Tribunal Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

Page 30237

 1                           Wednesday, 14 November 2012

 2                           [Open session]

 3                           [The accused entered court]

 4                           --- Upon commencing at 2.26 p.m.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Good afternoon, everyone.  We are sitting today

 6     pursuant to Rule 15 bis, with Judge Morrison being away due to official

 7     reasons.

 8             Yes, Mr. Robinson.

 9             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President.  We would like to make a

10     motion to ask the Chamber to reconsider its ruling that was made

11     concerning the mode of testimony of the next witness, Dusan Zurovac.  And

12     the reason for that is simply that due to the technical difficulties

13     which we've experienced this week, we have four witnesses still in

14     The Hague to testify over these next two days in which we have shortened

15     work hours, and these people have come -- been here all week and it's

16     very difficult for them to come back.  They're working and it's a

17     hardship for them to have stayed here without testifying and also not

18     to -- to be asked to return.

19             So we accept fully that we should not provide the Trial Chamber

20     with more than one revised statement, which we did with Mr. Zurovac and

21     we won't do that ever again; and we also understand that there are

22     materials in paragraphs 2 through 11 in his statement that are not

23     relevant and need not be admitted.  But having learned those lessons,

24     without -- we would appreciate it if we could proceed by Rule 92 ter to

25     minimise the time that we would take with this witness's testimony so

Page 30238

 1     that the other witnesses can still be heard during the week.  And our

 2     apologies for our errors in the way we have approached this particular

 3     witness's documentation.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger, would you like to respond.

 5             MR. TIEGER:  Yes, Mr. President, thank you.  I'm moving over to

 6     this end so I can maintain eye contact with the entire Bench.  That's why

 7     I'm over here.

 8             First of all, as a preliminary matter, we don't agree that this

 9     is an exceptional circumstance or situation warranting reconsideration.

10     We deal with scheduling issues all the time, for better or worse.  This

11     is a matter that we understand involves a relatively short adjustment.

12     We understood from Mr. Robinson the anticipated time for viva voce would

13     be 30 to 45 minutes, in which event the impact is given the amount of

14     time that would normally be taken by or has been consumed by 92 ter

15     submissions and summaries consisting of 10 to 15 minutes, so the impact

16     would be negligible.  In any event, this kind of routine and customary

17     scheduling issue is not such that it rises to the level of

18     reconsideration that would upend a Trial Chamber decision.

19             But more importantly, let me get to the issues involved.

20     Mr. Robinson's proposal to eliminate paragraphs 1 through 11 or 2 through

21     11 really addresses only one part of the issue and clearly the smallest

22     part.  The Trial Chamber's principal concern and the one that clearly had

23     the greatest adverse impact on the Prosecution was the steady

24     proliferation of exhibits throughout the course of the week.  Now, I

25     emphasise, this comes against the backdrop of hundreds and hundreds of

Page 30239

 1     65 ter violations by the Defence, that is, its failure to provide,

 2     pursuant to the Rules, adequate factual summaries of what witnesses

 3     were -- what factual issues witnesses were expected to testify to, a

 4     matter which left the Prosecution, if it had any hope of attempting to

 5     conduct adequate preparation, utterly dependent on the statements.  So

 6     while under these circumstances the appropriate remedy might well have

 7     been to simply preclude any eliciting of the belated information, the

 8     Trial Chamber crafted a compromise that would hopefully discourage the

 9     Defence from engaging in this practice in the future but allowed it the

10     option and opportunity to elicit such evidence, as was included in that

11     final submission that it saw fit but in the context of a viva voce

12     presentation.

13             Mr. Robinson's proposed solution basically vitiates that

14     compromise.  So by eliminating only the material that is admittedly

15     marginal or even meaningless, it allows the accused basically the full

16     benefit of the criticised practice and imposes upon the Prosecution the

17     full burden that the remedy, at least in part, sought to address.

18             So under these circumstances, we consider that there really are

19     only two possible legitimate alternatives.  One is maintaining the

20     Court's decision to have all evidence led viva voce.  And if the Defence

21     is unhappy with that solution, then the only recourse would be to return

22     to the situation that existed before the addition of the belated

23     information, belated exhibits, and simply lead 92 ter the original

24     statement, that is, paragraphs 1 through 20.  Any other proposed solution

25     would be unfounded and unfair.

Page 30240

 1             I should note that Ms. West is actually leading the witness.  I

 2     don't know if she has anything to add that may be of use in this

 3     analysis, but other than that, that completes my submissions.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  My apologies for calling up on Mr. Tieger.

 5             But, Ms. West, do you have anything to add?

 6             MS. WEST:  I do not, Mr. President.  Thank you.

 7             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, I don't want to prolong the discussion,

 8     Mr. President.

 9                           [Trial Chamber confers]

10             JUDGE KWON:  Having considered the arguments of the parties, the

11     Chamber now gives its ruling.  In reaching its oral decision of

12     12th of November that Dusan Zurovac be led live, the Chamber considered

13     the successive and substantial additions made to the statement proposed

14     for admission as well as the fact that a large portion of the witness's

15     statement covered matters irrelevant to this case.  The Chamber is of the

16     view that the arguments put forth by the accused as a basis for

17     reconsideration do not alleviate the Chamber's initial concerns in

18     relation to the witness's evidence being presented pursuant to

19     Rule 92 ter and which led to the Chamber to decide that he be called

20     viva voce.

21             While the Chamber appreciates that witnesses may be

22     inconvenienced by having to travel back to the Tribunal a second time,

23     this is unfortunately a reality of trial proceedings but not one which

24     justifies not hearing a witness live when the Chamber decided that should

25     be the case.  The Chamber therefore decides that it will not reconsider

Page 30241

 1     its decision that Dusan Zurovac be led live.

 2             There's one further issue I'd like to discuss before we continue.

 3     Mr. Karadzic, on the 12th of November, 2012, you filed a motion for image

 4     distortion for Witness Miladin Trifunovic whose KW number is 515.  In

 5     paragraph 4 of that motion, the accused states, and I quote:

 6             "Dr. Karadzic apologises for the late notice of this requested

 7     measure, as Mr. Trifunovic did not raise this issue until he arrived in

 8     The Hague."

 9             However, the Chamber has been informed by VWS that upon his

10     arrival in The Hague the witness was surprised that protective measures

11     had not been requested, as he had specifically asked for such measures

12     when he met with a member of the Defence team in early to mid-October.

13             So, Mr. Robinson, whether you can provide an explanation on this.

14             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President.  It's true that witnesses and

15     our investigators do discuss the possibility of protective measures when

16     they're first contacted.  Often much of that took place before the trial

17     started and before the Trial Chamber has denied the protective measures

18     for other witnesses who have similar circumstances.  And so we have our

19     Case Manager contacting each witness when we first try to schedule their

20     travel to The Hague and to ask them whether or not they need protective

21     measures so that we could file a motion if they do.  And when our

22     Case Manager asked Mr. Trifunovic that, he indicated that he didn't need

23     protective measures so we didn't file a motion for him.  And then when he

24     came to The Hague and -- he was disappointed that he didn't have any

25     protective measures.  And so we finally discussed it with him and he was

Page 30242

 1     willing to nevertheless testify so long as he could at least have image

 2     distortion since he was travelling to areas where he felt he could have

 3     problems.  And so that's why you didn't receive the motion until this

 4     week.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Why was he disappointed after having said that he

 6     would not need protective measures?

 7             MR. ROBINSON:  Frankly, I don't know, Mr. President.  I think

 8     maybe there was a misunderstanding between him and the Case Manager

 9     because he seemed to think that he would have protective measures, but in

10     fact we were informed by the Case Manager, who was talking to witness

11     after witness and has a very strict protocol as to how he's performing

12     those duties, that he hadn't requested any.  So I can only think that

13     there was some kind of miscommunication or misunderstanding between them.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

15             In any event, the Chamber finds it unacceptable that inaccurate

16     representation of the position of witnesses in relation to protective

17     measures find their way into motions before the Chamber.  So in the

18     future, the Chamber expect the accused to ensure adequate communication

19     within its team and to ensure that the appropriate attention is given to

20     request -- for protective measures.  Witnesses simply cannot be left in

21     the dark until their arrival in The Hague, expecting to be granted

22     protective measures when they have not even been requested.  Therefore,

23     it is for the Defence team to adequately inform and advise its witnesses

24     in a timely manner about the request it has or will make in relation to

25     protective measures.

Page 30243

 1             Having said that, the Chamber will issue a written decision

 2     shortly on that motion.

 3             Unless there's any other matters, we'll bring in the next

 4     witness.

 5             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I would just only suggest that this

 6     witness have an 90(E) warning, please.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 8                           [The witness entered court]

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Good afternoon, sir.

10             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Good afternoon.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Would you take the solemn declaration, please.

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I solemnly declare that I will

13     speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

14                           WITNESS:  DUSAN ZUROVAC

15                           [Witness answered through interpreter]

16             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  Please make yourself comfortable.

17             Mr. Zurovac, before you start giving evidence, I would like to

18     draw your attention to a particular rule here at the Tribunal.  Under

19     this rule, Rule 90(E), you may object to answering a question from the

20     Prosecution, the accused, or from the Judges if you believe that your

21     answer will incriminate you.  When I say "incriminate," I mean that

22     something you say may amount to an admission of your guilt or could

23     provide evidence that you have committed an offence.  However, even if

24     you think your answer will incriminate you and you do not wish to answer

25     the question, the Tribunal has the discretion to oblige you to answer the

Page 30244

 1     question.  But in such a case, the Tribunal will make sure that your

 2     testimony compelled in such a way shall not be used as evidence in other

 3     case against you for any offence other than false testimony.

 4             Do you understand what I have said to you, sir?

 5             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 7             Yes, Mr. Karadzic.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Good day, Your Excellency.  Good

 9     day to everyone.

10                           Examination by Mr. Karadzic:

11        Q.   [Interpretation] Good day, Mr. Zurovac.

12        A.   Good day.

13        Q.   Unfortunately, I'll have to spend a little more time on the

14     examination-in-chief because you will be led viva voce, but I assume that

15     no one has anything against you being provided with your statement.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I don't know what the exact

17     procedure is.

18             JUDGE KWON:  I think you should know how to conduct your

19     examination-in-chief with the advice of Mr. Robinson and other legal

20     associates.  Please proceed.

21             MR. ROBINSON:  Is there any problem, Mr. President, with him

22     having his statement?  A witness can have a prior statement to assist

23     them whether or not it's admitted under 92 ter.

24                           [Trial Chamber confers]

25             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have any observation, Mr. Tieger -- or

Page 30245

 1     Ms. West, I'm sorry.

 2             MS. WEST:  I don't.  I have no objection to that.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

 4             Yes.

 5             MR. TIEGER:  Mr. President, I would have one observation and that

 6     is I believe when that's happened in other Chambers, it's -- the witness

 7     has been asked to advise the parties if and when he is referring to the

 8     statement so that the record is clear.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, but we can observe whether the witness consults

10     his statement or not and then we can monitor it.

11             Let it be done.  We'll print out the -- do we have B/C/S version?

12     We'll print out the B/C/S version and provide it to the witness.

13             In the meantime, please continue, Mr. Karadzic.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Could you tell us your name.

17        A.   My name is Dusan Zurovac.

18        Q.   I'm waiting for the interpretation to be completed.  I would like

19     to ask you to do the same.

20             Can you tell us where and when you were born?

21        A.   I was born on the 19th of November, 1941, in Nevesinje, in

22     Herzegovina.

23        Q.   Thank you.  What are you by profession?

24        A.   I'm a professor of literature.

25        Q.   Is that what you are by profession?  Did you work in your

Page 30246

 1     profession?

 2        A.   Yes, I did.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  Where did you live?

 4        A.   I lived in Sarajevo and in Mostar.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Where did you live in Sarajevo?

 6        A.   I lived in Novo Sarajevo in Zagorska Street number 81.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Is that your privately owned house or is it a

 8     collective residence?

 9        A.   It's my privately owned house.

10        Q.   Thank you.  Where were you when the war broke out?

11        A.   I was in Mostar.

12        Q.   Thank you.  When did you return to Sarajevo?

13        A.   I returned there three months later, about three and a half

14     months later.

15        Q.   Thank you.  Did you at any point in time join the Army of

16     Republika Srpska?

17        A.   Yes, I did.

18        Q.   Where did you report to the army and could you tell us for what

19     reasons you did this?

20        A.   I reported to the VRS in my neighbourhood, my settlement.  It was

21     an exclusively Serbian settlement.  I reported there because I didn't

22     want the same thing to happen to me that happened to me in Mostar at the

23     beginning of May.

24        Q.   What do you have in mind?  What happened to you in Mostar at the

25     beginning of May?

Page 30247

 1        A.   On the 5th of May, 1992, I was imprisoned and I was taken to the

 2     central prison in Mostar.  On the 18th August I was taken to Stolac and I

 3     experienced things that are difficult to understand.  It's hard to

 4     understand how one man can do such things to another man.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Which unit did you join?  Where was that unit

 6     deployed?

 7        A.   The 4th Company of the 2nd Battalion deployed in Ozrenska Street.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  Could you tell the Chamber where the 4th Company had

 9     its area of responsibility?

10        A.   Its area of responsibility was from Pandurevica Kuca and up until

11     the crossroads at Milinkladska Street.

12        Q.   Thank you.  How far is Ozrenska Street from Zagorska Street, or

13     rather, your house?

14        A.   Well, my house is at the corner where Zagorska Street joins

15     Ozrenska Street, to the left, on the left-hand side.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Were you assigned some command responsibilities; and

17     if so, on what basis?

18        A.   Not initially, I wasn't assigned any command duties, I was an

19     ordinary private.  Later, when the commander of the 4th Company was

20     killed, I became the commander of the 4th Company.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Did you have a rank of any kind?

22        A.   Yes, I did.  I was a lieutenant-colonel at the time.

23             THE INTERPRETER:  A second lieutenant, correction.

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Thank you.  Where did you obtain that rank?

Page 30248

 1        A.   In the VRS, the Army of Republika Srpska.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D6099.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Are you familiar with this map and have you marked it?

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could it be scrolled up a bit.

 6             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, I'm familiar with this map and

 7     I marked this triangle that you can see in the corner.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we scroll up a bit.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   What does this triangle represent?  Is it in blue?

11        A.   Yes, in blue.  That is the area that was under the control of the

12     4th Company.

13        Q.   Could you tell us what this represents?

14        A.   On the whole, this line is the line of demarcation.  That's where

15     the trenches were located and the bunkers on both sides.  The enemy was

16     10, 15, or 20 metres away from us.

17        Q.   Thank you.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Your Excellencies, is it necessary

19     to sign the map or can it be admitted as it is?

20             JUDGE KWON:  No, he didn't sign -- mark it -- anything on this

21     map in the courtroom, but I need some clarification.

22             Sir, Mr. Zurovac, can you read English?

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, I can't.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Who wrote the annotation on this map, Mr. Karadzic?

25     I see "zone of responsibility of D. Zurovac" and further up I see the

Page 30249

 1     comment like "no line of sight" and there's "1.250 metres."  Who put

 2     those markings -- notations?

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We received information from the

 4     witness and then we made these notes --

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic --

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- he also showed where the line

 7     should be traced.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Karadzic --

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- the blue line is his.

10             JUDGE KWON:  -- you asked only about the blue markings and then

11     the witness said he does not understand or read English.  In order for us

12     to admit this as it is, you have to put questions about this comment as

13     well.  Yes.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

15             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

16        Q.   Can you tell us how far your area of responsibility is from the

17     area marked as number 10 or 18?

18        A.   The distance is about a kilometre and a half from number 10 at

19     least, and from number 4, the distance would be about 900 metres, I

20     believe, from the firing position, the distance from the firing position

21     that was under the control of the 4th Company.

22        Q.   Just a moment, please.  Were you informed about an incident that

23     took place on the 3rd of September, 1993, in Ivana Krndelja Street?

24        A.   Yes, I was.

25        Q.   Could you tell us how the Ivana Krndelja Street has been marked

Page 30250

 1     here?

 2        A.   The Ivana Krndelja Street leaves from -- goes from the bridge

 3     over Miljacka up to this hill, there's a vertical line where -- from

 4     where incident 4 occurred over the Miljacka river to Hrasno.

 5        Q.   And how far is it from your positions to the Ivana Krndelja

 6     crossroads and the street that goes from the east to the west?

 7        A.   About 900 metres.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  Is there a clear line of sight here?

 9        A.   No.

10        Q.   Between your position and the location marked as number 4; isn't

11     that correct?

12        A.   That's correct.

13        Q.   Thank you.  What, in fact, obstructs this line of sight?

14        A.   Well, the lie of the land, the hill is such that you can't see

15     anything from the positions of the 4th Company.  You can't see the

16     location where incident 4 occurred.  You can see where Tranzit is located

17     here.  It was only possible to see this incident, the location of this

18     incident, if you were on the hill behind us.  In such a case the distance

19     would be over a kilometre and a half.

20             What is obstructing the line of sight?  Well, the hills are

21     obstructing the line of sight.  It's a hilly area.  We were in some sort

22     of a valley, so there were three or four hills that were obstructing the

23     line of sight.  They made it impossible to see the Ivana Krndelja Street.

24     So sometimes the enemy brought through -- brought in manpower and

25     equipment through the Tranzit.  We weren't aware of the fact.  You can

Page 30251

 1     only hear certain sounds that were produced and so on and so forth.  You

 2     couldn't see anything.  I think this thesis is one that doesn't hold

 3     water because incident 4 could only have been seen from 400 metres behind

 4     our positions, from Gojino hill or Gradon [phoen] hill.

 5        Q.   Are those hills in the area of responsibility of the Serbian

 6     army?

 7        A.   Yes.

 8        Q.   In such a case, what would the distance be between those points

 9     from which you have visibility and location number 4?

10        A.   From those points, from Gojino Brdo, the distance would be about

11     2 kilometres and from Seratlino [phoen] Brdo the distance would be about

12     a kilometre and a half.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Tell us, please, whether you were informed about the

14     incident that happened on the 22nd of July, 1994, in the

15     Miljenko Cvitkovic Street?

16        A.   Yes, although I was not the company commander at the time, I had

17     a work obligation at the time.  However, there is a lot of illogical

18     things involved in that.  It was stated that the boy was standing in

19     front of a shop window.  We were behind his back some kilometre and a

20     half away from him and the boy allegedly was hit in the stomach.  This

21     doesn't make sense.  Let's not even talk about ranges and other things

22     that we will discuss later, whether we could do it or not.  There is no

23     either theoretical or practical possibility for us to have done that.

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we call up another document but

Page 30252

 1     before that we need the map still.  Then I will call up other documents.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 3             MR. ROBINSON:  Mr. President, concerning this map we would like

 4     to tender it and also I would like to ask that it be added to our 65 ter

 5     list.  It wasn't on our list because it wasn't in existence at the time

 6     we submitted our list.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. West.

 8             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I heard evidence regarding number 10

 9     and number 4.  I heard 1500 kilometres -- excuse me, metres and

10     900 metres, but this map has 1.250 metres on it and an extra dot, so if

11     we can have some clarification about that.

12             JUDGE KWON:  What did you refer to as extra dots?

13             MS. WEST:  I don't think he said anything about 18.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Was it not on the map originally?

15             MS. WEST:  It may have been, Your Honour, but if this is

16     admitted, it's not going to make any sense otherwise unless he speaks

17     about it.

18             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I explain?

19             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] We did not show the witness any

21     documents concerning the location 18.  It's a Prosecutor's map and I

22     don't think that this witness knows anything about that incident.

23             MS. WEST:  And, Mr. President, I can accept that and perhaps

24     we'll just get rid of that number, but it also regards the 1.250 metres.

25     Unless I'm mistaken, I didn't hear any evidence regarding that.

Page 30253

 1             JUDGE KWON:  With that point, I agree with.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Mr. Zurovac, what's the significance of 1.250 metres on the map?

 4        A.   It's a distance, the distance from our firing positions to

 5     incident 10, which is marked on the map.  I said about 1500 metres, I

 6     said that that was the distance, and that incident number 10 could have

 7     been seen only from the hills behind our backs.

 8        Q.   In that case, that would be even further than your line of

 9     defence?

10        A.   About 300 metres.  Gojino Brdo is some 350 metres from our

11     positions and Seratino [phoen] Brdo was about 300 metres from our

12     positions.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the map be admitted?  If the

14     witness needs to sign it, I will ask him to sign it.

15             JUDGE KWON:  It's okay.  You don't have to sign it.

16             We'll admit this.  Shall we give the number.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Your Honours, document 1D6099 receives number

18     D2427.

19             JUDGE KWON:  And I just note that the base map is the one that

20     was admitted as P2192, but I note that probably Defence team changed the

21     colour of number 18 from green to yellow, even the legend.  I find it

22     amazing.

23             Yes, let's continue.

24             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] On the screen I can see number 18

25     in green --

Page 30254

 1             JUDGE KWON: [Previous translation continues]...

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] -- both in the captions and when it

 3     comes to the figure.  They're all green.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Yellowish-green.  Yes, let's continue.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             And now can we see a photo, this is 65 ter 24026.  24026 pursuant

 7     to Rule 65 ter.

 8             Thank you.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Mr. Zurovac, do you recognise this location?

11        A.   No, I've never seen this location.  I recognise the place, but I

12     could not see it because of the obstructions --

13             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreter did not understand the

14     witness's answer.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Zurovac, could you repeat your answer so that

16     the interpreters can interpret it.

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I know this area very well because

18     I lived here for almost 30 years; however, the obstructions that are in

19     the Ivana Krndelja Street, I never saw them before, not only me but also

20     none of my soldiers.  I can vouch for that with my own life.

21             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

22        Q.   Could you look at the photo and point to your positions were.

23        A.   Our positions are in the depth of the photo, about 900 metres

24     from here, but the configuration of the terrain was such that the terrain

25     was sloping.  The area is known as Hrasno Brdo or Hrasno hill.  It's a

Page 30255

 1     hilly terrain, hence the name.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can the witness be assisted in

 3     marking Ozrenska Street.

 4             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 5        Q.   Are the positions visible in this photo, Mr. Zurovac?

 6        A.   No, they're not.

 7        Q.   Can you draw arrows pointing from the skyline towards the ground

 8     to show where your positions were?

 9        A.   That would be a problem because as far as I can see, the photo

10     was taken from a position which is somewhere on the road.  You can see in

11     the photo that this was not taken from the depth of the terrain where our

12     positions were.  This is very clear.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Then I won't ask you to mark.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this photo be admitted into

15     evidence, please.

16             MR. ROBINSON:  Also, Mr. President, we would like to request that

17     this be added to our 65 ter list, as we didn't contemplate using it until

18     recently.

19             JUDGE KWON:  And probably the Prosecution may be aware of the

20     provenance of this document, but in the future I would like the accused

21     to introduce where it's from.  I can see here it's from Galic trial.

22             Yes, Ms. West.

23             MS. WEST:  I don't have any objection to that.

24             JUDGE KWON:  Well, the request is granted and we will admit this

25     into evidence as Exhibit D2428.

Page 30256

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Prosecution exhibit?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  My correction.  I should have said D2428.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   Before we move the photo from the screen, Mr. Zurovac, the road

 5     that you see in the photo, was it used by the BH army?

 6        A.   At the beginning of my testimony I said that the BiH army used

 7     this road, but we could not control transit along that road.  That's the

 8     route of the former railway line.  It was a bit below us.  There was no

 9     visibility.  There was no line of visibility from us to there.  We could

10     not control that road.  They used it to transport manpower and equipment.

11     This street was very busy when it comes to that.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to call up

14     65 ter 24024.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Robinson, if the accused is going to use many

16     documents which were not listed as -- on the 65 ter list, why don't you

17     deal with in lump sum all together so that we can deal with it more

18     conveniently.

19             MR. ROBINSON:  It would be better to do that at the end, perhaps,

20     because I'm not exactly sure how many of these we're going to get to.

21     We're trying to also be conscious of not using too much time.  Unless you

22     would like me to make a general request that would apply to any document

23     that he offers during the course of this examination that's not on our

24     list.

25             JUDGE KWON:  The Prosecution is informed of those documents?

Page 30257

 1             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, they have been included on our Rule 92 ter

 2     package, so we are -- they have been informed of them and they have been

 3     informed that they were not on our 65 ter list.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  In the future, the Chamber should have been informed

 5     of similar documents -- of documents of similar nature.  We haven't

 6     received any.

 7             MR. ROBINSON:  I'm sorry, I'm not following, Mr. President.  We

 8     filed on the 9th of November our Rule 65 -- Rule 92 ter package which

 9     includes the list of documents that were intended to be used with the

10     witness.  Now what Dr. Karadzic intends is to select some of those, as

11     time permits, and offer them.  So that's what we're working from is our

12     Rule 92 ter package of the 9th of November, and there's a column that

13     indicates which ones were on the 65 ter list and not.

14             JUDGE KWON:  That's all due to various filings, I think.  Yes, I

15     found it.  Let's proceed.

16             But, Ms. West, do you have any objection in relation to specific

17     documents or you can tell us in general?

18             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.  In general, at least the

19     documents I've seen so far, I'm aware of them.  I do understand that

20     they're not on the 65 ter list, but they are documents that I've seen.  I

21     don't want to make a general -- I don't want to take the general position

22     that the Prosecution does not object to a whole mass load of non-notified

23     65 ter documents, but in these particular cases these are documents of

24     which I've been aware.

25             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  On that basis, let's proceed.

Page 30258

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Mr. Zurovac, do you recognise this photo?

 4        A.   Of course I do.  I recognise it.

 5        Q.   What does this photo depict?  What's in the background?

 6        A.   This is Ivana Krndelja Street, its pavement, and in the

 7     background is Hrasno hill, it's the top of Hrasno hill.

 8        Q.   Who controlled the summit of Hrasno hill?

 9        A.   That was our area of responsibility.  Nobody lived there.  There

10     was just an old lady there who had a mentally ill son.  People had fled

11     from there so both of those hills, nobody resided there because our line

12     was some 250 or so metres from the tops of any of these hills.

13        Q.   Thank you.  Was there a line of visibility from the place where

14     this lady is standing and your trenches?

15        A.   No, there was none.

16        Q.   Thank you.  What about Asimovo Brdo, where was that?

17        A.   If you look at this photo you will see it on the left-hand side,

18     some 900 metres away.  Asimovo Brdo is somewhat higher than both Gojino

19     and Seratino Brdo.  It's much higher and would be to the left-hand side

20     of the photo as I am looking at it now.

21        Q.   Who controlled Asimovo Brdo?

22        A.   The enemy.

23        Q.   Asimovo Brdo was dominant together with Gojino and the other hill

24     that you mentioned?

25        A.   Yes, but it was at least 50 metres higher than the other two.

Page 30259

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this photo be admitted,

 2     please --

 3             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, there have been several questions that

 4     have been leading in this matter.  I've said nothing.  I understand the

 5     issue of time, but I don't want Mr. Karadzic to get into the habit of it.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  I -- as usual practice, I let you go on until

 7     objected to.  Now you heard Ms. West's submission.  Please bear in mind

 8     not to lead the witness.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Before we move the exhibit from the screen, can you tell us where

11     the enemy trenches were, looking from this photo?

12        A.   The enemy trenches were below our trenches towards the area where

13     this lady or this man is standing.  In other words, enemy trenches would

14     be closer to us.  Our trenches were a bit further away.  They were some

15     15 or 20 metres behind their trenches.

16        Q.   Looking at the horizon depicted in the photo, where were the Serb

17     trenches and where were the Muslim trenches?

18        A.   Do you want me to draw a line?  Towards the top of the photo you

19     see a white house and then you see a greenish house, and the top of the

20     hill is somewhere there among the houses.  And our trenches were below

21     that greenish house.  In the photo it would be on my right-hand side.

22     That's where our trenches were.

23        Q.   Thank you.

24             JUDGE KWON:  This photo will be admitted as Exhibit D2429.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

Page 30260

 1             Could we see 65 ter 23968.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Do you recognise this photograph and can you tell us what it

 4     shows?

 5        A.   Yes.  This is Ivana Krndelja Street.  You can see to my left that

 6     there are certain skyscrapers, it's Ivana Krndelja Street.  All these

 7     buildings here, the house that's being built - I don't know whose it is,

 8     I don't even know whose house is to the right, the one that has been

 9     destroyed.  From this position you can't see the location of the incident

10     marked as incident number 4.  That's quite simply not possible.

11        Q.   Thank you.  Was this photograph taken to the north of

12     Ozrenska Street or to the south?  Where's Ozrenska Street in relation to

13     this photograph?

14        A.   It's behind this house, behind these trees.  It depends because

15     it's not a straight street.  It's in a mountainous terrain and the street

16     winds between the houses that were built in the area.  It's not to the

17     north -- well, in fact, it's more to the north.  Yes, that's quite

18     certain.

19        Q.   And your positions?

20        A.   Well, our positions were here in the depth, in the depth.  You

21     can't see where our positions are in the photograph.

22        Q.   Thank you.  So where was the photographer standing in relation to

23     your positions, was he closer to the Muslims or was he further away from

24     the Muslims in relation to your trenches in fact?

25        A.   The photograph I was shown a while ago -- well, my impression is

Page 30261

 1     that that was taken from Demino hill.  They tried to find a good angle to

 2     take the photograph, because I'm saying that from the positions of the

 3     4th Company it wasn't possible to see the location of incident number 4.

 4     That was, quite simply, impossible.

 5        Q.   Thank you.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into

 7     evidence?

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. West.

 9             MS. WEST:  No objection.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Exhibit D2430.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 23967, please.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Can you tell us whether you recognise this photograph?  What can

14     we see in the photograph and where was the photograph taken from?

15        A.   You can really see Ivana Krndelja Street in this photograph.  It

16     was photographed from the right-hand side.  This can be seen because of

17     the layout of the buildings and you can see that these buildings

18     obstructed the line of sight, as well as these residential buildings

19     here, they obstructed the line of sight to incident -- to the location of

20     incident number 4.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Which street is Ivana Krndelja Street, the one to the

22     left or the one to the right by these blocks?

23        A.   The skyscraper to the left and the residential buildings are to

24     the right, so it's between the skyscrapers and the residential buildings.

25     That is the location of the Ivana Krndelja Street.

Page 30262

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Can you tell where this was taken from, from the

 2     ground or from where exactly, from what sort of position?

 3        A.   I don't know.  It was certainly from some other position, not

 4     from the position that was under the control of the 4th Company because

 5     it would have been quite impossible to take this photograph from that

 6     position.  It was to the right, to the town, to Vraca, I mentioned

 7     Demino Brdo, Demino hill, a minute ago.  Perhaps this photograph was

 8     taken from that hill, from Demino hill.

 9        Q.   Thank you.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this photo please be admitted

11     into evidence.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Who took these pictures, Mr. Karadzic, by the

13     Defence team?

14             MR. ROBINSON:  Mr. President, these were taken by the Prosecution

15     and you see the 65 ter numbers are Prosecution 65 ter numbers.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

17             They were also used in Galic case?  Do you know that, Ms. West?

18             MS. WEST:  Not at the moment, but I will have that answer for you

19     momentarily.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  Yes, this will be admitted as

21     Exhibit D2431.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

23             Could we now see 1D6099.

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   I would like to ask you the following.  Could you tell us whether

Page 30263

 1     from your positions in Ozrenska Street, was it possible to use automatic

 2     rifles and single shots in order to hit the location marked as number 10

 3     with precision?

 4        A.   It would have been impossible to do that.  You know that the

 5     enemy lines were in front of us and if anyone appeared on a roof and

 6     opened fire, for example, on a woman with a child, well, that would have

 7     been quite mad.  It's a mad idea, a mad assumption.

 8             But I'd like to say something else.  If you have a look at the

 9     previous photograph, if you have a look at the angle or the point from

10     which the photograph was taken, you can see that -- you can see certain

11     things to the right.  If you have a look at the location of incident

12     number 4, you can see that the 4th Company is to the left.  That's where

13     our area of responsibility is.  Why would it be impossible to hit that

14     area?  Well, because first of all it's a great distance and an automatic

15     weapon isn't intended to hit targets at such distance.  It is possible,

16     but you can't really target such a location.  You can't use an automatic

17     weapon because from our positions it was not possible to see the location

18     of incident number 4.  That's the first thing.  And secondly - and this

19     is incredibly important - do you think people would -- people who were in

20     trenches, who were spending their lives in trenches, do you think they

21     would have the idea of leaving the trenches, climbing up on some sort of

22     hills, and opening fire on some women?  Well, that's quite crazy.

23        Q.   Why would that be crazy?

24        A.   Well, any honourable man, any honourable combatant, any

25     honourable Serbian combatant wouldn't allow such things.  All of these

Page 30264

 1     combatants were parents, they had their children, they had their own

 2     families.  So imagine someone opening fire on a woman and a child, how

 3     could such a person know that that woman and that child were Muslims.

 4     I'd like someone to explain that to me.

 5        Q.   Thank you.  Is there also the issue of that person's security if

 6     that person climbed up onto a roof?

 7        A.   Absolutely not.  That would have meant certain death.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 9             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I think we're gearing towards that

10     direction again.

11             JUDGE KWON:  Do you follow, Mr. Karadzic?

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but I'm in a hurry.  I'm

13     trying to save some time.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   We have dealt with the incidents.  I wanted to ask you about the

16     strength of your company.

17        A.   Well, that depended.  Its strength depended on the conditions, on

18     the situation in the battle-field.  There were 120 men in the company at

19     the most on the basis of the list.  However, no more than 80 per cent of

20     them were covering the lines.

21        Q.   Thank you.  Where were these combatants from?

22        A.   All these soldiers were on the whole from these private houses.

23     They were quite simply people who were defending their homes and their

24     families.  In fact, the families had moved out because it wasn't possible

25     to live there.  This might seem to be a sort of fabrication for people

Page 30265

 1     who aren't familiar with the situation, but as for the living conditions

 2     there, well, that is an entirely different story.

 3        Q.   Thank you.  What was the age of the men in your unit?

 4        A.   Well, it wasn't favourable and this does demonstrate the fact

 5     that people were, in fact, defending their homes, their families.  There

 6     were quite a few people who, in fact, had never served in the army, so

 7     you can't really speak about an elite elected unit.  They were there and

 8     they had to decide whether to defend themselves or not, whether to live

 9     or not.  They were just defending their territory, nothing else.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D20359, 1D20359.

11             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

12        Q.   While waiting for that to come up, where was the enemy facing

13     you?

14        A.   At the other end of the line of confrontation.  We had a flank

15     line of confrontation.  There was the 101st Mountain Unit and then we

16     also had the 102nd Mountain Unit.  They were far stronger than we were.

17     The ratio wasn't 10:1, it was 20:1.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Are you familiar with this document and did you sign

19     it?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Did you ever submit reports to anyone and how frequently?

22        A.   Well, on the whole you submit reports to the battalion commander

23     and this is done twice during the day, about 10.00 in the morning and in

24     the evening, unless there's an extraordinary situation and it's

25     impossible for someone to find time to write anything.

Page 30266

 1        Q.   Thank you.  Can you tell us anything about the contents of this

 2     document?  What is the gist of the document?  How is the unit described?

 3        A.   Well, this document shows that I tried to report to the superior

 4     command on the situation in the unit and to report on their age,

 5     structure, on the type of men in the unit, because you should bear in

 6     mind that these people never had any rest.  They didn't leave to have

 7     rest.  So I informed them about the psychological situation, how well the

 8     unit was equipped, and all other negative aspects that involved in the

 9     war.  This was in 1992.  In December we were waiting an attack that was

10     to take place two days later on Gojino Brdo, Gojino hill, and we

11     sustained quite significant casualties there.  It was in December 1993.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this document please be

14     admitted into evidence.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

16             Shall we give the number.

17             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D20359 receives number D2432,

18     Your Honours.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

20             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

21             Could we have a look at 23066 -- 1D23060.  1D23060.

22             JUDGE KWON:  It's noted as one of the associated exhibits.  Let

23     us check.  I'm told it's not released.

24             MR. ROBINSON:  I think Dr. Karadzic may have read the number

25     wrong.  It's 1D20360.

Page 30267

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you, Mr. Robinson.  It's coming.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Could you tell us something about this document.

 4        A.   This is a report again, a daily report.  To tell you the truth, I

 5     can't read this, the letters are very small.  Could we zoom in a bit so

 6     that I can see what it's about?

 7             There's just one thing I would like to clarify here.  If the men

 8     were waiting at the firing position -- well, often we had to ask for

 9     assistance because the combatants at the positions were waiting for

10     orders from above.  If they did that all the time, they wouldn't survive,

11     because the situation was such that each and every combatant had to take

12     action in order to save his life.  So this is a daily report to the

13     battalion command and it shows what the situation was on that day,

14     although I can't see the date at the top of the document.  But there's no

15     doubt about the fact that I signed it.  It was the 1st of January, new

16     year, in fact.

17        Q.   Thank you.  And does it say -- well, that was for yesterday, but

18     does it say that today the enemy hasn't opened fire nor have you and you

19     don't have water?

20        A.   We don't have water, we don't have electricity, we have nothing.

21     The conditions can't be described.  The people who are listening to this

22     now can't even understand what the situation was like.  It's impossible

23     to understand what people are prepared to do in order to defend their

24     honour, to defend their lives, and to defend their homes, and so on and

25     so forth, to defend their icons and their religion.

Page 30268

 1        Q.   Thank you.

 2             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted, please.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Exhibit D2433.

 4             MR. ROBINSON:  Mr. President, during the course of the

 5     examination we would actually like to tender a number of reports similar

 6     to this that has been shown to the witness in the proofing process that

 7     describe the daily life on the line where he was working and are authored

 8     by him.  And I was wondering whether or not the Chamber would allow

 9     Dr. Karadzic to simply elicit from the witness that he has had the

10     opportunity to review the specified documents which are in the statement

11     and that they appear to be reports authored by him which describe the

12     situation at his position during the war.  And if that would be

13     sufficient, we could save a lot of time.

14             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, may I be heard?

15             JUDGE KWON:  Of course, yes, Ms. West.

16             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I would object to this

17     procedure.  It was something that I think we discussed even with a

18     witness that I took during the last portion of the Prosecution case in

19     chief.  We did it through a 92 ter process, where a lot more information

20     was elicited about a list of documents that she had put together.  It was

21     at that point that Mr. Robinson objected and I make the same objection

22     here.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Further -- if my memory serves correct, it's not

24     consistent with the Chamber's past practice.  If they're relevant, put

25     them to the witness; otherwise, there's no need for those documents -- I

Page 30269

 1     will consult my colleagues.

 2                           [Trial Chamber confers]

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, the Chamber is of the view that if Mr. Karadzic

 4     wants to tender those documents, he needs to put those documents to the

 5     witness.

 6             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Has this been admitted?

 7     Yes.

 8             I'd like to call up 1D20361.  1D20361.

 9             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

10        Q.   Mr. Zurovac, can you tell us briefly, is this your document?

11     When was it drafted and what does it represent in a nutshell?

12        A.   Believe me, I can't see much.  In any case, it was around

13     Christmas 1993.  It's not very visible.  It says here yesterday around

14     12.00, or rather, 12.20, the enemy --

15             THE INTERPRETER:  It is impossible to interpret because the

16     witness is reading too fast and mumbling.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Zurovac, the interpreters are not able to keep

18     up with your speed, so could you slow down when reading out something.

19     So could you repeat your answer, please.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] This is a report, a daily report,

21     sent to the battalion command which was drafted on the 7th of January,

22     1993, on Orthodox Christmas.  One can see from this report that on

23     Orthodox Christmas, the enemy launched an attack on our positions from

24     the line on the flank, from Asimovo Brdo, which was the biggest threat

25     for us in any case.  In this report I mention some of the shortcomings

Page 30270

 1     and shortages.  There were a lot of such things, both in our lives as

 2     well as in war time, especially in war time.

 3             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 4        Q.   It says here:  "Combined artillery and infantry attack."  What is

 5     that?

 6        A.   First there is artillery support to move us from our trenches,

 7     and after that the infantry starts using grenades and infantry weapons in

 8     order to move our line in their favour.  I suppose that they counted with

 9     the fact that it was a holiday, that the men had gone home to celebrate,

10     and they thought that our strength was diminished and that's why they

11     attacked us, I suppose.

12        Q.   Thank you.  You say here that there was indiscriminate shelling.

13     What kinds of shells were used against you?

14        A.   Interestingly enough, when it comes to shelling in this specific

15     case and in general, that company was like a gateway for all those who

16     wanted to break through our firing positions, to break us up, to open

17     Sarajevo, but it's not a good word because Sarajevo was enclosed.  That's

18     why I'm not using the word "to open" Sarajevo.  However, they wanted to

19     break us up and to move us further in the depth of our positions and that

20     would have given them the control of entire Ozrenska Street.  That was

21     the main goal.  It is very important for those who know the situation in

22     the case that they had broken up our lines, they would have come behind

23     our lines and they would have captured the entire unit.

24        Q.   Can we look at the last sentence to see what that is about.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Scroll up a little, please.

Page 30271

 1             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, scroll up.

 2             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 3        Q.   Could you please read this out aloud.

 4        A.   Of course I can.

 5             "How do we regulate the men's rest?  I'm afraid that exhaustion

 6     and tiredness will take their toll."

 7             Let me explain, those people were on the front line from the

 8     first day to the last day without any breaks.  People who had a bath only

 9     exceptionally, perhaps once in a month or even in two months.  The

10     conditions of life were such that a normal mind cannot grasp that, as

11     I've already told you.

12        Q.   Thank you.

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?  I'm looking

14     at the time.  I'm in your hands about the break.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.  This will be admitted as next exhibit,

16     i.e., Exhibit D2434, and we'll break for 25 minutes and resume at

17     13 past 4.00.

18                           --- Recess taken at 3.47 p.m.

19                           --- On resuming at 4.15 p.m.

20             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, if I can interrupt.  Just one quick

21     administrative matter.  There were two photos that were used during the

22     direct and you had asked the provenance of them.  Both were used in the

23     Galic case, that's D2428 and D2429.  In the first one, 28, that's the

24     photo we saw that vantage point was the street and we saw a bunch of

25     hash -- or lines on it and that was used in the Galic case with the

Page 30272

 1     victim of the sniping incident, Nafa Taric, and she was drawing the

 2     barricades.  As for D2429, again that was a photo actually of Nafa Taric

 3     of the location of the incident itself.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  How about 2430 and 2431?

 5             MS. WEST:  I do not believe those were used in the Galic case.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  But they are from the Prosecution.  Thank you.

 7             Yes, Mr. Karadzic, please continue.

 8             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I would like to call up

 9     1D20346.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Mr. Zurovac, please, in a nutshell, tell us what is this document

12     about?

13        A.   I can't see the document well, I can't read it, because the

14     letters are too small.

15             I can answer your question.  I know what this document is about.

16     It speaks about very bad conditions in the unit.  In addition to the age,

17     structure, in addition to absenteeism from the defence line, there were

18     other problems in the unit.  People leave without permission and I

19     informed the commander that the situation in the unit is alarming.  This

20     is a daily report for the 31st of August, 1993.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we zoom in on the bottom of the

22     document.

23             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Let me take a look, please.

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   Who cosigned the report?

Page 30273

 1        A.   It was Ljubo Bozic who was actually the driver of the unit's

 2     lorry.

 3        Q.   Thank you.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 6             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D20346 receives number D2435,

 7     Your Honours.

 8             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 9             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I would like to call up 1D20351.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   Mr. Zurovac, what does this document contain?  It was issued on

12     the 12th December 1993.

13        A.   Can this be zoomed in?  I'll try to read it.  This was -- this is

14     the situation as I found it.  I can say that we never provoked the enemy

15     during a cease-fire.  We were never in a situation to provoke them

16     because the enemy was much more powerful and it actually suited us when

17     there was a cease-fire, when there was no shooting, because we knew that

18     the enemy was much stronger than us.

19        Q.   Thank you.  What about the UNPROFOR visit that is mentioned here,

20     can you tell us how often UNPROFOR visited you, whether they found it

21     difficult or easy?

22        A.   UNPROFOR came very often to our line because it was one of the

23     most difficult lines on the Sarajevo front line.  I suppose that an

24     agreement would be reached not to open fire.  I don't know how objective

25     their reports were.  I hope that they were.  They would come and they

Page 30274

 1     would see the same things that I mentioned in my daily reports.  That

 2     would be that.

 3        Q.   Thank you.

 4             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Zurovac, here you say that soldiers were forced

 6     to fire back.  Could you explain to us how or why were those soldiers

 7     forced to fire back in response to the provocation from the Muslim side?

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honour, this is self-evident.

 9     If they opened artillery fire in support of a future infantry attack,

10     people who were in trenches would respond.  To avoid a situation where

11     they would be captured alive they had to return fire in order to save

12     their lives because the enemy was only 15 or 20 metres away from them.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  My question is this:  You referred to enemy

14     fire as provocation.  What would have happened if you had not fired back?

15             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Your Honours, in that case we would

16     either have to withdraw or we would have all been killed.

17             JUDGE KWON:  That would not have been provocation.  What did you

18     mean here by "provocation"?

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Provocation, those were short

20     bursts of fire on our positions along the entire separation line.

21     Sometimes those provocations ended without any further, more complex

22     actions.  That would be provocation.  That was done to disturb peace in

23     the unit.  People could not feel safe and at ease.  All means were used

24     in order to put us in an unfavourable position.  That's how things are

25     done in war time.  I would call this a type of special warfare.

Page 30275

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 2             This will be admitted as Exhibit D2436.

 3             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 4             I have to correct the transcript.  The witness said that that

 5     fire could be preparation for an imminent attack, not a future attack as

 6     an attack sometime in the future.  The witness used the word "imminent,"

 7     not "future," and that's why there was response to the fire.  A future

 8     attack can happen any time.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Do you confirm that you used the word "imminent,"

10     Mr. Zurovac?

11             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Absolutely.  That was some sort of

12     announcement.  The enemy could have given up on that.  However, it could

13     have been an introduction into an attack or aggression against our line.

14             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  I would like to call up

15     1D20354.  Can this be zoomed in for the benefit of the witness.

16             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

17        Q.   This is a similar report.  Can you explain its meaning,

18     especially here where you say that provocations were stepped up during

19     the night along the entire line of defence.  "At 3.00 we had to respond

20     and shut the enemy down."

21        A.   We suffered most problems from the 101st Mountain Brigade which

22     was on our right-hand side flank.  If we were provoked by the unit that

23     was in front of us towards the Ivana Krndelja Street, the unit on our

24     flank opened mortar fire and fire from all other types of weapons.  We

25     suffered major losses as a result of that.  In my company I lost 54 men,

Page 30276

 1     not even including those men that had come to assist us and civilians.

 2     It was a killing field, a true execution site.

 3             Maybe I should continue.  We didn't have electricity, we didn't

 4     have water.  To be even more specific, sometimes we did not even receive

 5     food for a fortnight.  It was very risky for anybody to come to us, to

 6     our unit, because on two occasions the drivers that were bringing us food

 7     were killed in their vehicles.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  Here we can see that you had some people who had

 9     defected.  How often did that happen?  What was their ethnic affiliation?

10        A.   It happened very often.  They were Serbs.  They would take

11     opportunities when they were in trenches together.  They usually paid

12     those who were with them.  They would put a sign on their chest on which

13     it says:  Don't shoot, I'm a Serb.  There were a lot of such instances,

14     especially when Croats and Muslims started fighting.  On that day as many

15     as 24 men crossed over to our side.

16        Q.   It says here that they were Serbs.  Were they Serbs or mostly

17     Serbs?

18        A.   Serbs.  When I say 24 men, I mean when the Muslims and Croats

19     started fighting, those were mostly Croats who defected on that day.  The

20     rest of them were exclusively Serbs.  Let me explain.  They had been

21     members of the BH army before that.

22        Q.   What's Corkovic's name, in fact, is he a Serb?

23        A.   Let me just have a look.  Where is that name?

24        Q.   Second line, second paragraph.

25        A.   Corkovic, Serb, and the other person who was a policeman was sent

Page 30277

 1     the psychiatric hospital.  People fought in such situations.  They'd lose

 2     it, they'd spatially and temporally lost.  People would simply lose it.

 3     They wouldn't know where they were, they wouldn't realise that they were

 4     in danger.  So I don't know what this person's ethnicity is.  I stated

 5     that he was allegedly a policeman here, Hibor [phoen] Corkovic, but he

 6     was sent to Sokolac to the mental ward for treatment.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  And Figuric, that is a Croatian surname.  Was this

 8     person a Croat?

 9        A.   That's quite possible.  I can't remember exactly because a lot of

10     years have passed since then --

11             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I don't think this is of huge

12     consequence, but I just again want to remind Mr. Karadzic of the form of

13     his questions.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.

15             Let's continue.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Could this be admitted

17     into evidence?

18             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.  Shall we give the number.

19             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D20354 receives number D2437,

20     Your Honours.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Could we now see

22     1D20352.

23             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

24        Q.   Could you please have a look at this document.  What does it say

25     in the first line?  I'll read it out.  It says:

Page 30278

 1             "On the basis of observations, the enemy is massing forces in

 2     Zagorska Street ..."

 3             Is that your street?

 4        A.   Yes, it is.  I have to clarify this.  When I mentioned the byroad

 5     a while ago, we don't actually see it.  At the foot of Zagorska Street,

 6     it was possible for them to bring in lorries to transport two batteries,

 7     for example, that we couldn't even see.

 8        Q.   You didn't open fire on them, did you?

 9        A.   No, we didn't --

10        Q.   Thank you.

11             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I think it's -- I don't know if he

12     doesn't understand or he's not listening --

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I'll rephrase it.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Did you fire on them when they brought in manpower and equipment

16     to that area?

17        A.   No, because we couldn't see anything and we couldn't just open

18     fire blindly for numerous reasons.  First of all, we couldn't see the

19     enemy; and secondly, we would be using a lot of ammunition and this

20     doesn't make sense.

21        Q.   With regard to these attacks and provocations, with regard to the

22     fire that was opened on your area of responsibility in Ozrenska Street,

23     what was your opinion of this, what was your attitude toward this?

24        A.   Well, as I said a while ago, I said what was at stake.  It was

25     quite simply a matter of clearing that area of Serbs in Sarajevo.  They

Page 30279

 1     were to be driven out towards Lukavica and later this was, in fact, done

 2     in accordance with the Dayton Agreement.  These people were, quite

 3     simply, driven away and Sarajevo now is what it is.

 4        Q.   Thank you.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can this be admitted?

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Did we not admit this?  This is a different one.

 7             Yes.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D20352 receives number D2438,

 9     Your Honours.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Could we now see

11     1D20356.  Could we zoom in.

12             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

13        Q.   Have a look at the first two sentences.  Could you please tell us

14     something about them.

15        A.   "Yesterday at 1145 hours the enemy improvised an attack on our

16     lines or on the lines of the 2nd and 3rd Platoon.  The attack lasted for

17     20 minutes.  We were forced to return fire.  There were no consequences

18     for our combatants.  Yesterday we visited the lines ..." and so on and so

19     forth.

20             So this is a quite usual war of attrition.  There are such

21     customary provocations.  In the course of the day and in the course of

22     the night, a unit is provoked.  As I said a while ago, it's a special

23     type of war, you try to exhaust the combatants.  If the combatants can

24     have a rest and sleep -- if they can't sleep and rest, well, the enemy is

25     constantly opening fire because they're rested, more rested than we are,

Page 30280

 1     and this is, in fact, why they engage in such provocations, in order to

 2     incapacitate the other side, the unit, my unit, in fact, if I can put it

 3     this way.

 4        Q.   And -- thank you.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into

 6     evidence?

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 8             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D20356 receives number D2439,

 9     Your Honours.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we see 1D20362, please.

11             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, if I can just ask when the document is

12     brought up if I can at least briefly see the English.  I'm familiar with

13     these documents, but I just want to see it for a short time.

14             JUDGE KWON:  Is it not possible to follow in English with your

15     personal computer?

16             MS. WEST:  I was only seeing the B/C/S for the last few

17     documents --

18             JUDGE KWON:  That's probably --

19             MS. WEST:  Oh -- yes, I could do that.

20             JUDGE KWON:  Because the witness said he was not able to see the

21     small fonts.

22             MS. WEST:  And I understand, and I realise why you're doing it --

23             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

24             MS. WEST:  -- but if we could just -- and I can manage it.  Thank

25     you.

Page 30281

 1             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

 2             THE INTERPRETER:  The interpreters would also appreciate it if we

 3     could see the English on the screen as it is difficult to follow when the

 4     witnesses read at such speed.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Could you please tell us something about the first sentence and

 8     what does it mean, in fact?

 9        A.   "For several days, from 1400 to 1500 hours, the enemy has been

10     shelling our positions with 82-millimetre and 120-millimetre mortars.

11     About a dozen shells fell yesterday of an unknown calibre.  There were no

12     casualties.  Material damage was huge ..."

13             Well, what I have to say is in the course of the war, shells that

14     aren't customary did appear and professional soldiers and officers didn't

15     know where they had been made, where they had come from.  In such cases,

16     you have artillery preparations which is followed by an infantry attack,

17     et cetera.  So if you have a look at the document, the one from yesterday

18     and all these reports, you can see that attempts are constantly being

19     made to move our positions behind the Mojmilo hill, towards Lukavica --

20     or, in other words, attempts are being made to drive people away from our

21     territory, our houses, our ancestral land.

22        Q.   Why is the material damage huge?

23        A.   Well, one of their batteries was behind the railway station and

24     sometimes heavy artillery would completely destroy a privately owned

25     house.  It would raze the house to the ground.  These weren't isolated

Page 30282

 1     events.  There's probably a document about this and photographs that show

 2     that this happened.  An entire house might be destroyed by artillery fire

 3     and not only one house.  For example, if they thought that our people

 4     were in those houses, the houses would be covered by fire and only the

 5     foundations, the concrete foundations, of those houses would remain.

 6        Q.   Thank you.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into

 8     evidence?

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D20362 receives number D2440,

11     Your Honours.

12             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.  Could we now see

13     1D20367.

14             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

15        Q.   Could you please have a look at the first and last sentences.

16        A.   "Recently, enemy snipers have been particularly active, beginning

17     to shoot at around 0700 hours and going on throughout the day."

18             That's a fact.

19             "Yesterday in Gojino Brdo, Mihajlo Brbonjic was lightly wounded,

20     but was sent back to his position having been treated at the clinic.

21             "This morning the enemy sniper was active again.  Troop movements

22     have been reduced to a minimum."

23             THE INTERPRETER:  Could the witness please repeat the last

24     sentence.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] It might be useful to point out

Page 30283

 1     that the snipers opened fire from the skyscrapers at Pero Kosoric Street.

 2     They were at the level of our lines so they could cover our lines.  They

 3     could completely cover our lines.  Whenever someone appeared -- well, the

 4     troops would joke, they'd put someone's cap on a pole, raise it, and then

 5     they would open fire.  Fabrika -- the factory Zrak remained in Sarajevo,

 6     they produced sights there, so they had a lot of snipers.  They had these

 7     snipers, that's one thing.  And secondly, all those who were involved in

 8     shooting before the war as a sport were engaged as snipers.  So not only

 9     in our units but in all units snipers inflicted quite a lot of harm.

10             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

11        Q.   I fear that in line 10 something missed.  The witness said that

12     there were men who had been -- who practiced shooting as a sport before

13     the war and they were engaged by the enemy.  Is that what you said,

14     Mr. Zurovac?

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   Thank you.  Could you just say whether there were any civilian

17     casualties as a result of this sniper activity?

18        A.   Yes, of course.  In Ozrenska Street, as I said, a hundred men

19     from my company were killed.  They're men who came to assist us, men from

20     my unit as well.  In the area under our control, over 20 civilians were

21     killed.  There were seven or eight women who were killed.  What did the

22     snipers do?  Well, it's very sad, but they targeted everything.  In the

23     area of Vraca they killed a cow.  So they would fire on anything.

24        Q.   Thank you.

25             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could this be admitted into

Page 30284

 1     evidence?

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D20367 becomes Exhibit D2441,

 4     Your Honours.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you.

 6             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

 7        Q.   Mr. Zurovac, which unit was facing you, which Muslim unit was

 8     facing you?

 9        A.   I've already said that there was the 101st Mountain Brigade on

10     our flank and below us there was the 102nd Motorised and Infantry and

11     Mountain Brigade.  The 101st and the 102nd Brigade.  One was facing us

12     and the other was on our flank.

13        Q.   Thank you.  What sort of weapons did your enemies have?  As far

14     as you know, what sort of fire did you come under?

15        A.   Well, at the beginning until I appeared there, I think that we

16     had better weapons, but soon, once I had arrived, they had all types of

17     weapons.  And later when I left, I think that their weapons were even

18     better than ours.  So they had all types of weapons that are used in a

19     war.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] If I could have some understanding

22     for this document.  Could it be admitted into evidence.  I would just

23     like the witness to see 1D02681, 1D02681.

24             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

25        Q.   In that area of responsibility, was there a change in units?

Page 30285

 1     Were there any changes apart from the names of the units or did they

 2     remain as they were throughout the war-time period?

 3        A.   They remained as they were.  As far as I know, our units remained

 4     as they were.  The beginning -- perhaps there was some changes, but

 5     nothing much.  Perhaps the unit would be given a different code, the men

 6     remained where they were from 1992 up until the end of the war.

 7        Q.   Thank you.  Please have a look at this order from the

 8     101st Brigade and tell us what sort of artillery they had and where did

 9     the commander of the 101st Brigade deploy these weapons, and does this

10     tally with the information you had at the time?

11        A.   Could this please be enlarged because it's really not very

12     legible.  If we could enlarge it, that would be good because I can't read

13     it at all.

14             I see that 120-millimetre weapons are mentioned, 105-millimetres,

15     82-millimetres, and so on and so forth.  We knew about that.  Well, how

16     did we know about that?  Because of the action they took.  From

17     August 1993 until the end of the war they had superior fire-power, not

18     only superior manpower.  Here you can see that they had all types of

19     weapons and we know this for two reasons.  We know this because when they

20     would open fire on us, we knew what they were using.  Soldiers know what

21     is being used to open fire, and there were quite a few Serbs who defected

22     from their units.  They came over to our side.  And these people provided

23     us with information on the weapons that they had and on the lines that

24     they were holding.

25        Q.   Thank you.  Could I now ask you to have a look at the part that

Page 30286

 1     says "VP" and tell us what that means.  Do you know anything about these

 2     locations that were facing your line, the line of confrontation?

 3        A.   Yes, of course I know these locations.  You should bear in mind

 4     the following.  A minute ago, I said that Asim hill and Milina Kosa --

 5     when you go towards Milinkladska Street, well, in that area they can

 6     dominate our positions.  This is important to bear in mind.  And

 7     secondly, as you are probably aware, they often opened fire from all

 8     buildings, all roofs.  You can see this in the documents.  In a letter

 9     from General Morillon, Izetbegovic and his artillery located at the

10     hospital in Kosevo -- he is warned about that and they opened fire from

11     all those locations.  And they would put a lot of mortars on lorries so

12     these mortars would be mobile.  And they would fire a few shells for --

13     and then they would change their location.  So in such cases there was

14     nothing we could do.  We didn't have such possibilities.

15             As I said a while ago, the byroad below Hrasno -- no units from

16     our company could control that byroad.  Anything could happen there and

17     we wouldn't be aware of it because we couldn't observe anything.

18        Q.   Thank you.  Unless it's a leading question, I hope I can put

19     this.  Do you know these who have 82 mortars, three of them, were they

20     positioned in an inhabited area?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   Thank you.  The second firing position in the annex?

23        A.   Yes, the same thing applies.  You see, normally people are

24     mistaken in what they believe these fire -- firing positions to be or

25     targets because normally they would target inhabited areas, hospitals,

Page 30287

 1     et cetera.  From the military point of view, they were legitimate

 2     military targets.  However, then the question would arise of them having

 3     shelled an inhabited area.  Those who were on the spot were able to see

 4     that this wasn't true because with very few exceptions, Sarajevo was the

 5     say it was, bearing in mind the separation lines that didn't see that

 6     much fighting.  After all, Mr. Ghali said himself when he visited

 7     Sarajevo that there were places that had seen far worse fighting than was

 8     the case there.

 9        Q.   Thank you.

10             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] With some flexibility toward the

11     Defence, can this document be admitted into evidence?

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

13             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 1D02681 becomes Exhibit D2442,

14     Your Honours.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Thank you for that.  Thank you to

16     Mr. Zurovac.

17             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

18        Q.   One other question.  Mr. Zurovac, you're a writer, aren't you?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   Thank you.

21             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I am done with the witness.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

23             Yes, Ms. West.

24             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, could I just have a moment, please.

25             May I ask for the assistance of the usher, please.

Page 30288

 1                           Cross-examination by Ms. West:

 2        Q.   Good afternoon, sir.

 3        A.   Good afternoon.

 4        Q.   I just want to take up on one of the documents that Mr. Karadzic

 5     showed you.

 6             MS. WEST:  May we have D2434, please.

 7        Q.   This is one of your documents from January 7th, 1994.  And in his

 8     question to you at page 33, line 21, today, he said:

 9             "You say here there was indiscriminate shelling ..."

10             And you went on to answer that question affirmatively.  Can you

11     tell us, looking at this document, to what part of it you referred when

12     you spoke about "indiscriminate shelling"?

13        A.   Let me just see, let me find that.  Can you point me to the

14     paragraph where I said that?

15        Q.   No, that's my question for you.  I want you to point me to the

16     paragraph where it talks about indiscriminate shelling.

17        A.   I don't understand you.  You want me to ask you where

18     indiscriminate shelling took place?  Is that your question?

19        Q.   No, let's try this again.  When Mr. Karadzic showed you this

20     document he said that this document suggests that there was

21     indiscriminate shelling of your positions or of -- out of the city onto

22     Bosnian Serb areas.  Show me in this document where it says there was

23     indiscriminate shelling.

24        A.   I don't see that place here.

25        Q.   Let's move on.  You spoke earlier today --

Page 30289

 1             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] May I draw the attention of

 2     everybody in the courtroom to line 5, which starts with the words "around

 3     1400 hours the enemy shelled our positions randomly or indiscriminately

 4     and at irregular intervals ..."

 5             I don't know whether this has been interpreted or not, but here

 6     in the Serbian it says clearly --

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "At around 1400 hours the enemy

 8     shelled our positions randomly and at irregular intervals.  About 10

 9     times 82-millimetre shells fell ..."

10             That's correct.  Your question was what?

11             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Karadzic, I find it inappropriate for you to

12     intervene for that reason.  You can take up that issue in your

13     re-examination.

14             But, Ms. West, would you like to take up from there?

15             MS. WEST:  I will.

16        Q.   In this sentence:

17             "The enemy shelled our positions randomly ..."

18             When you say "our positions," you mean your military positions,

19     do you not?

20        A.   Shells can fall short or overreach.  So this is random shelling.

21        Q.   Of your positions, so the "positions" means military positions,

22     does it not?

23        A.   Yes.

24        Q.   Okay.  Earlier today you spoke about -- at transcript page 34 you

25     said that the enemy:

Page 30290

 1             "... wanted to break through our firing positions, to break us

 2     up, open Sarajevo, but it's not a good word because Sarajevo was

 3     enclosed.  That's why I'm not using the word 'open' ..."

 4             Can you tell us now exactly what do you mean?  Is it your

 5     position that Sarajevo was encircled?

 6        A.   That was not my position.  Sarajevo is closed from the inside.

 7     In Sarajevo there were criminals who became high-ranking officers in the

 8     enemy army overnight.  There is a sea of documentation about women who

 9     asked the mayor who was in Dobrinja when Sarajevo would be open and he

10     said Sarajevo would be open when the last German mark leaves the pockets

11     of the poor people and ends up in the hands of the criminals.  If we are

12     talking about the encirclements, we can talk about three different

13     circles around Sarajevo.

14             THE INTERPRETER:  The witness should be kindly asked to speak

15     slower.  It is impossible to interpret every word.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Zurovac, in order for the Chamber and the public

17     to understand what you are saying through interpreters, please slow down

18     when you speak.  Please speak slowly.  Thank you.

19             Yes, Ms. West.

20             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you.

22             MS. WEST:

23        Q.   Sir, we've heard from several witnesses already and there are

24     more to come who indicate that there was an SRK policy of containment of

25     Sarajevo.  Do you agree with that?

Page 30291

 1        A.   No.

 2        Q.   And it was the objective of the 2nd Battalion to keep the city

 3     under siege, was it not?

 4        A.   No.

 5        Q.   The Court will hear some evidence from another Defence witness

 6     that that was exactly the case, that the 2nd Battalion was purposely put

 7     there to keep the city under siege.  Your disagreement with this notion,

 8     can you tell us the basis for that?

 9             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President.  I think when putting

10     that proposition to the witness and for the parties, we should at least

11     hear who is being referred to, if necessary in private session.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Ms. West, would you like to respond?

13             MS. WEST:  Out of an abundance of caution, let's go into private

14     session.

15             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

16                           [Private session]

17   (redacted)

18   (redacted)

19   (redacted)

20   (redacted)

21   (redacted)

22   (redacted)

23   (redacted)

24   (redacted)

25   (redacted)

Page 30292

 1   (redacted)

 2   (redacted)

 3   (redacted)

 4   (redacted)

 5   (redacted)

 6   (redacted)

 7   (redacted)

 8                           [Open session]

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Ms. West, please continue.

10             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.

11        Q.   Sir, who is Milan Hrvacevic?

12        A.   Milan Hrvacevic was an assistant battalion commander.  I can

13     explain why Milan Hrvacevic spoke the way he did.  Milan Hrvacevic --

14        Q.   No, thank you.  Let me ask you this:  He was the deputy commander

15     of the 2nd Battalion, correct?  Your battalion.

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I was not allowed to interrupt

17     Prosecution witnesses.

18             JUDGE KWON:  No, he didn't answer the question put by Ms. West so

19     she was directing to answer her question, but let us see.  Let's

20     continue.

21             We'll allow the witness to answer any questions and we'll not

22     stop the witness.  Let's continue.

23             MS. WEST:

24        Q.   Sir, he was the deputy commander of your battalion; correct ?

25        A.   Yes.

Page 30293

 1        Q.   And as you've already indicated, you understand that he said that

 2     the 2nd Battalion was there to keep the city under siege.  So my question

 3     for you is:  Since Mr. Hrvacevic was higher up in command than you, do

 4     you think he might have had more information than you to make such a

 5     statement in 1996?

 6        A.   When was this statement provided and under what conditions?

 7     Maybe that would be interesting.  It is well-known that Milan Hrvacevic

 8     went there to interpret at UNPROFOR.  He was captured.  He was beaten up.

 9     He was tried, and subsequently it turned out that all those statements

10     were not valid, they were all refuted.

11        Q.   So, sir, that didn't answer my question.  But would he -- let's

12     try it again.  Would he have been in a position to have more information

13     than you, such that he would have made this statement in 1996?

14             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President, may we know to whom this

15     statement was made, was it made to the OTP or to the Bosnian authorities?

16             MS. WEST:  Yes, fair enough.  It was an OTP statement in 1996.

17        Q.   Sir?

18             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, now the English translation has been completed.

19     Could you repeat your question, Ms. West.

20             MS. WEST:

21        Q.   Would Milan Hrvacevic have been in a position to have more

22     information than you such that he would have made this statement in 1996?

23             MR. ROBINSON:  Mr. President, I think that's calling for

24     speculation as to what motivation he might have had to make that

25     statement.  If she wants to ask him what was his position and what was

Page 30294

 1     the witness's position, then that's one thing; but to speculate as to why

 2     he would have made that statement, we don't think that the witness is

 3     capable of giving an answer to that question that's helpful to the

 4     Chamber.

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Can we move on, Ms. West?

 6             MS. WEST:  Yes, we can.  Thank you.

 7        Q.   Sir, you spoke today about several documents and in a few of them

 8     we saw that you employed the term "provocation" when describing ABiH fire

 9     coming out of the city.  And the Honourable Judge Kwon asked you

10     specifically what you meant by that term.  And one of the things you said

11     in response is:

12             "It could have been an introduction into an attack or aggression

13     against our line."

14             Sir, would you agree with me that the term "provocation," was, in

15     fact, an effort to break the siege -- or what you term "provocation" to

16     be was, in fact, an effort to break the siege?

17        A.   Absolutely, I stand behind my words.

18        Q.   So just to be clear, when you say they were provoking the SRK,

19     you believe that they were trying to break the siege?

20        A.   Not only do I believe that; that's correct.

21        Q.   And do you think they were justified in trying to break the

22     siege?

23        A.   I suppose it was justified from the point of view of an intention

24     to take the entire state of Bosnia-Herzegovina, to place it under

25     control, and to create a state that would suit the policy of

Page 30295

 1     Alija Izetbegovic.

 2        Q.   Well, we'll get to that shortly.  But tell us, do you think that

 3     one of the reasons they were trying to break the siege was lack of food

 4     and supplies that they had within the city?

 5        A.   I don't think so.  You know only too well that Sarajevo had a

 6     tunnel under the airport and that through that tunnel they transported

 7     not only food and footwear and clothes, but even weapons.

 8             MS. WEST:  May we have 65 ter 24069A, please.

 9        Q.   This is a report from the UNHCR office, the Special Envoy for the

10     former Yugoslavia.  It's the entire report -- it's a compilation of

11     reports, but we are going to look at specifically one that's dated

12     June 1993.  This is a period of time when you were there.  And on the

13     right-hand corner, "One year of air-lift" -- and I believe there should

14     be B/C/S, but I'll go slowly through this.  "One year of the air-lift" on

15     the right-hand side, it talks about:

16             "... Sarajevo air-lift celebrating its 4.000th flight to the

17     besieged capital, having flown 44 million kilos of humanitarian relief

18     items.  The air-lift started on July 3rd, 1992, and some 20 nations have

19     contributed ..."

20             It goes on in the middle of the paragraph.

21             "After over one year of siege, Sarajevo survives thanks to the

22     resilience of the population and the aid ..."

23             And then the next paragraph, there's a comment from the

24     High Commissioner, and she said:

25             "... 'condemns the actions of those who are blocking the delivery

Page 30296

 1     of food, medicine, fuel, water, power, gas, and other humanitarian

 2     assistance in a cowardly attempt to starve and kill innocent civilians.'"

 3             Now, sir, do you not agree with me that one of the reasons the

 4     ABiH would want to break the siege is because they were lacking in all

 5     these things that she just mentioned, food, medicine, fuel?

 6        A.   I don't agree with you, not fully.  In Sarajevo people who were

 7     starving were Serbs, Muslims, and Croats.  It was a state of war.  You

 8     cannot look at things so narrow mindedly.  If Sarajevo was the biggest

 9     camp in Europe, it would be a camp for the Serbs.  I don't agree with

10     this because we were never in a situation to stop a humanitarian convoy

11     or do any such thing.

12             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I would tender this document.

13             MR. ROBINSON:  Objection, Mr. President.  The witness hasn't

14     confirmed anything about the document and it's not directly contradictory

15     to his testimony in the sense that it's not something he would be

16     expected to have known about in those terms.

17             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, it was June 1993.  This man had already

18     been there for almost a year and on -- right on the outskirts of this

19     sieged area.  Although he's suggesting that other people were suffering

20     as well, it directly goes to impeachment of him.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             JUDGE KWON:  The Chamber agrees that this document is related to

23     the credibility of the witness, so for that reason, only for that reason,

24     we'll admit this.  So we'll admit this to the extent it relates to the --

25     relates to this witness's -- relates to the impeachment of this witness's

Page 30297

 1     evidence.

 2             Yes, Mr. Robinson.

 3             MR. ROBINSON:  Yes, Mr. President.  Would that be limited to the

 4     paragraph?

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 6             MR. ROBINSON:  Thank you.

 7             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 24069A receives number P5988,

 8     Your Honours.

 9                           [Prosecution counsel confer]

10             MS. WEST:

11        Q.   Sir, let me put a theory to you and then I'm going to ask you a

12     question about it.  It has been your suggestion and generally the Defence

13     case that the ABiH attacks or provocations, as you put it, were offensive

14     in nature and that the SRK only responded.  Yet, by virtue of the siege,

15     the entire event was offensive in nature on the part of the SRK because

16     it was the encircling party.  To keep the city under siege and perhaps

17     even to split the city required offensive measures by the SRK.  And by

18     "offensive," I mean aggression and I mean what you term as "provocation."

19     And in this case, the ABiH was trying to deblock the city to get the city

20     open.  Do you disagree with my position?

21        A.   I don't disagree -- I don't agree with it.  How can a person be

22     an aggressor against his own country, against his own house?  This is

23     what I'm wondering.  Is that possible?  Can 15.000 people hold a siege

24     around the 60.000 men in the 1st Sarajevo Corps?  These are my counter

25     questions in response to your question.

Page 30298

 1        Q.   So, sir, I can understand -- I gather what your position is, but

 2     I would ask you to not ask any questions and just try to respond so we

 3     can get through this.

 4             MS. WEST:  May I have 65 ter 240 --

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. West, I note the time.  It's time to take a

 6     break.  We'll break for 25 minutes.  And I see that the -- whether the

 7     nature of the attack, offensive or defensive, was raised by the Defence

 8     in the first place, but I was wondering whether we are not gearing

 9     towards the realm of jus ad bellum.  So please bear that in mind.

10             We'll take a break and resume at quarter to 6.00.

11                           --- Recess taken at 5.19 p.m.

12                           --- On resuming at 5.46 p.m.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Ms. West, please continue.

14             MS. WEST:  Thank you.

15             May we have 65 ter 24078, please.

16        Q.   Sir, this is a document dated December 16th, 1993, and under the

17     first paragraph -- can you see this?

18        A.   I can't read anything.

19        Q.   Okay.  I can agree it doesn't look great, but I will go slowly

20     through it.  Paragraph 1 says:

21             "The enemy did not give up from their offensive intentions to

22     unblock Sarajevo and link the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Corps of the so-called

23     ABiH on the line ..." and it names some places "aiming to split our

24     forces and bring them into an unfavourable operational position."

25             MS. WEST:  If we can go to page 4 in the English, page 3 in the

Page 30299

 1     B/C/S.

 2        Q.   Under "the commander's decision" it says:

 3             "I decided to perform an active defence with the Corps' main

 4     forces ..."

 5             Let's just stop there for a moment.  Sir, can you tell us what

 6     active defence means?

 7        A.   That means that the units were in a state of readiness.

 8        Q.   Doesn't that just mean -- isn't that just another term for

 9     offence, active defence is the same as offence?

10        A.   No.  The idea of defence doesn't contain with -- doesn't contain

11     the idea of offence, of offensive action.

12        Q.   All right.  Well, let's go down.  It says --

13             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to comment on the

14     transcript.  It says that defence excludes the idea.  It doesn't say it

15     does not contain.

16             THE INTERPRETER:  Interpreter's note:  There is no difference.

17             JUDGE KWON:  I don't see much difference and the interpreters

18     noted that there's no difference.

19             MS. WEST:  Should I continue?

20             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, please.

21             MS. WEST:

22        Q.   If we continue on, at the end of this paragraph it talks about

23     the goals and it says:

24             "... the main goal to:

25             "Prevent the Muslim forces from unblocking their part of the town

Page 30300

 1     and the occupation of the special purpose industrial objects ..."

 2             Sir, do you agree with me that what the Muslims were trying to

 3     do, the ABiH forces, was trying to break the siege?

 4        A.   Yes.

 5             MS. WEST:  If we can go to in English page 5.  It's page 3 of the

 6     B/C/S.  I think we're there on the B/C/S.

 7        Q.   Under (b), this still regards goals, it says:

 8             "In the area of Sarajevo take control over ..." and it lists a

 9     number of places "and later on, upon the arrival of fresh forces, take

10     control over Mojmilo, by executing operational activities from Hrasnica

11     cut the communication towards Igman and Central Bosnia to Muslims from

12     Sarajevo; link the operational formation of the Corps in the

13     Lukavica - Ilidza axis and establish conditions for the division of

14     Sarajevo in two parts."

15             Sir, would you agree with me that splitting Sarajevo into two

16     would constitute an offensive act by the SRK?

17        A.   Well, to a certain extent, yes.  But I would like to know when

18     this order was issued.  I would like to know what the date of the order

19     is.

20             MS. WEST:  Your Honour, I would tender this document dated

21     December 16th, 1993.

22             MR. ROBINSON:  No objection.

23             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, this will be admitted.

24             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 24078 receives number P5989,

25     Your Honours.

Page 30301

 1             MS. WEST:  May we have P05980.  This is a document the

 2     Trial Chamber saw very recently.

 3        Q.   This is dated April of 1994.  Thank you.  And under "tasks" it

 4     says Muslim forces -- under 2.

 5             "Muslim forces are creating conditions for unblocking Sarajevo

 6     and launching attacks along other axes and lines of contact with our

 7     units."

 8             If we go to number 8, which is the next page of the English, it

 9     says:

10             "Fortify positions around Sarajevo by erecting wire and concrete

11     barriers which would in turn strengthen the belief that they are really

12     blocked ('in a camp')."

13             Now, sir, by April of 1994 you had been there already for some

14     time, at least November of 1992.  Had you seen any wire or concrete

15     barriers around the city like described in this document?

16        A.   No, no, I really hadn't.

17        Q.   Now, today at page 47 you were talking about weapons and you were

18     making a comparison between the weapons the SRK had and the ABiH had, and

19     you said:  At the beginning until I appeared there I think we had better

20     weapons but soon they had all types of weapons.  And then you looked at a

21     document that was dated June 13th, 1995, it was an ABiH document, and you

22     made some comments on it.  I'd like to talk a little bit more about the

23     comparison of weapons.

24             MS. WEST:  And the first thing I'd like to look at is

25     65 ter 07737.  It's a map -- and, Mr. President, I know the witness is

Page 30302

 1     having difficulties seeing this.  I wonder if the usher could actually

 2     give him the map itself.  It might be easier.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 4             MS. WEST:  Again, this is -- it's map 30 in the Sarajevo map

 5     book.

 6        Q.   Sir, this is the map that you have on the screen in front of you.

 7     And you can -- can you tell us what the title of this map is?  What does

 8     it say in the middle?

 9        A.   Commander's decision with regard to the attack Lukavica 95 --

10     well, we had a work obligation at the time, I have to point this out, so

11     I'm not familiar with this at all.

12        Q.   But that's fine.

13        A.   I can't say anything about it.

14        Q.   That's fine.  But I want to talk about 1995 in regards to weapons

15     because during your direct you already spoke about the month of June 1995

16     and regarding weapons.  I want to look at the little white box in the

17     bottom of this map and you can turn the page of your book and you will

18     see it bigger.

19        A.   Unfortunately, I can't read anything here.

20        Q.   If you turn the page of that map book, you will see it in very

21     large print.  There you go.  So this is an SRK balance of forces in 1995,

22     and on the left-hand side we see SRK forces and their equipment and on

23     the right-hand side we see ABiH forces and their equipment.  And if you

24     look through this you'll see that the SRK had four tanks, ABiH had two;

25     SRK had four 155 howitzers, ABiH had one; SRK eight 122 howitzers, ABiH

Page 30303

 1     five.  And as you go through it, you'll then see SRK had 14, 105

 2     howitzers, ABiH two.  And then we'll go down to mortars, they had 36 to

 3     18, 120-millimetre mortars, ABiH had 12; SRK had 40, 82-millimetre

 4     mortars, ABiH had 16.

 5             Sir, contrary to your position earlier today, would you agree

 6     with me by the SRK's estimation, it had far more weapons than the ABiH

 7     did in 1995?

 8        A.   No, I was speaking about infantry weapons.

 9        Q.   So your limit your earlier testimony to infantry weapons and not

10     these types of weapons?

11        A.   No.

12        Q.   Let me ask you this:  As regards 120-millimetre mortars, did your

13     battalion have 120-millimetre mortars while you were there?

14        A.   I don't know about the battalion, but I do know that my company

15     did not have any such mortars.

16        Q.   What about 82-millimetre mortars, did your battalion have those?

17        A.   Probably.

18        Q.   What about multiple-rocket launchers, did the battalion have

19     those?

20        A.   I don't know.

21             MS. WEST:  May we have -- may I tender this, Your Honour?

22             MR. ROBINSON:  Well, the witness hasn't confirmed anything from

23     that, Mr. President.

24                           [Trial Chamber confers]

25             JUDGE KWON:  Because it's related to his evidence he gave in

Page 30304

 1     examination-in-chief and also credibility, we'll admit this.  We'll give

 2     the number.

 3             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 07737 becomes Exhibit P5990,

 4     Your Honours.

 5             MS. WEST:  May we have P5984, please.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Does the 65 ter number 7737 also include the zoomed

 7     legend?  If it does not, let's include it as well.

 8             MS. WEST:  Thank you very much.

 9        Q.   Now, we're going to look at a document from June of 1993.  This

10     regards your 2nd Battalion and your company, and this is a period of time

11     when you were in the company; correct?

12        A.   Yes.

13        Q.   And is this an accurate representation of what -- the status of

14     ammunition in your company at the time?

15        A.   I can't remember.  I can't remember now whether this is correct,

16     whether this was actually the status, but I assume that to be the case,

17     although this was signed by the commander who preceded me.  He was

18     killed.  But I assume that this was the situation.  I was present there

19     at the time but in the capacity of a private.

20        Q.   And number 7 and 8, grenades 60-millimetre and 82-millimetre,

21     those refer to mortar shells; correct?

22        A.   Yes.

23             MS. WEST:  P5983, please.

24        Q.   Now, this moves into October of that same year, so a little bit

25     later.  It's a list of weapons in your company, and again it's signed by

Page 30305

 1     the previous commander to you.  But do you have any reason to believe

 2     that this is not accurate?

 3        A.   It's not accurate because it was signed by a driver of the lorry.

 4     I have to clarify certain things here.  Since a mortar detachment was

 5     formed earlier on far from our rear, then when we believed there might be

 6     an attack, we would report to the battalion command and they would send

 7     us two or three mortars.  Because if you know what a mortar is and what

 8     mortar fire is, well, if you have 50 metres between the lines, then you

 9     can't use the weapon because the shell might hit the person who fired it.

10        Q.   That's exactly right and the Trial Chamber has heard evidence on

11     that.

12             MS. WEST:  Let's move to P5985, please.

13        Q.   This is actually a document signed by you and it's December of

14     1993.

15        A.   Yes.

16        Q.   And as regards these -- this ammunition you wrote:

17             "We have none of the above-mentioned ammunition.  I request that

18     you deliver this ammunition to me."

19             And included in this are 60-millimetre mortar shells and

20     82-millimetre mortar shells.  So you agree by December 1993 you had been

21     using those type of mortar shells, had you not?

22        A.   I apologise, was this 1993 or 1995.  It's not very legible.  If

23     it's 1993, I'll go back to what I was saying.  If it's December 1993, we

24     were expecting an attack that took place in December, in fact, and we

25     asked the battalion command to supply us, to provide us, with two mortars

Page 30306

 1     and with ammunition that we did not have in the warehouse.

 2        Q.   Okay.  But just two months earlier there is a list of weapons for

 3     the company in which it was listed 60-millimetre and 82-millimetre

 4     mortars, suggesting that you did have those types of mortars two months

 5     earlier; and then six months earlier it was the same indication.  So are

 6     you suggesting now that prior to December of 1993 you did not have

 7     mortars?

 8        A.   No, I'm not trying to say that.  I don't know what the situation

 9     was before I came to the unit and before I became company commander.

10     Every company had mortars, but when the mortar platoon was established in

11     the rear on a hill -- well, this isn't the front lines for good reasons

12     because that would be in the vicinity of the enemy.  So when that mortar

13     platoon was established on Poljino [phoen] hill, when we had information

14     according to which an attack might be launched, we report to the

15     battalion command.  The battalion command would take two or three mortars

16     and they were given to us as assistance in such cases.  In December, a

17     few days after that event, there was an intense attack on Gojino hill.

18     We lost some of our positions and we sustained quite significant

19     casualties.  This was on Gojino hill.

20        Q.   Tell us what type of targets you would use 60- and 82-millimetre

21     mortars for?

22        A.   We could only fire on the flank.  We couldn't fire in front of

23     us.  It was on the flank where the enemy was located and where our unit

24     was located.  That was behind Asimovo hill.  There used to be a prison

25     there and their units were deployed there and they threatened us from the

Page 30307

 1     flank.  So we could only fire on the flank with these shells.  In front

 2     of our line, it would have been interesting if someone had been harmed by

 3     mortars.

 4             THE INTERPRETER:  The witness is kindly asked to repeat the last

 5     sentence, which was not clear.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Zurovac, could you kindly repeat the last

 7     sentence.

 8             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I said it would be interesting if

 9     we could determine the situation at the front line.  As far as I know,

10     there were no casualties towards Dolac Malta, that's the front line, no

11     one died as a result of mortar shells.  This is at least the information

12     that I had.

13             MS. WEST:

14        Q.   Sir, as I understand your testimony, you only used the mortars to

15     fire behind you and not in front of you; is that right?

16        A.   What do you mean behind us?  You're not right.  I'm talking about

17     our flank.  I don't know how your people are interpreting.  I'm talking

18     about our flank.  The deployment of the company towards Mol [phoen].

19     There is a flank, that's what I mentioned a little while ago where there

20     was the 1st Mountain Company and the area which was our forward position

21     towards Malta.

22             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Transcript.  Transcript, two

23     interventions.  First of all, on line 4, page 69, the witness said:  Such

24     weapons are not kept on the forward line.  Second of all, here the flank

25     is being interpreted as "behind" instead of "beside."  The witness never

Page 30308

 1     said "behind," it should have been interpreted as "beside," instead it

 2     was interpreted as a "flank."

 3             JUDGE KWON:  Apart from that issue of flank, could you repeat

 4     your intervention with respect to page 69.

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I said that the witness stated that

 6     when that battery or that group was established, the mortars were moved

 7     behind the lines because such weapons are not kept on the forward line.

 8     And this was not recorded when the witness stated that.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  The transcript says -- reflects that -- as

10     witness -- witness as having said:

11             "But when the mortar platoon was established in the rear on a

12     hill -- well, this isn't the front line for good reasons because that

13     would be in the vicinity of the enemy."

14             I think that reflects what you suggested, Mr. Karadzic.  Shall we

15     continue?

16             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Yes, but it would be really good if

17     the interpretation was accurate.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Yeah, it's with that speed interpreters are having

19     very hard time -- to keep up with us.

20             Yes, let's continue, Ms. West.

21             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.

22        Q.   And so that I clearly understand, it's your testimony that you

23     never used mortars to fire in depth into the city of Sarajevo; is that

24     correct?

25        A.   Yes, that's correct.

Page 30309

 1        Q.   Okay.  Now today at the beginning of your testimony you spoke

 2     about a number of -- or at least two of the sniping scheduled incidents

 3     and you were giving us some ranges.  Now, just so that we are absolutely

 4     clear, your company covered part of Ozrenska Street; correct?

 5        A.   Correct.

 6        Q.   And is it not true that there were at least 12 snipers in the

 7     2nd Battalion?

 8        A.   I wouldn't know that, I really wouldn't.

 9        Q.   Were there any in your company?

10        A.   No.

11             MS. WEST:  May we have 65 ter 24077, please.

12        Q.   This is a document, part of which is handwritten, and it's from

13     January 1994, signed by you.  Now the part that we see is handwritten, do

14     you recognise that handwriting?

15        A.   I do.

16        Q.   Whose handwriting is that?

17        A.   This is the handwriting of a foot soldier, but it's neither here

18     nor there.  You can ask me questions.

19        Q.   Okay.  This appears to be a listing put together of fugitive

20     soldiers or soldiers who deserted.  I'd like to go to number 25 in the

21     list, and under number 25 we have Rajko Ciro - excuse my

22     pronunciation - and it says here "AP," the registration number, and then

23     "sniper."  Under that "automatic M56 sniper" and then there's a word in

24     your language.  Tell me what this represents.  What does that information

25     represent to you?

Page 30310

 1        A.   This list was compiled of those men who had left the unit with

 2     weapons.  This person, Ciro Rajko, who unfortunately got killed, he left.

 3     For a while he was an assistant company commander.  He left and he took

 4     this sniper rifle with him.  I don't know how he had gotten by it.  The

 5     weapons had been obtained much before I joined.  While I was there, I'm

 6     sure that we did not have a single sniper rifle in the unit.

 7             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] I have to intervene on the

 8     transcript once again.  A very important word is missing from the

 9     transcript.  The witness said:  This is a list of the men who had left

10     the unit with weapons and they were being searched for the weapons that

11     they had taken with them.  That's why they were being searched, and this

12     was not recorded.

13             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Zurovac, do you confirm that?

14             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.  This is actually a list of

15     the weapons who had been taken by people.  One went to Nevesinje and the

16     other to Visegrad, and this is a list of weaponry that had been taken by

17     the people who left the unit and we were looking for those weapons.  And

18     those people had been issued with those weapons in 1992.  We were looking

19     for them and this is a list of the weapons and the people that we were

20     looking for.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

22             Judge Lattanzi also confirms that it was so translated into -- in

23     French.  Let's continue.

24             MS. WEST:

25        Q.   This document is dated December 1994.  So by this time you had

Page 30311

 1     been in this company for well over a year; is that right?

 2        A.   Yes.

 3        Q.   And you said that this particular person left the unit with a

 4     sniper rifle but that was -- you don't know how he -- I don't know how he

 5     got it, is that correct, even though you'd been there for already over a

 6     year?

 7        A.   Yes.  You have to bear in mind that I did not come when those

 8     people were being issued with the weapons.  This list contains at least

 9     90 per cent of the men who were no longer members of the unit.  The

10     commander ordered us to compile a list of the weapons that had gone

11     missing and that were being looked for and this is the list.  For some

12     weapons we knew where they were, we knew where some people were, but not

13     all of them.  You can see that very well from the list.

14             THE INTERPRETER:  The witness is being asked to slow down,

15     otherwise the interpreters cannot vouch for the accuracy of the

16     interpretation.  Thank you.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Zurovac, you are again requested to speak slow.

18     Thank you for --

19             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I'll do my best.

20             MS. WEST:

21        Q.   Sir, you speak about these people in the abstract, but this

22     particular person you actually said you knew.  You said he got killed, he

23     left.  For a while he was an assistant company commander.  Do you deny --

24     are you telling us that he did not act as a sniper for your company?

25        A.   I'm sure he was not.  Ciro Rajko had never served the army.  He

Page 30312

 1     could not be a sniper.  He left and went to Pale.

 2        Q.   Let's look at number 39.  Do you recognise the person listed

 3     under number 39?

 4        A.   When I joined the unit, that person was not there.  He had gone

 5     to Bijeljina.

 6        Q.   That --

 7        A.   Which means that he had taken the weapons that were issued to him

 8     at the beginning of the war.

 9        Q.   But this, too, indicates that he took with him a sniper rifle;

10     right?

11        A.   Please, I have just told you that he was issued with weapons at

12     the beginning of the war.  I don't know what those weapons were.  I am

13     just saying that when I was commander and even when Major Loncarevic was

14     commander, we did not have a single sniper rifle in the unit and I'm

15     stating that clear and loud once again.

16             MS. WEST:  Go to number 83, please.

17        Q.   Do you recognise this person's name?

18        A.   I don't have that on the screen.

19             MS. WEST:  It's the last page of the B/C/S.

20             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

21             MS. WEST:  Perhaps I can give the witness a hard copy of this.

22     Oh, I think we have it now.

23        Q.   Do you recognise that name under number 83?

24        A.   I do.

25        Q.   And he too had a sniper rifle; correct?

Page 30313

 1        A.   I don't know.  That person had left.  He had moved out of Bosnia;

 2     I don't know where.  At the beginning of the war he was a company

 3     commander.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Ms. West, I'm afraid there are two sets of documents

 5     in this number.  Could we show page 4 of this document and whether --

 6     check whether it is the same document or different one.

 7             In the meantime, Mr. Zurovac, you confirm that this is your

 8     signature?

 9             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

10             JUDGE KWON:  Page 4 in B/C/S.  And in English 5 or 6.

11             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] It's that.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Should be the next -- in English it says "Claimed

13     weapons," so could you take up from there, Ms. West.

14             MS. WEST:  Thank you.  I think if we could go to page 8 of the

15     English and if there is some -- we can later ensure that this is the

16     correct correlation.

17        Q.   On 8 English for 83 we have Blagoje Savic and in the B/C/S we

18     just saw the same name and I said to you:

19             "He too had a sniper rifle, correct?"

20             And you said:

21             "I don't know that person had left, he moved out the of Bosnia; I

22     don't know where.  At the beginning of the war he was company commander?"

23             But, sir, my question is:  When he left, he left with a sniper

24     rifle.  That's what this list represents; correct?

25        A.   Well, I know.

Page 30314

 1        Q.   You know because you personally know?  You personally know he

 2     left with a sniper rifle?

 3        A.   Yes, yes.  You have to bear in mind that it often happened that

 4     people left weapons -- took weapons, sold it, or when they joined a less

 5     dangerous unit -- this was a very risky unit and people defected.  Why

 6     don't we use the right term.

 7             MS. WEST:  If we can look at 89 and we'll just stay with the

 8     B/C/S for now.

 9        Q.   89, above your signature, we have a person named Gusic.  Do you

10     see that?  And he too has a sniper rifle.  Do you recognise that name?

11        A.   Of course I do.  At the beginning of the war, Gusic was seriously

12     wounded and he left and he never reappeared.  This is a list of claimed

13     weapons.  What the unit had from the beginning of the war and even before

14     sniper squads had been set up with the battalion, I don't know.  I don't

15     know how it was set up, whether it was set up at all, if we're talking

16     about a sniper squad.  I don't know whether that was set up and how it

17     was set up.

18        Q.   Sir, can you tell us why these people would have left your

19     company with sniper rifles if they themselves were not snipers?

20        A.   Of course I can tell you.  I've just told you that people

21     defected.  At the beginning of the war those people were probably issued

22     with all those weapons and they took those weapons away.  They smuggled.

23     They sold it on the black market.  There was black market for everything.

24     Jerko Gusic was probably issued with a rifle.  At the beginning of the

25     war he was seriously wounded and he left and went --

Page 30315

 1             THE INTERPRETER:  And the interpreter didn't hear where that

 2     person went to.

 3             MS. WEST:

 4        Q.   Sir, can you tell us where that person went to?

 5        A.   I believe that he went to Vojvodina.  I'm not sure.  I did not

 6     find him in the unit when I joined it.

 7             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, I'd like to tender this document.

 8             MR. ROBINSON:  No objection.

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, this will be admitted.

10             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 24077 becomes Exhibit P5991,

11     Your Honours.

12             MS. WEST:  May we have 65 ter 24076.

13        Q.   And this is a lengthy document.  It is actually the log-book for

14     the 4th Company.

15             MS. WEST:  And, Mr. President, if I may give a hard copy to the

16     witness and a copy to the Defence because it's otherwise unwieldy to use.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Any objection, Mr. Robinson?

18             MR. ROBINSON:  No.  We appreciate that.

19             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

20             MS. WEST:  And for the record, I have marked pages in the copy

21     for the witness because those are the pages I'm going to go to.

22        Q.   So take a moment, sir, and flip through this and tell me if you

23     recognise this.  Sir, do you recognise this particular book or this type

24     of log-book?

25        A.   No.  I don't recognise this, at least I don't recognise the pages

Page 30316

 1     that I have leafed through.  I did not join the company at that time.  I

 2     was still imprisoned in Mostar.

 3        Q.   Okay.  And I see that you're looking at the beginning of the

 4     book, but as you go through it, it actually goes into the year 1994 and

 5     that was a period of time when you were with the company; correct?

 6        A.   I still haven't reached that part.  I'm at the month of

 7     July 1992.  You say that pages are enumerated.  I can't see that.

 8        Q.   Well, let me just ask you a general question, then.  Was it

 9     customary for companies to keep a log-book?

10        A.   No.

11        Q.   Did your company keep a log-book?

12        A.   No, why would it keep a log-book, given the fact that there were

13     daily reports.  Every day two daily reports were sent.  I find this

14     document suspicious.  I don't see why a log-book would be kept on top of

15     the two daily reports every day.

16        Q.   Okay.  Let's go through some of the pages.

17             MS. WEST:  I'd like to look at page 19 in the English and also

18     page 19 in the B/C/S.

19        Q.   And for you, sir, I've put a little green tab on page 19 so you

20     could get to it more readily and I think you're on it now.  This is

21     July --

22        A.   Very well.

23        Q.   July 1992.  In the right-hand corner it says "4th Platoon" and

24     then "August 1992" on the right-hand side.  And then it says Karlo Bauer

25     was issued with a sniper rifle.  Do you recognise that name?

Page 30317

 1        A.   No.

 2        Q.   If we can go to page 34 --

 3        A.   No, no, no, really no -- this is a Croat judging by the first and

 4     the last names, so no.

 5             MS. WEST:  Page 34, please, in both the B/C/S and the English.

 6        Q.   And up in the left-hand corner we see "4th Platoon."  It had 400,

 7     7.62-millimetre; 225, 7.9-millimetreS; and 30 for sniper rifle.  This

 8     appears to be in November 1992 when you came into the company.  At that

 9     time, were there any sniper rifles in the company?

10        A.   I apologise, how many sniper rifles did you say there were?

11        Q.   I'm reading what the English says.  You can read the B/C/S.  It

12     says "30 for sniper rifle."  Now, I'm not suggesting that it means

13     30 sniper rifles.  My question to you is:  Were there any sniper rifles

14     in the company in November of 1992?

15        A.   At the beginning of the war I don't know.  "30 for," do you know

16     what this means?  "30 for sniper rifles," not probably even a

17     well-equipped battalion has that, let alone a company with only a hundred

18     men.

19             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Can we see what unit this is and I

20     can't see anywhere that it says "30 for sniper rifles."  And also, what

21     is the provenance of this document?  There is no ERN number on what we --

22     on the document that we see on the screen.  We see it in the hard copy

23     but not on the screen.

24             JUDGE KWON:  I expect to hear that in the coming questions.  Let

25     us continue.

Page 30318

 1             MS. WEST:  Thank you.

 2             If we can go to page 45 in both the B/C/S and the English.

 3             JUDGE KWON:  But just while we are on this page in B/C/S, shall

 4     we ask the witness to read that fourth line.

 5             MS. WEST:  Yes, if we can go back to page 34.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, we are on that page in the B/C/S version.

 7             MS. WEST:

 8        Q.   Witness, did you hear Judge Kwon's request?

 9        A.   The 1st Platoon?

10        Q.   Mm-hmm --

11             JUDGE KWON:  The --

12             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 1st Platoon -- do you mean the

13     left-hand side of the page or the right-hand side of the page?

14             MS. WEST:

15        Q.   Left side --

16             JUDGE KWON:  Left, which start with "Sare" ...

17             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] The 1st Platoon, I don't have that

18     here.  Maybe it is not well --

19             JUDGE KWON:  Do you see the monitor in front of you?  Do you see

20     the fourth line which starts with probably "Sare"?

21             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.

22             JUDGE KWON:  Could you read that line aloud so that we can hear

23     the interpretation.

24             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Sare SOK sniper" something, very

25     hard.  I don't know what this SOKN means.  It's very difficult to read

Page 30319

 1     this and discern the meaning.

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Could you read the first line, then, please ?

 3             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "The 1st Platoon - 640 KM," is it,

 4     "7.62" --

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Then, Mr. Zurovac, the fourth line should read "Sare

 6     30 KM," doesn't it -- shouldn't it?

 7             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] "Sare 30KM," yes, probably -- I

 8     mean I -- this is not ...

 9             JUDGE KWON:  Very well.  I'll leave it at that.

10             Let's continue.

11             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.

12             Our information is that this document came from the 4th Company

13     of the 2nd Battalion of this brigade; however, at this point I will not

14     ask to tender it where the witness himself has not indicated that it was

15     customary in his battalion to keep it.  But I'd like to move on to

16     65 ter 12226, please.

17        Q.   Now, sir, you joined the 4th Company in November of 1992;

18     correct?

19        A.   Yes.

20        Q.   And you left sometime in 1994; is that right?

21        A.   Yes.

22        Q.   When exactly, what month?

23        A.   I left on the 10th of April or the 10th of March, 1994.  I can't

24     remember exactly when, but I went to do work obligation.

25        Q.   Now, we're looking at a listing from your company in September of

Page 30320

 1     1993 and it's a listing of wounded soldiers.

 2             MS. WEST:  And if we can go -- we can see it both in the English

 3     and in the B/C/S.  We actually see -- may I have page 5 of the English,

 4     please.  And the listing in B/C/S is just the same names.

 5        Q.   We see your name on this.  Were you wounded in September of 1993?

 6     And that listing is --

 7        A.   I was.  I was wounded.

 8        Q.   And also from the top we see number 3, a Karlo Bauer who was also

 9     wounded and this is the same name of the person we just saw in the

10     log-book at page 19 who was issued --

11        A.   I apologise --

12        Q.   Hold on, please.  This is the same name of the person we saw on

13     page 19 in the log-book who was issued a sniper rifle.  Do you remember

14     him?

15        A.   No.  This name means nothing to me.

16             MS. WEST:  I'd like to tender this document, Your Honour.

17             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

18             THE REGISTRAR:  Document 12226 becomes Exhibit P5992,

19     Your Honours.

20             MS. WEST:

21        Q.   Now, earlier today at page -- at transcript 57, when we were

22     talking about the siege and I asked you whether you thought the ABiH was

23     justified in breaking the siege and you said:

24             "I suppose it was justified from the point of view of an

25     intention to take the entire state of Bosnia-Herzegovina, to place it

Page 30321

 1     under control and create a state that would suit the policy of

 2     Alija Izetbegovic."

 3             Do you remember saying that?

 4        A.   Yes, I do.

 5        Q.   And can you tell us what his policy was?

 6        A.   Establishing an Islamic state of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a

 7     whole.

 8        Q.   Separate from that, do you believe that the ethnic groups should

 9     not live together under one state and related to that?

10             MR. ROBINSON:  Objection, Mr. President, this doesn't arise out

11     of the direct examination.

12             JUDGE KWON:  Would you like to respond to that or will you move

13     on?

14             MS. WEST:  I was trying to clarify something that he had brought

15     up in the cross, Your Honour.

16             JUDGE KWON:  What -- what subject do you refer to, Ms. West?

17             MS. WEST:  The policy of Alija Izetbegovic, but if Your Honour

18     prefers I will move on.

19                           [Trial Chamber confers]

20             JUDGE KWON:  Please continue, Ms. West.

21             MS. WEST:

22        Q.   Sir, we were just speaking about that policy and you said it was

23     establishing an Islamic state of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a whole.  And this

24     is something that you -- a subject matter you spoke of in your statement

25     as well.  Now, sir, my question to you is this:  During the direct

Page 30322

 1     examination Mr. Karadzic briefly asked about your time prior to 1992, and

 2     he mentioned that you were in a camp.  Is that correct?

 3        A.   Correct.

 4        Q.   And --

 5             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Which statement is the Prosecution

 6     referring to again?  Can we receive this?

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Probably in answer to your question.

 8             Yes, Ms. West, you can clarify.

 9             MS. WEST:  Thank you.  Well, it was -- well, I suppose it would

10     be the final of the four statements of this particular witness.  I don't

11     know what the ID number is, but it's the witness's statement.  But at

12     this point I was asking about his earlier testimony on direct in which he

13     stated that he was in a camp.

14        Q.   And you said yes.  And was that the Ljubuski camp?

15        A.   No.  I said it was a prison in Mostar, not a camp.

16        Q.   Okay.  My apologies.  But was it at Ljubuski or in Ljubuski?

17        A.   I don't know.  I passed through Ljubuski, not only I but all the

18     prisoners when we were taken away for an exchange in Stolac.

19        Q.   So it's your testimony that you just passed through Ljubuski; is

20     that right?

21        A.   Well, there were some beatings behind some sort of a stadium

22     there, then they crammed us into buses, the same ones that they had used

23     to take us there; and we were taken for an exchange at Todorovic's near

24     Stolac.

25        Q.   Now, in your earlier statement - and this can be of any one of

Page 30323

 1     them - it's paragraph 9, you said:

 2             "I was transferred from Mostar to Ljubuski and I suffered even

 3     greater misery and beatings there.  When they arrested me I weighed

 4     99 kilos" --

 5             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

 6             MR. ROBINSON:  Excuse me, Mr. President, this is beyond the scope

 7     of direct and particularly unfair given the fact that the Chamber said

 8     that this material was irrelevant so we didn't lead it.

 9             MS. WEST:  Mr. President, may I be heard?

10             JUDGE KWON:  Yes.

11             MS. WEST:  During the direct he spoke about his time at the camp,

12     and although we did have a discussion about the material being

13     irrelevant, in paragraph 11 of his statement he indicates that -- he

14     speaks about his motivation for joining the SRK, which is related to this

15     camp and that's why I'm getting into it now.

16             JUDGE KWON:  Did he say "camp"?

17             MS. WEST:  If I can have a moment, please.

18             JUDGE KWON:  Do you have more to conclude your cross-examination,

19     Ms. West?  How much more do you need?

20             MS. WEST:  Only a few moments.

21             JUDGE KWON:  I'm sorry?

22             MS. WEST:  Only a few moments.

23        Q.   Sir, I'm not going to qualify what Ljubuski was, but as a result

24     of being there you indicated that you sobered up in paragraph 11 of your

25     statement.  You said that:

Page 30324

 1             "... increasing obvious hatred that the Croats and Muslims had

 2     toward the Serbs forced us to sober up and see the falseness of

 3     brotherhood and unity and to think back to the suffering of the Serbs in

 4     the First and Second World Wars, when we were exterminated en masse."

 5             Can you tell us what you mean by "sober up"?

 6        A.   Of course.  In the Second World War I was left without my

 7     parents.  The Serbs have a historical memory such as it is and to avoid

 8     1941 from being repeated when the Serbs in Herzegovina were killed

 9     en masse, when pits in Herzegovina were filled with Serbian corpses, in

10     order to make sure that this didn't happen to me and to all Serbs, well,

11     150.000 Serbs fled from Sarajevo in order to avoid such things happening

12     to them, things that happened to them in the First World War and the

13     Second World War.  This shows that they sobered up.  They sobered up in

14     the sense that people came to their senses.  Were they to wait for them

15     to be thrown into a pit again, into the same pit that my father was

16     thrown into, was I to be thrown into such a pit?  To prevent such things

17     from happening, it's quite natural that I behaved as I did and everyone

18     else had no choice.  They were faced with a fait accompli.

19             MS. WEST:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I have no further

20     questions.

21             JUDGE KWON:  Thank you.

22             Mr. Karadzic, do you have re-examination?

23             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Just two or three questions,

24     Your Excellency, very brief questions.

25                           Re-examination by Mr. Karadzic:

Page 30325

 1        Q.   [Interpretation] Mr. Zurovac, when we spoke about indiscriminate

 2     fire on positions, what was hit in that indiscriminate fire?

 3        A.   On the whole we knew where their positions were, where our

 4     positions were, and so on.  They would destroy buildings, private houses,

 5     in indiscriminate firing so there was nowhere for us to sleep, nowhere

 6     for us to take shelter.  They would destroy houses, anything that might

 7     serve a man was, quite simply, destroyed.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  How many private houses were destroyed in this

 9     indiscriminate fire?

10        A.   Everything on our combat line a hundred per cent.  There are

11     documents, there's footage after Dayton, and everything shows that all

12     those houses were destroyed.  Unfortunately, they are still in that

13     state.

14        Q.   Thank you.

15             THE ACCUSED: [Interpretation] Could we please have a new

16     translation in which the term "randomly" would be changed to

17     "indiscriminately."  Nonselective.

18             MR. KARADZIC: [Interpretation]

19        Q.   And was there any firing in the depth?

20        A.   Yes.

21        Q.   Were there any civilian casualties and was that as a result of

22     fire snipers?

23        A.   On the whole as a result of sniper fire, to a certain extent as a

24     result of artillery fire, but most of the casualties sustained were

25     sustained as a result of sniper fire.

Page 30326

 1        Q.   Thank you.  When you were asked about who had snipers, you asked

 2     about what a Tandzara is.  What does it mean?

 3        A.   A Tandzara is an M48 rifle, an old Yugoslav rifle.

 4        Q.   Thank you.  Regardless of whether there were any sights

 5     available, did you have snipers to whom you as a commander assigned

 6     tasks?

 7        A.   No.

 8        Q.   Thank you.  I won't ask you about the theoretical implications of

 9     a siege.  What was the combat task that your company had?

10        A.   Defence exclusively.

11        Q.   Of what?

12        A.   Houses, territory, ancestral land, the places where we were born,

13     where we lived.  This was a working area and the population was

14     90 per cent Serbs, so we were defending our lives.

15        Q.   Thank you, Mr. Zurovac.

16        A.   You're welcome.

17             JUDGE KWON:  As regards your request for retranslation,

18     Mr. Karadzic, the Chamber will leave it at that.  Simply, if you need

19     to -- if you like that part retranslated, I would like you to put it in

20     writing.

21                           [Trial Chamber confers]

22             JUDGE KWON:  Mr. Zurovac, that concludes your evidence.  On

23     behalf of the Chamber, I would like to thank you for your coming to

24     The Hague to give it.  Now you are free to go.

25             THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Thank you very much.

Page 30327

 1                           [The witness withdrew]

 2             JUDGE KWON:  Yes, Mr. Tieger.

 3             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you, Mr. President.  I didn't know if the

 4     Chamber was about to rise or wanted to raise another matter, but there's

 5     one quick matter I think I need to address before we adjourn.  So you

 6     just let me know when you think the time is.

 7             JUDGE KWON:  Now you have the floor, Mr. Tieger.

 8             MR. TIEGER:  Thank you.  I simply wanted to respond to an e-mail

 9     that Mr. Robinson sent concerning a proposed change in the witness order

10     and I'm afraid we do have to protest against this effort for the

11     following reason.  As the Defence and I believe the Trial Chamber are

12     both aware, we are required by necessity to prioritise the translation

13     and therefore the subsequent analysis of documents potentially to be used

14     in cross-examination.  And in that connection, the multiple shifts in the

15     witness order that have already taken place in the past week or so have

16     strained those resources and, therefore, the ability and the capacity of

17     the responsible attorney to deal with the material that is capable of

18     shedding light on the events at issue and potentially the credibility of

19     the witness.  So on the heels of those previous changes, this does

20     unfairly disadvantage us, and I raise that point.

21             Now, I want to be clear, I'm not asserting that it is impossible

22     and, as always, we're prepared to do our utmost to accommodate the

23     Chamber.  But particularly given the fact that this appears to be some

24     theoretical concern about the return of the witness which we believe

25     could be adequately addressed simply by commencing the witness's

Page 30328

 1     examination-in-chief and having the witness then return, as we would

 2     presumably do by retaining the current order, we consider that the impact

 3     on the Prosecution under these circumstances would be unduly unfair.

 4             JUDGE KWON:  Let me be clear, next one is Malinovic?

 5             MR. ROBINSON:  That's correct, Mr. President.

 6             JUDGE KWON:  And in any event, the witness in question was one of

 7     the witnesses we were supposed to conclude by the end of this week --

 8     this week, was it not?

 9             MR. TIEGER:  Not originally, but as things ultimately transpired,

10     yes.  But as I say, that -- that, as I recollect, is a result of multiple

11     changes that ultimately accelerated that witness.

12             JUDGE KWON:  I noted that you commented you would be able to deal

13     with it, but after the --

14             MR. TIEGER:  With --

15             JUDGE KWON:  -- court session I would like you to have a word

16     with the Defence team and sort it out in a -- in a more co-operative way.

17     Whether it's -- please discuss it with the Defence and then come back to

18     the Chamber tomorrow.

19             MR. TIEGER:  Very well, Mr. President.

20             JUDGE KWON:  And before we adjourn, Mr. Tieger, the Chamber would

21     like to hear from you tomorrow morning on the following subject.  The

22     Chamber has stated on a number of occasions that although it will not

23     impose time-limits on the Prosecution's cross-examination just yet, it

24     would continue to closely monitor the conduct of trial.  Having heard

25     21 witnesses excluding the current -- the last witness, Dusan Zurovac,

Page 30329

 1     the Chamber notes that the Prosecution has used much more time on

 2     cross-examination than the accused on both examination-in-chief and

 3     re-examination.  The Chamber also notes that for the overwhelming

 4     majority of these witnesses the evidence presented pursuant to

 5     Rule 92 ter was extremely limited with short statements and very few

 6     associated exhibits, if any.  Often, the witnesses' Rule 92 ter evidence

 7     also focuses on a limited number of issues.  The Chamber would,

 8     therefore, like to hear from you tomorrow for first thing on the issue of

 9     time spent by the Prosecution on cross-examination.

10             The hearing is now adjourned.  We will sit here at Courtroom 3 at

11     9.00 tomorrow.

12                           --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.00 p.m.,

13                           to be reconvened on Thursday, the 15th day of

14                           November, 2012, at 9.00 a.m.