A. Yes, I think we probably just lost everybody else in the room,
5 but I know what area you're speaking of, yes.
6 Q. Now, in between these two rivers, is Mount Ozren
7 those two rivers?
8 A. Yes, that's right.
9 Q. Now, do you know that up on Mount Ozren there was a municipality
10 at one time called Petrovo Selo?
11 A. No, I don't -- didn't know that.
12 Q. Do you know that that municipality was abolished and Ozren, which
13 was 100 per cent Serb, inhabited by Serbs, was divided up among the
14 neighbouring Muslim municipalities?
15 A. Well, I object to your characterisation of the neighbouring
16 municipalities as Muslim, and I don't know the administrative history of
17 that -- of the Ozren area prior to 1991.
18 Q. Thank you. What I'm trying to say, Mr. Donia, this is something
19 that every peasant there knows, namely, that their lives and development
20 virtually ceased when the municipality of Petrovo
21 they again have that municipality. Municipality of Petrovo
22 an area, were divided among the other municipalities in each of which the
23 Serbs became a national minority.
24 Did you know -- do you know why I'm talking about Ozren as a
25 paradigm, not as Ozren in its own right?
1 A. You're talking about Ozren as a paradigm? I'm -- what do you
2 mean by that? I'm not sure.
3 Q. What I'm saying, that a compact Serbian entity was abolished as a
4 municipality and was divided among the other municipalities, the adjacent
5 neighbouring municipalities, in which the Serbs became a minority.
6 A. Okay. Well, first of all, that's not gerrymandering because
7 there was no anticipation of elections at the time the administrative
8 boundaries were drawn. I take it what you have done is gerrymandering,
9 in the wartime period and immediately afterwards, to assure Serb parties
10 would -- would prevail in those areas.
11 The -- if you look at the distribution of Serb villages that I've
12 looked at around the -- just south of Doboj in that Ozren area, what you
13 get is indeed a serpentine kind of configuration, and to look at those
14 villages as a municipality would be contrary to the whole notion of a
15 municipality as it existed under socialism and which I explained a couple
16 of days ago, which was a municipality was to have a centre, a seat,
17 bearing the same name as the municipality. It was to be as economically
18 self-sufficient as possible. It would be surrounded by land that is
19 partly agricultural, partly simply socially owned land that would be
20 essentially free space and suburban villages, and the purpose of that
21 notion of a municipality was, in fact, geographic and economic. It was
22 designed to encourage economic development, and that is the level at
23 which economic development was encouraged under socialism.
24 The communities of municipalities were incidental to that
25 fundamental unit of analysis or administration which, as you know, became
1 a socio-political community in the definition of socialist-era
3 So I understand your -- your critique of -- and your use of Ozren
4 in particular as an example of this, but I do believe that if you
5 actually made a municipality out of Ozren, it would be largely ethnically
6 homogenous and would probably defeat the possibility of economic
7 development because it would be so geographically contorted and not have
8 the diversity that one would look for in a developing region like that.
9 Q. But you agree with me that in a democracy the people should have
10 been asked what it was that they wanted.
11 A. As a general principle, I would agree with that.
12 Q. Thank you. Can we take a look at Western Bosnia. You see
13 Bosanski Petrovac, Titov Drvar, Bosansko Grahovo, and Glamoc. Do you
14 know where the seat was, to which community of municipalities did
15 Bosanski Petrovac and Drvar belong?
16 A. Are you talking about the period before 1990? I don't know.
17 Q. Their seat was at Bihac, and those municipalities were
18 devastated. The people left. There was no industry. There was no
19 economy. The people abandoned the area. Do you believe me or should I
20 give you the figures?
21 A. Well, I'd love to see the figures. I do want to point out that
22 in this case one is dealing with an administrative centre that had been
23 an administrative centre for that part of Bosnia going back well over a
24 hundred years. So -- and the same would be true of -- of Mostar. When
25 the Austrian -- Austro-Hungarian administrators came in, they selected
1 basically the five or six largest towns to be administrative centres in
2 somewhat the same spirit as municipalities were later created under the
3 socialist government. So the -- again, the argument you're making here
4 is not to me at all self-evident, that purely dumping a -- making a place
5 an administrative centre would result in a flourishing economy or in
6 outstripping other areas.
7 Q. But, Mr. Donia, a million and a half Serbs are listening to this,
8 and three million Muslims and Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, they know
9 exactly what I'm talking about. Where there is the administrative centre
10 of a community of municipalities, there you have the economic power, the
11 money, the finance, the investments. Everything is there, and everything
12 from the pertaining municipalities go there.
13 Do you know that Glamoc and Bosansko Grahovo were linked up with
14 Livno, and that Glamoc and Bosansko Grahovo lagged behind tremendously in
15 their development whereas Bosansko Grahovo did not -- sorry, whereas
16 Livno did not.
17 A. I think you've just overestimated our listening and watching
18 audience by about 4.5 million, but the economic development of these
19 areas I -- I don't pretend to know the relative economic development of
20 each, and I'm not convinced that the, let's say, differential development
21 of one city to another is based on whether it's the seat of a
22 municipality -- community of municipalities or not.
23 Q. Do you agree that before the Second World War, Kalinovik had
24 25.000 inhabitants, and before this war 5.000 inhabitants? Kalinovik is
25 a predominantly Serb municipality between Foca and Kalinovik.
1 A. I'm not familiar with either -- the population at either time.
2 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's correction: Between Foca and
3 Nevesinje. Sorry.
4 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
5 Q. Mr. Donia, you have stated your position vis-a-vis our political
6 view that communities of municipalities were -- are just and detrimental
7 [as interpreted] from the economic standpoint to us, that the motives of
8 those who did this were ethnocentric. Do you agree with me that you had
9 to know these things that I'm asking you about in order to draw such a
10 conclusion, namely, that the Serbs were making some demands about
11 municipality boundaries which actually were not justified? And we see
12 that those boundaries changed, and they changed because of the moves made
13 by the Communists.
14 A. I think there's about five questions there, and I'm going to try
15 and sort them out.
16 You state that I expressed the viewpoint that the motives of
17 those who did this were ethnocentric. I did not make that statement.
18 I have looked --
19 Q. Sorry, I was not precise myself. You -- you said that our demand
20 encroaching upon the municipalities or the communities of municipalities
21 was some sort of a politically subversive action, something which was not
22 desirable and was not justified. Is that correct?
23 A. No, I don't think that's correct. I noted your critique of the
24 municipal structure and stated that -- I mean, I've looked at Sarajevo
25 more than anyplace else, and I also looked at Bosnian Krajina to some
1 degree, and based on looking at those areas, I did not see an
2 ethno-national factor in the determinations of municipal boundaries under
3 socialism, and I think I indicated that in the main, or for all practical
4 purposes or something like that, the drawing of municipal boundaries was
5 not driven by ethnicity, and I stand by that. I think the municipal
6 boundaries that we're looking at today were basically created with the
7 intent of having rational economic development units within
8 geographically manageable administrative areas. And there were other
9 factors that went into those boundaries.
10 The fact of the matter is that developing 109 municipalities is
11 an extraordinary undertaking for a government, any government, and is
12 probably about the lowest unit that one could realistically expect to
13 have an impact on in terms of economic development. And even then, a lot
14 of those -- you can go into any one of these municipalities even today
15 and see factories, some of them abandoned, some of them very small, that
16 were put there during the socialist period to try to contribute to the
17 economic self-sufficiency of municipalities.
18 I would point out that you are looking at this from a strictly
19 national viewpoint, strictly ethnic viewpoint, and you're tying those
20 proposals to your claims of Serb land, and that's fine. I am not saying
21 that's illegal to advocate or even to ultimately achieve. I'm not making
22 that judgement, but I am pointing out that it is linked to your
23 understanding of what Serb land is and that the municipality redesign
24 that you have in mind would, in fact, be gerrymandering in creating solid
25 Serb areas that would be overwhelmingly Serbian composition, leaving the
1 rest aside.
2 Q. Thank you very much. Thank you for saying that this is a legal
3 and legitimate thing, but this is not how I read it in your paper. But
4 let me ask you this: Who would actually have endured it if
5 municipality -- the municipality of Berkovici continued to exist? To
6 whose detriment would that be if the municipality of Petrovo
7 continued to exist, and other municipalities? Who would that -- who
8 would be -- have been hurt by that? Why would it have been detrimental
9 to anyone?
10 A. I take it, then, you're proposing to re-establish those now
11 long-gone municipalities? Is that what you're proposing?
12 Q. Well, they were established. Berkovici exist again. Petrovo
13 exists once more. And the people, the community, now has its income, and
14 they continue to develop. They can have their own school now. They can
15 have their own development, which was arrested when those municipalities
16 were abolished.
17 Now, do you believe, justified or not, that in socialism it was
18 very important where the SDK, the social accounting service, was, where
19 the bank was, where the Municipal Committee was, the inter-municipal
20 committee of the League of Communists was seated, where the
21 self-management community of interest was? You know what the SIZ, the
22 self-management community of interest, was, for health, for education and
23 so on. So all these financial institutions which had their hands on the
24 income of the entire community. Do you agree that under socialism, that
25 was concentrated in the seats of these communities of municipalities?
1 A. No.
2 Q. Well, where, then, were these institutions if not in this
3 community of municipalities and their seats?
4 A. Well, many of them were municipal-level institutions, and I think
5 you're attributing too much grandeur to the communities of municipalities
6 that existed under socialism.
7 Q. And why then -- why did this become important -- we wanted to
8 redesign the community of municipalities?
9 A. Well, it became important because you adopted it as a tool to
10 weaken, cripple, and eventually disable the government of
11 Bosnia-Herzegovina. You used it as a state-building tool for the
12 rudiments of a new Bosnian Serb polity with the intent of superseding
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina as it existed in 1991.
14 Q. Do you mean to say that we intended to create a Serb state in
17 A. No, I don't mean to say that.
18 Q. But at the time, we had criticisms of regional development. Do
19 you accept that our motive was regional development, which in the Serb
20 lands was lagging behind because the incomes of those regions were placed
21 in the hands of the centres which did not belong to those areas but
22 exploited them. Simply speaking, those areas were exploited.
23 A. Dr. Karadzic, the things that you did in the early 1990s set the
24 economic development of Bosnia
25 You destroyed the infrastructure that it was dependent upon, and to
1 suggest that this now has turned into a situation of economic prosperity
2 after the war in Republika Srpska is to me just an implausible assertion.
3 Q. Ah, well, Mr. Donia, you have now expanded my task. I now have
4 this question to ask you: Did we, in 1990, even think of
5 regionalisation? Did it enter our head at all?
6 A. Well, I don't know. The first activities in favour of
7 regionalisation I can see on -- in mid-January 1991. So whether this
8 occurred to you as a -- as a project, that is, to form regional
9 associations based on the SDS
10 1990, I don't know.
11 Q. But let's stick to what all of us can know, and that is that our
12 pre-election campaign was that the boundaries of the municipalities and
13 the communities of municipalities should be adapted to the wishes and
14 needs of the democratically -- the democratic intentions of the
15 population living there and the population who wanted to live better,
16 have a better life, and that there was no question of any autonomous
17 regions in Bosnia-Herzegovina; isn't that right?
18 A. Again, I note several questions here. Certainly the proposal to
19 redraw municipal boundaries was a part of the pre-election campaign. I
20 didn't see much evidence that it was linked to the economic dimension in
21 the course of the campaign. You clearly had one or two points in your
22 platform that were contributed or devoted to economic development, but
23 very little of that then actually found its way beyond maybe the first
24 few weeks of the campaign and was pretty well forgotten about after the
25 campaign was over.
1 I --
2 Q. Thank you. Since this map has not got any markings on it we
3 won't be tendering. May we have D255 next, please, which was already an
4 exhibit, just to show you that Mr. Izetbegovic had set out before him in
5 our platform -- well, that the SDA never had any criticism to make about
6 those activities of ours.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we have D255 next, please.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. So that we can establish, Mr. Donia, when it was that the Serbs
10 found the need to create autonomous regions and when they found the need
11 to create Republika Srpska, because without them we cannot make these
12 sweeping statements.
13 Now, look at the last paragraph there:
14 "Everywhere, especially here in Bosnia-Herzegovina, we were for
15 the most part devoted to the system which seemed to have been established
16 to ensure our national annihilation. In the time of the greatest
17 devotion to the regime and the system, the greatest impoverishment
18 occurred precisely in those devoted Serbian areas, and Serbian areas
19 loyal to the system were the very ones to suffer economic and cultural
20 decline and large-scale migration. Several hundred thousand Serbs left
21 Bosnia and Herzegovina in this period, and Bosnia and Herzegovina
22 left without their progeny. Territorial organisation broke down the
23 natural Serbian entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Serbian
24 nation was reduced to an inferior economic, demographic, and political
1 This is an extract taken from a speech, the introductory speech
2 at the founding Assembly, my speech, and nobody had anything to say about
3 that because it can be borne up -- it can be substantiated by any
4 economic analysis. Do you agree with that, Mr. Donia?
5 A. I think I noted earlier that my concern with your speech at the
6 founding Assembly was the degree to which you had already formulated this
7 notion of a Serb people as a homogenous whole and coherent population
8 group, and this is what I had in mind. The notion that Serbs were the
9 victim of the socialist period just to me is counter intuitive. It
10 misstates the whole character of the socialist government and its -- its
11 intentions and its policies. I think that actually one later in the
12 campaign more commonly heard the proposition that the government had, in
13 fact, retarded the economic development of all three peoples in that
14 period when you and others were holding the joint rallies amongst the
15 various parties.
16 So I -- I think you're expressing here a kernel of an idea that
17 developed much later and much more, let's say, convincingly, if you
18 will -- not convincingly but tied to a specific programme which was
19 designed to remedy this, but that specific programme was, in fact, based
20 on a single party and mono-ethnic initiative that took wing in 1991. It
21 wasn't, to my mind, there as a specific proposal or initiative in the
22 time of the electoral campaign or even in the few weeks after the
23 election, but it did have its origins in -- in early 1991.
24 Q. Mr. Donia, do you consider that the Serb people did not exist as
25 an entity but that I tried to create it? Is that what you're saying?
1 A. I wouldn't say you tried to create it. I'd say you looked at it
2 as a kind of national revival. You were trying to raise the
3 consciousness, the national consciousness of those people who could
4 potentially think of themselves as Serbs, and perhaps for one -- one or
5 another reason describe their identity as hybrid or as Yugoslav or as
6 something else, and you wanted those people to think of themselves as
7 Serbs and to behave as Serb nationalists at -- which meant embracing the
8 ideals and programme of the SDS
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May we see page 3 of this same
10 document, please.
11 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
12 Q. Mr. Donia, do you think that the Serbs in Bosnia should have been
13 something other than the Serbs in Yugoslavia?
14 A. Well, I think they were different from Serbs east of the Drina
15 certain limited ways. Their situation was different. They were involved
16 in the lives of other republics and had specific ideals that appealed to
17 them, although I think in general the Serb -- let's say, Serb national
18 leaders shared many ideals and many -- and Serbs share the same basic
19 allegiance to their national identity. But there were some differences,
20 and I think -- I personally find those very interesting. I think the --
21 one of them was that Serbs west of the Drina seem to be more oriented to
22 the Serb experience in the Second World War than did Serbs in Serbia
24 Q. And do you agree that the Serbs from Nis and the Serbs from
25 Novi Sad
2 A. Yes, I think you could think of them as, if you will,
3 subcommunities of a broader national community of people who shared the
4 Serb identity in Yugoslavia
5 Q. What I'm concerned about, Mr. Donia, is this: You seem to
6 consider that we generated something in Bosnia-Herzegovina which we did
7 not have the right to. Do a million and a half Serbs in
8 Bosnia-Herzegovina have the right to fight for their economic -- well,
9 for their equality, equality with others, for their economic prosperity,
10 cultural identity, and national identity? Do they -- this collective of
11 a million and a half people, do they have their rights, the rights to do
13 A. I think all people have the rights that you basically described,
14 all citizens of any polity should have those rights. They do not have
15 the right to -- should not have the right to eliminate those of other
16 groups from territories that they claim or claim huge blocks of territory
17 which are to be devoid of those that are currently living there.
18 Q. Are you making a judgement, then? Are you saying that the Serbs
19 in Bosnia-Herzegovina wanted to do that, wanted to do it that way?
20 A. I'm simply saying that they have a lot of rights, should have
21 those rights, along with other citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They
22 should have those same rights as other citizens have, but that when it
23 comes to destroying other -- the basis of other groups, that they should
24 not have those rights, and neither should any another group.
25 Q. Well, all right. We'll come to that. But are you suggesting
1 that's what the Serbs did? Is that your position, that the Serbs did
2 what you said they did and that which they should not have done?
3 A. I mean, talking about the period that -- let me make clear.
4 Talking about the period that we're talking about, which is prior to
5 January 1991, absolutely not. I am not making that suggestion. I think
6 if you get into 1992, much of that happened.
7 Q. We will clarify that in due course, but, Mr. Donia, do you think
8 that the formation of the Croatian Democratic Union, the Croatian Party
9 of Rights, the Party of Democratic Action, did it have some other root
10 but the ethnic root, which you do not allow for the Serbs?
11 A. No.
12 Q. So all those parties which started out in 1990, mostly in the
13 west, had -- well, the main parties that won the elections both in
15 ethno-democratic stream, motive.
16 A. The -- there was, as I discussed yesterday, to me a fluorescence
17 of democratic national activity going back to very late 1989, when it
18 became evident that multi-party elections would be held in Bosnia
20 fluorescence, if you will, took place in support of the formation of
21 national parties. Some of it was non-national. Some of it could even be
22 called anti-national, but it was a product of the arrival of democracy.
23 And so people formed parties by the dozens and hundreds in the former
25 as one could find in a -- in a newly emerging democracy.
1 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that the Croatian Democratic Union as a
2 predominantly national party in Croatia
3 other parties? It had a major victory. That's my first question. Yes
4 or no. That will suffice.
5 A. Wiped out other parties? No. It did not wipe out other parties.
6 It had a victory which was actually less than an absolute majority in the
7 elections because of the -- but won the majority of seats because of the
8 first-past-the-post system that had been voted into effect by the
9 outgoing Communist-dominated legislature.
10 Q. And the Croatian voters had an alternative. They had others to
11 vote for, but they opted for the HDZ. Is that right?
12 A. I think I just said that they -- the HDZ did not receive a
13 majority of the votes.
14 Q. I think that they won most of the seats, but I think we also
15 agree that the Party of Democratic Action was formed before the Serbian
16 Democratic Party. Isn't that right?
17 A. Well, I indicated that if you look -- if you -- if the measure
18 that you'd like to use to recognise parties as having organised is their
19 founding Assemblies, that the Party of Democratic Action was formed in --
20 on May 26 and the SDS
21 that one could use. I think that's a reasonable one to use, and if
22 you'll agree that that's the reasonable one to use, then it would be the
23 case that the SDA was formed before the SDS.
24 Q. Can anybody in the world claim that the Serbs in
25 Bosnia-Herzegovina would have formed the Serbian Democratic Party had all
1 that not been preceded by the superior or significant victory of the HDZ
2 in Croatia
3 Democratic Action's formation? Do you think that the SDS would ever have
4 been formed had these others not previously been formed? Do you have a
5 shred of evidence to prove that that would not have happened?
6 A. I think you're asking me to prove a negative, but I would point
7 out, as I did yesterday, that there was a great deal of organising
8 activity going on, at least starting with the first month of 1990, that
9 eventually culminated in the organisation of the SDS. I think that the
10 specific form that the SDS
11 One was the recognition by yourself and others that to form the party as
12 an affiliate of a party in a neighbouring republic was ill-advised. The
13 HDZ, of course, did that, and I think was not a particularly successful
14 thing to do.
15 Also, your own hesitancy to get involved in -- as president of
16 the party certainly played a part in the specific form that the SDS
17 eventually took, and perhaps significantly the advice of Mr. Cosic and
18 others which kept the SDS
19 in Bosnia
20 the party that Mr. -- Dr. Raskovic was heading in Croatia.
21 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, we'll adjourn there for today and for
22 this week. So over the weekend plan and think about your -- the
23 remaining of your cross-examination and plan your conduct so as to be
24 able to pose more precise and focused questions, thereby shortening your
25 overall cross-examination time.
1 On Monday we'll be hearing -- we will be sitting in the morning
2 in Courtroom I, but given that there will be a Judges' Plenary at 1.00,
3 so we will adjourn at 10 to 1.00. So I'm telling you for the purpose of
4 your planning. And if necessary, we'll go back -- we'll go into private
5 session and then we can discuss it in the absence of the witness, but
6 there's a motion regarding a witness who will be coming end of this
7 month, and now I'm wondering whether the Defence is minded to respond to
8 that motion or -- or it is minded to object to it? Can I know in
10 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. Actually, Dr. Karadzic and I
11 haven't yet had a chance to discuss that, but we can let you know
13 JUDGE KWON: Could you do that in writing tomorrow?
14 MR. ROBINSON: Yes.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you very much. I wish you all have a good
16 rest over the weekend. Monday, 9.00.
17 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.05 p.m.
18 to be reconvened on Monday, the 7th day
19 of June, 2010, at 9.00 a.m.