1 Thursday, 14 July 2011
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.01 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, Doctor. Good morning, everyone.
7 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good morning, Excellencies. Good
9 morning to everybody.
10 WITNESS: CHRISTIAN NIELSEN [Resumed]
11 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic: [Continued]
12 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Dr. Nielsen.
13 A. [Interpretation] Good morning. I wish you a productive morning.
14 We cannot rest until we still have work to do.
15 Q. Thank you. We were talking about two unauthorised documents or
16 perhaps even three documents. You established similarities between that
17 document and the document dated 19 December 1991; is that correct?
18 A. [In English] I take it you are referring to the two unauthored
19 documents on the decentralisation of internal affairs and, yes, to some
20 extent in my report I discuss similarities between those two documents
21 and the December 19th document.
22 Q. Thank you. You are familiar with the Defence thesis that those
23 were benevolent proposals that came from the top echelons. Do you have
24 anything to say with this regard in view of the fact that a
25 recommendation in those documents was that our structures should adhere
1 to the JNA and to resubordinate themselves to the JNA?
2 A. I became familiar with that thesis through one of your earlier
3 questions during my testimony, and I believe that I spoke of my view of
4 that thesis. Again, it is clear that the Serbs working in the then-joint
5 Bosnian MUP in the second half of 1991 viewed the JNA and indeed all
6 organs of the federal Yugoslav government as organs that were -- to which
7 they had an affiliation and were predisposed and from whom they could
8 seek assistance if that became necessary in light of a deteriorating
9 security situation. So it is quite logical with -- to me and I agree
10 with you that they -- these documents contemplate co-operation between
11 the police and the JNA.
12 Q. Thank you. With regard to the organigramme, did you find the
13 document that was final and that was finally adopted? Do we have a
14 document in lieu of that draft document?
15 A. I'm not sure which particular document you are referring to and
16 whether I found a final version of that document. All of the documents
17 to which I have just referred are, as far as I can see, draft documents.
18 These two on the decentralisation or possibility of decentralisation of
19 affairs in Bosnia-Herzegovina. However, as I note in the report, for
20 example on page 21, one of these documents pushes for the establishment
21 of a new CSB in Trebinje and that was indeed something that came about
22 through the adoption of a new Law on Internal Affairs by the Bosnian
23 Serbs subsequently. That is one of many examples from these documents
24 where I see that the contemplations contained in those documents later
25 become reality.
1 Q. Thank you. However, do you agree with me that final documents
2 should have more weight than drafts, because any draft is subject to
4 A. Absolutely. I agree that final versions of these documents would
5 have more weight than drafts. Unfortunately, those final versions, if
6 they exist, were not available. I did not find them in the extensive
7 searches I made of archives related to the Bosnian Serb police.
8 Q. Thank you. Do you agree with me that you said that on the 16th
9 of April, Minister Subotic proclaimed a state of an imminent threat of
10 war? Do you agree that the Muslim side did that on the 8th of April,
11 which was eight days earlier?
12 A. Yes. I note both the 8th of April decision as well as, I
13 believe, Subotic's decision or relevant decisions of the RS government on
14 the proclamation of an imminent threat of war in paragraphs 189 and 190
15 of my report.
16 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that the Muslim side -- or, rather,
17 that Alija Izetbegovic proclaimed general mobilisation on the 4th of
18 April, contrary to the wishes of Professor Plavsic and
19 Professor Koljevic, the Serbian members of the Assembly who opposed that
21 A. Yes, I am aware of that fact and I note in my report that partly
22 out of -- as a result of that disagreement, Plavsic and Koljevic resigned
23 and that is in footnote 188.
24 Q. Thank you. Do you agree with me that when general mobilisation
25 is proclaimed one has to assume that there is an enemy out there? What
1 did Mr. Izetbegovic assume who his enemy was? Do you agree that that was
2 aimed primarily against the Bosnian Serbs and only later against the
4 A. I agree that a general mobilisation normally takes place when
5 there is some kind of security threat, internal or external, that gives
6 cause for such a mobilisation. As to who Mr. Izetbegovic assumed his
7 enemy was, I believe that is a question that is best addressed to those
8 persons who were around Mr. Izetbegovic at that period in time since he
9 is no longer available to answer that question. And I agree that at this
10 point in time, as far as I know and not being an expert on the Bosnian
11 Muslim political agenda at this time, I agree that Mr. Izetbegovic, as
12 far as I know at this point, still had hope that the JNA would be a
13 factor of stability in Bosnia and Herzegovina, whereas I believe he
14 regarded some Bosnian Serb formations such as paramilitary formations
15 with a more critical eye.
16 THE INTERPRETER: Mr. Karadzic is kindly asked to come closer to
17 the microphone.
18 JUDGE KWON: Could you come closer to the microphone.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation] The microphone will come closer
20 to me in this particular instance. We have a saying, a proverb to that
21 effect in our language. Do you remember that Mr. Izetbegovic
22 proclaimed the state of war on the 20th or the 22nd of June? I believe
23 that it was on the 20th of June. He proclaimed a state of war, and
24 then he marked his enemies. In addition to the Bosnian Serbs, those
25 were also Serbia and Montenegro. Those two states were marked as
1 his enemies.
2 A. That is a subject which, in some respects, transcends my
3 expertise. As far as I recall and I do not consider myself an expert on
4 that subject, I do believe you're correct in stating that a state of war
5 was proclaimed by Izetbegovic in June. However, I thought that I
6 recalled that Mr. Izetbegovic was not declaring war against the Bosnian
7 Serbs per se and that indeed there were at least some pronouncements
8 during that period by the Bosnian government that Serbs would be welcome
9 to assist them in defending Bosnia and Herzegovina as indeed some Serbs,
10 for example, Jovan Divjak, did.
11 Q. An exception that actually proves the rule.
12 A. I would agree that Mr. Divjak is a very exceptional person.
13 Q. An exceptional example as well; right?
14 A. In every sense of the word.
15 Q. You were an investigator from 2002 to 2004. You know that
16 investigations also involved the cases of Izetbegovic and Tudjman; right?
17 A. I will briefly respond in Serbian. [Interpretation] I believe
18 that here there is a -- it is very important to make a distinction
19 between an investigator and a researcher. I've always been a researcher,
20 not an investigator, and I know that there were investigations carried
21 out against Izetbegovic and Tudjman, but I personally did not participate
22 in those investigations either as an analyst or a researcher.
23 Q. Thank you. However, you did participate in interviewing some of
24 the witnesses; right?
25 A. [In English] Yes. I participated in interviewing some witnesses.
1 Q. You also read Stanisic's statement, and Stanisic provided his
2 statement as a suspect; right?
3 A. That is correct. I -- well, I should say I did not read
4 Mico Stanisic's statement. I watched it on video because I was provided
5 by the Prosecution in that case with the DVDs of his suspect interview
6 prior to my testimony in that case, and I was very content to see that
7 Mico Stanisic had read and agreed with significant portions of my report.
8 Q. Thank you. Did you review the materials relative to the
9 responsibility of Izetbegovic and President Tudjman?
10 A. I was certainly able to see some of the materials that were being
11 used by the researchers who were working on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian
12 Croat cases, particularly where such documents discussed, for example,
13 co-operation between the Bosnian Serbs and the Bosnian Croats during the
14 war in various instances. However, I did not review at any length that
15 documentation, as my full-time job was reviewing the very large
16 quantities of information related to the Bosnian Serb police and the
17 police in Serbia.
18 Q. You studied the police in Serbia. Did you observe major
19 antagonisms and mutual slandering between the federal SUP and the MUP of
21 A. Yes, I studied that subject. I am familiar with those major
22 antagonisms which culminated in the forcible takeover of the
23 Federal Secretariat for Internal Affairs by the MUP of Serbia in the fall
24 of, I believe, 1992.
25 Q. And you will also agree that one group speaks of the other, one
1 should take those words with some reservations.
2 A. I agree, and that is an excellent point. That is precisely why
3 the vast majority of the documents that I cite in my report are documents
4 produced by the Bosnian Serbs themselves so that I was not relying on
5 potentially slanderous statements made by Bosnian Muslims or Bosnian
6 Croats about the Bosnian Serbs, rather, I was interested in seeing how
7 the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the RS looked seen with their own
9 Q. Thank you. You did not study the Muslim and Croat MUP. Did any
10 of your colleagues study the conduct, the structure, and the essence of
11 the MUP of what we call the Muslim-Croat federation? In other words, the
12 remainder of the MUP of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
13 A. Unfortunately, every man has only one life, and I could only
14 study a limited amount of material, and so to my great regret I did not
15 have time to study also the other MUPs in the former Yugoslavia, and
16 precisely for that reason we had that division of labour to which I've
17 earlier referred in the leadership research team. And indeed, I had
18 colleagues who studied the structure and the essence of the organs of
19 internal affairs, both in the entity known as Herceg-Bosna, as well as in
20 the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the other entities or
21 Ministries of Internal Affairs outside the territory of Bosnia and
22 Herzegovina, for example Croatian MUP, RSK MUP, et cetera.
23 Q. Thank you. Could you perhaps tell us who studied the Muslim part
24 of the MUP in the same way you did with the Serbian part of the MUP, and
25 have you ever seen the resulting materials?
1 A. Should I respond, Your Honour?
2 JUDGE KWON: How is this relevant?
3 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellency, if we describe the
4 actions of only one boxer in the ring and the other is invisible, then
5 the one whom we are describing looks ridiculous. We should actually see
6 what the other side did and how that reflected on the activities of the
7 Serbian side.
8 JUDGE KWON: Doctor, you're not minded, you may not. I'll leave
9 it in your hands.
10 THE WITNESS: Well, I will again state that there were analysts
11 who were working at the same time as I was, employed by the leadership
12 research team and who were tasked to look at the MUP of Bosnia and
13 Herzegovina and also tasked to look at the other MUPs. If -- if you
14 would like and if the Chamber feels that it's relevant, I can put names
15 to the analysts who were thus employed.
16 JUDGE KWON: No. Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, we don't think that that's
18 relevant, and the witness doesn't need to do that.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please continue, Mr. Karadzic.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. The Defence will
21 request all the materials directly from the Prosecutor.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation].
23 Q. Since we don't have much time, Dr. Nielsen, we now have to draw
24 your attention, we have to focus on the public security station's
25 segment. I'm sure you'll agree with me that was the lowest-ranking
1 organisational police unit in our regions; right?
2 A. With great respect, please allow me to supplement your knowledge
3 of the MUP. I would note that the public security station is the
4 municipal level of the police in the organs of internal affairs, and
5 there actually is another tier of the police hierarchy below the public
6 security station, namely the police stations, "stanica milicije," that
7 were at the local level, at the village level, often.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 JUDGE KWON: Do you have that abbreviation for that police
10 station? "Stanica milicije".
11 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. During the period from November
12 1990 until the end of 1993, such police stations, at least in areas
13 controlled by the Bosnian Serbs, were known as "stanice milicije" or SM
14 as an abbreviation. After that, and I think this is important since
15 there's a period of this case that goes into 1994 and 1995, they changed
16 the word "milicija" to "policija" and therefore these became "policijska
17 stanica," abbreviated PS.
18 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. Thank you. Can we now look at 65 ter 15699 in e-court.
21 Do you remember if you've ever seen this document? This was
22 issued by the public security station in the municipality Centar in
23 Sarajevo. The second paragraph describes a paramilitary formation which
24 was brought by a local man from Apatin in Vojvodina. They styled
25 themselves Chetniks and then they started bringing in people. They even
1 brought in and arrested Mr. Petrovic, who was the president of the
2 municipality and that was on the 6th of August, 1992.
3 A. Yes, I am familiar with this document, and it is exemplary of a
4 trend of similar incidents during this period.
5 Q. The public security station wrote to the ministry -- or, rather,
6 to the Romanija Birac CSB to inform them what was going on. Can we go to
7 the following page. This document should have a translation, I believe.
8 JUDGE KWON: I'm afraid not. It's coming, yes.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. This is the first page. It says here that an individual went to
12 Apatin in Vojvodina and brought back some men. Then they established
13 themselves as a unit and then they started acting of their own will and
14 the MUP informs their superiors that their conduct is out of order;
16 A. Yes, that's correct. I would point out this is being filed by
17 SJB Centar Sarajevo pursuant to an order issued on the 25th of July,
18 1992, which is this very period when the MUP is trying to crack down
19 on such paramilitary formations.
20 Q. Thank you. Next page, please. Here we see that there are some
21 percentages relating to the MUP, which indicate that the manpower has not
22 been reached. It only has 30 per cent of the active-duty officers, and
23 even such a low percentage are being asked to take part in combat.
24 Would you agree that 30 per cent of manpower strength is not even
25 enough to maintain law and order, let alone to send them to fight on the
1 front line.
2 A. That was definitely the subject of the constant complaints of
3 this SJB as well as other SJBs at the time, yes.
4 Q. Thank you. Now, look at this page in English, and in Serbian it
5 says that problems are caused by members -- individual members of the
6 reserve force, and it says now that guarding of prisoners, expelled
7 persons, et cetera. They said that they managed to reach an agreement
8 with the SJB Vogosca and Pale to hand over such persons to them to be
9 guarded. Is that right?
10 A. Yes. That is another significant topic dealt with in this
11 document. I would note that all of the subjects are being dealt with
12 pursuant to the 11 July 1992 meeting of the leadership of the RS MUP in
14 Q. Can we have the next page in both languages, please, the last
15 paragraph in Serbian where it reads that there are no military judiciary
16 organs, and there are no department of military police or military
17 prosecutors' offices. In English that's the second paragraph from the
18 top. And before that, on the very top it says that it is difficult to
19 maintain law and order, to control crime rates, to set up joint control
20 and check-points for the prevention of looting, et cetera. And you
21 couldn't expect 30 per cent of the police officers to do more than that,
22 would you?
23 A. That is the conclusion of the police, yes.
24 Q. Thank you.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D1558, Your Honours.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. I'm going to skip some elements that are not encompassed by the
5 indictment due to the lack of time. Can we now briefly look at 52881. I
6 believe you also made reference to this document?
7 JUDGE KWON: Number again?
8 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's P281 -- 2881, or 65 ter 8106.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. Do you recall this document?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. If you agree, it seems that they are talking here about 54
13 criminal reports filed against Serbs, which means that 70 people were
14 charged and that we have among them returnees, nine of them. There are
15 12 juveniles, of which 12 are Muslim, four are Roma, and a little bit
16 down there you see that there are charges against violent crimes and
17 sexual assaults.
18 THE INTERPRETER: Could Mr. Karadzic please slow down when citing
19 figures. Thank you.
20 JUDGE KWON: They couldn't follow. Please slow down when you
21 cite figures.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. I apologise.
23 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. So on page 1 it says that reports were filed for a total of 78
25 crimes. Seventy people were involved. Nine of them are returnees, 12 of
1 them are juveniles, of which 12 are Muslim and 4 are Roma, which should
2 make a total of 16.
3 Do you agree that this breakdown shows that there were returnees
4 already and that they are causing problems and that of the 70 criminal
5 reports filed, 16 are against other ethnicities, whereas the remaining
6 ones are against the Serbs?
7 A. I agree that that is what the document states. I would also
8 point out that statistics that are being collected and collated and
9 published during this period should be taken with a grain of salt because
10 particularly for persons of Muslim and Croat ethnicity, the police
11 documentation also shows that very considerable numbers of them were
12 being detained without any criminal complaints, and therefore statistics
13 that are solely focused on criminal complaints or reports only show us
14 part of the picture of what the police is engaged in during this period.
15 Q. Thank you. Then I would ask for the time to be allocated to the
16 Prosecution to be allocated to me instead, because I'm going to ask you
17 about this. So we have a fact that cannot be disputed, that we have 54
18 Serbs who were charged and only 16 others.
19 A. I agree that this is what the document states.
20 Q. Thank you. You said in your statement that by mid-June only six
21 non-Serbs, mainly Muslims, remained in the MUP. Did you mean by that
22 that there were six of them in the MUP headquarters, or did you have the
23 entire structure of the MUP of Republika Srpska in mind?
24 A. The document that I cite, and I'm trying to locate it right now,
25 left me with the clear impression that that figure of six non-Serbs who
1 were employed as of that point in time in the RS Ministry of Internal
2 Affairs was a figure for the ministry as a whole and not for a particular
3 regional centre or municipal police station.
4 Q. Thank you. However, in the Stanisic and Zupljanin case, on page
5 5535, 26th of January, 2010, you accepted that at least another 140
6 employees, non-Serb employees, were in the MUP as a whole. Do you agree
7 that this shouldn't be a final number? Do you recall that testimony?
8 26th of January, 2010, page 5535.
9 A. Yes. Now that you mention it, I do vaguely recall that exchange
10 during my testimony in Stanisic and Zupljanin. I would again state that
11 I was operating at the time with the knowledge that was in the documents
12 that I was able to review, and as you point out, I corrected my view on
13 that point in light of documents I believe produced by the Defence in the
14 other case.
15 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that you saw for yourself and you
16 confirmed that in your statements and your reports that Zupljanin
17 permanently tried to preserve the multi-ethnic nature of the MUP in the
18 region of Banja Luka?
19 A. I agree as I did during my testimony during -- or in Stanisic and
20 Zupljanin that there are documents, a number of documents in which
21 Zupljanin tried, or at least asserted that he was trying to preserve the
22 multi-ethnic nature of the MUP in the region of CSB Banja Luka. However,
23 as I also note extensively in my report and in my testimony in Stanisic
24 and Zupljanin, the overwhelming bulk of documentation from the area of
25 CSB Banja Luka shows that that multi-ethnic nature was not preserved and
1 indeed many of the persons subordinate to Mr. Zupljanin were actively
2 engaged in preventing police officers of Muslim and Croat ethnicity from
3 remaining in the MUP at that time, and I deal with that on pages 55 and
4 subsequently of my report.
5 Q. If we have time, we'll get back to this.
6 1D3631 in e-court. If necessary, can we please rotate the page.
7 I believe we don't need a translation. There is a translation, though,
8 but probably this will be sufficient since you can read the Cyrillic
10 Is this a payroll list for August 1992, which says that only 50
11 per cent of salaries are payable? It says, "Authorised employees, former
12 employees," and it says, Husein Rahmanovic, a Muslim; Saban Mujkic, a
13 Muslim; Hadzan Bardak, a Muslim; Vehid Alihodzic, Muslim.
14 Do you agree that all of these people that appear on this first
15 page are all Muslims? And we also have another name, Husein Rahmanovic,
16 the fourth from the top whose name is not underlined?
17 A. A couple of points. I agree this appears to be a payroll list
18 for August 1992. I do not necessarily see that it is a police payroll.
19 I would note it also says that these are old employees. "Zastare
20 radnike," it indicates at the top, whatever that may mean. I would then
21 also very briefly note for the Court's information that the reference to
22 the document stating that only six Muslim employees could be found in all
23 of RS MUP is in paragraph 208 of my report. And specifically with
24 respect to your previous question on CSB Banja Luka and the multi-ethnic
25 character of the police in that area, I note in paragraph 195 that a
1 report of CSB Banja Luka filed in August 1992 stated that all members of
2 non-Serbian ethnicity had left the police and, in fact, a team of RS MUP
3 that visited the public security station in Banja Luka said that the few
4 remaining Bosnian Muslim employees had been put on leave. No one knew
5 what to do with them.
6 Q. Next page, please, so that we can see the stamp of Bijeljina MUP.
7 This is the stamp.
8 JUDGE KWON: Can you go back to the first page? I wonder whether
9 you answered the question whether all the names on this page are Muslims.
10 THE WITNESS: I apologise, Your Honour. The answer to that
11 question is there are a number of names on this list that appear to be
12 those of Muslims. There are also names of persons who are, it appears,
13 of Serbian ethnicity.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. But those four, Husein, Saban, Hadzan, and Vehid, are all Muslims;
16 right? The fourth name, the fifth name, the tenth and the eleventh name.
17 A. I agree that those are all Muslim names and I would note that
18 three of those four names are underlined.
19 Q. Thank you. Can we look at the stamp, and then we'll move to the
20 next page.
21 Republika Srpska, Ministry of the Interior, Bijeljina CSB;
23 A. Actually, my reading of it is that it says Centre of Public
24 Security in Bijeljina, which would indicate that this document would have
25 to be -- or at least the stamp on the document is from after January
1 1994. [Interpretation] Public security centres and such centres did not
2 exist back in 1992.
3 Q. But this is August 1992. I don't know if it is a public security
4 station or -- or a centre. So we have public and state security, and
5 this refers to public security sector that these people worked in.
6 A. The word that I see here is "centre" and then "public security."
7 This is what I see.
8 Q. Thank you. Can we have the next page, please.
9 Mulasalihovic, Dzevdet; Muhamed Krainovic. They're all Muslims
10 as well, would you agree?
11 A. [In English] yes, I agree, and I would again note that both
12 Muhamed and Dzevdet are underlined.
13 Q. Can we move two pages forward, please.
14 Esref Aljic; Hrustem Hrustanbegovic [phoen]; Petar Bekter, probably
15 a Croat; and Halid Halilic; and Mustafa Hamidovic. So we have four
16 Muslims and one Croat on this list --
17 A. [Overlapping speakers].
18 Q. -- do you agree?
19 JUDGE KWON: Did you say "yes"?
20 THE WITNESS: I agree.
21 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
22 Q. Can we move now four pages forward.
23 Do you agree that Nermina Uzunic is a Muslim woman;
24 Maida Arapovic; Radica Muhamedbegovic could be a Serb married to a
25 Muslim, and that these are again Muslim names; right?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Nermina, Maida, and Radica are all females, probably working in
3 the administration department; right?
4 A. I agree. RS MUP was not an equal opportunity work-force as
5 regards gender.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can this be admitted.
7 But briefly can we show the English version for the parties.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we have been following. This will be admitted.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D1559, Your Honours.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Can we now look at 65 ter 05672. Can we have the previous page
12 in Serbian, please.
13 Do you agree that here in the English -- can we have page 1 in
14 the Serbian, please. And the next page in English.
15 Please look where it says:
16 "During 1992, between the 1st of January and the 20th of
17 December, 1992, in the area of Banja Luka Public Security Station, the
18 total of 107 violent crimes have been registered, 90 of which have been
19 solved, which makes 84.1 per cent."
20 Have you ever seen this report before?
21 A. Yes, I agree that that is what the document states, and yes, I
22 have seen this document previously.
23 Q. There is 12 juveniles among those 20, et cetera.
24 Can we look at the next page in Serbian so that we can see the
1 Look at the table, and the last paragraph which reads that
2 regardless of the inter-ethnic conflicts, as far as the perpetrators and
3 the victims of violent crimes are concerned, it corresponds to the
4 make-up of the population, ethnic make-up of the population, and it says
5 that most often the attackers and victims are of the same ethnicity. The
6 most numerous among them are Serbs, 74 of them, actually, which is 73 per
7 cent, 8 Croats, and 19 Muslims. The similar situation is among victims:
8 Of a total of 122 victims, 69 were Serbs, which makes 58 per cent, 16
9 Croats, et cetera. You have seen this document?
10 A. Yes. As previously noted, I have seen this document.
11 Q. Would you say that 84 per cent of solved cases during wartime
12 could be described as a quite remarkable achievement by the civilian
14 A. It is certainly a very high percentage. However, as I also noted
15 this morning with respect to a similar document, I as an analyst take all
16 such statistics, both the total incidence of crimes and the distribution
17 of perpetrators and victims during this period, with a rather enormous
18 grain of salt, because there are a lot of things that are changing, and
19 as the police themselves admit in other documents, a lot of crime that is
20 not being documented, as well as persons who are being detained without
21 being charged. So this document, however thorough it may appear at first
22 glance, paints only part of larger picture.
23 Q. Can we have the next page in English so that the Chamber and the
24 Prosecution can look at these figures, although you can see them in this
25 table. But do you agree that on page 1 there is a remark that this is an
1 official secret which is strictly confidential for -- only for the eyes
2 of the minister, so it's not intended for public use?
3 Next page, please.
4 So we have numbers here. So the Serbs constitute the largest
5 number of both perpetrators and victims. Slightly more of them are Muslim,
6 and the Croats constitute the lowest number, which exactly reflects the
7 ethnic make-up of the population. Here it says that in most cases, both
8 the perpetrators and the victims are Serbs, for example, which says that
9 in most cases we have people committing crimes within their own ethnic
11 Now let's look at page 1 so that we can verify that this was an
12 official secret and a strictly confidential document.
13 A. I agree that this document is a strictly confidential document
14 that was, as you say, not produced for the media, but, rather, produced
15 for the internal consumption of employees and managers of the Ministry of
16 Internal Affairs. I would again point out that when we talk about
17 anything reflecting the ethnic make-up of the population during this
18 period, it is important to remember that the ethnic composition of the
19 population in Banja Luka, as in so many other municipalities during this
20 period, was not static but was rapidly changing due to the war.
21 Q. Thank you.
22 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted.
23 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D1560, Your Honours.
25 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
1 Q. Can we now see 65 ter 06732. Do you agree that this report was
2 drafted based on a decision of the CSB Banja Luka, dated 14 August. The
3 commission had inspected public security stations in Prijedor,
4 Bosanski Novi, and Sanski Most and a report was compiled. Reference is
5 made to collection centres in the first paragraph. The document
6 originates from Bosanski Novi and the collection centre in question is
7 also Bosanski Novi. In the middle part of the first paragraph we read
9 These activities did not have the desired effect on the voluntary
10 relinquishment of arms and apart from that, during the night of 10 May,
11 1992, in the village of Blagaj Rijeka, according to the report of a
12 military police patrol an attack was mounted upon it. These events
13 provoked a series of attacks on the areas and villages with majority
14 Muslim populations. Thus on 24 May 1992, the entire population from the
15 villages in the area of Dolina, Japra, Japra Valley was accommodated in
16 the central part of Blagaj Japra. Towards the end of the first paragraph,
17 it says Territorial Defence units or combat units of the JNA participated
18 in the -- those battles. It says here all these attacks were carried out
19 by armed and uniformed persons who self-organised or members of
20 Territorial Defence units or combat units of the JNA but members or
21 employees of the Bosanski Novi public security station did not take part
22 in these attacks. Do you remember this report?
23 A. Yes, I have reviewed this document.
24 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'm sorry to interrupt Mr. Karadzic
1 but this report from the Bosanski Novi SJB is contained within the
2 Defence exhibit D00470, which is the bigger report about Sanski Most,
3 Bosanski Novi and Prijedor, so I don't know whether we want to be going
4 to the exhibit so that we don't have a duplication of documents.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Should we upload the 447 and take a
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 MS. SUTHERLAND: It's 470 -- D470, I'm sorry.
9 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
10 Q. D470, yes. That's probably that. Can we go to the following
12 MS. SUTHERLAND: It's on page 17 of the English and page 13 of
13 the B/C/S.
14 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could please all
15 unnecessary microphones be switched off. Thank you.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. This was a description of what was going on. It says here that
18 uncontrolled groups and units. And then can we go to the following page
19 in Serbian. No. This is not the same, no. This is not the same in the
20 Serbian version. This is not an identical document.
21 The English version seems to be identical, but the Serbian is
23 Can we also look at the following English page. Maybe we will be
24 able to get our bearings. This is Sanski Most, what we see in Serbian.
25 Can we get the next English page. Okay.
1 Do you agree that from the 2nd of June, 1992, the forces beyond
2 control retaliated against the Muslims and attacked their property?
3 Three hundred persons, mostly of Muslim ethnicity were brought in.
4 They -- most of them were of military age, and they were accommodated in
5 a collection centre that was disbanded on the 5th of June. Some 17
6 people who were considered to be of security interest were detained on
7 the premises of the military police, whereas the others were allowed to
8 go home.
9 Do you remember this report?
10 A. Yes.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'm sorry. I -- it's on page 23 of
12 this document, the B/C/S, for the Bosanski Novi. The -- in my haste, I
13 saw Bosanski Novi, but that was the actual commissioner's report about
14 Novi, but the SJB report is on page 23.
15 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Now, this is okay. We can see the document. Can we now look at
19 two pages further ahead.
20 Do you remember, Dr. Nielsen, that the military and the police
21 were arguing on who's supposed to guard the evacuated population, who is
22 supposed to guard those who were arrested, and what about -- and who was
23 supposed to guard those who were detained? There was an argument between
24 the two institutions about that; right?
25 A. Yes. That was the subject of protracted disagreement between the
1 army and the police, and it was one of the topics discussed at length at
2 the 11 July 1992 meeting in Belgrade.
3 Q. Do you agree that the police wanted to guard only those that were
4 being investigated, those that were possibly subject to criminal
5 proceedings, and the police mainly succeeded in that attempt? They were
6 also of the opinion that the military should guard prisoners of war.
7 A. I agree that that is what the police wanted to do. However,
8 until approximately the end of August 1992, they were unsuccessful in
9 restricting themselves to that narrower type of activity, but they did
10 certainly push for that starting in the second half of July and going
11 into August. I think I've referred elsewhere to them trying to divest
12 themselves of the business of operating or guarding detention facilities.
13 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that our language makes a distinction
14 between a person who is arrested and the person who is detained, that a
15 person who is arrested is subject possibly to criminal proceedings,
16 whereas a detainee or a prisoner of war is somebody who was captured
17 during fighting a -- and does not necessarily have to be subject to
18 criminal proceedings?
19 A. [Previous translation continues] ... I agree that that
20 distinction exists.
21 Q. So if we find a document containing the word "prisoner," we
22 should investigate whether that prisoner is a possible subject to
23 criminal proceedings or a prisoner of war. In other words, that a
24 distinction should be made between a detainee, meaning a prisoner of war,
25 and a prisoner.
1 A. I agree that there is a difference between a prisoner of war and
2 a prisoner such as the type of person who might be incarcerated in a
3 penal institution, and there is a difference which is also reflected in
4 the police documentation between prisoners or prisoners of war and those
5 who are merely detained. I would point out that as so many other
6 aspects, and we discussed this yesterday, the police were not always
7 extremely attentive to precision in terminology in their own documents.
8 JUDGE KWON: Just for the record, your answer to the previous
9 question was in the positive?
10 THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honour. That distinction exists in the
11 Serbian language.
12 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
13 Q. Thank you. Do you agree that Keraterm and Omarska were
14 investigation centres, and wherever the police stood guard, one would
15 also find investigators, investigating judges, because those were the
16 places where investigations and interviews were taking place, and the
17 triage of those who were detained there. Manjaca, on the other hand, was
18 a prisoner of war camp that was established by the former JNA even before
19 the war in Bosnia started?
20 A. I agree that Manjaca was a prisoner of war camp and that's what I
21 call it in paragraph 288 of my report. I also agree that it was a
22 different from Keraterm, Trnopolje, and Omarska. Whereas Manjaca was
23 operated by the army of the RS, the VRS, the other facilities were
24 primarily operated by the police. In Omarska's case, pursuant to the
25 orders of the Crisis Staff in Prijedor. And I would also agree that the
1 police characterised Omarska and Keraterm not necessarily as
2 investigation centres. Sometimes they called them reception centres,
3 "prihvatni centri," but I would note that the interrogation of persons in
4 all facilities often was conducted through teams consisting of military,
5 public security, and national security officials as indicated in
6 paragraph 288.
7 Q. Thank you. Did you notice that, for example, after those
8 investigative actions, in Prijedor from Omarska and Keraterm people were
9 released because they did not pose a security threat? Fifty-nine per
10 cent were released and 41 were forwarded to Manjaca as prisoners of war.
11 A. I am not familiar with that precise figure. I would note that in
12 paragraph 289 of my report, a number of these facilities is dealt with
13 and the police statistics show that 8.660 informational interviews had
14 been conducted with 5.740 persons during this period of the summer of
15 1992. However, only four criminal complaints were filed based on these.
16 I also do not know where the persons to whom you refer as being
17 released from Omarska and Keraterm were released to. In any case, I
18 believe they were not permitted to return to their previous residences.
19 Q. Well, Dr. Nielsen, we have proof that they themselves wanted to
20 go to Trnopolje because they thought that they would feel safe there.
21 They did not want to return home, because they couldn't get police
22 protection there. There simply was not enough police officers. Do you
23 know that Trnopolje was a camp established by prisoners themselves?
24 A. That description of Trnopolje does not conform to the
25 descriptions of Trnopolje that I find in the police documentation. I
1 also do not have the information from the documentation that I examined
2 to be able to conclude or agree with you that prisoners -- or, excuse me,
3 detainees who had been in Omarska and Keraterm voluntarily went to
4 Trnopolje. I do, however, have information in the report, including, for
5 example, reports by Vinko Kondic, who was the chief of police in Kljuc,
6 stating that the atmosphere in his and other municipalities in Bosnian
7 Krajina was such that Muslims who tried to return to their own homes were
8 not safe and were in many cases attacked.
9 Q. Can we now see 65 ter 05440. I have to skip quite a number of
10 documents unless I'm given more time in the next session. Maybe this is
11 food for thought. Maybe the next session could be split between the
12 Prosecutor and Defence.
13 I have to deal with the special unit, because you yourself
14 mentioned that unit in your report.
15 Are you familiar with this document issued on the 6th of May,
16 1992? And in this document a reference is made to a special line-up
17 involving a newly established detachment of special purpose police.
18 A. I assume that you are referring -- well, actually, I'm not sure
19 whether you're referring to the unit led by Karisik or whether you're
20 referring to the unit in CSB Banja Luka where, indeed, on the favourite
21 holiday of the police, Security Day, there was such a parade, in which I
22 believe you and other leaders of the Bosnian Serb leadership were in
24 Q. The day before that there was an Assembly session where I took my
25 duties. That was on the 12th of May. Do you remember that?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Can we go to the following page. We are interested in what the
3 objectives of that event were.
4 In English, I suppose we have to go a page further ahead, and in
5 Serbian, it is the last page.
6 It says here:
7 "I draw your attention to the expectations from this event, which
8 is to present our forces and the determination of the police to preserve
9 public peace and order, in the current very complex situation. It is
10 necessary that you make these preparations with utmost
11 responsibility ...," and so on and so forth.
12 Do you agree that the main task given to this unit was to
13 preserve public peace and order? Right?
14 A. Yes, I agree that that was the main task given to this unit,
15 which was somewhat ironic given that documentation by the police from
16 around the same period, as I note in -- or statements by the police in
17 the same period, as I note in paragraph 224, indicated that the chief of
18 the sector for crime in CSB Banja Luka was aware that that unit, which
19 had paramilitary origins, included some persons who may have committed
20 criminal acts.
21 Q. Very well. In the course of 1992, they were established and
22 disbanded. That's what we established yesterday, that they were
23 disbanded for the reasons explained by yourself, because it -- it was
24 impossible to trust the legal conduct of those people.
25 A. Yes, that's correct. This unit which was given the main task of
1 preserving public peace and order was, in fact, disbanded in August 1992,
2 precisely because its conduct was not contributing to the preservation of
3 public peace and order, but, rather, producing a contrary effect, in the
4 view of the Bosnian Serb Ministry of Internal Affairs.
5 Q. Thank you. Do you remember that Stojan Zupljanin participated in
6 the event and said that he was proud that many Muslims and Croats had
7 remained with us and that 50.000 citizens of Banja Luka applauded him by
8 way of supporting that multi-ethnic composition of the force? We saw the
9 clip here, and we -- it was admitted into evidence.
10 A. I am not familiar with that particular clip, but, yes, I
11 certainly am familiar with the fact that Stojan Zupljanin participated in
12 that event and spoke of the security situation in Bosnian Krajina and
13 that he, as I noted previously, at this point was making public
14 statements asserting that the purpose of the police in the CSB Banja Luka
15 region would be to maintain representation for all the ethnic communities
16 of Bosnian Krajina. And he also, as I note in paragraph 194, at around
17 this same time insisted that he wanted to keep a national representation
18 in the police, that is, proportionate to the national structure of the
19 population in those municipalities.
20 Q. Thank you.
21 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
23 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit D1561, Your Honours.
24 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
25 Q. Can we now see 65 ter 05537.
1 Do you agree that this document was issued on the 21st of July?
2 It is a report on some unknown people presenting themselves in front of
3 Dusan Djukic's house, which at the time was inhabited by the family of
4 Amir Durgutovic. The house was attacked. Amir fled. They opened fire
5 after him. After that, Amir Durgutovic, a Muslim, found an official ID
6 of a member of the special unit and took it to the public security
7 station in Banja Luka and reported the incident and also the men in
9 Can we go to the following page?
10 It says here that there were four men involved, members of the
11 detachment for special purposes, and a criminal report was filed against
12 all of them. Is that correct?
13 A. Yes. I agree this is one of a number of incidents where we see
14 that persons of Bosnian Serb ethnicity who were harbouring and protecting
15 persons of Muslim ethnicity, for example, were themselves subjected to
16 attacks or assaults, unfortunately, in some cases, as in the present
17 case, by members of RS MUP. In this case, members of the Special Police
18 detachment of CSB Banja Luka, which was subordinate to Zupljanin. A
19 number of such incidents took place, which led, as you note, to criminal
20 complaints against these persons, and as I deal with it in paragraph 226
21 of my report, when two members of this unit were finally arrested, the
22 unit in fact launched a -- basically, an armed assault against the prison
23 in Banja Luka, threatening that they would actually attack the prison if
24 the members of that unit were not arrested -- or, excuse me, released.
25 This is an incident which contributed to the tension between
1 Tutus and Zupljanin, because Tutus felt that Zupljanin was taking the
2 side of those officers who had been arrested by the police.
3 Q. However, soon thereafter, two or three weeks after this incident,
4 the unit was disbanded; right?
5 A. That is correct, although a number of the personnel who had been
6 suspected of engaging in criminal activity during their period of
7 employment for the CSB Banja Luka Special Police Unit continued to work
8 in the RS MUP. Indeed, some of them were promoted, such as Ljuban Ecim
9 who occupied several positions in the National Security Service of the
11 Q. However, we established yesterday that part of the campaign
12 against Ljuban Ecim was slander, gossip, Serbia's favourite pastime;
14 A. Again, I do not wish to agree with you about what Serbia's
15 favourite -- or the Serbs' favourite pastime is. I would hope it would
16 be tennis now. But I would state that as regards this incident,
17 certainly Vladimir Tutus whom, as you know, is, himself, a Serb, he
18 complained that such incidents were damaging the rule of law in the RS
19 and, as I note in paragraph 226, he stated specifically with respect to
20 such incidents and I quote, "The state cannot be built on violence."
21 As for Mr. Ecim, I think his subsequent activities, including his
22 very large role in narcotics trafficking in the Balkans speaks for
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, I note the time. It's time to take a
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Please reconsider sharing the next
2 session with the Prosecution. Can I get part of the time that the
3 Prosecution needed so that I can deal at least with a few more topics?
4 And I kindly ask that this document be admitted.
5 JUDGE KWON: We'll admit this.
6 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit D1562, Your Honours.
7 JUDGE KWON: And the Chamber will give you --
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE KWON: A quarter of an hour to conclude your
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
12 JUDGE KWON: We will resume at five past 11.00.
13 --- Recess taken at 10.33 a.m.
14 --- On resuming at 11.06 a.m.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
16 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
17 Q. Thank you. Can we briefly have a look at 65 ter 5534. 05534. I
18 think it's what we had already. Actually, I thought it was somewhat
19 different. Well, all right. Let us just remind ourselves of this. It's
20 been admitted.
21 Committed a crime. On the 21st this criminal report is being
22 written up, and the centre of security services is being informed. It's
23 the public security station that is informing the security services
24 centre, and since this has already been admitted, can we have
25 65 ter 1595. Let's just draw your attention to the dates. Let us all
1 pay attention to the dates. This is the 21st of July. 65 ter 1595. Can
2 we have that?
3 JUDGE KWON: Just a second. 65 ter 5540 is identical to 5534?
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: No, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE KWON: You said 5534. What was uploaded was 5540.
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes. This is a new document now.
7 Yes. This one hasn't been admitted.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation].
9 Q. So do you agree -- ah-ha. I see. 1595, this is what we see in
10 Serbian now --
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, just before the break, Mr. Karadzic
12 took the witness to 05537, and that was admitted as D1562. He then
13 called up 05534 and we thought that was the same document as the previous
14 one, but it's in fact different.
15 JUDGE KWON: Why don't we upload 5534 first, let us see what ...
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As I look at the Serbian version,
17 it seems to be what we already had.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes. It is the Prosecution Exhibit P2770.
19 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Can we now have
20 65 ter 1595.
21 THE REGISTRAR: This is Exhibit D1534, Your Honours.
22 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
23 Q. Do you agree that in the first paragraph here it says already on
24 the 27th of July, that is to say, six days after what had happened, the
25 minister issued an order to disband these units, all of these units, that
1 belonged to the public security stations here, and --
2 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, you dealt with it yesterday, and we
3 admitted it.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but I would like to say:
5 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
6 Q. Do you agree, Dr. Nielsen, you mentioned that during the
7 examination-in-chief, do you agree that this does not mean that the
8 proceedings were stopped?
9 A. Proceedings against whom?
10 Q. It means that the units were disbanded. They were resubordinated
11 to the army. They were sent to the army. However, proceedings against
12 the perpetrators of crimes were not halted or stayed in that way; right?
13 A. It is the case that the proceedings were not abandoned. However,
14 as I pointed out yesterday, and as has been confirmed to me repeatedly by
15 my very close colleagues in the RS MUP, most of such -- of -- of these
16 proceedings against police officers languished in various desk drawers
17 for the duration of the war and only afterwards became the process of
18 vigorous prosecution.
19 Q. Thank you. Now, in view of the time we have, I would like to ask
20 you the following: You mentioned that Muslims in Banja Luka were being
21 dismissed and that they left the police and so on.
22 Do you remember that all of these recommendations were actually
23 made orally for their own safety and nothing was done in writing to
24 dismiss them unless they left the territory and stopped coming to work?
25 You spoke about that on page 38 of the examination-in-chief.
1 A. This is a subject that I deal with at length in my report. I
2 note that members of the police in areas that came under the control of
3 the RS MUP were ordered to sign or swear solemn oaths to the MUP. In
4 many cases, Muslims and Croats did not wish to take those oaths. In some
5 cases, they were not even allowed to take such oaths.
6 I'm not aware of the fact that the police of Croat or Muslim
7 ethnicity in the RS MUP voluntarily left based on oral recommendations
8 that that was for their own safety. I don't find a reflection of that in
9 the documentation. And as I note again in paragraph 195, certainly in
10 Banja Luka Public Security Station, the few remaining Bosnian Muslim
11 employees were put on leave because no one knew what to do with them.
12 This seems to contradict assertions made by Zupljanin and others that
13 Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats would be welcome in the ranks of the RS
15 Q. Dr. Nielsen, did you see a single dismissal in writing except in
16 cases when people were away for a long time, which meant that a
17 particular policeman had left the area? Did you see a single notice that
18 was made on ethnic grounds?
19 A. It is in fact the case that I do not recall seeing notices of
20 termination of employment that were solely made on ethnic grounds. The
21 dramatic change in the ethnic demographics of the police that took place
22 in the RS MUP in this period was largely accomplished without such
23 termination orders being issued. There were many other ways in which it
24 was made known to Muslims and Croats that they were not welcome as
25 employees in the RS MUP.
1 Q. However, we have no proof of that; right? It's an assumption.
2 A. I disagree with that. I would again, for example, point out that
3 there were municipalities in which Muslims and Croats were not permitted
4 to swear the solemn oath. Even in those isolated cases, and they were
5 isolated cases in which they actually did wish to swear an oath to a
6 Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs. And I would point out even with
7 the caveat of the document that you raised earlier that certainly the RS
8 MUP's own documentation when taken in its totality clearly reflects that
9 Muslims and Croats were largely removed from the ranks of the
10 Ministry of Internal Affairs of the RS.
11 Q. We don't have time, Dr. Nielsen, to prove that, so we have to
12 challenge it this way. However, we'll deal with it some other time.
13 On page 49, you deal with the topic of Tajfun or Sigma. I am
14 going to put something to you and you are going to agree or disagree with
15 that assumption. Tajfun was an intelligence group in the JNA that got in
16 touch with us, and since before the war the JNA -- the JNA was hostile
17 towards us. We accepted their information; right?
18 A. In the interests of time, I will agree with that statement, yes.
19 Q. Thank you. Further on during the first months of the war, they
20 continued working as an intelligence service, and when they started
21 bringing people into custody, I ordered Mr. Stanisic to integrate them in
22 state security but not as a group but as individuals, rather. Do you
23 have that information?
24 A. I agree with the rough outlines of that statement, yes.
25 Q. Afterwards, they were reluctant to be resubordinated, and they
1 continued to exist as a group. Afterwards, Tomo Kovac suggested that
2 they be arrested and that was approved, and indeed they were arrested;
4 A. Yes, it is correct that the members of Tajfun were reluctant to
5 be resubordinated, and yes, it is correct that - and now we're well past
6 1992 - they were the subject of attempts to arrest and disband that
8 Q. That's right. Now, furthermore, do you agree that already in
9 April or perhaps even before that, in 1994, I think -- or, actually,
10 1993, they sent anonymous information to the state security of Serbia and
11 ultimately they deceived the state security of Serbia when they said that
12 I had given them approval to co-operate with the DB of Serbia?
13 A. Well, I'm very thankful as an analyst to get this additional
14 information from you, because it was, indeed, my conjecture based on the
15 documentation available to me about Tajfun that certainly they did send
16 anonymous information to the State Security Service of Serbia, much of
17 which cast the activities of various organs of the Republika Srpska in a
18 critical or negative light, and I was always very suspicious because of
19 the efforts made by the RS leadership to eliminate Tajfun, that members
20 of that same group should have obtained your permission to once again
21 engage in similar activities under the auspices of the State Security
22 Service of Serbia, although they of course, as you say, deceived Belgrade
23 in stating that they had received such authorisation.
24 Q. Now, it's just a question of the sequence of events. My
25 proposition is that first we asked for them to be resubordinated. Then
1 we asked for them to be banned, and then we ordered their arrest, and it
2 was only then that they started writing about this alleged corruption of
3 the leadership of Republika Srpska. So first we banned them, and then
4 they started slandering us in Serbia. And do you remember that that was
5 at the time when our relations with the leadership, the political
6 leadership, of Serbia were very chilled and ultimately broken off
8 A. I certainly agree that the writings of this group, the dispatches
9 of this group, which in large part focussed on allegations of corruption
10 in the leadership of Republika Srpska and in the families of various
11 members of the leadership of Republika Srpska was unacceptable -- or were
12 unacceptable to the RS leadership, and that, would say, strengthened the
13 resolve of the RS leadership to ban this organisation. It may also have
14 strengthened the resolve of members of that organisation to augment their
15 reporting on such activities. At any case, it's clear that such reports
16 were the subject of Tajfun's, and later Sigma's, interest.
17 Q. This is my proposition, that they did not report about any kind
18 of corruption before we had banned them all together. We don't have time
19 to prove it today, but does this sound acceptable and reasonable to you,
20 that first they were banned at a very early stage. First, they were
21 ordered to -- their reintegration was ordered, and then they were banned,
22 and it was only afterwards that they wanted to ingratiate themselves with
23 the political leadership of Serbia. And do you remember at the time our
24 relations with the political leadership of Serbia were very bad and they
25 wanted to ingratiate themselves on that basis with the Serbian
2 A. I find your explanation of the sequence of events somewhat
3 plausible, however, I do not personally have the knowledge. I would have
4 to review all the documents of Tajfun and Sigma again to make a finding
5 analytically as to when they first began reporting on allegations of
6 corruption, but I certainly agree with you that Sigma came about at a
7 time when the political leadership of Serbia was -- and its relations
8 with the leadership of the Bosnian Serb Republic were very bad, and I
9 think that the leadership of Slobodan Milosevic at that time was very
10 interested in collecting material that could be used to put pressure on
11 the Bosnian Serb leadership.
12 Q. Thank you, Dr. Nielsen. Please do not feel offended in any way.
13 I was just attacking a lack of precision, not you in any way. If
14 curiosity killed the cat, imprecision killed the truth. Do you agree
15 with that? Thank you, Witness.
16 A. [Interpretation] I agree, Doctor, and I thank you for the many
17 questions you put to me. It was my pleasure to answer your questions.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Karadzic.
20 Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
21 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour. Your Honour, the first
22 matter I want to deal with isn't strictly a matter of re-examination. I
23 simply want to clear up the confusion which occurred in relation to one
24 of the log-books, and I have the log-book from the evidence unit.
25 Dr. Nielsen did say that he wanted to take a look at the entire log-book,
1 and if I may do that. That's in relation to --
2 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: That's at transcript pages 16332 to 16333, and
4 it's in relation to the exhibit which was marked MFI P2991.
5 Mr. Usher.
6 Re-examination by Ms. Sutherland:
7 Q. Dr. Nielsen, you recall that I asked you if you had reviewed the
8 entries from the 9th to the 16th of July 1995 and you confirmed that you
9 had. I asked you if the log-book then showed that communications were
10 being sent between the IDB and other organs in the RS, the RSK and Serbia
11 during this period and you confirmed that it was consistent with
12 communications functioning among the institutions. You then said, and I
14 "In this case, I believe if I'm not mistaken that this is a
15 log-book of incoming dispatches."
16 And then you went on to say that you would need to review the
17 entire book.
18 I'd ask you to go to the entries which we began discussing last
19 week, and that's on ERN -- starts on the ERN page 0310326. Sorry, 3 --
20 0371-0323 were the beginning of the entries that we were discussing.
21 Do you see the sequential numbering in column 4 of the document?
22 And this can come up in e-court so Your Honours can see it.
23 JUDGE KWON: So you can upload it.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: It's 65 ter number -- --
25 JUDGE KWON: I think it's coming.
1 MS. SUTHERLAND: -- 22833A.
2 THE WITNESS: Yes, I see the sequential numbering in column 4.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND:
4 Q. And would that indicate to you whether this was a log-book of
5 incoming or dispatches or communications being sent?
6 A. Well, in the case of this log-book, when I'm looking now at both
7 pages in front of me, I see both documents that are being logged here as
8 being from some other sources and there's also documents that are being
9 logged here as being for some sources. In any case, it's to me
10 concurrent with the fact -- and I would note that besides this log-book,
11 I'm familiar with a great many log-books of a similar nature covering
12 this period that I was able to review documentation, including this
13 log-book that showed that both incoming and outgoing communications were
14 occurring regularly during this period in July 1995 involving the RS MUP
15 and its various constituent units as well as government organs and
16 relevant units of the VRS.
17 Q. And the other log-book that we saw last Thursday was Exhibit
18 MFI P2990, which you confirmed were the outgoing -- the -- the
19 communications being received, did you not?
20 A. Yes, I believe that is correct.
21 JUDGE KWON: What does this last column say, receiver's
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, unfortunately in relation to the
24 English translation, originally we had just the headings of the -- the
25 65 ter number done.
1 JUDGE KWON: I'm asking the witness, because he's aware of -- he
2 speaks the language. But I think --
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: But, Your Honour, can I just say --
4 JUDGE KWON: I'm wondering whether this is not something that
5 parties can agree when this is log-book received or received for --
6 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, can I just say we have to revise
7 this English translation though, because when the translators did these
8 excerpts that we asked them to do, they then did the incorrect headings,
9 because you can -- if you can see in the log-book, the date and the time,
10 columns 2 and 3, are separate columns, and here they've given one column
11 as column 2. And then you will also see over columns 10 and 11 are also
12 given only one column in this English translation column 9, and it should
13 be columns 10 and 11. So there should be 12 columns in the English
14 translation. There's only 10. So we are having that revised. But --
15 JUDGE KWON: And how should this be translated? "Potpis
17 THE WITNESS: Your Honour, I agree that the English translation
18 of column -- what is column 12, the far right-hand column in this
19 log-book, "potpis primaoca" is the recipient's signature.
20 JUDGE KWON: Please consider whether this is something easily
21 agreed upon on the part of the Defence. Let's move on, Ms. Sutherland.
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.
23 Q. Dr. Nielsen, yesterday at transcript pages 16459 to 164 -- I'm
24 sorry. Before I do that, Your Honour, can I ask that the MFI status
25 be removed from -- from P2990 and P2991. Obviously pending the -- as
1 long as we get the correct translation, English translation.
2 JUDGE KWON: Could you remind me again? What was the reason for
3 marking for identification?
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: Because we were -- because we were just getting
5 the entries, the full entries from both of the log-books that I took
6 Dr. Nielsen to for the periods between the 9th and the -- and the 16th of
7 July. And on the other log-book, a similar date range. So that's why
8 they were marked for identification last Thursday. I'm asking them --
9 for the MFI to be removed and for them to be fully admitted.
10 JUDGE KWON: Any objection, Mr. Robinson?
11 MR. ROBINSON: No, Your Honour.
12 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Then that will be done.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND:
14 Q. Okay. Dr. Nielsen, as I said, yesterday at transcript page 16459
15 to 16462, Mr. Karadzic asked you about the process of conferring awards
16 on members of the MUP. He showed you a couple of documents. I want to
17 show you two MUP documents and ask your views on the awards mentioned in
18 those documents and the first one is 65 ter 23195.
19 This is a proposal dated the 7th of August, 1995. Who is it
21 A. This document is type-signed by the leader of the State Security
22 Service of the RS, Dragan Kijac. I would note that it is not signed by
23 him but has been signed for him. It may well be actually -- the
24 signature might be Skipina, if I'm not mistaken.
25 Q. And it's addressed to the deputy minister, and again to remind
1 the Chamber, who is the deputy minister in August 1995?
2 A. Tomislav Kovac.
3 Q. And what's being proposed and why?
4 A. The State Security Service is nominating employees of its
5 regional centre of state security in Bijeljina for -- and specifically is
6 offering them a kind of monetary award for actions that they undertook in
7 what is referred to as the liberation of Zepa and Srebrenica.
8 Q. And was it common to request that MUP members be awarded money
9 rather than a promotion in rank or a decoration?
10 A. I would say that for the period of 1992, I'm not aware of
11 monetary awards of this kind. It may have been the case that such awards
12 were made in 1995. I do know that there are cases in which particularly
13 deserving members of the police, again seen with the eyes of the
14 ministry, would be nominated to receive, among other things, larger
15 apartments or other types of non-monetary compensation.
16 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I tender this document.
17 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. I object to this. I
18 think this did not really arise from the direct examination. This is an
19 attempt for the Prosecution to show that people rewarded who participated
20 in the Srebrenica event and those events were not the subject of any of
21 the cross-examination and I don't think it's right to admit the document
22 at this stage through this witness.
23 JUDGE KWON: Can I hear from you, Ms. Sutherland.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, Mr. Karadzic discussed with the
25 witness the process of conferring the awards on members of the MUP, and
1 this is another example of how awards were conferred.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I kindly ask for just one
3 clarification. I spoke about proposals made to the president of the
4 republic to confer decorations, whereas this is an internal matter of the
5 MUP, intelligence officers at that, who did not take part in combat, who
6 were just providing information. This has nothing to do with the
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber finds it difficult to see that this
10 question has arisen from the cross-examination, so we'll not admit this.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour.
12 Q. Dr. Nielsen, during the discussion about the Wolves of Vucjak,
13 you noted and this is at transcript page 16417, a report by Zupljanin in
14 September of 1991 regarding this group. If I could 65 ter number 00906
15 on the screen, please. And if we could have page 3 of e-court, which is
16 page 1 the report.
17 Is this the report that you were referring to? And if I could
18 draw your attention to the last paragraph on page 1, on the first page of
19 this report. Is that what you're referring to?
20 A. I'm not sure, because do I not in this -- I know that the report
21 was from Banja Luka in September 1991, but in the Serbian language here
22 which I'm looking at, I don't yet see the passage to which I referred the
23 Court's attention yesterday when we had it up during cross-examination
24 where there was a reference to specifically to Mr. Milankovic. Now I see
25 a reference to him. If I could also have the next page in Serbian,
2 It may be the case that there's an additional document. This is
3 one of the documents certainly sent during this period showing an
4 awareness by Zupljanin and CSB Banja Luka of who Veljko Milankovic was
5 and what kind of background he had. The document we had up yesterday,
6 which may have been a different one, specifically referred to 54 criminal
7 complaints that were pending against Mr. Milankovic at this same period.
8 Q. You were asked about -- Mr. Karadzic put to you that -- that the
9 Wolves of Vucjak were resubordinated to the VRS and that they were good
10 fighters and that they did not commit any crimes. Does at that paragraph
11 on the bottom of page 1 of the report in English and also in B/C/S and
12 going over to -- sorry, page 2 in B/C/S, tell you anything about what
13 they were doing in -- no, I'm sorry. I'll withdraw that.
14 A. If I may just state that the document to which I was referring in
15 discussion about Milankovic is not this document. This document also
16 contains information about Veljko Milankovic from this period in
17 September 1991. The specific document which I referred to earlier is the
18 CSB Banja Luka document cited in footnote 73 of my report in paragraph
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I'd seek to tender this document
21 that we have on the screen, 00906.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
23 THE REGISTRAR: P3000, Your Honours.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just one clarification, please.
25 Actually, this does speak of Milankovic but not of the Wolves from
1 Vucjak. The Wolves from Vucjak are somewhat different. They're a far
2 broader unit and they came into being later.
3 JUDGE KWON: The witness didn't say anything about Vucjak in
4 relation to this document.
5 Yes, let's proceed, Ms. Sutherland.
6 MS. SUTHERLAND:
7 Q. Yes. Dr. Nielsen, does it say down there, "A group of 30 persons
8 in the Prnjavor area since 11 July when they returned uniformed and well
9 armed from training in the SAO of Krajina have been consistently
10 committing brazen and gross violations? Do you know that -- the area
11 where the Wolves of Vucjak are from?
12 A. To your first question, I am -- I agree that that is what the
13 document states. The second question, I believe that the Wolves of
14 Vucjak stemmed from the Prnjavor area.
15 Q. Thank you. You were also discussing with Mr. Karadzic about the
16 support the Wolves of Vucjak received from Bosnian Serbs in either 1991,
17 1992, or beyond. I want you to -- to watch a short excerpt from SRT
18 video report. It's about a two-minute clip, and that's 65 ter number
19 40572A. It is an excerpt from SRT on the 5th anniversary of the
20 establishment of the Wolves of Vucjak.
21 [Video-clip played]
22 MS. SUTHERLAND: And we have synced the English transcript.
23 [Video-clip played]
24 THE INTERPRETER: "[Voiceover] Momcilo Krajisnik, president of the
25 parliament of Republika Srpska addressed the gathering on the occasion of
1 the fifth anniversary of the renowned unit, Vukovice Vucjake. You,
2 Wolves from Vucjak, who are present here today in civilian clothes rather
3 than uniforms belong to this area as much as you belong to the people of
4 Dalmatia, Lika, Western Slavonia, Posavina. Your war path is difficult,
5 but glorious. Since 1991 when you lit the torch of freedom, defending
6 the people the Serb Krajina, you went through all theatres of war and
7 participated in many combats in Republika Srpska and the Republic of Serb
8 Krajina. Both your friends and enemies will remember your heroism. You
9 and your legendary commander, Veljko Milankovic, have been history's
10 favourites. I have no doubt that children in schools and especially
11 military school cadets will ask themselves when studying about our
12 combat, which formation did the soldier Wolves from Vucjak belong to?
13 The response will be: It was the unit every army in the world would be
14 proud of. Your deeds are immortal because each one of you is worth two
15 men. In other words, we can say that you belonged to the entire Serbian
17 MS. SUTHERLAND:
18 Q. Dr. Nielsen, in your view this is an example of the support of
19 the Serbian leadership for Veljko Milankovic's unit, the Wolves of
21 A. Yes. This is the first time I see this video, but it is
22 consistent with other expressions, public expressions, of pride and
23 support shown by the Bosnian Serb leadership for the Wolves of Vucjak.
24 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you. I have no further questions.
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I respond?
1 JUDGE KWON: No, no, no.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have an objection. I have an
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] And my objection is that in the
6 previous document it is evident that Veljko Milankovic had seven criminal
7 reports and 17 misdemeanour charges reports, but the fact is that the
8 incrimination of the Wolves of Vucjak due to the fact that Milankovic was
9 held accountable for something is inappropriate because the Wolves of
10 Vucjak have not committed any crimes and we have no evidence to
11 substantiate that.
12 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, it all goes to the weight. This will
13 be admitted.
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you, Your Honour. And we do have
15 documents --
16 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3001, Your Honours.
18 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: And we do have documents in relation to the
20 issue that Dr. Karadzic just raised which we will be showing with other
21 witnesses due to the time. Thank you.
22 [Trial Chamber confers]
23 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I once again just for the sake
24 of clarification briefly? Would it be right for the Trial Chamber know
25 that Milankovic was dead by the time Krajisnik was making this speech?
1 JUDGE KWON: It all goes to the weight and then -- not at this
2 time, Mr. Karadzic.
3 That concludes your evidence.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE MORRISON: It's simply an observation I make simply because
6 I won't have another opportunity to do it: I just say I've never met
7 anybody or come across anybody who has such facility in so many languages
8 as you do. It seems to be an extraordinary achievement in itself.
9 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE KWON: And with such a memory. Thank you. That concludes
11 your evidence. On behalf of the Chamber and the Tribunal, I'd like to
12 thank you for coming to the Tribunal to give it.
13 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honour.
14 JUDGE KWON: You're free to go.
15 [The witness withdrew]
16 JUDGE KWON: Who is our next witness?
17 MR. GAYNOR: Mr. President, the next witness is Isak Gasi.
18 MS. SUTHERLAND: May I be excused, Your Honour?
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. Sutherland.
20 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you.
21 JUDGE KWON: Are there any procedural matters to deal with before
22 we bring in the witness?
23 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. Maybe I can give Mr. Gaynor a
24 chance to get settled so he's not at any kind of disadvantage.
25 Mr. President, I notified by e-mail the Chamber that we would be
1 making a motion with respect to both of these next two witnesses who
2 testify about events in Brcko municipality, and our motion is to exclude
3 the testimony of these witnesses on all events other than the events at
4 the Luka camp, because on the 8th of October, 2009, you entered an order
5 that no evidence of crimes in Brcko be led except for events in Luka
6 camp, and we're simply asking you to enforce that order. Thank you.
7 MR. GAYNOR: If I may respond, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
9 MR. GAYNOR: The motion of the Defence is similar to motions
10 which were filed during the Sarajevo portion of the case. The
11 indictment, in fact, reads crimes associated with Luka camp and the
12 indictment also does not exclude the municipality of Brcko. Your Honours
13 have already considered the nature of the impact of its
14 Rule 73 bis ruling in relation to Brcko municipality in paragraph 28 of
15 the decision on the fourth Prosecution motion for judicial notice of
16 adjudicated facts of the 14th of June, 2010. Now, in that decision
17 Your Honours noted the marked-up version of the indictment filed by the
18 Prosecution on the 19th of October, 2009 and identified the adjudicated
19 facts of which Your Honours would not take judicial notice and Your
20 Honours did take judicial notice of facts relating to the takeover of
21 Brcko municipality and which are general facts. Now, in accordance with
22 the spirit of Your Honours' ruling, the evidence which we are tendering
23 is relevant to the widespread and systematic nature of the attack against
24 the non-Serb population. It's relevant to the pattern of takeovers --
25 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you for slowing down.
1 MR. GAYNOR: It's relevant to the pattern of takeovers across the
2 targeted municipalities. It's relevant to the objective and methods of
3 the joint criminal enterprise alleged in the indictment, specifically the
4 role of the MUP, the army, the SDS, the Serb Crisis Staff and Serb
5 paramilitaries. Now, in respect of Luka camp, the evidence is relevant
6 to sustaining the discriminatory nature of the arrest and imprisonment of
7 the detainees who were detained at Luka camp, the co-ordination between
8 the police, military, and paramilitaries and the arrests and detention of
9 those detainees and the persecutory environment in which the camp
11 His Honour Judge Morrison has previously pointed out that the
12 process of redacting portions of a statement may be suitable for a jury
13 trial, but before non-jury bench, and Your Honours are well aware of
14 which incidents are in the indictment and which incidents have been
15 excluded from the indictment, and the mechanical task of redacting a
16 sentence here or there would not be of any particular assistance to the
17 Chamber. For those reasons -- to summarise, consistent with Your
18 Honours' rulings during the Sarajevo portion of the case, consistent with
19 Your Honours' decision on the fourth Prosecution motion for judicial
20 notice of adjudicated facts, I submit that the motion should be
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
23 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Your Honour. I acknowledge that during the
24 Sarajevo part of the case you allowed unscheduled incidents which were
25 struck from the indictment and even evidence from places that were never
1 even mentioned in the indictment, such as Gorazde and Bihac. So this is
2 definitely something that you've been doing as a practice, but I -- we're
3 still hoping there will be some meaning to your order under
4 Rule 73 bis (D). Hope springs eternal, and we think that this is an
5 appropriate occasion for you to actually take some case management action
6 to limit the scope of the trial. Because the decision that you make at
7 this staff will also impact on the Defence case. We will bring witnesses
8 from Brcko, probably many, and it -- when we're all signature here in
9 2015 wondering why the trial took so long, we can remember this day and
10 other days when we tried to limit the scope of the trial. So we ask you
11 to put your foot down here and limit the evidence of Brcko to what is
12 actually in the indictment, which is just Luka camp. Thank you.
13 [Trial Chamber confers]
14 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will rise for 15 minutes to consider
15 this, but before that, there's a ruling I need to issue in private
16 session. We go into private session.
17 [Private session]
12 [Open session]
13 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
14 JUDGE KWON: We'll rise for 15 minutes.
15 --- Luncheon recess taken at 12.00 p.m.
16 --- On resuming at 1.22 p.m.
17 JUDGE KWON: This is the Chamber's ruling on Mr. Robinson's oral
19 The Chamber recalls paragraph 6 of it's 8 October 2009 decision
20 in which it accepted the Prosecution's proposal not to lead evidence in
21 relation to, inter alia, the crimes alleged to have taken place in Brcko,
22 save for the crimes in the Luka camp and thus ordered the Prosecution,
23 pursuant to Rule 73 bis (D) not to present evidence in respect of these
24 crime sites and incidents.
25 Having reviewed the proposed transcript of prior testimony for
1 Isak Gasi and the proposed amalgamated statement for Djordje Ristanic,
2 the Chamber finds that while the Prosecution may lead general evidence
3 relating to the takeover of Brcko, it should not present evidence
4 pertaining to incidents alleged to have occurred in Brcko during the
5 takeover and in detention facilities which were struck out of the
6 indictment after the 8th of October, 2009 decision. The Chamber is not
7 unmindful of the fact that during the Sarajevo component of the case the
8 evidence relating to unscheduled incidents was led. However with respect
9 to the allegation of the overarching joint criminal enterprise, given the
10 large number of municipalities remaining in the indictment, and the
11 number of crimes alleged to have occurred therein, there's no need for
12 the Prosecution to present evidence relating to crimes struck out under
13 Rule 73 bis in order to present its case on the pattern of events across
14 the municipalities. This is particularly so when one considers the size
15 and the scope of this case.
16 In relation to Isak Gasi, this means that e-court pages 36 to 53
17 and 87 to 88 of the transcript of his testimony in the Krajisnik case,
18 which bears the 65 ter number 22527 A, may not be tendered into evidence.
19 In relation to Djordje Ristanic, this means that questions 181 to
20 189 of the amalgamated statement, which bears the 65 ter number 90248,
21 may not be tendered into evidence.
22 The Chamber further instructs the Prosecution:
23 (1) to upload redacted versions of 65 ter numbers 22527A and
24 90248 in accordance with this oral decision; and,
25 (2) not to seek the admission of associated exhibits which were
1 discussed in these redacted portions of Gasi's and Ristanic's evidence.
2 That's the ruling, and let us bring in the witness.
3 [The witness entered court]
4 WITNESS: ISAK GASI
5 [Witness answered through interpreter]
6 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, sir.
7 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Judge.
8 JUDGE KWON: If you could take the solemn declaration, please.
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
10 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
11 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. If you could make yourself comfortable.
12 Yes, Mr. Gaynor.
13 MR. GAYNOR: Thank you, Mr. President.
14 Examination by Mr. Gaynor:
15 Q. Witness, could you state your full name, please.
16 A. My name is Isak Gasi.
17 Q. Did you testify in the trial of Momcilo Krajisnik on the 4th and
18 5th February, 2004?
19 A. Yes, I did.
20 Q. Have you had an opportunity to review an English-language version
21 of the transcript of your evidence in that case?
22 A. Yes I did.
23 Q. Did you inform me of several corrections to that transcript that
24 you wished to make?
25 A. Yes, I did.
1 Q. I now propose to read the corrections which Mr. Gasi informed me,
2 and the page numbers relate to the page numbers of the Krajisnik
4 At page 440, line 8, Radivoje Knezevic should be Stevo Knezevic.
5 At page 452, line 16, page 456, line 22, and page 555, line 21,
6 Simeunovic should read Simonovic.
7 On page 468, line 16, Zivan should read Ivan.
8 On page 468, line 25, two kilogrammes should read half a
10 On page 463, line 3, Djukanovic should read Djurkovic.
11 Mr. Gasi, subject to those corrections, do you adopt the
12 transcript of your evidence in the Krajisnik case as your evidence here
13 today, and if you were asked questions on the same subjects, would you
14 provide the same answers?
15 A. Yes.
16 MR. GAYNOR: Subject to Your Honours' ruling, would I like to
17 tender the transcript of Mr. Gasi's evidence in the Krajisnik case
18 subject to the redactions which Your Honours' ordered.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes, that will be accepted.
20 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P3002, Your Honours.
21 MR. GAYNOR: I now propose to read for the public a summary of
22 the transcript.
23 Mr. Gasi was a member of the SDA and held a position on Brcko
24 town's Executive Committee. He observed senior SDS members attending
25 rallies in Brcko town prior to the outbreak of the conflict. Karadzic
1 spoke at a rally to mark a founding assembly of the SDS.
2 One of the SDS rallies was marked by inflammatory language and a
3 tense atmosphere. Between February and April 1992, Mr. Gasi witnessed
4 weapons being distributed to local Serbs. In mid-April 1992, he attended
5 a meeting at which Milenko Vojnovic also known as Dr. Beli and
6 Djordje Ristanic of the SDS were present, and Ristanic demanded that
7 Brcko town be divided.
8 On the morning of the 30th of April, 1992, the two bridges over
9 the Sava River were blown up. Mr. Gasi observed a column of JNA tanks,
10 personnel carriers, and other military vehicles 2 kilometres in length on
11 the road between Bijeljina and Brcko.
12 On the 2nd or 3rd of May, 1992, he saw JNA aircraft fly over a
13 part of Brcko town that was inhabited by non-Serbs and heard explosions
14 from that area just after the aircraft flew past.
15 From 10th to 27th May, 1992, Mr. Gasi was detained at
16 Elektro-Brcko, and he was forced to work there and in Brcko town.
17 In Brcko town he saw the unloading of human corpses in civilian
18 clothing from a truck by men in military uniforms. While at
19 Elektro-Brcko, Ljubisa Savic, also known as Mauzer, visited and
20 threatened non-Serbs held there.
21 On 27 May, 1992, Mr. Gasi was taken from Elektro-Brcko to the SUP
22 building in Brcko town by two Serb police officers. He was then taken to
23 Luka camp where he was detained until 7th of June, 1992. There were
24 approximately 200 detainees at Luka camp. He saw Ranko Cesic take four
25 non-Serb men from the hangar at Luka and shoot them in the back. He saw
1 Goran Jelisic beat and threaten detainees. Major Vojkan Djurkovic
2 visited Luka camp on several occasions. Mr. Gasi and other detainees
3 from Luka were made to throw 15 to 20 human corpses into the Sava River.
4 They were in civilian clothing. Many appeared to have been shot either
5 in the back or in the head.
6 Also during this period, Mr. Gasi and other detainees from Luka
7 were taken to the SUP building to clean. During the period 1st May to
8 7th June, 1992, the witness saw persons from the following groups at Luka
9 camp: Men in JNA uniforms, police, the Red Berets, Arkan's Tigers, Mirko
10 Blagojevic's radicals, and Mauzer's men. On the 7th of June 1992,
11 following a request from Captain Dragan, Mr. Gasi was released from Luka
12 camp by the camp commander, Konstantin Simonovic.
13 That ends the public summary. I'd now like to ask the registrar
14 to call up 65 ter 23189.
15 Mr. Gasi, on the screen in front of you in a moment you will see
16 a document which is a copy of minutes of the Serb SJB in Brcko of a
17 meeting of the 2nd of June, 1992. Can you read that document in front of
19 Are the names of Branko Gajic and Pero Zaric visible to you on
20 that document?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Did you ever see those two men at Luka camp?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 Q. What were they doing at Luka camp?
25 A. Mr. Pero Zaric interrogated me, or conducted an interview with
1 me. Mr. Branko Gajic came once in a regular police uniform accompanied
2 by another police officer, and he took out a neighbour of his. That man
3 was taken out on that day. That was probably seven or eight days after
4 my arrival at Luka.
5 Q. Did you know Petar Djokic who, according to the first sentence,
6 was appointed the police station commander?
7 A. Yes. I personally know Petar Djokic.
8 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to tender that document, Mr. President.
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3003, Your Honours.
11 MR. GAYNOR: Could I call up please 65 ter 23192. This document
12 is a document of the RS MUP SJB Brcko, dated the 28th of October, 1992,
13 issued by the station commander Petar Djokic.
14 Q. You see in this document, Mr. Gasi, a reference to Ranko Cesic.
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Did you know him prior to the conflict?
17 A. Yes, I did.
18 Q. How well did you know him?
19 A. I know his younger brother as well. I know his mother. We used
20 to live in the same apartment block building. I lived on entrance number
21 1, and he lived on entrance number 3.
22 Q. This document refers to Cesic being a member of the police
23 reserve corps unit of the war station of the Brcko police during the
24 period from 15th of May, 1992, until the 22nd of June, 1992. Do you see
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Does that cover the period that you were detained at Luka camp?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Do you believe this document to be a reference to the Ranko Cesic
5 that you saw at Luka camp?
6 A. Yes.
7 MR. GAYNOR: I tender that, Mr. President.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
9 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3004, Your Honours.
10 MR. GAYNOR: I'd now like to call up, please, document
11 65 ter 23190. This is a payment list for September 1992, issued by the
12 Serb SJB in Brcko, dated the 7th of October, 1992.
13 Q. You've had a chance to review this payment list previously. Is
14 that right, Mr. Gasi?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. I want to draw your attention to some of the names on it. Number
17 7, Petar Kaurinovic; number 8, Dragisa Tesic; number 9,
18 Stojan Vasiljevic. Do you see those names?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Are you aware of whether any of those men were at Luka camp?
21 A. Petar Kaurinovic was at the camp. As for the others, the names
22 that you read out, I heard from my father, who was at Luka alongside my
23 two brothers, that they interrogated them on the 8th of May, 1992.
24 Q. Did those two men -- you're referring to Tesic and Vasiljevic.
25 Did they interrogate your father at Luka camp?
1 A. Yes. Petar Kaurinovic was also present there when my father and
2 my two brothers and my sister's son were at Luka.
3 Q. What did you see Petar Kaurinovic do at Luka camp?
4 A. He and Pero Zaric and Dragan Kontic interrogated me on the 28th
5 of May. That was on the second morning after I arrived, and they
6 questioned me.
7 Q. Number 25 is Mladen Rubic. Was he at Luka camp?
8 A. He used to come to the camp, and as they said that he collected
9 volunteers to go and to sweep the streets in the town and do other jobs
10 as well, but I know him. I know who he is.
11 MR. GAYNOR: Can we turn to page 5 in B/C/S and page 4 in
12 English, please.
13 Q. Underneath number 217 we see Branko Pudic. Did you see him at
14 Luka camp?
15 A. Yes. I saw him the first day I came.
16 Q. Can you describe the circumstances in which you saw him.
17 A. When they brought me from the public security station or the SUP,
18 this gentleman met me personally in front of the office. He started
19 shouting at me immediately and asking me about Muslim barricades, Muslim
20 extremists, and, I don't know, some people that I knew, and in this
21 commotion, he took out his pistol and hit me on the back of my neck and
22 then he pushed me into this office.
23 Q. In your testimony in the Krajisnik trial at pages 445 and 444,
24 you refer several times to a man called Pudic who hit you at Luka. Is
25 that this man, Branko Pudic?
1 A. Yes, that's the man. That's the man, Branko Pudic. He was a
2 policeman before the war in Brcko and also during the war.
3 MR. GAYNOR: Could we move to the next page in English and stay
4 on this page in B/C/S.
5 Q. Under 224, we see Mihajlo Pejic. Was he at Luka camp?
6 A. Yes. I saw him once as well. He was also looking for volunteers
7 to go to town to do the cleaning and I don't know what else they were
8 doing. I know him personally. He used to be a reserve police officer
9 before the war.
10 Q. Number 240 is Dragan Rubic. Was he at Luka camp?
11 A. Yes. Together with his brother Mladen that we mentioned before
12 he also collected volunteers to go out and perform labour. But they
13 didn't beat anyone at the time or force anyone to do anything. They were
14 just coming there and asking for volunteers to do some work.
15 Q. Number 252 is Konstantin Simonovic. What post did he hold at --
16 did you see him at Luka camp?
17 A. Yes, I did. As far as I know, his name was Konstantin Kole, and
18 he introduced himself as the commander of the Luka Brcko remand prison.
19 That's how he referred to himself.
20 Q. As well as the nickname Kole, what other nickname did he use?
21 A. Kosta.
22 Q. In your evidence in the Krajisnik trial you refer repeatedly to a
23 man called Kosta at Luka camp. Were you referring to
24 Konstantin Simonovic?
25 A. Yes, I was.
1 Q. What kind of uniform did he wear at Luka camp?
2 A. He always wore regular police uniform while I was there.
3 Invariably he was dressed in a regular police uniform.
4 Q. Did you ever enter his office?
5 A. Yes, on two occasions.
6 Q. Did you see anything in or around his office to suggest that he
7 was in charge of Luka camp?
8 A. Yes. On the second time that I entered his office, he called me
9 to give him some names of Muslim extremists, and he promised me that for
10 each name that I gave him he would give me a tablet against the diarrhoea
11 that I was suffering from at Luka at the time.
12 Q. Did you ever see Simonovic interact with Goran Jelisic at
13 Luka camp?
14 A. They did not talk, but he was in his company when Jelisic went
15 into the hangar twice.
16 Q. Could you describe the circumstances of each of those two
18 A. Goran came once with Monika, who was Kole's half sister, and he
19 was behind them. They entered the hangar and went to the middle -- or,
20 rather, to the other hangar where we were. They were more to the left
21 from me in that hangar, closer to other detainees, and there was a guy
22 there called Admir Didic. He was given the nickname Kurir. He was
23 dressed in pyjamas. He was completely beaten up and covered in blood.
24 Q. Was there another occasion that Goran Jelisic was in the hangar
25 in the company of Simonovic?
1 A. Yes. He came once again into the hangar brandishing a gun with a
2 silencer, and he said, "I fuck your Balija mothers." And he also told us
3 that he had killed 98 Balijas and that he would kill another 98 Balija.
4 Kole approached him, took him by the arm. I couldn't hear what they were
5 talking about, but it seems that he was trying to appease him. At one
6 point they turned away and they went towards the door of the hangar, but
7 he kicked one or two detainees on the way out of the hangar.
8 Q. Sorry, who kicked the detainees on the way out of that hangar?
9 A. Goran Jelisic.
10 Q. Could you describe the interaction between Simonovic and Jelic as
11 friendly or unfriendly, according to your observations?
12 A. Well, he took him by the arm. They had their arms interlocked
13 and looked like two good friends. While Goran was shouting in the
14 hangar, he seemed to me to be intoxicated, and it seemed to me that the
15 other man was trying to calm him down. He took him by the arm and
16 eventually took him out of the hangar.
17 Q. Could we move to page 6 in English and 6 in B/C/S, please.
18 There are another three names, 297 is Dragan Zivkovic. 300 is
19 Branko Gajic. 303 is Milenko Delic. Did you see those three men at Luka
21 A. Yes. Dragan Zivkovic was a police officer before the war. He
22 used to come down there with a group whenever they needed volunteers. I
23 told you already about Branko Gajic. And Milenko Delic was in the same
24 situation that I explained and described earlier, because he was also the
25 one who took one of his neighbours out of the hangar.
1 Q. Were all three of them police officers as far as you were aware?
2 A. All three of them were police officers, and they retained the
3 same uniforms during the war.
4 Q. 312 is Milomir Marinkovic. Do you know anything about him?
5 A. Milomir Mika Marinkovic was secretary for driving test commission
6 before the war. If you wanted to pass a driving test in the former
7 Yugoslavia, you had to go to the secretary, pay the fee and take the
8 tests, and that was what Milomir Mika Marinkovic did before the war.
9 Q. We'll come back to him in due course. Could we go to the final
10 page of the document, please. You'll see that it is -- the name stated
11 there is Zarko Cosic. Do you see that name?
12 A. Yes, I do.
13 Q. Do you know who his predecessor as head of the police was?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 Q. Who was it?
16 A. Dragan Veselic.
17 Q. Briefly describe the circumstances of Veselic's -- why Veselic
18 ceased to be police chief and Cosic took over.
19 A. When I left the Luka camp, I heard in Belgrade that Veselic was
20 killed in a car accident near Novi Sad. I heard that from other people
21 from Brcko, because we had a place in Belgrade where we used to get
22 together. I think it was July of 1992 or late June 1992. I'm not quite
23 sure. And that is when I heard that Veselic was killed in a car accident
24 in Serbia.
25 Q. Could I ask the registrar to focus on the stamp. Mr. Gasi, could
1 you just read the stamp as far as you can tell? Perhaps we can just zoom
2 in on it.
3 A. Serbian Republic of Bosnia, I think, and Herzegovina,
4 Ministry for Internal Affairs, Brcko Public Security Station.
5 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to tender that document, Mr. President.
6 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3005, Your Honours.
8 MR. GAYNOR: We're now going to play a video. This is 65 ter
9 40350K. For the information of all the parties, this is an extract from
10 a programme called "Assignment". This episode is called "Cracks in the
11 Armour". It was broadcast on BBC 2 on the 10th of December, 1994. The
12 footage was taken in autumn of 1994. Your Honours have already seen
13 extracts from this episode through the evidence of Jeremy Bowen. We can
14 play, please.
15 [Video-clip played]
16 "The Bosnian Serbs have fought for Brcko at the negotiating table
17 as well as on the front line. Without it, their mini-state would be cut
18 in two. Brcko's sturdy Hapsburg buildings have survived the war unlike
19 many of its Muslims and Croats. Until ethnic cleansing started only a
20 fifth of Brcko population was Serb. Now they run the town. The river
21 marks the border with Croatia. The bridge has been blown and the Serbs
22 have no plans to rebuild it.
23 "The local police chief, Zarko Cosic, drove me up towards the
24 front line. We chatted in Italian which he'd learnt during his last job
25 as a barman in Switzerland. He told me he had come home to Brcko just
1 before the war started to take part in what he thinks is a crusade
2 "There were constant provocations. It was impossible to live in
3 the city so we had to throw the Muslims out."
4 MR. GAYNOR:
5 Q. Mr. Gasi, is that the Zarko Cosic who you referred to a few
6 moments ago?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Was he, to your knowledge, a member of any political party?
9 A. Yes. He was one of the founders of the SDS party in Brcko.
10 Q. How do you know that?
11 A. I know. I attended this founding Assembly of the SDS in Brcko.
12 I know a lot of people who were involved in founding the SDS of Brcko. I
13 know them personally.
14 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to tender that.
15 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, I have an objection to this. This
16 could have been accomplished simply by showing a still photo of that
17 individual, and I would ask that you substitute a still photo with no
18 sound for this clip, because what we heard instead was a statement of
19 this individual which we have no way to cross-examine, to ask him what he
20 meant, what was the context, and it's very prejudicial to admit a
21 statement of that individual without any foundation other than the fact
22 that he recognised him and he identified him. Thank you.
23 MR. GAYNOR: Well, Mr. President and Your Honours, we've already
24 admitted a great number of extracts of documentaries prepared for the BBC
25 by Jeremy Bowen, and I don't see --
1 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to ask some questions in relation to
2 its content?
3 MR. GAYNOR: Yes, I can do so, Mr. President.
4 Q. Mr. Gasi, you heard the words spoken by Zarko Cosic in that clip.
5 A. Yes, I did.
6 Q. Now, are you able to comment as to whether they are consistent
7 with your own personal dealings with Zarko Cosic?
8 A. Not before the war. We were friends. I don't know why he says
9 here that there were problems with the Muslims who resided in Brcko.
10 Q. You said that he was a member of the SDS party. Could you
11 describe whether he was, as far as you're aware, an unwilling or an
12 enthusiastic member of the SDS party?
13 A. I can only tell you that I know that he had worked in
14 Switzerland. He was a waiter there. Before the war while I was at
15 school, while I socialised with him. I knew his mother. I know where
16 they lived. We often visited that part that we in Brcko that we used to
17 call Serbian Varos. I knew the man. I knew his wife. I never was under
18 the impression that a man like him could say something as bad as he did
19 about the Muslims with whom he had spent his entire life.
20 Q. You were present, you said, at the founding meeting of the SDS in
21 Brcko; is that right?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Could you describe the nature of the addresses given during that
25 A. Mr. Karadzic was on the stage in front of the culture hall. He
1 delivered a speech, and he said that the Serbian people for the first
2 time in its history had a chance to set up its own party and that for the
3 first time in history the Serbian people would have enough political
4 strength to avoid the repetition of the bloody history, and that was the
5 gist of all of that as far as I can remember. There were no direct
6 threats. However, what Mr. Karadzic was saying at the time is not
7 something that I had learned at the history lessons in school. I know
8 that Bosnia had been 500 years under the Turkish rule, we all were, but I
9 really did not see any reason to utter those words at a rally of a
10 political party at that time. And to be honest, I really didn't feel
11 comfortable with all that.
12 Q. Now, Mr. Cosic in his words said, "We had to throw the Muslims
13 out." And he was speaking as police chief at the time. Is that
14 consistent with your observations as to what happened in Brcko in 1992?
15 A. To be honest, during the ten days that I spent in Luka, I saw
16 some 200 wretched men very much like myself. Ninety-five per cent of
17 them were Muslims. There were a few Croats. I suppose that that fit in
18 the ideology of his that he had inherited from somebody. They managed to
19 throw us out, and I don't believe that in the course of 1992 to 1994 more
20 than 5 per cent of the Muslim residents remained in Brcko.
21 After the peace agreement was signed, people started returning,
22 and the situation has changed somewhat.
23 MR. GAYNOR: I can tender the clip at this stage, Mr. President.
24 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. I maintain our objection.
25 JUDGE KWON: The purpose of tendering this clip is to identify
1 Mr. Cosic, we are minded to admit those portions from -- from which part
2 Cosic appears, but if you tender the -- present the part which contains
3 Mr. Jeremy Bowen's statement, I don't think we have a basis to admit that
4 at this moment through this witness.
5 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, if I may. I wanted to speak to a
6 more general matter.
7 JUDGE KWON: Just a second.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tieger, we will not hear from you on this point,
10 but if you have another general point, we'll hear from you.
11 MR. TIEGER: Well, the same problem will rise repeatedly,
12 Your Honour, in connection with such matters. I think I've raised this
13 point before, but perhaps not as explicitly and it needs to be raised
14 now. Mr. Robinson is making a hearsay objection. It's unfounded for two
16 JUDGE KWON: No. I don't think this is --
17 MR. TIEGER: Mr. President, it will come up again in a related
18 context, I would think.
19 JUDGE KWON: Yes. When it arises we'll then deal with it. Let's
21 MR. GAYNOR: I'd now like to show another clip. Again this --
22 JUDGE KWON: You're tendering --
23 MR. GAYNOR: Beg your pardon. We are tendering.
24 JUDGE KWON: So I would like you to redact the other part.
25 MR. GAYNOR: We'll take out the words of Jeremy Bowen, yes,
1 Mr. President.
2 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
3 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3006, Your Honours.
4 JUDGE MORRISON: Sorry, Mr. Robinson. Can we clarify something.
5 I didn't understand that to be a hearsay objection myself. Am I wrong in
7 MR. ROBINSON: No, you're not wrong. You're correct.
8 JUDGE MORRISON: Thank you.
9 JUDGE KWON: We'll give the number.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3006, Your Honours.
11 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to play another video which may raise some
12 of the same issues, but I think we'll just play it and see how we get on.
13 This is 4350L. It's another clip from the same episode.
14 [Video-clip played]
15 "THE INTERPRETER: (Voiceover) People have now suffered probably
16 more than anyone in Republika Srpska they have ensured shelling and heavy
17 casualties. They have given everything to make this a Serbian state. It
18 doesn't matter if we are independent or part of Serbia. We don't want to
19 live with Muslims as we did before the war. That's our goal. When they
20 use their majority to out-vote us."
21 MR. GAYNOR: Can we stop there, please.
22 Q. Could you just comment on his words, saying, "We don't want to
23 live with the Muslims as we did before the war"? Was that consistent
24 with your observations as to how the Serb police behaved during 1992?
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It would be fair to quote the entire sentence.
1 Q. I think Mr. Gasi has heard the entire sentence. Mr. Gasi could
2 you make any observations about what you heard the police chief make in
3 that clip?
4 A. I don't know why he's talking about pressure being put on the
5 Serbian people before the war. It doesn't make sense. That same Cosic
6 had a good education, a good life. Moreover, his father had fought in
7 the People's Liberation War, so I really don't know where that comes
8 from. I really don't understand this man.
9 When I used to see him before 1991 and what I see in this
10 video-clip, I just can't believe all that. The creation of a state that
11 would be a Serb-only state, really, I don't know what to think or say.
12 It's crazy. It's madness. I really don't know what other word to use.
13 MR. GAYNOR: For the record we stopped there at 58:39. Can we
14 play on, please.
15 [Video-clip played]
16 "Before the war, Brcko was the biggest inland port in Bosnia.
17 The docks on the river Sava -- "
18 MR. GAYNOR: We've stopped at 58:45. Do you recognise that
19 location, Mr. Gasi?
20 A. Yes, I know what this is. It's Luka in Brcko.
21 MR. GAYNOR: Is this the location where you stated in your
22 evidence that you threw the bodies into the River Sava?
23 A. It's not the same location, but it's not far. It's very close.
24 The place where I was was about a hundred metres or so from the crane
25 that you saw in the photo. A bit further away from that, closer to the
1 very entrance into Luka.
2 Q. I know you were questioned about this a little in Krajisnik, but
3 could you describe as much as you were able to observe, the kinds of
4 injuries which those bodies which you were throwing into the river had
5 received, insofar as you were able to determine yourself.
6 A. We threw three bodies in the -- into the water. I tried to
7 inspect them a bit more closely. I believe that they all were hit by
8 bullets in the back or in the back of the head.
9 One of them opened his eyes. He was still alive when we were
10 throwing him in the water. And then my neighbour says, "What are we
11 doing, neighbour?" And then I tell him, "Throw him in the water," and we
12 did. On then people, soldiers perhaps, started shooting at us from
13 across the river from Croatia, and then we started running to the
14 carriages in front of the hangar, and one of the soldiers turned a rifle
15 towards us and ordered us to go back and fuck our mother. And the other
16 one says, "Don't -- don't force them to go there. The Croats are going
17 to kill them if they go there." And then we entered the hangar after
18 that incident.
19 Q. The soldier that told you to go back to the bank of the river,
20 what -- do you know his ethnic background?
21 A. [In English] I don't know. [Interpretation] I don't know. I
22 can't tell you who was of what ethnicity just based on the uniforms that
23 they wore. They didn't introduce -- introduce themselves to me.
24 Q. So is it right that you were escorted to the river to throw the
25 bodies in by soldiers? Is that ...
1 A. Yes. They asked for volunteers in the hangar, those same men.
2 MR. GAYNOR: Can we play on, please.
3 [Video-clip played]
4 "... Sava are deserted now. When the Serbs were taking control
5 of Brcko they imprisoned the Muslim --"
6 MR. GAYNOR: Stop, please, stop at 58:52.
7 Q. Do you recognise this location, Mr. Gasi?
8 A. Yes, I do. This is the first entrance, and that hangar was
9 empty. The next one you see in that same row of buildings, that's the
10 part of Luka where I was.
11 MR. GAYNOR: Play on, please.
12 [Video-clip played]
13 "... Croats in these warehouses. They went on to eradicate every
14 trace of their old neighbours. The mosques were flattened. There used
15 to be one on this --"
16 MR. GAYNOR:
17 Q. And do you recognise that location?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. That's at 59:03. What is that location?
20 A. There's nothing there now, but there used to be a mosque here,
21 the Sava mosque.
22 Q. You can play the last few seconds of this?
23 [Video-clip played]
24 "... corner. The soldiers said don't bother filming."
25 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to tender that video, Mr. President.
1 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. If I could be heard on this
2 point and perhaps I'm asking you in some small way to think about the
3 ruling that you made on the earlier video.
4 This is a 1994 broadcast, 1994 interview with Mr. Cosic, which is
5 actually what I'm concerned with, the admission of his statements, and
6 I'd ask you to think about how this is any different than if a third
7 party had made a written statement two years after the event. And we
8 always have not admitted third-party statements when shown to another
9 witness who comments on them, and that's essentially what part of these
10 videos are, third-party statements in an oral form instead of a written
11 form. And so I think to be consistent, you should not admit any of the
12 statements of Mr. Cosic on either of those two videos. Thank you.
13 JUDGE KWON: Would you like to respond, Mr. Gaynor?
14 MR. GAYNOR: Well, in accordance with Your Honour's earlier
15 ruling, I'm happy to remove the words of Jeremy Bowen from the extract
16 and to leave the rest of it in accordance with the first ruling
17 Your Honours have given.
18 JUDGE KWON: I'll consult my colleagues.
19 [Trial Chamber confers]
20 JUDGE MORRISON: Mr. Robinson, can we get -- can you distinguish
21 in your arguments between admissibility and the potential for weight?
22 MR. ROBINSON: Yes. I think that every statement of a third
23 party that is admissible -- or that is admitted can always be judged for
24 weight, but we have been drawing some kind of line throughout the whole
25 trial of some fairness, element of a fair trial, basically, and I think
1 that the line you've drawn, as I understood it, is that contemporaneous
2 documents even maybe that contain statements, but contemporaneous
3 documents are allowed to be -- if the witness confirms them, they're
4 allowed to be admitted because there's some kind of reliability and
5 overall fairness to admit a contemporaneous document that's recorded at
6 the time. But then when you take it to the next level, when you're
7 admitting people's statements of their recollection of events, their
8 version of events, I think you've drawn the line that those don't fall
9 into that same category even though they could be weighed like every
10 other piece of evidence, so I think that's -- that's an element of the
11 fairness of the trial that we have appreciated and we think is necessary
12 and we think that this falls squarely into that side of the category when
13 you have a statement being made two years later.
14 JUDGE MORRISON: And what distinction -- what do you say about
15 the distinction to be made between statements which are made spontaneous
16 and statements which are made as part of an investigative -- more formal
17 investigative process?
18 MR. ROBINSON: Well, I think there might be room for feeling that
19 some spontaneous statements would be more reliable than those being made
20 part of an investigative context, but in this particular case, this is
21 essentially the same thing. This is an investigative journalist instead
22 of an investigative police officer asking somebody about events that
23 essentially he's investigating. Whether -- I don't think it's
24 particularly a big distinction, as far as the fairness of the trial goes,
25 whether the statements are made to a journalist or made to a police
1 officer. If there's somebody inquiring about the events at the time
2 later on, and the person is making a statement to them, then it
3 basically -- it has the same problems of reliability and subjectivity,
4 motive, and all those things that go into a statement made by a third
5 party after the events. And those are the people that really we should
6 be here -- hearing and cross-examining. If we're going to give any
7 weight at all to the statement of a third party after the events, we
8 ought to have that person here so that we could find out what they meant
9 when they said it and what -- what reliability there is to that person in
10 general. What is their credibility.
11 JUDGE BAIRD: Mr. Robinson, we're dealing here with the question
12 of admissibility as opposed to reliability.
13 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, we're dealing with the question of
14 admissibility because there is a threshold before something is
15 admissible, that there ought to be some level of reliability and some
16 level of fairness by the fact that some information is admitted in a
17 context in which it can't really be challenged. And so every -- if we're
18 just dealing with weight we can say that everything is admissible, no
19 rules. So there has to be some line at which we say, even though we are
20 professional Judges and can weigh the evidence no matter what it is,
21 there's some line before we're going to even admit the evidence in a
22 criminal trial against an accused person, and I thought you were drawing
23 that line in statements after the fact by third parties wouldn't be
25 JUDGE BAIRD: Thank you.
1 JUDGE MORRISON: And lastly for me, what about the nexus between
2 this particular witness and the statement?
3 MR. ROBINSON: Yes. Well, there's almost no nexus between the
4 witness and the statement other than the fact that the witness is someone
5 who is known -- the person making the statement is someone who's known to
6 the witness, but he himself has been saying how surprised he is to hear
7 the sentiments being expressed by this individual.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes. I was waiting for the translation.
9 Yes, Mr. Gaynor or Mr. Tieger.
10 MR. GAYNOR: Well, Your Honours, I was just going to say that
11 this -- these two extracts that we've seen do not fall within our
12 understanding of the term "statement". A statement prepared for the
13 purposes of a domestic investigation or for the purposes of proceedings
14 before this Tribunal do fall within the lex specialis, 92 bis, 92 quater,
15 et cetera. In this situation, what we have are a few sentences made by
16 an individual in the context of a greater document. It's like a
17 newspaper article in which the person says a few things or any document
18 tendered to Your Honours in which person A says that person B told me X.
19 Now, under the hearsay rules, which are in place in this Tribunal, such
20 hearsay evidence is admissible and the question of weight is the question
21 to be addressed. In this case, I believe that the two extracts do not
22 fall within Your Honours' consistent rulings that statements need to
23 comply with the rules of 92 bis, 92 ter, et cetera. Thank you.
24 MR. TIEGER: And Mr. President, if I could add one point since
25 reference has been made to the confrontation which implicates the hearsay
1 rule and to 92 bis: There is not a system in the world where such a
2 statement could not come in. Let's look at the adversarial system which
3 attempts to be restrictive in its admission of hearsay to protect juries.
4 In such circumstances, however, there are a panoply of exceptions by
5 which evidence comes in despite the fact that it's hearsay. One such
6 exception relates to admissions against penal interest. Another
7 exception relates to statements by co-conspirators or participants in a
8 joint criminal effort and so on.
9 This is a document that would come in a much more restrictive
10 setting and -- and evidential system than we have here. So it would be
11 paradoxical to invoke our broader, more receptive system because we have
12 Judges in favour of keeping evidence out, and the paradox is, of course,
13 that the rationale is let's not circumvent 92 bis. Of course that's
14 right. That provision exists so that the hearsay rule wouldn't swallow
15 up everything. So therefore the Prosecution -- therefore, when
16 statements are taken under the circumstances Mr. Gaynor outlined and
17 there is an attempt to circumvent that, there's a reason to pay attention
18 to it, but when there is otherwise a situation in which the evidence
19 would come in even in the most restrictive system, that is no -- then the
20 invocation of 92 bis is -- is obviously inapt for both the reasons
21 Mr. Gaynor outlined and because it is, in fact, not being circumvented.
22 So here we have evidence which would classically come in, even
23 under the most restrictive of evidential systems. It should come in here
24 in a system that has been designed to ensure that this Chamber and other
25 Chambers are in a position to get as much evidence as possible so they
1 can -- so you can make a decision based on the totality of the evidence
2 at the end of the case.
3 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. Not to belabour this
4 conversation, but I'm going to have to make Mr. Tieger go back to federal
5 rules of evidence school, because statements of co-conspirators are not
6 admitted, unless they're made in furtherance of the conspiracy. A
7 statement to a journalist later on would not be admissible, at least in
8 the system that he and I work. And also statements against interest are
9 also not admissible unless the person is shown to be unavailable. Thank
11 MR. TIEGER: And I have to repeat, we're not in -- we're not in
12 the federal system. We're not in California. We're in a system which is
13 designed to ensure that this court gets the best information possible.
14 There's no effort to circumvent 92 bis here. There's no violation of
15 hearsay because we don't have hearsay. This evidence should come in.
16 JUDGE KWON: I apologise for your inconvenience, Mr. Gasi. Could
17 you bear with me a moment.
18 [Trial Chamber confers]
19 JUDGE KWON: In case of a third party's statement such as the
20 interview article given to the newspaper journalist, unless the witness
21 confirms or adopts the part of the content of the statement, it has been
22 our practice not to admit the third party's statement.
23 The Chamber is of the view this applies to this video. So we'll
24 admit this video without the audio, given that a witness identified
25 certain places.
1 Mr. Gaynor, please proceed.
2 MR. GAYNOR: Thank you, Mr. President. Could we call up, please,
3 65 ter 07706. This photograph coming up now was shown to you --
4 JUDGE KWON: We'll give the number first for the previous one.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3007, Your Honours.
6 MR. GAYNOR:
7 Q. It was shown to you during the Krajisnik trial. It's referred to
8 at page 437 of that transcript.
9 MR. GAYNOR: Mr. Registrar. Could we focus in now.
10 Q. Could you recognise this location, Mr. Gasi?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Where is it?
13 A. Very close to the Brcko-based Elektrodistribucija. To be more
14 precise, as you go towards Bijeljina, along the main road, you reach the
15 Mistrafovic that's where you turn right towards the pig farm and towards
16 the customs area, and it is perhaps some 200 metres away from that main
18 Q. Do you recognise the vehicle in the top right-hand portion of
19 this photograph?
20 A. I used to see that vehicle every day because it passed two or
21 three times a day by the Brcko-based Elektrodistribucija company.
22 Q. Tell us what period of time you're referring to.
23 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President. I have an objection to
24 this, and unless I'm mistake, this does not relate to the Luka camp and
25 maybe Mr. Gaynor can correct me if I am wrong, but I think this is
1 another event --
2 MR. GAYNOR: Yeah. This -- this does not relate to any specific
3 dropped incident. What we're get to go is the identity of the person who
4 drove the vehicle. We'll get there in about one question's time.
5 Perhaps I can proceed and then Mr. Robinson can rise again if he wishes.
6 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Let us see. Let's proceed, Mr. Gaynor.
7 MR. GAYNOR:
8 Q. You referred to seeing this two or three times a day while you
9 were at Elektrodistribucija. Could you clarify what time period you're
10 referring to here?
11 A. Perhaps the first time in the course of the day, around 9.00 in
12 the morning, and then maybe half an hour or an hour later it would go
13 back in the direction of town, and then around 2.00 or 3.00 in the
14 afternoon, and then the last time late in the afternoon before dusk,
15 perhaps around 6.00 or 7.00 in the evening. And that was in May 1992.
16 Q. Do you know who was driving that vehicle?
17 A. On one occasion I saw Mika Marinkovic driving that vehicle.
18 Q. Earlier in your evidence, you referred to a person listed on the
19 payment list under 312 as Milomir Marinkovic. Do you recall that?
20 A. Yes. I believe it's the same one, yes. Yes. It is the same
22 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to tender that photograph, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE KWON: Why do we need this photo, Mr. Gaynor?
24 MR. GAYNOR: In fact, it's one of the associated exhibits subject
25 to Your Honour's ruling. I was the connecting the identity of the driver
1 of the van to the location of mass graves in and around Brcko, which is
2 relevant to the persecutory context in which Luka camp operated.
3 JUDGE KWON: On a related note, have you identified these
4 associated exhibits which are not supposed to be tendered pursuant to
5 73 bis (D).
6 MR. GAYNOR: I haven't had time to did do that, Mr. President. I
7 was going to do that overnight and come back to you tomorrow.
8 Your Honours have given us the precise pages and I just need to match up
9 which exhibits are on which pages.
10 JUDGE KWON: I think this was referred to in transcript page 437,
11 and this is one of them.
12 Mr. Robinson.
13 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Your Honour. As I understand it this is one
14 of those events that is not -- I haven't checked the transcript pages
15 myself. Especially, you gave the e-court pages, so I have to match them
16 against the actual transcript pages. But this -- the event -- what he
17 described viewing some bodies is completely independent of his stay at
18 the Luka camp, and I didn't see any connection between this particular
19 event and what you've allowed as permissible for Brcko. So I don't
20 believe that you should admit the photograph, and we've had evidence --
21 he's identified a truck but the truck isn't the obvious point of the
22 photograph. The point of the photograph is a mass grave and it's not
23 relevant to these proceedings given your ruling.
24 MR. GAYNOR: If I may respond, Mr. President. What the witness
25 is essentially telling us is that the driver of this truck, who took
1 bodies to and from the mass grave, was the same person who's listed on
2 the police payment list. He is a member of the RS MUP in Brcko. Other
3 members of the RS MUP in Brcko were working at the Luka camp. So, if
4 nothing else, it certainly supports in a very strong way, the argument
5 that Luka fell under the control of the RS MUP in Brcko.
6 [Trial Chamber confers]
7 JUDGE KWON: While the Chamber understands the link, albeit
8 marginal, between this photo and the alleged Marinkovic's role, by
9 majority, Judge Morrison dissenting, it is not admitting this evidence
10 since we don't see any need to admit this through this witness.
11 MR. GAYNOR: I'm obliged, Mr. President. The next exhibit
12 concerns the identity of a particular individual, and I'd like to call up
13 07411. It does depict an incident which has been struck from the
14 indictment. It's being brought up to -- to -- in relation to the
15 identity of an individual who was seen at Luka camp.
16 Could we rotate that, please.
17 Q. First of all, Witness, do you know who the individual on the left
19 A. When I saw these pictures for the first time in Belgrade in 1992,
20 I didn't know who that person was. Now I do know.
21 Q. Who is it?
22 A. Goran Jelisic.
23 Q. Can you make any comments whatsoever about the clothing which he
24 is wearing?
25 A. Police uniform, the one that existed then in Brcko.
1 MR. GAYNOR: Can I ask Mr. Registrar, please, to focus on the
2 bottom left corner of the photograph, please.
3 Q. Do you see the item that Mr. Jelisic appears to be wearing on his
4 right hip?
5 A. A police truncheon.
6 MR. GAYNOR: I'd like to tender that photograph, Mr. President.
7 JUDGE KWON: Is this not related to the Schedule A incident 4.3?
8 MR. GAYNOR: If that's a -- it does depict a dropped incident,
9 Mr. President. The point I'm wishing to make is that this individual was
10 seen at Luka camp by this witness and by others and perhaps if I ask a
11 few more questions of the witness it will become clearer.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
13 MR. GAYNOR:
14 Q. Mr. Gasi, you saw Goran Jelisic at Luka camp; is that right?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. What uniform was he wearing when you saw him at Luka camp?
17 A. On one occasion he wore a camouflage uniform.
18 Q. And on the other occasions when you saw him?
19 A. Once he wore a police uniform as we see now in this photo, but it
20 wasn't a shirt. It was the regular police coat.
21 MR. GAYNOR: So, Mr. President, the purpose of tendering this
22 photograph is to support the witness's evidence that Goran Jelisic did
23 appear in police uniforms. He's holding a police truncheon.
24 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
25 MR. ROBINSON: Actually, Mr. President, I really can't think of
1 a -- of a credible objection to this, because although it deals with an
2 another incident, showing the link between Mr. Jelisic and the police, I
3 think is a relevant thing for the Prosecution so we don't object.
4 JUDGE KWON: Yes, all right. We'll admit this.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3008, Your Honours.
6 MR. GAYNOR: Thank you, Mr. President.
7 Thank you, Mr. Witness. I have no further questions.
8 JUDGE KWON: You suggest dealing with the associated exhibit
10 MR. GAYNOR: Yes, when I have a chance to study Your Honours'
11 ruling and to identify those which fall within the ruling, I would like
12 to tender them at that point, Mr. President.
13 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
14 Very well. We have about -- more than ten minutes, Mr. Karadzic.
15 Could you begin your cross-examination.
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If you wish, Excellency, I can put
17 a few questions, introductory questions.
18 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
19 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Gasi.
20 A. Good afternoon, Mr. Karadzic.
21 Q. Today on page 68 of the transcript you said that you attended the
22 founding assembly and that you heard me say that Serbs would no longer
23 allow something that had happened to them before to happen to them again,
24 and you say that you were perplexed because that is not something that
25 you studied in the history that you studied; is that right?
1 A. Yes, that's right.
2 Q. Mr. Gasi, a few months before that did Mr. Tudjman win the
3 elections in Croatia, and did he return the symbols that the Independent
4 State of Croatia had?
5 A. You're right. Tudjman did win. Now, as far as the independent
6 symbols are concerned of the Croatian state from the Second World War, I
7 would not agree with you on that.
8 Q. Is it correct that Mr. Tudjman returned the chequer-board flag,
9 the kuna as the currency? Did he not say that the Independent State of
10 Croatia, the NDH, was not a fascist state but, rather, part of the
11 aspirations of the Croat people to have their own state?
12 A. You're right. That is what he said. As for the kuna and the
13 chequer-board flag, it is the same symbol like what you Serbs have,
14 Eagles with the four Ss.
15 Q. Mr. Gasi, the two-headed eagle with the four Ss is an ancient
16 Byzantine symbol that Russians and Albanians also have, at least, it is
17 also the Russians and Albanians, whereas the chequer-board flag and kuna
18 existed only in Pavelic's day during the Second World War; right?
19 A. You are right.
20 Q. Do you remember, you were a member of the SDA, did you attend the
21 founding assembly of the SDA in Sarajevo?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Please, we should pause a bit because we speak the same language
24 no matter what we call it, and then the interpreters are going to have a
25 tough time until they manage to interpret what we're saying.
1 A. You are right.
2 Q. Do you remember that this founding assembly, the -- of the SDA in
3 Sarajevo, Mr. Dalibor Brozovic, a high official of the Croatian state,
4 that is, and Croatian Democratic Community, the HDZ, said that Croatia
5 would defend itself on the Drina River?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Do you remember that the boundary of the Independent State of
8 Croatia was on the Drina River? It had engulfed Bosnia and Herzegovina
9 during the Second World War.
10 A. Yes, you're right.
11 Q. Do you understand now why I said that, if indeed I did? Did you
12 understand that Bosnian -- that Serbs were worried that
13 Bosnia-Herzegovina would become part of an Independent State of Croatia
15 A. You see, Mr. Karadzic, I wouldn't agree with you on that now.
16 Q. This Assembly that you attended and that you participated in, was
17 that on the 26th of May?
18 A. Yes, Mr. Karadzic. The Holiday Inn in Sarajevo.
19 Q. And the founding of the SDA in Brcko was sometime in August, the
20 end of August?
21 A. St. Peter's Day, Mr. Karadzic.
22 Q. St. Peter's Day is on the 12th of July, and that is when it was
23 founded in Sarajevo. When was it founded in Brcko?
24 A. In Brcko, I'm telling you it was St. Peter's Day. You Serbs also
25 have an old calendar, and sometimes you use the new calendar too. So the
1 only thing I can tell you is it was St. Peter's Day. Now, was it June
2 according to the old calendar or July, again, I'm not sure.
3 Q. Are you trying to say that on St. Peter's Day I was both in Brcko
4 and in Sarajevo at the same time?
5 A. I'm telling you now, now was St. Peter's Day in Sarajevo on one
6 particular day and whether you went to Brcko on the next day, I don't
7 know, but I know it was St. Peter's Day, and I know that I saw you on a
8 podium that was made for you in front of the cultural centre and you were
9 making a speech. Mr. Solaja, a local Brcko Serb, was on one side
10 standing next to you and on the other side was Mr. Zika Lakic, a good
11 friend of mine from Elektrodistribucija.
12 Q. Very well. We're going to establish that easily from the
13 newspapers. When this happened were there any journalists at the
14 founding Assembly of the SDS in Brcko?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. And do you believe that they followed my speech and carried it as
18 A. I'm sure they did.
19 Q. Were there any unfavourable reactions to that speech of mine in
21 A. Yes. When from the audience people starting shouting things at
22 you and when they started ringing symbols, the ones that we mentioned a
23 moment ago. That is when the people who were watching this and listening
24 to this started behaving like that. It wasn't only Serbs. There were
25 other ethnic groups there as well.
1 Q. Mr. Gasi, I'm just asking you something else --
2 JUDGE KWON: I need to remind you, Mr. Gasi, again, if you start
3 answering before the interpretation into English or French, it is over --
4 the interpreters are having difficulty to hear you. So put a pause after
5 the question before you start answering, please.
6 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
7 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. This is what I'm asking you: Was there any criticism in the
10 public of this particular speech? Were analysts and journalists writing
11 about that speech of mine as something that was unacceptable?
12 A. As far as I can remember, that was not the case.
13 Q. Thank you. At the founding Assembly, was the representative of
14 the SDA and the HDZ, were they all invited and did they all attend, and
15 could one see the future coalition in the making there?
16 A. Yes, you're right.
17 Q. Thank you. Do you know what happened to Serbs during the
18 Second World War in Brcko?
19 A. As for what I learned in history and what I heard from my father
20 who was a participant in the national liberation war, yes.
21 Q. Would you tell the Trial Chamber what happened to them.
22 MR. GAYNOR: Objection, Mr. President. This is very, very
23 marginally relevant to events in Brcko in 1992, as well as possibly being
24 tu quoque.
25 JUDGE KWON: Move on to another topic, Mr. Karadzic.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, with all due respect,
2 this has to do with mens rea, what I was thinking in the summer of 1990
3 and whether that was founded on anything. The witness took a certain
4 position with regard to that speech of mine. He was surprised at it, and
5 we now realise that the HDZ won the election in Croatia and that Brozovic
6 attended and the witness knows from what his father told him that --
7 JUDGE KWON: I think you put sufficient questions. I think you
8 can move on to another topic.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. Mr. Gasi, do we agree that although the Muslims constituted the
12 majority population of Brcko, nevertheless it wasn't the SDA that won in
13 Brcko. It was the successor of the Communist Party, the so-called SDP;
15 A. The successor of the League of Communists of Yugoslavia, the
16 Socialist Democratic Party, yes.
17 Q. Is it correct that the SDA won about 10 per cent more of the vote
18 in Brcko than the SDS did?
19 A. In terms of percentages, I'm not sure. I believe that they got
20 quite a bit more.
21 Q. Well, do you agree that the SDA won about 28 per cent, the HDZ
22 about 22 per cent, and the SDS about 17 per cent?
23 A. Yes. I think you could be right on that.
24 Q. Do you agree that these three political parties that were the
25 victorious parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina constituted a coalition in Brcko
1 as well with the intention of changing the system -- or, rather, to take
2 over from the successors of the Communists?
3 A. I believe that that was your intention, yes.
4 Q. You were a member of the SDA; right?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. From the 26th of May, 1990, from its founding; right?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Did you hold any particular position in the party in Brcko?
9 A. Yes. I was a member of the Executive Board.
10 Q. How many members did the Executive Board of the city board of the
11 SDA in Brcko have?
12 A. I think it was seven when I was a member.
13 Q. Thank you. So you were one of seven; right?
14 A. That's right.
15 Q. Until when were you in the SDA?
16 A. When the election lists were being completed, that is when I
17 publicly resigned all the posts I held in the SDA.
18 Q. However, in your statement of the 7th of May, 1993, 65 ter number
19 19924, on page 1 you say that you were in the SDA until November 1991,
20 that is to say, for all of one year since the elections -- from the time
21 the elections took place?
22 A. No. I resigned before January. That's not correct that I was
23 not a member in 1991.
24 Q. Let us have a look at this, 1D --
25 JUDGE KWON: Let's stop here.
1 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] As you wish, yes.
2 JUDGE KWON: We'll continue tomorrow.
3 Mr. Gasi, as you must have been explained by the victims and
4 witness section, during your testimony you are not supposed to discuss
5 with anybody about your testimony. Do you understand that?
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. Yes, Judge.
7 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Gasi.
8 We'll rise and resume tomorrow at 9.00. Tomorrow we'll be
9 sitting until 2.30, with two half an hour breaks.
10 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 3.01 p.m.,
11 to be reconvened on Friday, the 15th day
12 of July, 2011, at 9.00 a.m.