1 Thursday, 20 October 2011
2 [Closed session]
11 Pages 20222-20301 redacted. Closed session.
2 [Open session]
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes Mr. Robinson.
4 MR. ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. President. This is the 60th motion
5 for finding of disclosure violation and for remedial measures. I
6 apologise for making it orally, and perhaps after you hear me a little
7 bit, it might be advisable to have this in writing but since it deals
8 with the next witness I have to raise it orally.
9 At the end of -- at the break we received from the Prosecution
10 correspondence between itself and a government where the witness resides
11 in which the Prosecution requested that the repatriation of the witness
12 from that country be postponed as a result of his status as a witness for
13 the Prosecution, and there's correspondence from the government
14 indicating that they had granted that request, and we believe that this
15 should have been disclosed to us a long time ago. These are dated back
16 to 1996 and 1999, so they've been in the possession of the Prosecution
17 for a long time, and we feel that they fall squarely within Rule 68. And
18 fortunately, thanks to the work of Mr. Harvey and his colleagues, there's
19 been a decision on this very issue last week in the Haradinaj case, and
20 it's called: "Decision on Joint Defence Motion for Relief from Rule 68
21 Violations by the Prosecution and for Sanctions Pursuant to Rule 68 bis,"
22 a decision of 12 October 2011, in which the Prosecution was found to have
23 violated Rule 68 by failing to disclose the very same type of information
24 that was in support of an asylum application in that case, and the
25 Prosecution was, in fact, reprimanded, or the Prosecutor himself,
1 Mr. Rogers, was reprimanded for his failure to disclose this information.
2 After we saw this decision we made a specific request on the 18th
3 of October for any promises or benefits conferred upon witnesses of this
4 nature and have now just received for this particular witness these
5 documentation. So we believe that you should make a finding that Rule 68
6 has been violated in this case, and we believe that as a remedy for that,
7 that you ought to either exclude the testimony of the witness given the
8 nature of the violation and the number of violations that have occurred
9 in this case, or at the minimum postpone his cross-examination until such
10 time as we've had an opportunity to review this material and incorporate
11 it into our cross-examination.
12 Thank you.
13 JUDGE KWON: Could you expand, before I hear from Mr. Tieger, how
14 those material forms kind of 68 inculpatory material?
15 MR. ROBINSON: Yes. It's the provision of a benefit to a witness
16 for -- in exchange for his testimony, so it goes to the witness's
17 credibility. And so in the Haradinaj decision, it's said:
18 "Evidence that the Prosecution has provided or may provide any
19 objective form of assistance to a witness falls squarely within the
20 purview of Rule 68."
21 And that's at paragraph 45 of that decision. And then it went on
22 to say that the Prosecution's failure to disclose a letter which assisted
23 the witness in his asylum application, as well as his request for such a
24 letter, violated Rule 68, and that's at paragraph 51 of that decision.
25 So we believe that there's -- and I think that it's also just
1 simply intuitive that whenever the Prosecution is providing a benefit to
2 a witness, it relates to that witness's credibility. Thank you.
3 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Tieger.
4 MR. TIEGER: Well, Mr. President, I think we -- we'll obviously
5 be moving forward on this. I imagine Mr. Robinson will be submitting his
6 written submission in furtherance of this. Let me emphasise that we
7 responded as quickly as possible to Mr. -- to the Defence's 66(B)
8 request. They have the materials, as Mr. Robinson indicated. Given the
9 court schedule and the nature of those materials which Mr. Robinson
10 himself asserts he is now fully assimilated, they're very short, there's
11 more than ample time before this cross-examination concludes to
12 incorporate them into their cross-examination strategy, and as for
13 Mr. Robinson's suggestion that there is some form of stare decisis in the
14 form of the decision in Haradinaj, the Court will have an opportunity to
15 examine, I presume based on Mr. Robinson's representations, the asserted
16 basis for the characterisation of these materials as Rule 68, the nature
17 of those materials, the nature of the specific circumstances, and make
18 its own determination accordingly.
19 In the meantime, there's no reason not to proceed. We're not
20 going to conclude the cross-examination today. There is more than
21 sufficient time -- in my estimation, there will be quite sufficient time
22 to address the materials received with the witness today, but there
23 certainly will be more than sufficient time to do so before the witness's
24 testimony concludes.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 JUDGE KWON: The Court will rise to consider this matter briefly,
2 but before that, Ms. Sutherland, how long do you estimate your
3 examination-in-chief to last?
4 MS. SUTHERLAND: Hopefully about 20 minutes, Your Honour.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
6 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, would you like to look at any of
7 the material as part of your deliberations?
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, thank you.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I just ask to complete my
10 answer to Mr. Tieger why the question of conferences was so important,
11 the conferences on Bosnia? He objected to my mention of Cutileiro. Just
12 one --
13 JUDGE KWON: Not now, Mr. Karadzic.
14 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I kindly ask you --
15 JUDGE KWON: It won't --
16 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Then I kindly ask you to tell me
17 when I can do this.
18 JUDGE KWON: We rise for five minutes.
19 --- Break taken at 4.35 p.m.
20 --- On resuming at 4.45 p.m.
21 JUDGE KWON: The Chamber will now make a ruling as to whether
22 this constitutes a violation on the part of the Prosecution of Rule 68
23 obligation. In order to reach that conclusion, we need a written
24 submission from the Defence. Irrespective of the conclusion we may reach
25 in terms of preparation for Mr. Karadzic's cross-examination on this
1 topic, given that this is very short document and that the -- the
2 cross-examination of this witness will not be concluded today, and
3 Mr. Karadzic will have ample time to prepare for this particular,
4 considering the fact that we will resume on Wednesday next week, there's
5 no prejudice on the part of the Defence in starting the cross-examination
7 That's the ruling. And before we hear the evidence of the next
8 witness, there's one oral ruling the Chamber wishes to issue with regard
9 to the -- Mr. Karadzic's motion for reclassification of ex parte appendix
10 KDZ-456, protective measures, which was filed on 19th of October, 2011.
11 The Chamber notes the Prosecution's response filed earlier today
12 not opposing the motion. The Chamber hereby grants the motion and orders
13 that the confidential and ex parte Appendix A to the Prosecution motion
14 for delayed disclosure for KDZ-456, KDZ-493, KDZ-532, and KDZ-531, and
15 variation of protective measures for KDZ-489, filed on 8th of May, 2009,
16 be disclosed to the accused and reclassified as confidential.
17 Very well. Let's bring in the witness.
18 I will return these documents to Mr. Robinson.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Good afternoon, Your Honour. The Prosecution
20 calls Ivo Atlija.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Ms. Sutherland.
22 [The witness entered court]
23 THE WITNESS: IVO ATLIJA
24 [Witness answered through interpreter]
25 JUDGE KWON: Good afternoon, Mr. Atlija.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.
2 JUDGE KWON: Would you take the solemn declaration, please.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
4 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Please make yourself comfortable.
6 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
7 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Ms. Sutherland.
8 Examination by Ms. Sutherland:
9 Q. Sir, please state your full name for the record.
10 A. My name is Ivo Atlija.
11 Q. Mr. Atlija, as we discussed, part of your evidence in this case
12 will be submitted in writing, and we first need to deal with the
13 formalities associated with that submission.
14 You testified in a number of ICTY trials, and in particular the
15 Stakic trial on the 3rd and 4th of July, 2002, and you've had the
16 opportunity to review the audio recordings of that testimony. Can you
17 confirm that the audio recordings accurately reflect your statements at
18 the time?
19 A. Yes, I did listen over to the statements, and they are correct.
20 Q. If you were asked about the same matters in court today, would
21 you provide the same information to the Trial Chamber?
22 A. I wouldn't change anything. I would provide the same answers.
23 MS. SUTHERLAND: The 65 ter number 20710 is the English
24 transcript of Mr. Atlija's Stakic testimony, Your Honour. I have noted a
25 few corrections in the English transcript. Transcript page 5550, line 5,
1 the question begins: "You say that this was the SDA propaganda," and
2 from the sentence immediately after it and the questions before it, it is
3 clear that "SDA" should read "SDS."
4 At transcript page 5554, line 17, the word "look" should read
6 Transcript page 5602, line 5, "Jakerina," spelled
7 J-a-k-e-r-i-n-a, should be spelled J-a-k-a-r-i-n-a.
8 At transcript page 5655, line 1, the word "it" should read "had,"
9 and this is clear because it's the same question that was repeated
10 earlier at transcript page 5653, at line 16.
11 And finally at transcript page 5610, "son Iva" should read the
12 "son Ivo."
13 And with those corrections, I would tender 65 ter number 20710,
14 the witness's Stakic testimony into evidence.
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes. That will be admitted.
16 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P3672, Your Honours.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: With Your Honours' leave, I will now read a
18 summary of the witness's written evidence.
19 The witness, Ivo Atlija, was born in the village of Brisevo in
20 the Prijedor municipality, a village inhabited predominantly by Bosnian
21 Croats. In early 1992, the witness lived in the town of Prijedor and
22 worked in the central repair shop at the Ljubija mine.
23 The witness testified about the inter-ethnic relations, pre-war
24 propaganda, the increase of armed persons in the municipality, and the
25 SDS takeover of power in the municipality at the end of April 1992. He
1 testified that on the day of the takeover, when he was on his way to
2 work, he saw check-points and bunkers along the road, armed Serb soldiers
3 and Serb flags flying outside the municipal building. When he arrived at
4 work, the manager told employees that orders had arrived, that the SDS
5 had taken power in Prijedor, and that they should disperse and go back to
6 their homes. The witness then went to the village of Brisevo and a Serb
7 subsequently moved into his apartment in Prijedor.
8 The witness described attacks by Bosnian Serb forces on Brisevo
9 and surrounding villages. He explained that because Brisevo is located
10 on higher ground than surrounding villages, he was able to observe in
11 considerable detail the military attack on Hambarine, which is Schedule A
12 10.2, and see the destruction of houses in Carakovo, Rizvanovici, and
13 Kozarac, and that's Schedule A, 10.1. Subsequently he became aware that
14 villagers had been killed. The witness also testified that he heard
15 radio broadcasts by the Bosnian Serb authorities about the attacks which
16 asserted the "great success of the Serb army."
17 The witness testified that Brisevo was initially shelled on the
18 27th of May, 1992. He described in detail the second attack on Brisevo
19 by Bosnian Serb forces, using artillery and infantry, which started in
20 the early hours on 24 [Realtime transcript read in error "14"] July 1992.
21 He testified that approximately 68 people were killed, including his
22 father, 14 women, 2 male persons under the age of 16, and 4 invalids, and
23 this is Schedule A, 10.9. He testified that 36 men were arrested and
24 taken to Krings detention facility in the Sanski Most municipality. This
25 is Schedule C, 22.4. The Catholic church in Brisevo, which is Schedule
1 D, 17, and many houses were destroyed or badly damaged during the attack.
2 The witness also testified that between the time of the second
3 attack on Brisevo and the end -- at the end of July and his departure
4 from the area in November 1992, the witness helped to bury the dead,
5 attended the funerals, and saw the bodies of more than 200 non-Serbs
6 killed by Bosnian Serb forces. The witness testified that he
7 participated in two discussions with the representative of the
8 authorities of the Serb autonomous region of Krajina, Vojo Kupresanin,
9 who told the witness that the attack on Brisevo was a "minor incident" in
10 which the 6th Krajina Brigade and the 5th Kozara Brigade were involved.
11 The witness testified that he also had a meeting with Milomir Stakic, the
12 mayor of Prijedor, about moving out of the area.
13 That completes the summary of the witness's written evidence.
14 Q. Mr. Atlija, I have a limited number of questions for you. You
15 testified at transcript page 5559 that the first attack on Brisevo was on
16 the 27th of May, 1992. How long did that first attack last?
17 A. That first attack lasted almost the entire day. However, the
18 intensity got small -- lower and lower in the afternoon, and then our
19 delegation went to the Serb check-points in the direction of Rasavci and
20 Ostra Luka village, and after that meeting the attack ceased.
21 Now I would like to take this opportunity because I noticed in
22 English translation when you talked about the second attack on the 24th
23 of July, 1992, the transcript shows the 14th of July and I believe that
24 that should be corrected.
25 Q. Thank you. Between the first attack and the second attack on
1 Brisevo on the -- on the 24th of July, were you and other inhabitants of
2 Brisevo able to travel freely in the municipality of Prijedor?
3 A. Our movement was very restricted. We could not move freely.
4 Q. You testified at transcript page 5597 that 68 persons were killed
5 during the course of the attack on Brisevo on the 24th of July and
6 testified in detail about burials which you participated in, and that's
7 at transcript page 5598 to 5617, and transcript page 5639 to 5640. I
8 want to quickly go some -- go through some of the grave sites which you
9 described in your testimony and the persons buried therein.
10 At transcript page 5603, if Mr. Registrar can bring that on to
11 the screen, you talked about the grave in the hamlet of Mlinari, and on
12 transcript page 5605, you mentioned a number of people who were buried,
13 Luka Mlinar, Ivica Mlinar, Jerko Ivandic, Milan Ivandic, and his two
14 brothers, and you don't recall their names right now. You think one of
15 them was called Pejo Ivandic. Do you know a person called Stipo Ivandic?
16 A. The names are correctly recorded. Pejo Ivandic was the brother
17 to Milan Ivandic, and of course I know them. They were people from our
19 Q. Do you know Stipo Ivandic?
20 A. Yes, of course I do, and I apologise, I should have made a pause
21 for the interpreters' sake, but of course I do know Stipo Ivandic, too.
22 Q. Do you know what happened to him in 1992?
23 A. Stipo Ivandic and his entire family Ivandic and several other
24 local people whose names were not Ivandic were taken out of the house.
25 They were made to dig for their own graves. They were made to take
1 pickaxes and spades and shovels and dig out their own graves, and then
2 they were they were shot dead, and then they were put in the graves,
3 covered partially by soil, and then left there.
4 Q. And you mention that on page -- transcript page 5604. My
5 question is: Was Stipo buried in that grave as well?
6 A. Yes, Stipo Ivandic was buried there too.
7 Q. Thank you. On the same page, transcript page 5605, you talk
8 about a grave in the hamlet of Buzuci. And you mention there a number of
9 people. You said that they were lying in front of Marko Buzuk's house.
10 You mention Milan Buzuk and Ivica Buzuk. Do you know a person called
11 Mate Buzuk?
12 A. Yes, I do know Mate Buzuk. They, too, were members of one
13 family. Milan Buzuk was the son of Marko Buzuk, and Marko and Mate were
15 Q. What happened to Mate Buzuk in 1992, do you know?
16 A. I saw Mate Buzuk get killed outside his house that belonged to
17 his father, Marko Buzuk, and he was buried with the others.
18 Q. With Milan and Ivica?
19 A. Milan and Ivica were killed, too, outside their house. They were
20 about several metres apart, their bodies, and it was especially difficult
21 to see Milan there, because his head was smashed with some hard object,
22 probably with some kind of stick or pole, and there were traces of blood
23 next to them, and we buried them there too.
24 Q. The three of them together.
25 A. Yes. We buried them, in fact, in the yard just outside Marko
1 Buzuk's house.
2 Q. Moving on to another grave. This is at transcript page 5606 at a
3 hamlet called Jezerske [sic]. Am I pronouncing it correctly?
4 A. The place is called Jezerce.
5 Q. There you mentioned -- you found bodies of Srecko Buzuk,
6 Ivo Lovric's body, Vlatko Buzuk. Do you know a person called
7 Miroslav Buzuk?
8 A. Miroslav Buzuk was Vlatko Buzuk's brother. He was buried. He
9 was a co-worker. We worked for years together.
10 Q. I now want to move to transcript page 5607. You talk about --
11 you mention there the hamlet of Mustanica, and you mention that
12 Pero Dimac was buried there, and also your father, Atlija, was buried in
13 another place. What was the name of your father, the first name of your
15 A. My father's first name was Ilija. His name was Ilija Atlija, and
16 Pero Dimac was buried near his house; whereas, my father was buried some
17 15 to 20 metres away from our family home in Brisevo. And I would like
18 again to note here that it should -- where it says "Zlatko Buzuk" in the
19 transcript it should be "Vlatko." So it's not a Z but a V, Vlatko,
21 Q. Thank you, Mr. Atlija. Also on transcript page 5607 you mention
22 Ante Matanovic, and you say that he was buried about two kilometres south
23 from his house but that part of that village is also called Mustanica. I
24 would like to show you a document.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: If 65 ter number 13027 could be placed on the
2 Q. Mr. Atlija, do you recognise the document on the screen dated the
3 16th of June, 1997?
4 A. Yes, I do recognise this document.
5 Q. And this is an exhumation report. We do have an English
6 translation. And you reviewed this document a couple of days ago, did
7 you not?
8 A. Yes, I did.
9 Q. And it concerned the exhumation at a place called Stara Rijeka;
10 is that right?
11 A. Yes. This was exhumation from the Grosica cemeteries between
12 Stari Majdan and Stara Rijeka, which is in the area of separation, the
13 borderline between Republika Srpska and the Federation of Bosnia and
14 Herzegovina, and I'm not quite certain on whose territory officially it
16 Q. And this exhumation report lists the bodies of nine people with
17 the family name Matanovic [phoen], that is Miladin, Johan, Irvin [phoen],
18 Fabijan, Ante, Zoran, Goran, Predrag, Zdravko. The Ante Matanovic that's
19 listed in this document as body number 5, is that the same Ante Matanovic
20 that you referred to at transcript page 5607?
21 A. Yes, it is the same Ante Matanovic. He was killed near his house
22 and then he was subsequently transferred buried together with the other
23 members of the Matanovic family at the cemetery Grosica.
24 Q. And did you attend that burial with the other members -- with an
25 Ante and other members of the Matanovic family?
1 A. No, I did not attend the funeral at the Grosica cemetery.
2 MS. SUTHERLAND: Your Honour, I tender that document.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
4 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P3673, Your Honours.
5 MS. SUTHERLAND:
6 Q. Mr. Atlija, at transcript page 5608, you talk about a grave-site
7 at -- in the hamlet of Ivandici, and you were asked how many people were
8 there, and you said several people, practically -- this is on transcript
9 page 5609. Several people, practically the whole of Ivandic family. And
10 then you mention Stipo, his wife, his two sons, but you don't know their
11 names any more. Do you know the name of Sreto Ivandic and
12 Danica Ivandic?
13 A. Yes, Sreto and Danica Ivandic were an elderly couple, and they
14 were also members of that same Ivandic family.
15 Q. And do you know what happened to them in 1992?
16 A. They, too, were killed near their own house, and they were also
17 buried near the place where they were murdered.
18 Q. Do you know a woman called Mara Ivandic?
19 A. Yes. Mara is also one of these unfortunate Ivandic people who
20 were killed at the time.
21 Q. And did you know a person called Andja, also known as Pranincina?
22 A. Yes, I did know her. Everyone called her Pranincina. I didn't
23 know her last name, and that's why when I gave my statement I only
24 provided her first name and her nickname, because I wasn't sure of her
25 last name. I'm not sure of her last name to this day. I don't know it.
1 Q. Do you know what happened to her in 1992?
2 A. She met the same sad fate as the other members of the Ivandic
3 family, and she also lived in the same part of the hamlet. There were
4 several houses there grouped together. I don't know exactly what house
5 it was.
6 Q. And finally in relation to this incident, do you know a person
7 called Bato Ivandic? Or that may be a nickname.
8 A. Bato is a nickname, and that's what I said in my statement,
9 because I couldn't recall his first name. Unfortunately, in that part --
10 in those parts it was common for people to be addressed with their
11 nicknames throughout their lives so that there were cases where people
12 died and I never learned their real names, unfortunately.
13 Q. Do you know what happened to him in 1992?
14 A. He, too, was killed together with the other members of the
15 Ivandic family, and in that same part of the village other people were
16 killed, members of other families, not just Ivandic family.
17 Q. Do you know the family names of the people that were killed?
18 A. Yes. For instance, members of the Komljen, Luka Komljen, his son
19 Ivo, and another son whose name I can't recall. Then Kaja Komljen.
20 Q. That's K-o-m-l-j-e-n.
21 I want to take you now to a grave in the hamlet of Cengici, and
22 this is at transcript page 5609, and you mention on transcript page
23 5610 -- sorry, just going back to -- to 5609. You said that there was a
24 grave near Ivo Zunic's house and several people were killed and buried
25 there, and you said that there were women in that grave, too, and in
1 particular there was someone called Kaja Komljen? Do you also -- do you
2 know a person called Ante Komljen and what his wife's name is?
3 A. Yes, I know Ante Komljen. He was related to Kaja Komljen, but
4 forgive me, I can't tell you exactly how they were related.
5 Q. You also mentioned a Luka Komljen and his son Ivo. Do you know
6 his wife and Ivo's mother's name?
7 A. I can't remember. I'm truly sorry. I forgot. It's been 20
9 Q. Do you know a person called Jovo Marijan, M-a-r-i-j-a-n, and if
10 so, do you know his wife's name?
11 A. Let me just correct you. His first name was not Jovo. It was
12 Ivo, I-v-o, Ivo Marijan. He was killed together with his wife. Now, the
13 name -- I don't know the name. I forgot.
14 Q. And were these people buried in the same grave that you mention
15 on transcript page 5610?
16 A. They were buried close to Ivo Zunic's house.
17 Q. Thank you, Mr. Atlija. I have no further questions. As
18 explained to you, your Stakic transcript is now evidence in this case.
19 MS. SUTHERLAND: Thank you very much, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE KWON: Any objection to admission of associated exhibit,
21 Mr. Robinson?
22 MR. ROBINSON: No, Mr. President.
23 JUDGE KWON: Just one item. Video-clip? 40471. The Chamber is
24 minded to admit only those portions shown to the witness at the trial.
25 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour.
1 JUDGE KWON: I wonder whether you can identify the portions.
2 Microphone, please.
3 MS. SUTHERLAND: I can, Your Honour. It's -- it starts 10
4 seconds into the clip and the witness can identify the -- the time-codes
5 of where he's -- certain things are shown, and we can provide that to the
6 Chamber. It -- it is shown up until 7 minutes 20, so the remaining 5
7 minutes on the current exhibit weren't played in the courtroom. So I
8 would only seek to tender up till 7 minutes 20, and that will be 40471A,
9 Your Honour.
10 JUDGE KWON: Very well. Thank you.
11 MS. SUTHERLAND: And then --
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
13 MS. SUTHERLAND: In relation to the other video, 40472A, I have
14 again the same -- I have done the same exercise, the time-codes, and it
15 starts at 10 minutes 20 and it goes through to the end at 11 minutes 40.
16 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. All the associate exhibits other than
17 those already admitted will be admitted into evidence and given a number.
18 Well, we have ten minutes. Would you like to start,
19 Mr. Karadzic.
20 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I will be guided by your wishes.
21 JUDGE KWON: Please proceed, Mr. Karadzic.
22 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
23 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Mr. Atlija?
24 A. Good afternoon, Mr. Karadzic.
25 Q. Forgive me if when expressing solidarity with you for the loss of
1 your father I nevertheless have to ask you this: Are you able to testify
2 in this case impartially, without any vested personal interest?
3 A. There is no difficulty in that for me. I testified in other
4 cases too. I try to be impartial and speak only to those issues that I
5 am certain of.
6 Q. Thank you for this. In your 2000 statement, October of 2000
7 that's 1D4469, you say that in your Croatian area Pajo Maretic [sic]
8 worked in the school and that he was the one reporting on all the
9 activities in that community to the Serbs. What was the period of time
10 that he worked in your school?
11 A. The teacher Pajo Marcetic, that's his proper name, native of
12 Rasavci, worked in our school at the time when I attended the primary
13 school. In other words, in the 1970s. He continued working up to the
14 war period, and he disappeared shortly before the attack on Brisevo.
15 Q. Thank you. Therefore, in that period leading to the attack, at
16 which point did he start working for the Serb side and spying on you?
17 A. I don't know if the term "spying" is appropriate at all. That's
18 not how I characterised. Pajo Marcetic was the sort of person who would,
19 even before the war, report to the then-milicija, that's to say the
20 police and other organs of authorities, everything that was happening,
21 and I'm talking about the period when the national parties came to be set
22 up, at a time when the referendum for the independence of
23 Bosnia-Herzegovina was organised. In that period, Pajo Marcetic would
24 report to Rasavci and Prijedor and all those things that he deemed
25 relevant and important that happened in Brisevo.
1 Q. And who to precisely?
2 A. Pajo Marcetic had very close links with the then authorities. He
3 would pay frequent witness -- visits to the municipality, to the police
4 station, though he was not officially either a municipality servant or a
5 member of the police force. I was able to see that after the war he said
6 that at the time he was a member of the SDS and he felt an obligation to
7 act the way he did.
8 Q. Thank you. You said that he conveyed to the authorities of
9 Republika Srpska -- or, rather, that he was loyal to the authorities of
10 Republika Srpska, and you said so on the 30th of January, 1993, to the
11 Croatian information agency, page 9 in English, and -- or, rather, no,
12 page 10 in English and 9 in Serbo-Croat; right?
13 A. That's right. It's just I'm not sure that it was really called
14 Republika Srpska at the time. I'm not sure if I used that name.
15 Frankly, I'd have to look at the statement.
16 Q. Do we agree, therefore, that Republika Srpska was not in
17 existence before April of 1992, before the war broke out in Sarajevo?
18 A. Excuse me, I'm making a pause for interpretation. At the time,
19 officially there was no Republika Srpska. You're right about that.
20 Q. Thank you. Can you please tell us what it was in Brisevo that
21 had to be concealed from the authorities?
22 A. It is such a general question. Can you please be more specific?
23 Q. If he informed on you in that case, he must have been conveying
24 information that you did not want the authorities to be aware of. What
25 was it exactly?
1 A. Can you please be more specific? There are a great many things
2 that can be discussed or done that inhabitants of a village need not
3 necessarily want the authorities to be aware of, regardless of the
4 inhabitants involved, the authorities involved, or the village involved.
5 Q. Very well. Thank you. However, at that point it was still
6 common government, government that ruled all. What was it that the
7 inhabitants of Brisevo did not want the authorities to know of and that
8 this man Marcetic conveyed to them?
9 A. Since you insist on putting this broad question to me, I will
10 give you an example. Marcetic went as far as stepping into the Catholic
11 church secretly during the mass to hear out what the priest had to say in
12 his sermon, in that bit between the prayers and the liturgy, and just as
13 was the case in the previous socialist system, that information would
14 immediately be transferred to the Ljubija police station and from there
15 to Prijedor, and those over there would immediately take measures.
16 Q. If we assume that this was something that had been done by the
17 Communists, what was it that he could have been conveying after the
18 elections because, as you say, whoever did something about somebody being
19 a member of a party, about somebody owning this or that, about somebody
20 standing against the authorities of Republika Srpska, who was loyal to
21 them or who was armed, that would be reported. Well, which of these
22 issues had to remain concealed from the authorities? I mean, who voted
23 for whom, that's not a secret issue. Who was a member of which party,
24 again not a secret issue. What I'd like to know is why did you deem him
25 dangerous for you?
1 A. Nowhere did I state that he was dangerous, that he was a danger
2 to us. And when you say that all these issues are in the public domain,
3 that's not true. Nobody need know who I vote for. Nobody need know if I
4 am a member of a political party or a political organisation, and nobody
5 need know if I cast a yes or no vote at the referendum for the
6 independence of Bosnia-Herzegovina, or if I took part in the referendum
7 to begin with. It is not true that all this information is public and
8 that it need be public.
9 Q. Thank you. Well, how could he have known who you voted for?
10 A. I did not claim that he did know, but he was trying to learn
11 that. He would engage in provocative behaviour to do so.
12 JUDGE KWON: We'll stop here. Have we been informed as to the
13 witness order for next week after Mr. Atlija?
14 MS. SUTHERLAND: Yes, Your Honour. That's been filed earlier
15 this afternoon.
16 JUDGE KWON: If you could remind me who the next witness is.
17 MS. SUTHERLAND: Off the top of my head, KDZ-080,
18 Mevludin Sejmenovic, and KDZ-163 are the next 3 in order.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
20 [Trial Chamber confers]
21 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Atlija, we will adjourn for today and resume
22 next week on Wednesday, so in the meantime, you are not supposed to
23 discuss with anybody else about your testimony. Do you understand that,
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I understand.
1 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
2 The hearing is now adjourned.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] You're welcome.
4 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 5.33 p.m.,
5 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 26th day of
6 October, 2011, at 2.15 p.m.