1 Tuesday, 20 March 2012
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness entered court]
5 --- Upon commencing at 9.04 a.m.
6 JUDGE KWON: Good morning, everyone.
7 Before we begin to hear the evidence of the next witness, I have
8 something to deal with before.
9 It has been brought to the Chamber's attention that over the last
10 couple of weeks the number of last-minute extensions to already extended
11 sittings has increased. The Chamber recognises that this is a strain on
12 all participants in these proceedings, and, in particular, on the
13 interpreters. The Chamber wishes to express its gratitude for the
14 quality of their work and their dedication. The Chamber would also ask
15 the parties to keep to their time estimate or to the time granted by the
17 Finally, it would ask the Prosecution to organise the witness
18 scheduling so that such scheduling constraints calling for last-minute
19 extension should not occur, save on an exceptional basis, and to inform
20 the Chamber as soon as possible when it becomes aware of such a
22 That said, if the witness could take the solemn declaration,
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will
25 speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
1 WITNESS: KDZ357
2 [Witness answered through interpreter]
3 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, sir. Please be seated.
4 Good morning, Ms. Edgerton.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Good morning, Your Honours.
6 Examination by Ms. Edgerton:
7 Q. Mr. Witness, do you hear me in a language you understand?
8 A. I hear you well.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MS. EDGERTON: Then could we begin by calling up 65 ter 90322,
11 the pseudonym sheet for this witness. And, of course, not broadcast it.
12 Q. Mr. Witness, do you see your name on the screen in front of you
13 correctly spelled?
14 A. Yes, I do.
15 MS. EDGERTON: Could that be the first Prosecution exhibit for
16 this witness, please, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes. That will be admitted under seal.
18 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P4626, under seal, Your Honours.
19 Thank you.
20 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
21 Q. Now, Mr. Witness, you've given a statement to this Tribunal in
22 the past, and you've also testified in four previous proceedings; most
23 recently in the Tolimir case in 2010.
24 Now, in coming to testify here today, did you have a chance to
25 listen to a recording of your evidence in that case?
1 A. Yes, I listened to my evidence.
2 Q. You might have to lean a little bit further into the microphone
3 when you give your answers, Witness.
4 Were you satisfied with the accuracy of that recording?
5 A. Yes, I am satisfied.
6 Q. If you were asked the same questions today during these
7 proceedings as you were asked in that case, would you give the same
9 A. Yes, certainly.
10 MS. EDGERTON: And so, Your Honours, the transcript of this
11 witness's evidence in the Tolimir case is 65 ter 23650, and if that could
12 be, please, the next Prosecution exhibit. I'd just like to note that
13 23650A is a public redacted version of that evidence.
14 JUDGE KWON: So probably we will give two separate exhibit
16 Yes, we'll do that.
17 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 23650 should be assigned
18 Exhibit P4627, under seal.
19 And 65 ter 23650A should be assigned Exhibit P4628.
20 Thank you.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
23 Now, to summarise that written evidence, during 1994 and 1995,
24 this witness was involved in the monitoring, recording, and transcribing
25 of intercepted radio signal communications involving Serbian forces and
1 Serbian civilian leaders as well.
2 He describes the location at which this was conducted, the staff
3 involved, the equipment used, and all stages of the process and
4 procedures involved in the intercepting and transcribing of these
5 communications. He was personally involved in all aspects of this
6 process. He explains how recordings were made of intercepted
7 communications and how speakers were identified.
8 Additionally, this witness has reviewed, identified and
9 authenticated transcripts of intercepted communications prepared within
10 the unit in which he served, including conversations he personally
11 recorded and transcribed.
12 And that's the brief summary of the written evidence.
13 Q. And, Mr. Witness, further to that, I have some -- small number of
14 additional questions I'd like to ask you, and I'd just like to, before we
15 begin, caution you that if in your answers you feel you might reveal your
16 identity, please ask for private session.
17 Now, Mr. Witness, in your written evidence at pages 2067 to 2069,
18 you were asked whether you shared any of your intercepts with the army
19 and vice versa, and you explained how you made an arrangement with
20 representatives of the PEB of the 2nd Corps to do that.
21 So, practically speaking, can you just tell us briefly how this
22 sharing was done?
23 A. I can't recall when exactly, but at some point, this idea came
24 about as a necessity of sorts. There was a need to keep the military and
25 civilian leadership of my service informed, and they believed that it
1 would be useful if we, at the location, did not decide on what was
2 important or not but that we should, rather, hand everything over to the
3 2nd Corps and then, in turn, they would provide their conversations to
4 us. That is how we began this exchange process, although I no longer
5 recall when exactly.
6 We exchanged such reproduced conversations in the following way.
7 First, they would be processed, that is to say, put in it the computer
8 and encrypted. During the open phase, they were saved on floppy disks
9 and exchanged as such, both ways. When they provided us with such
10 floppy disk conversations, we only introduced a small number of measures
11 or procedures that had previously been arranged in order to be able to
12 identify the conversations provided by the 2nd Corps and the PEB, and we
13 would also assign numbers to such conversations under which they were
14 then forwarded to the seat of our service.
15 Q. So other than these small number of measures you've spoken about,
16 to identify the conversations as being provided by the 2nd Corps, did
17 you -- did you modify them in any way at all?
18 A. The text itself was not changed at all. There was no need. In
19 the heading, though, such conversations received an addition. In other
20 words, we put in a remark that this conversation came from the 2nd Corps.
21 We also included the date and number under which we logged it and
22 forwarded it.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MS. EDGERTON: Could we have a look quickly at P4483, please. A
25 transcript of a conversation which took place on 16 July 1995 at 1529
1 between someone from the Main Staff and Palma, and it bears the ordinal
2 number 668.
3 Could you enlarge the B/C/S page, please.
4 Q. Now, Mr. Witness, we don't see this heading at the top of the
5 English translation but perhaps you could tell us what the heading at the
6 top of this -- the B/C/S original reads, please.
7 A. Yes, I can see it.
8 It contains the remark I mentioned, indicating that the
9 conversation came from the 2nd Corps PEB for our needs.
10 We also see in the left-hand corner the number that was used to
11 log it and the date.
12 Q. So from your answer I take it this is an example of the
13 intercepts we've just been discussing?
14 A. Yes, precisely.
15 Q. And it emanated, then, from your unit?
16 A. Yes. We forwarded it to our seat, the seat of our service.
17 Q. Thank you.
18 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, this conversation has previously
19 been marked for identification and subject to authentication discussed by
20 a previous witness at pages 25312 to 25317 of the transcript of this
21 trial. I'd like to ask this be admitted for all purposes now.
22 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
23 Yes, Mr. Robinson.
24 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President. We don't have any objection
25 to that. We've been in communication with the Prosecution and it seems
1 that they would like to move into evidence all of the documents that have
2 been marked for identification once they're authenticated by a witness.
3 I don't know if it is your desire to have further showing of the
4 relevance of those, but as far as we're concerned, it is not necessary.
5 So it's up to you.
6 JUDGE KWON: I think in marking for identification, pending the
7 authentication, Chamber examined the prima facie relevance and probative
8 value of intercepts. I think that has been our practice. So whether
9 we'll deal with it in a -- separately on a comprehensive manner or we
10 deal with it one by one, it is up to the Prosecution.
11 And then we have no problem in fully admitting this exhibit at
12 the moment.
13 We'll do that, Ms. Edgerton. It was admitted when -- marked for
14 identification when Mr. Obradovic was here, if my memory is correct.
15 MS. EDGERTON: And, of course, it is Your Honours.
16 Could we go over now to a conversation of another type, D2002, a
17 conversation dated 16 July 1995 at 4.15, with the ordinal number 664
18 between the Main Staff duty officer and General Mladic.
19 Can you just enlarge. Thank you.
20 Q. Now, Mr. Witness, is this a conversation that was transcribed
21 within your unit?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And the difference between this one and the intercept we've just
24 looked at appears to lie in the header and in the combination of letters
25 and numbers at the bottom of the page.
1 What do those letters and numbers at the bottom of the page,
2 left-hand side, represent?
3 A. At the bottom of the page is the code -- are the code-names or
4 code designations of the two workers who worked on the document.
5 The first one ending at 073 is the person who recorded the
7 The other designation, or combination of letters and numbers,
8 identifies the person who reproduced the conversation.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 MS. EDGERTON: Same request, please, Your Honour, with respect to
12 JUDGE KWON: But why was not marked for identification?
13 According to the record, it say it is was fully admitted.
14 I will consult the Registrar on this.
15 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
16 JUDGE KWON: Whatever status it may have been, we'll admit it
18 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
19 Could we go -- oh. Could we go now further to 65 ter 32446, a
20 conversation dated 11 July 1995 with the ordinal number 535. And that
21 conversation appears at the bottom of the B/C/S page in front of you,
22 Mr. Witness, and it's a conversation between General Gvero and
23 Dr. Karadzic.
24 And, Mr. Registrar, if you could just indulge the witness, could
25 I ask you to go to the second page of the B/C/S version so the witness
1 can see the name indications at the bottom of the document. Thank you.
2 Q. Mr. Witness, having looked at this, could you tell us whether
3 this transcript also emanated from within your unit?
4 A. Yes, 100 per cent.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, I'd like to ask for this
6 conversation to be admitted as a Prosecution exhibit and my submission
7 would be that the relevance being absolutely obvious on the face of this
8 conversation, Your Honours admit this for all purposes as well.
9 JUDGE KWON: I take it there's no opposition from the Defence on
11 MR. ROBINSON: That's correct.
12 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll admit this.
13 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P4629, Your Honours. Thank you.
14 JUDGE KWON: By the way, Ms. Edgerton, do we have to admit this
15 under seal or publicly?
16 MS. EDGERTON: Although these were admitted in the Tolimir case,
17 or similar intercepts, not this one, were admitted in the Tolimir case
18 under seal, I think that in light of today's record thus far, we're able
19 to admit this publicly.
20 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll come back to those items. But thank you
21 for your guidance. We'll admit it publicly. Thank you.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Could -- remaining on this document that we -- oh,
23 actually, I think we'll have to call up essentially the same document
24 under another 65 ter number. And that's 32447. And just for the record,
25 we see 32247 on the -- on the B/C/S page in front of us, as it happens,
1 but we'll need to have the English translation.
2 Q. It's another conversation, just 20 minutes after the first one,
3 between Dr. Karadzic and General Gvero that we just dealt with and it has
4 the ordinal number 536, and we see General Gvero saying:
5 "Mr. President, Serbian silver, Serbian church, Serbian flag,"
6 and further.
7 Was this conversation, then, also something, Mr. Witness, having
8 looked at it, that was recorded and transcribed by your unit?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Thank you.
11 MS. EDGERTON: Same request, please, Your Honours, with respect
12 to this one.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
14 MR. ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. President, I'm just wondering about the
15 last line of this intercept. I don't know if that is it part of the
16 intercept or somebody's subjective viewpoint of other information they're
17 receiving. So I don't know if Ms. Edgerton wants to inquire, but I think
18 we would object to the last line unless there's other foundation to it.
19 JUDGE KWON: And you do not challenge the other interlocutor was
20 Mr. Karadzic.
21 MR. ROBINSON: We don't know. But we're taking the intercept at
22 face value, so we understand that this is a sufficient foundation for its
23 reliability. But, in any event, we think that the -- the intercept can
24 be admitted but the last line should be struck absent further foundation.
25 JUDGE KWON: Ms. Edgerton.
1 MS. EDGERTON: I'm happy to ask the question of this witness
2 about the last line, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE KWON: Yes, please do.
4 MS. EDGERTON:
5 Q. Mr. Witness, there's a notation that appears at the bottom of
6 this transcripted conversation that reads:
7 "General Gvero is present today at the Supreme Command
9 Do you have any information on where that information might have
10 been derived from?
11 A. I'll try to explain.
12 On this channel or direction that we monitored, there were a
13 number of lines that were tapped. That day, the operators, following all
14 of the lines, concluded that only Gvero was there, which doesn't, of
15 course, mean that there were no lower-ranking officers. It's not as if
16 the building was empty. But that day, somebody must have commented upon
17 that in another conversation, which may not have been important or
18 reproduced, that only Gvero was present, or in one of the previous
19 conversations, it was so said.
20 In any case, this is what I'm trying to say. A remark like this
21 would not be arbitrary because our intention was not to misinform. It
22 does have a basis. The colleagues who worked on it that day introduced
23 the remark based on something sound.
24 Q. And just one further question. When you talk about basis,
25 Witness, on what basis would Dr. Karadzic have been identified as one of
1 the interlocutors in these two conversations?
2 A. Now I see that Gvero is addressing Karadzic with "President."
3 That is one argument that we relied on, since it was standard practice
4 that Karadzic was addressed with "President."
5 Q. Thank you.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Could I please renew my request to have this
7 second intercept admitted, Your Honours, for all purposes.
8 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Robinson.
9 MR. ROBINSON: Mr. President, I'm advised that the last line
10 hasn't actually been translated into English correctly. That there's the
11 word "only" General Gvero was present to -- is present today that is
12 omitted from the English translation.
13 So perhaps it can be sent back for revision. But aside from
14 that, I think our position is -- is that we don't object to the admission
15 of the intercept but we call the Chamber's attention to the weight to be
16 given to comments as opposed to -- and also identification of speakers
17 based on deductions as opposed to what is in the actual text and we hope
18 that you will give that less weight.
19 Other than that, though, we think it is sufficiently reliable
20 under the standards of the Appeals Chamber that it can be admitted.
21 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
22 Sir, Mr. Witness, could you kindly read the last line so that we
23 can hear the interpretation again, which starts with "Danas."
24 Could you read it please aloud.
25 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Today only General Gvero is
1 present at the Supreme Command headquarters."
2 JUDGE KWON: So apparently "only" is omitted from the
4 I think that's clear from the record, Mr. Robinson.
5 Yes, we'll admit this.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Your Honours, 65 ter 32447 shall be assigned
7 Exhibit P4630.
8 Thank you.
9 MS. EDGERTON: And, finally, could we go to 65 ter 31269B, an
10 intercept which took place on 18 July 1995, bearing the ordinal number
11 696, recorded on the Pale radio-relay route between a person identified
12 as X and a person named Budimir.
13 Now, to assist the witness, could you just pull up this
14 conversation in his language so that he can go to the bottom of the page.
15 Thank you.
16 Q. Mr. Witness --
17 MS. EDGERTON: And then back up to the top, please.
18 Q. -- was this -- is this another example of a conversation
19 transcribed by and emanating from your unit?
20 A. Yes, this is a conversation of ours.
21 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, given Mr. Robinson's position, I'd
22 like without further questions to tender this as the next Prosecution
24 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Robinson.
25 MR. ROBINSON: We don't object, Mr. President.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, we'll admit this.
2 THE REGISTRAR: As Exhibit P4631, Your Honour. Thank you.
3 MS. EDGERTON: And, Your Honours, that would conclude my
4 examination-in-chief. And with that, of course, I'd like to move in
5 associated exhibits as identified in our notification.
6 JUDGE KWON: What about those -- the -- those intercepts that
7 does -- do not have English translation? Example -- for example,
8 65 ter 3383 and 65 ter 32458.
9 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, I perhaps then would like to come
10 back to you on these after the conclusion of the cross-examination
11 because, in fact, there are English translations for all of them, and
12 they obviously haven't been uploaded and available to Your Honours. My
14 JUDGE KWON: And my second question is whether to admit them
15 under seal or not.
16 MS. EDGERTON: Subject to, in the case of a number of them, a
17 small redaction which we're prepared to do of the names that appear, the
18 code names and names that appear at the bottom of those intercepts, I
19 don't see any reason for them to be admitted under seal.
20 JUDGE KWON: So could you come back in a more comprehensive way
21 after this witness's evidence is over.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Of course. Thank you.
23 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
24 Sir, as you noticed, your examination-in-chief, or evidence
25 in-chief, was admitted in lieu of your oral testimony in written form,
1 i.e., your testimony in Tolimir was admitted in its entirety.
2 Now you'll be further cross-examined by Mr. Karadzic.
3 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
4 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. Good morning,
5 Excellencies. Good morning to all.
6 Cross-examination by Mr. Karadzic:
7 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, Mr. Witness.
8 A. Good morning.
9 Q. I would like to start with what was most recently discussed. The
10 way in which you determined that I was on the other end of the line. You
11 said that this form of address that was used, "Mr. President," that is
12 what was decisive; right?
13 A. Yes. There were a few ways in which we identified the
14 participants in a particular conversation. At any rate, as you know, as
15 you've seen here, there are a great many conversations in which the
16 participants were identified as X and Y. Also, we have in this latest
17 one, we have a certain Branimir. I have no idea.
18 At any rate, you were invariably addressed as President. That is
19 one of the arguments for us to write up that it was you. President was
20 the customary form of address that was used for you. We did not hear
21 anyone else being addressed as President in these communications.
22 Q. Thank you. In our part of the world, how do people address the
23 prime minister? Is it customary to say "Prime Minister" or "Premier," or
24 "President," again, "predsednice"?
25 A. Usually it's Premier, or "predsednice vlade," Prime Minister. In
1 this case, I really never heard a conversation with a prime minister.
2 Q. Thank you. And how does one address the president of the
4 A. I never addressed him, but you know that the best. Probably as
5 you look at each other into the eye, you call each other President, don't
7 Q. What about the president of the municipality? How does one
8 address the president of the municipality?
9 A. President of the municipality.
10 Q. The whole thing, invariably, or just President?
11 A. Mr. Karadzic, this was an exceptionally important piece of news.
12 This was an important moment. In this important moment, I don't think
13 that Mr. Gvero would have called the president of the municipality and
14 said, "The Serbian flag, the Serbian silver," and so on and so forth.
15 So if you look at the context of the conversation, in our view,
16 the conclusion is that it was you.
17 Q. Thank you. How does one address the president of a commission?
18 A. It depends. You can also address him by his name. I've already
19 said this is a very important conversation. This is a very important
20 piece of information. This is a high-ranking officer who was providing
21 information to someone that he is supposed to convey this important news
22 to. I don't think there's any point in going through all of these
23 things, president of the commission, whatever. This was our assessment
24 at that point in time.
25 We did not provide this conversation to anyone. We used this for
1 our own internal purposes, and I think that we did well.
2 Q. Thank you. While I was free, do you know that the president of
3 the assembly, Krajisnik, actually, that they tried to ascribe this
4 conversation, this intercept of yours, to him?
5 A. I'm not aware of that.
6 Q. Did you know what kind of relationship General Gvero and I had
7 during those days?
8 A. No, I don't know.
9 Q. Thank you. You completed a secondary technical school; right?
10 A. If you'd like to identify me, then I'd kindly ask that we move
11 into private session or closed session. I don't know exactly how this
12 should be done.
13 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Before doing that, Mr. Witness, page 16,
14 line 8, you just said: "In this important moment" -- I will read it from
15 that before that.
16 This is what you said:
17 "Mr. Karadzic, this was an exceptionally piece of news. This was
18 an important moment. In this important moment, I don't think that
19 Mr. Gvero would have called the president of the municipality and said,
20 'The Serbian flag, the Serbian silver ...'"
21 Do you remember having said that?
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, a moment ago.
23 JUDGE KWON: Do you mean to say that it was Gvero that called the
24 president, whoever it may be?
25 Would you like to see the intercept again? Yes, it's P4630.
1 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, certainly.
2 Yes, I see the conversation.
3 JUDGE KWON: Do you know who called first?
4 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I don't know. I don't know who
5 called who in this case.
6 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
7 Mr. Karadzic, if you meant to ask some personal questions, we'll
8 move into private session.
9 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll drop that, Excellency.
10 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
11 Q. This is what I would like to ask the witness now.
12 Is it correct, Witness, that he is not saying "Mr. President" in
13 this case. He is only saying "President." And was this recorded
15 A. I'll try to explain this to you. This phenomenon that may occur.
16 Sometimes the name is dropped or the form of address or the first part of
17 a sentence, because the operator who is sitting there, at the moment when
18 the conversation starts, the interlocutor can introduce himself or say,
19 please, or there can be a telephone operator who is linking them up, and
20 then he is late when he starts the recording so then that part remains
21 missing or unrecorded. So this is an authentic recording.
22 None of the operators could change that, you see. Perhaps
23 sometimes an operator could point out that a formal address was heard,
24 and then if, on the basis of that, if he heard, This is Gvero speaking,
25 please may I speak to this or that person. Then he would write down that
1 it was Gvero who is the person in question.
2 You see, in this conversation, Gvero did not introduce himself
3 either, if I see this right. I think that's the way it was. He didn't
4 introduce himself either. But we have these previous conversations. So
5 after 20 minutes, a new conversation took place between the same
6 interlocutors. So this is linked to the previous conversation. So you
7 can take the previous conversation perhaps and then it will all become
8 clear to you.
9 Q. Thank you. But, Mr. Witness, where it says "after 20 minutes"
10 and so on and so forth, all of these are the positions of the operator or
11 the observations of the operator instead of writing down exactly what the
12 time was and exactly what was being said; right? This is his comment.
13 This is his conclusion.
14 A. I suggest to that you we look at the previous conversation as
15 well. Perhaps there we have the exact time of the conversation recording
16 and then, by resorting to analogy, the operator realised that 20 minutes
17 later, this conversation took place.
18 Let us take a look at that first and then we can comment upon
19 this. There is nothing arbitrary about this. Nobody was trying to
20 relativise anything. This information was very important at the time,
21 and no one dared play any kind of games with this.
22 Q. Thank you. What do you mean useful and important? For what
23 purposes was this done?
24 A. I cannot say. It was our task to convey this, and what this was
25 used for afterwards and whether it was used at all, that I don't know.
1 Believe me.
2 Q. Thank you. Had this been done for a court of law, would you have
3 done something differently?
4 A. Well, had this been done for a court of law, then somebody would
5 have probably come to see us and tell us what it was that mattered to
6 courts of law, and then all of this information would have probably had a
7 different form. Perhaps more details and so on. I mean, each part that
8 could be heard before the recording would start -- well, I don't know
9 what a court would be interested in. But they would probably suggest
10 something to us. I don't know. Maybe we would keep the written record
11 that we would destroy after we would reproduce all of this. It would be
12 found in headquarters, printed out. I mean, I really cannot say.
13 Q. Thank you. Tell us, please: How did you recognise Gvero here,
14 if he didn't introduce himself?
15 A. I've just explained that. We'd have to go back to the previous
16 conversation, because it says here, again, we heard only Gvero, or, that
17 is to say, a conversation between the same interlocutors. So we'd have
18 to go back to the previous conversation. Perhaps he introduced himself
20 But let me tell you, at the time we knew Gvero's voice very well.
21 We heard him very often, and we would recognise his voice.
22 Q. Thank you. Tell us, please: How much time would be missed of
23 that initial time? How many seconds would be missed from the beginning
24 of a conversation?
25 A. Practically speaking, you can imagine yourself what the situation
1 is like. You have this equipment on your desk and then the recording
2 starts -- or, rather, the telephone rings and this man answers the phone
3 immediately and says, Captain so-and-so, please go ahead, and we would
4 press a button in order to start recording again and perhaps he would
5 introduce himself during that split second.
6 Q. So it's up to five seconds; right?
7 A. Well, I cannot tell you exactly how many seconds. We'd have to
8 measure that. But this is what it looked like in practice. You know
9 what it's like. Somebody picks up a phone, introduces himself, and you
10 press this button or perhaps you're a bit late because you were in
11 another area and by the time you get there and press the button, it's --
12 Q. I see. Did you figure out how people talked to me on the phone
13 during the war? Do you know that people would call and the secretary
14 would answer the phone, and this person would say, Is the president
15 there? And then she'd answer or she would ask me whether I was willing
16 to speak to this person or not.
17 Do you know that that was the procedure involved?
18 A. I believe that was the procedure, but you also know that,
19 frequently, you and other members of the leadership were in the field and
20 there were no secretaries. I don't know want to go into that. I can
21 only discuss here what we heard and wrote down that. That's the whole
22 point. Nobody made up anything. It wasn't our purpose. There was no
24 Q. Thank you. This took place on the 11th of July; correct?
25 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see the previous one? It
1 may be of assistance to the witness. P4629.
2 MS. EDGERTON: And the conversation that appears at the top of
3 the B/C/S page, for everyone's information, is actually 65 ter 30927.
4 That's the conversation with the ordinal number 534.
5 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. So we have to show the witness the
6 bottom part of the page.
7 Yes, Mr. Karadzic.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. So at the top, we have a conversation between General Gvero and
10 General Nicolai and Svetlana, the interpreter. Things are probably
11 clearer there, because people introduced themselves. Now as for the
12 conversation number 535, how did you establish who the participants were?
13 A. I've explained how. Now we go back to the time of the
14 conversation, which is 4.23 p.m. In that conversation, we only heard
15 Gvero. We didn't hear you, and there's a reason for that.
16 Now go back to your story of a couple of minutes ago, when you
17 asked me about the way the president was addressed. Now would
18 General Gvero be informing someone at a much lower level of having
19 discussed things with General Nicolai, and so on and so forth. That is
20 why we were certain at the time that it concerned you. He informed you
21 of some important things.
22 Q. Thank you. So your conclusions, as regards the importance of
23 that conversation, resulted in your conclusion that it was me?
24 A. No. You were addressed as President.
25 Q. But there is no "Mr. President," correct, just "President"? Do
1 you see "Mr. President" anywhere?
2 A. Well, perhaps there's no need for me to read the whole thing. If
3 you say so, yeah.
4 Q. Thank you. When did Serbs enter Srebrenica? At what time.
5 A. Believe me, information, details, that is something that I was
6 under no obligation to memorise, nor did I want to.
7 Believe me, that I only see these things when I come here now.
8 I recall only a few authentic conversations. I remember how
9 Mladic was arranging with a TV station that it be recorded and then sold.
10 I don't think we have it here. I also remember another conversation of
11 his when he entered himself, but I know longer remember what time it was,
12 at what time of day. And, ultimately, I did not analyse this
14 Q. Thank you. Why don't we have that intercept, where Mladic was
15 arranging for a TV crew to record something and then to have it sold?
16 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, that's not for this witness to
18 JUDGE KWON: No.
19 MR. ROBINSON: Excuse me, Mr. President, I would think that if
20 the witness has any knowledge of that he should be allowed to answer. I
21 don't see why he would be precluded answering [Overlapping speakers] ...
22 JUDGE KWON: then the question should be formulated whether he
23 knew there was such one or not.
24 MR. ROBINSON: Well, he just told us that there was. It's just a
25 question of why we don't have it. But I think he might have some
1 information about that.
2 JUDGE KWON: You may ask the witness whether such intercept
3 existed, but he take it for granted that such intercept existed.
4 Yes, please go on -- please carry on, Mr. Karadzic.
5 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Apologies, I wanted to ask the
6 witness this.
7 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
8 Q. Who decided which intercepts would not be handed over to the
9 Prosecution? That was the gist of my question, although it was put
10 inexpertly. You seem to be positive that you heard that conversation and
11 that it was recorded.
12 A. I am 100 per cent certain that I heard it. That footage was
13 sent -- was sold for 50.000 German marks. I know that for a fact.
14 Now, as for the recording itself, I don't know what its fate was.
15 I don't know what the fate was of other conversations. I don't know how
16 many intercepts were handed over to the Tribunal. I did not use that
17 information. I was simply a person involved in technical matters.
18 Q. Thank you. So you heard that there was footage made and sold.
19 But I'm interested in whether you heard Mladic say that he wanted it
20 recorded. Did you record or in another way register that particular
22 A. You will agree that it was a long time ago. I cannot say with
23 any certainty that it exists, but it can certainly be checked whether it
24 does exist or not.
25 Q. How many intercepts in total did you record over the two years?
1 A. It wasn't two years. If you recall some of the documents, we
2 arrived at that trig point in December 1992, and we used a lot of time to
3 test relay routes, make assessments as to the possibility of
4 intercepting, et cetera.
5 I don't know how many conversations there were. I know that on
6 some days, we barely managed to type it all into the computer, and we
7 needed the assistance of our secretary from headquarters to help us type
8 it all up.
9 Q. Was it because there were many on a particular day?
10 A. Yes, yes, because there were many. There were such days when we
11 were physically unable to type it all up.
12 Q. Thank you. Can you tell me how many on average, daily?
13 A. I don't know. I didn't follow that.
14 Q. Thank you. And how many times did you have me on the line? How
15 many intercepts include me?
16 A. Believe me, I don't know that either.
17 Q. Thank you. Very well. Can you tell us what you did with such
18 intercepts which paint me or the Serbian side in a good light?
19 A. I'm not sure I understand. What good light?
20 Q. What did you do with such intercepts that could be favourable for
21 the Defence?
22 A. Pardon me. First of all, let me say this: If we heard you - and
23 I will be literal - we even took down jokes you told, let alone other
24 things. Or if we heard anyone else from the leadership, we taped it all.
25 Q. Thank you. Tell us this then: Can you state that everything you
1 recorded, primarily in relation to me, that it is readily available to
2 the parties in these proceedings?
3 A. I don't know. I was offered this. I don't know about the rest.
4 Q. Thank you. As you were reviewing the transcripts, did you notice
5 that some were missing? Perhaps some conversations you recall.
6 A. A lot of time has passed, really. What I said about Mladic a
7 moment ago, I remember it clearly. I simply wanted to use that as an
8 illustration so that you would understand things better.
9 I don't know. I would have to go through the log-book and go
10 down the page to see whether everything's there.
11 Q. Does that log-book exist? Is it available to you so that you
12 could tell us which intercepts were not handed over to the Tribunal?
13 A. I can't. I can't say which ones were not because I would have to
14 check everything. As far as I remember, parts of that log-book were
15 presented in a trial, so it does exist.
16 Now what was the other thing you asked?
17 Yes, this is what I wanted to say. I remember, for example, some
18 orders, and I never came across those conversations, and I don't know
19 what happened with them. I'm afraid that some transcripts, especially
20 such conversations that were not discussed here, such as the ones over
21 the teleprinters or fax machines, perhaps the transcripts of those were
22 destroyed by the service as unimportant. I don't know. But I believe
23 that these transcripts should all be available.
24 Q. Thank you. Do you recall my oral orders that were intercepted
25 which you did not see here? Because you mentioned orders a moment ago.
1 Whose orders? Mine?
2 A. No, no. I don't recall the reproduced conversations, but I do
3 remember a conversation of yours -- well, I'm not quite certain. But a
4 telefax message was intercepted which followed a round of peace talks in
5 1995. So a truce was arranged, and the telefax contained an order on the
6 deployment of units. That's what I recall, and I didn't see it here.
7 There are many such conversations of military nature that were
8 perhaps not so interesting to be used here and probably were not made use
10 Q. Thank you. So you worked for the Ministry of Interior; correct?
11 A. If you want to discuss that topic, as I may be identified, I'd
12 kindly ask that we move into closed session.
13 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we move into private session
15 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
16 [Private session]
11 Page 26436 redacted. Private session.
11 [Open session]
12 JUDGE KWON: And I wanted to let the parties know that we'll be
13 sitting pursuant to normal schedule today, that given the -- another
14 trial that involves one of the members of the Bench. So if it is
15 convenient, we are minded to take a break now.
16 Yes, it's okay. We are now in open session.
17 Yes, Mr. Harvey.
18 MR. HARVEY: Mr. President, if I can use that expression without
19 causing confusion, may I introduce Ms. Alicia Kuin, who is a graduate
20 student at the University of Utrecht and who has been working with my
21 team for the last few months. Thank you.
22 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Harvey.
23 Shall we take a break now? For 20 minutes.
24 --- Recess taken at 10.21 a.m.
25 --- On resuming at 10.44 a.m.
1 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
2 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
3 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
4 Q. Witness, according to your best recollection, are you able to
5 tell us if Mladic asked only for everything to be recorded? Or did he
6 ask for things to be recorded for the purposes of sale?
7 Did he mention the sale, or did you hear later that this was sold
9 A. Should I repeat what I said? I should.
10 Mladic wanted to cash in on the exclusive footage of the entry of
11 the Army of Republika Srpska to Srebrenica. That's how it was.
12 Q. Thank you. And you don't remember which station or which crew
13 was in charge of that. Was that some military organisation or a regular
14 TV company?
15 A. As far as I can remember, there were several television
16 companies, and maybe even some foreign TV companies. But I really cannot
17 remember the name.
18 Q. Thank you. And do you remember if it was specified what should
19 be recorded, and was everything recorded?
20 A. It was not allowed to film everything. It was just the entry of
21 the Serbian forces to Srebrenica that was recorded, the actual act of the
22 army entering Srebrenica.
23 Q. Thank you. And if we were to look for this transcript, it would
24 be found somewhere, wouldn't it?
25 A. Well, I couldn't really tell you if it exists or not. I'm just
1 telling you what I heard. And the people who were working at that
2 location at the time, they heard the same thing. And as far as I can
3 recall, we wrote this down.
4 Q. Thank you. Are you able to tell us who made the decision and why
5 was this group formed at this location? I don't want to refer to the
7 A. I think that, in the course of 1994, we managed to prepare a
8 number of devices that were able to intercept radio-relay lines and
9 monitor telephone conversations. This decision, pursuant to which we
10 were sent to that location, followed an analysis of the monitoring of a
11 certain route, which showed that a large quantity of intelligence was
12 leaking from the citizens who, in conversations among themselves, gave
13 away positions, the number of men, certain actions, and so on and so
15 After that, we were told that we should talk to people from the
16 2nd Corps of the Bosnia-Herzegovina Army, of the Republic of
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina, and that's how we ended up at this location.
18 Q. Thank you. And you're talking about the leaking of information
19 from conversation of Serb civilians, right, which would be useful to you?
20 Or are you talking about Muslim civilians as well, in this case?
21 A. Well, it was very important to us to acquire intelligence from
22 your side, of course.
23 Q. Thank you. And are you able to tell us, if you remember, if, in
24 late 1994, President Carter secured a four-month truce, which we referred
25 to as Carter's Truce?
1 A. I do remember a few such cease-fires for the purposes of
2 negotiation, but I do not remember the individual ones and their
4 Q. Thank you. And do you remember that the B&H Army General Staff,
5 on the 5th of January, 1995, issued a directive for combat, which would
6 also affect the enclaves, five days after the signing of that cease-fire?
7 A. Well, if you heard me correctly, I really don't remember any of
8 that. I wasn't aware of any information that concerned the lines where
9 the actions happened.
10 Q. But you cannot link the forming of that team and that location
11 with this directive; is that correct? We're talking about late December.
12 And we have a cease-fire that is in effect, and, at the same time, we
13 have that directive being issued. Did you become aware later that you
14 were sent there because of what was contained in the subsequent
15 directive? Why were you sent there in 1994 otherwise?
16 A. Excuse me.
17 Q. Late 1994. That was not recorded. End of 1994.
18 A. I tried to explain that we didn't have either the personnel or
19 the material resources, and we did not do that kind of work before. You
20 know that. I mean, it was just a need that we became aware of. Military
21 resources, which was part of the PEB, were not capable of covering the
22 multitude of conversations and the connections that you inherited from
23 the Yugoslav People's Army and started to use yourselves. The
24 estimate -- or the assessment here was that a lot of intelligence that is
25 important could be acquired through the monitoring of those communication
1 routes. And, at the same time, we could take part in this monitoring and
2 augment the insufficient resources. So the fact that we went to this
3 location had nothing to do with any political events, negotiations, any
4 cease-fires or anything like that. There was no connection between these
5 two things.
6 Q. Thank you. You said before the break:
7 "... God forbid that a member of the service would be a member of
8 the Patriotic League."
9 Why did you say that?
10 A. I'm going to try to explain that. You know where I come from.
11 In my town, in 1992 and throughout the war, Bosniak and Serb and Croat
12 colleagues all worked together, and this is different from the area where
13 you were in the leadership so you know that. Perhaps you can mention a
14 Bosniak or not, but I don't think that anyone worked there. So the
15 environment where we worked was still not burdened by such matters. And
16 my position as a member of the service was to be organised apolitically
17 and to cultivate a strictly professional relationship, and this is why I
18 would like to tell you this. Other than the fact that we had active
19 operatives who were Serbs and Croats during the war, shortly before the
20 war, a few colleagues who went to different companies or who were in a
21 different line of work or were retired, offered to join and were taken
22 into the service and spent their entire time there throughout the war.
23 I don't doubt that the SDS or the SDA and the HDZ, had they, at
24 that time, used the options available to them and put their own cadres
25 into the service at the time, but I think that 90 per cent of the people
1 who actually worked there were professionals and it was their job to do
2 what they were doing. I think it's difficult to explain to people who
3 don't come from Bosnia and Herzegovina that in a conflict like that and
4 in a service like that, it's difficult to explain that we had members of
5 all three peoples in the service working at that time.
6 So I'm telling you this in order to reinforce my assertion that
7 it was unthinkable to me at the time to belong to the Patriotic League.
12 I have a problem to explain that to people. People don't
13 understand that. They don't believe it. However, I believe that you do
14 know that.
15 Q. Thank you. But I would like the Trial Chamber to know why. Why?
16 What is so irreconcilable between your service and the Patriotic League?
17 A. I really want to be clear here. I was not part of the operations
18 force that was involved in that kind of thing. I just know about this as
19 phenomena, occurrences. Then there were the conflicts there. After all,
20 you know that the Patriotic League, I mean, these people who were in
21 town, they were moved out of town. They could not stay in town
22 because -- well, let me put it this way. Let me speak as a citizen.
23 Everybody thought that that was unnecessary and that it makes the
24 situation even more complicated because the feeling amongst the citizens
25 themselves was different. No one was in favour of a war. No one
1 believed that there would be a war, and I believe that these multi-ethnic
2 people who worked there where I worked and in the police reflected that
3 kind of feeling.
4 Q. Thank you. That is quite praise-worthy, and I believe you. But
5 I am interested in hearing who was it that Bosnia-Herzegovina was at war
6 with in 1991?
7 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, if I may, just before the witness
8 answers. I actually really think that the answer at page 33, line 25, to
9 34, line 3, should be redacted because that would reveal the city that
10 this witness hails from.
11 JUDGE KWON: Line 24 to 3?
12 MS. EDGERTON: Sorry. 25 to 3.
13 JUDGE KWON: Did he mention his -- his town?
14 MS. EDGERTON: The situation he described was unique to that
16 JUDGE KWON: Yes. We'll follow your advice.
17 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
18 JUDGE KWON: Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. And who was it that Bosnia-Herzegovina was at war with in 1991?
21 A. You're probably asking me that because of that certificate.
22 I wondered myself. Believe me. I was not at war with anyone,
23 but that was the decision made at top-state level, to have this kind of
24 service recognised for those people who were in sub-services and those
25 who were, I think. Let me say: I think. I'm not sure. Those who were
1 in the Patriotic League and -- well, I don't know. I don't know. I
2 really don't know any more than that. I just know that we, members of
3 the MUP, did have those years of service recognised as such.
4 I know that Bosnia and Herzegovina, or, rather, we were not at
5 war with anyone.
6 Q. And do you know that some people had war-time service recognised
7 from the 30th of April, 1991, and that that is what the Bosnian law says?
8 A. I don't think you're right. This is the first time I hear of
10 Q. Thank you. We have that, so if we haven't tender it already, we
11 shall do so.
12 All right. Was this service, veterans' service, recognised for
13 Serbs as well, from 1991?
14 A. My colleagues, those people who worked together with me, they had
15 these years of service recognised just as they were in my case.
16 Q. Thank you. Did you tap the conversations of members of the
17 Army of Bosnia-Herzegovina? Did you record them; and if you happened to
18 do so, what did you do with these intercepts?
19 A. A moment ago, I explained that there weren't enough of us to
20 follow you. Really. There were very few people there, and there was
21 very little equipment too.
22 When reviewing the frequency, if we came across the route that
23 was used by our side, if I can put it that way, because -- you know what,
24 to tell you the truth, I don't know even know whether the army used
25 RU-800. I mean whether we had these channels at all, I really have no
1 idea. But if we were to come across these civilian routes we would not
2 really dwell on that. We didn't have time for that. There was no need
3 for us to deal with that because we had plenty of work on the other side.
4 Even more than we could handle.
5 Q. Thank you. Did you have any problems due to the existence of --
6 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Actually, can we move into
7 private session just for a minute.
8 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. The other infrastructure that existed there of the
10 United Nations, did that hinder you in any way?
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I mean, if I am going to refer to
12 this infrastructure, I would like us to move into private session.
13 JUDGE KWON: Yes. Could the Chamber move into private session
15 [Private session]
11 Pages 26446-26447 redacted. Private session.
16 [Open session]
17 JUDGE KWON: Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.
19 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
20 Q. So is it correct that one technician would be recording what was
21 heard and the other one would be transcribing what was heard on that
23 A. Everyone did everything at that particular location. You will
24 see that in one particular case one employee did the recording and in
25 another case that same person transcribed something.
1 So what does this look like in practice? Two men are sitting
2 there and they have equipment in front of them. At this point in time
3 there is nothing to be reproduced. They are following this, and then the
4 very next moment, both of them are recording. After that, they would
5 agree that one of them would go over and transcribe what was heard and
6 the other one continues to listen to what was being said. So that is, in
7 real terms, what the situation is like in that room. Or if there's
8 nothing happening at a particular moment, both of them would do that, and
9 they would listen as well, and then they would pause in their
10 reproduction or transcription if they would have to turn on the recording
11 devices in the meantime, and that was it.
12 Q. Thank you. So could you tell us then: Was it not possible, if
13 not even customary, that the person who was doing the transcribing did
14 not necessarily listen and record as well?
15 A. That's right. That's right.
16 Q. Thank you. Then we do agree that those comments and explanations
17 and so on and so forth were created by the person who was doing the
18 transcribing, not the person who was doing the recording.
19 A. In the specific case that we dealt with previously, when we dealt
20 with Gvero, the comment followed after listening to all the conversations
21 on that day, and then the employee wrote that, on that day, at that
22 location, there was only Gvero.
23 When an employee hears a conversation, then he writes down the
24 time, the route, and the participants. So the person who is going to
25 transcribe that can use that for making the heading, where it says
1 exactly what the time and frequency, channel and participants were.
2 So what does that mean in practical terms. The person who takes
3 the tape in order to transcribe what was heard, he will take this sheet
4 of paper where all of this is written down and he will see that those
5 introductions were heard, the ones that we talked about a minute ago, and
6 that is not on the tape so that is what he uses for writing up the first
7 sentence. So that is where this co-operation is indispensable between
8 the person who is doing the recording and the person who is doing the
10 Q. Thank you.
11 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we have a look at
12 65 ter 23644 without it being broadcast. It may have been made a
13 P exhibit already.
14 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
15 Q. Without referring to the location, can you tell us whether the
16 marked location is where you worked and whether the map depicts the area
17 you were able to monitor?
18 A. Yes. This is the location where we worked, but it is not the
19 whole area we could monitor.
20 Q. So you could cover a wider area. But what is on the map was
21 covered by you, was it not?
22 A. Well, let's put it that way. I would have to analyse everything,
23 but I do know that from the location, we covered this entire area and
25 Q. The part we see here, could you monitor it without any problems?
1 Under excellent conditions, so to say.
2 A. Well, I wouldn't agree. Nothing is in excellent conditions or
3 open to monitoring in Bosnia because of the terrain. It was always
4 possible that some communication could not be monitored, in valleys, at
5 the foot of mountains, et cetera.
6 Q. Thank you. Why did it happen that you could hear one participant
7 and not the other?
8 A. I'll try to explain. I hope you will be able to understand.
9 One participant has the ability of two-way communication. That
10 is to say, something I say and something the other person is saying. It
11 could happen that we heard well the person calling, whereas the person on
12 the other end was not heard because we could not locate the so-called
13 duplex frequency. By hard work, we managed, sometimes, and on another
14 piece of equipment, we would find the other frequency. And in that case,
15 we would have both ends and we could record a full conversation.
16 There was another thing. Depending on the quality of the
17 micro-telephonic combination, that is to say, the headset, and the signal
18 quality, we frequently, by combining the two, we could hear the other
19 person as well, but it was always the weaker signal.
20 Q. Thank you. Is it correct that you could listen in even in cases
21 when a VRS communication was protected, but you could break through our
22 protective measures?
23 A. Well, when I was up there, I didn't even know what protected
24 communication you had. Let me mention an example.
25 For example, we could hear a participant say, Is this
1 communication protected? And then the other one would say, Yes, talk
2 freely. But we could hear it all. Whatever traffic was protected, it
3 was usually by teleprinter encryption as well as telefax signals, but not
4 for us because by that time we had equipment which could decode.
5 Another piece of information. I think in 1995, perhaps in
6 July or August, encrypted telephone lines were used by your side and then
7 we could only pick up the scrambled signal. We knew it was speech
8 protected by a certain encryption method.
9 Q. Thank you. Can you see the bottom right-hand side of the map?
10 The two front lines depicted there?
11 A. Yes, I can see it.
12 Q. Could you listen to that area too?
13 A. I don't know how technically versed you are in telephonic
14 communication, but let me try and explain.
15 Say a person is in a cave which is completely protected and that
16 person makes a phone call to his friend in Bijeljina, he needs to become
17 part of the system which transmits signal through air, and that is where
18 such communication is open to interception.
19 What am I trying to say? One could call from this area and use
20 part of the route that was intercepted. However, if that person had a
21 conversation within the area you marked, then perhaps we would be unable
22 to hear it.
23 Q. So you're discussing wire connections or radio-relay connections?
24 A. Well, it is wire connection from here to the next switchboard.
25 But as from that point on, it uses the parabolic antenna and travels
1 through the air, becoming open to interception. I believe many
2 VRS officers were confused by this, thinking that they communicated by
3 wire, wire communication, whereas it was not protected.
4 Q. Thank you. Were you at your post in July 1995?
5 A. What post?
6 Q. The feature where you worked. Were you at your work post?
7 A. Yes, certainly.
8 Q. Thank you. Could you follow communication between you and the
9 locations that are marked here?
10 A. Are you asking me if we had communication with the area that is
11 marked here? Did we have direct communication? Is that what you mean.
12 Q. Well, you probably did not, but they probably communicated with
13 their corps.
14 Did you record that? And were you able to follow what was going
16 A. My group did not have such communication with the area. I don't
17 know of anyone from the corps being in communication with that location,
18 since I know the location itself was used only for interception.
19 Q. Did you have means of electronic insight into what was going on
20 in the area; and, if so, how?
21 A. When Srebrenica fell, we did not have a possibility to monitor.
22 We did monitor what you communicated, but during a period we were able to
23 pick up hand-held radio signals used by these enormous groups of people
24 leaving the enclave. We listened to that, and we listened to your
25 hand-held radios, too, when it became accessible. I can no longer say
1 which were the locations that we could monitor at that point in time, but
2 we were 100 per cent certain that there were hand-held radios used by
3 those people or your side.
4 Q. When you say "your side," or "my side," do you mean Serbian
5 hand-held radios?
6 A. No. I didn't have in mind your personal hand-held radio.
7 Q. Thank you. Did you record the conversations between these
8 enormous groups of people breaking through?
9 A. Unfortunately, we did not.
10 Q. How come? Why did you not?
11 A. This is why. From the conversations we could hear, we realised
12 that those enormous groups containing thousands of people were going
13 somewhere. They were on the move.
14 On the other side, we could hear Serb forces using radio
15 communication to confuse them and misinform them, which was the kind of
16 warfare that was used at the time. We were trying to listen to the Serb
17 hand-held radios and disturb their signal, but I don't think we
18 succeeded. They were too far away.
19 In any case, we monitored the situation, and, at some point, I
20 know that everyone in Zvornik was being mobilised, including the police,
21 and it was stated that an enormous group of 3.000 people was moving
22 towards Zvornik to attack them. But they didn't know that those people
23 were actually lost. They didn't know where they were, and your side
24 seemed to believe that there was an attack. They were simply trying to
25 flee and were disoriented.
1 Our goal was to scramble or block your signal. That was what we
2 were trying to do.
3 Q. Am I correct in saying that when it comes to electronic
4 communication, the sides used different tactics, such as jamming,
5 misinforming, sending messages that were aimed at confusing the other
7 A. That's a separate story. I was discussing a very specific event.
8 Members of the VRS were trying to have those people, those masses, as we
9 learned later on, to lead them to ambushes. That was the purpose.
10 Of course, special warfare is a different thing, such as
11 misinformation, et cetera, but I don't think that is the topic we are
12 supposed to cover here.
13 Q. Could you tell when there were two Serb officers talking whether
14 they were misinforming intentionally as to the numbers or intentions?
15 Could you tell they were doing that in order to tell your superiors that
16 such information should not be taken for granted?
17 A. The information we obtained by monitoring our radio-relay routes,
18 I can state that no misinformation occurred on that communication because
19 we heard frequently the participants saying, This is protected, they
20 can't pick this up, et cetera. So there was no misinformation there.
21 When it comes to the flight of the people from the enclave to
22 free territory, they were being misinformed by way of hand-held radios,
23 and the other side was saying, Move this way, move that way. That's
24 where our people are, et cetera. That is how it took place. Perhaps you
25 have some other information. But based on the conversations we heard, we
1 never concluded that there was intentional misinformation.
2 Q. Thank you. Well, let's leave July 1995 aside. But, in
3 principle, were you ever in a situation of doubting certain information
4 and believing that they were put out there in order to emphasise them or
5 de-emphasise them, in order to deceive the enemy, simply speaking?
6 A. Well, I would restrict myself to what I was given, and I would
7 limit myself to the route that we were monitoring. And the other
8 possibilities, I would not really speak about.
9 Q. Thank you. And who decided --
10 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Excellencies, could I tender the
11 map, please.
12 JUDGE KWON: I think it is part of his associated exhibits.
13 MS. EDGERTON: Correct.
14 JUDGE KWON: Yes.
15 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you. That is what I assumed,
16 but I didn't get confirmation.
17 MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]
18 Q. Who decided about the priorities, what should be listened to and
19 what should be a work priority?
20 A. Well, we had determined the priorities. The priority was this
21 route. Everything that went through that route, especially calls by top
22 leadership on the Serbian side.
23 Sometimes when there was no activity there, the operator could
24 make his own decisions on other channels, how important a conversation
25 was, and act on his own initiative.
1 Q. And how did you decide? How did the Serbs deceive those who were
2 engaged in the breakthrough? Did they pretend to be Muslim stations?
3 How did you discover that they were misinforming them?
4 A. We would listen for a long time. I think that at one point
5 somebody from the 2nd Corps PEB, since they did have more powerful
6 jamming devices, suggested to us that that was the -- how it was, and so
7 we focussed more there. We focussed more on certain locations.
8 Q. If they had wanted to do that, that would mean that they were on
9 the same frequency as the Muslims -- Muslim hand-held stations.
10 Otherwise, they wouldn't be able to hear them; right?
11 A. Of course. They did find them. They could hear them. They
12 would set themselves on their frequencies and then begin to plant
13 misinformation. That's correct.
14 Q. Thank you. And then in jamming Serbian hand-held stations, you
15 were also jamming the Muslim ones? Or were you able to filter that? I
16 mean, if you were on the same frequency, you were jamming both sides;
18 A. Well, I hear you speaking, but, as soon as I begin to speak,
19 somebody is going to push the button and start jamming my conversation.
20 So, in the same way, we would listen to people from the enclave and then
21 when they would start to broadcast from the other side, we would press
22 the button in order to jam the communication.
23 And now, since we're talking about this, I can say this. One
24 operative who was at this location, his close relative came from the
25 area. He broke through, and when he spoke with him about this, about the
1 jamming, the monitoring, and all of these things, this person from the
2 enclave told him that in one place, he saw about 3.000 dead people just
3 in front of a wood, and he managed to survive. And he confirmed this
4 information to us. I haven't talked about this here. Nobody asked me
5 anything about that, but I'm telling that there were people who took part
6 in the events.
7 I don't know where this location is. I didn't go there, but this
8 person's close relative confirmed that they were listening as these large
9 groups of people were being directed or guided to come to these locations
10 where the executions took place.
11 Q. You're talking about them being guided to ambushes. Are you
12 saying that these people were led to minefields and -- I mean, what were
13 these people being led to? And how do you know that this was a Serb
14 doing it and not a Muslim?
15 A. Well, I would rather not talk about this. I would ask you that.
16 What I'm saying is that in that period we heard the other side,
17 the Serbian side, use the communications to misinform the people who were
18 in these woods. What I was talking about now -- I mean, I don't know if
19 they were guided to minefields or something else. All I'm saying is that
20 in a conversation after the events, a conversation with somebody's
21 cousin, information was confirmed that people were led to ambushes and
22 that many of these people were killed then.
23 Q. Well, this is exactly what I am asking you.
24 Were you able to see by electronic means what was going on in
25 those woods? Were you able to see what the number of dead was and how
1 they were killed, how they died? Was it by artillery fire, in
2 minefields, was it infantry weapons? And did you know about the number
3 of casualties and the localities?
4 A. We couldn't know anything about the number of casualties, about
5 the places. And precisely because we didn't know, I think that we were
6 not successful in the jamming. I think that they were too far. We
7 didn't know what the numbers were, what the routes they were moving along
8 were. We didn't know anything.
9 We knew that the killings were going on. You could hear it from
10 the conversations. And in Zvornik, when they would pick up and say,
11 Well, 3.000 of them are coming towards us, we knew those kinds of things,
12 that sort of information from the conversations. Nothing else.
13 Q. And did you record this important communication?
14 A. Well, I already said that we didn't record these things,
16 Q. It's still not clear to me how -- well, let's clarify one thing.
17 If a Serb hand-held radio was used to misinform the Muslim side,
18 would that person introduce themselves as a Muslim or as a Serb?
19 A. Of course, the person would introduce themselves as a Muslim.
20 Otherwise how would they be able to plant the misinformation?
21 Q. And how could you tell that they were falsely introducing
22 themselves and that they were not actually a Muslim?
23 A. Well, we managed to do that. We managed to understand that. It
24 was so obvious. If you're listening, you would sense that that's what
25 that was. We even tried to say, and sometimes we even managed to do
1 that, we never had return information. We tried to let them know that
2 they were being misinformed.
3 Q. Sir, you and I of the same race. We speak the same language.
4 Our intonation is the same. How would anybody be able to tell the
5 difference between my ethnicity and yours? How would they be able to
6 tell by just conversation in speech?
7 A. At one point in time, I said that we had suggestions from the
8 2nd Corps about that same thing. I don't know if anybody established
9 that. But when you listen to the participants, you could see that there
10 is a group that is very diligently trying to deceive this other group,
11 and you can tell that this other group is tired, exhausted. You can hear
12 that by the way they talk, so I don't know why you're dwelling on this in
13 such detail.
14 I did mention this one event. There are traces of people who
15 were killed in that location. This is all I'm able to tell you. That's
16 how it was. And I stand by that.
17 Q. Witness, thank you very much.
18 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Honour, I have no further
19 questions for this witness.
20 JUDGE KWON: Thank you, Mr. Karadzic.
21 Yes, Ms. Edgerton, do you have any re-examination.
22 MS. EDGERTON: Between five and seven minutes' worth if I can,
23 Your Honours.
24 JUDGE KWON: Yes please.
25 MS. EDGERTON: And then we can deal with the exhibits after that.
1 I have an answer prepared for Your Honours.
2 Re-examination by Ms. Edgerton:
3 Q. Mr. Witness, today Dr. Karadzic spent some time on a couple of
4 intercepts from the 11th of July, P4629 and 4630, asking you about things
5 like how a president was addressed and dealing with the identification of
6 him as General Gvero's interlocutor.
7 I'd like to go back to those conversations and a couple more from
8 the 11th of July. The first one is 65 ter 30927, if we can see that
9 please. That's the conversation that I rose and spoke about during your
10 cross-examination on the same report as P4629 and 4630, at 1610 on the
11 11th of July between General Gvero and Nicolai at frequency 83600.
12 Now, Mr. Witness, about halfway through this conversation, about
13 the middle of your page and at the bottom of the English page, do you see
14 where General Gvero says:
15 "Tell General Nicolai through his interpreter that in case he
16 doesn't order the bombing to stop and doesn't withdrew NATO aeroplanes,
17 Nicolai will have responsibility for all further development of events."
18 Do you see that?
19 A. I see that. I see that.
20 Q. So just leaving for a minute this first conversation about
21 aeroplanes at 4.10. Let's go again to P4629, which is on the same
22 frequency at 1623, with General Gvero reporting to Dr. Karadzic on his
23 conversation with General Nicolai.
24 THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we find out more specifically
25 how it is known that it's Dr. Karadzic. It is only because it is written
1 so here?
2 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honours, may I continue?
3 JUDGE KWON: Yeah, it was discussed during his in-chief and in
5 So, on that basis, she can ask that question.
6 MS. EDGERTON: Thank you.
7 Q. Now, in this conversation, which is at the very bottom of the
8 page in your language, Witness, you see reference again to NATO
9 aeroplanes, where General Gvero says:
10 "I'm asking him to stop the operation immediately and get those
11 planes out of our sky ..."
12 So two conversations about aeroplanes within about 15 minutes of
13 one another; correct?
14 You're nodding your head. What does that mean?
15 A. I cannot see --
16 Q. [Previous translation continues] ...
17 A. -- at the top when this one began at 1610 and then there's
18 another one at 1623. Ah, that's where it is. Yes.
19 Q. Now, can we go to P4630. Third conversation on the 11th of July,
20 the second with Dr. Karadzic that we've already discussed, 20 minutes
21 after this one which takes place at 1623. And do you see in this
22 conversation --
23 MS. EDGERTON: I'll just wait a moment until we get the English
24 version up.
25 Sorry, we have two B/C/S versions.
1 Thank you.
2 Q. Do you see in this conversation where General Gvero tells
3 Dr. Karadzic:
4 "They're up in the air again."
5 A. Hmm, yes, yes. Yes.
6 Q. Thank you. Now I'd like to show you a radio signal communication
7 intercepted by Croatian authorities on the same day, 11 July, at the same
8 time, or within one minute, 1641. And that is 65 ter number - if I could
9 have your indulgence for just a moment - 32445.
10 And in this conversation, Croatian authorities identified
11 Dr. Karadzic as a speaker.
12 Take a second to look at the conversation. And do you see
13 Dr. Karadzic, at the very end of this conversation say:
14 "Yes, yes, I believe so, however, if they are going into a dive,
15 shoot them down."
16 Now you're nodding your head. What does that mean?
17 A. I'm just seeing some routes that we could not hear or did not
19 Q. Now, looking at these series of conversations that take place
20 within 30 minutes of one another, on the very same day, two of them from
21 two different sources which take place at approximately the same time on
22 the very same subject, aeroplanes, do you have any additional comment to
23 make on the identification of Dr. Karadzic as an interlocutor in the
24 two conversations we discussed in-chief recorded by your unit?
25 A. I am more than sure that it was Mr. Karadzic in those
1 conversations because these are very important topics, very important,
2 crucial matters, and no one would choose to speak with lower-ranking
3 persons on such matters.
4 Finally, this was recorded by a different, completely independent
5 group of people as well. I cannot tell now whether it's exactly the same
6 conversation and whether if we compiled them all we would get the same
8 Q. And just one final question to make the record abundantly clear.
9 30927, the first very conversation I referred you to when I took my feet
10 again, was that a conversation recorded and transcribed by your unit?
11 JUDGE KWON: Conversation with General Nicolai.
12 MS. EDGERTON: Could we have that up again, just so that the
13 witness can be abundantly sure.
14 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes. That was our report, yes.
15 MS. EDGERTON:
16 Q. Thank you.
17 MS. EDGERTON: I'd like to have 302957 admitted as a Prosecution
18 exhibit, and 32445, Your Honour, marked for identification.
19 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. Yes, we will do so.
20 THE REGISTRAR: 65 ter 30927 shall be assigned Exhibit P4632.
21 And 65 ter 32445 shall be assigned, marked for identification,
23 MS. EDGERTON: Nothing further, Your Honour, in re-examination.
24 JUDGE KWON: That concludes your evidence, Mr. Witness.
25 On behalf of this Chamber, and the Tribunal as a whole, I would
1 like to thank you for your coming to The Hague to give it. Now you are
2 free to go.
3 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.
4 JUDGE KWON: We will rise all together.
5 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, I'm sorry.
6 JUDGE KWON: [Microphone not activated]
7 MS. EDGERTON: Before we rise or after the witness leaves, I'm in
8 your hands, could we deal with the associated exhibits?
9 JUDGE KWON: Yes, why don't we do that. Yes, Ms. Edgerton.
10 MS. EDGERTON: Your Honour, 65 ter 03383, which was a numerical
11 list, now has the translation of the one line that needed translation
12 uploaded and the translation of the other 65 ter number is now uploaded
13 and available as well.
14 JUDGE KWON: Thank you. And the -- as to the items that should
15 be put under seal or ...
16 MS. EDGERTON: What I would propose, Your Honour, of course,
17 65 ter 23655 should be under seal. 23644, the map that we've been
18 discussing, should be under seal. 3383 marked by the witness, and 23651
19 should be under seal. But further to that, Your Honour, as indicated,
20 with some small redactions at the heading and the footer of the rest of
21 these conversations, I don't see why they should be under seal, and we
22 can effect that within a day and have those uploaded.
23 JUDGE KWON: There's no opposition to that from the Defence.
24 MR. ROBINSON: That's correct.
25 JUDGE KWON: Thank you.
1 We'll have a break for half an hour and resume at 12.35.
2 [The witness withdrew]
3 --- Recess taken at 12.06 p.m.
4 [Closed session]
11 Pages 26467-26491 redacted. Closed session.
21 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 1.47 p.m.,
22 to be reconvened on Wednesday, the 21st day of
23 March, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.